Battlefield 4 Chat

Sparks

tim3000 wrote: »

I have that perk unlocked it doubles the amount you can deploy. But as far as I know you cant plant more than 6 total. Also I dont if it is just me but it is an annoying perk often I have it on and it wont let me plant more than three. Im thinking that you have to unlock it for all factions separately.

If I understand it correctly, you get level one of that perk all the time; levels two through four are given in the game as your squad completes various squad level tasks. Get wiped as a squad and you lose those perks. Since the double capacity for mines is level three, you wouldn't expect to have it all the time.

Cuddlesworth

Sparks wrote: »

Ah to feck.
Look folks, unless you have access to the BF4 source code, you really can't be sure that whatever's causing your problem is down to netcode (and "netcode" isn't even a word for pete's sake). It could be any one of a hundred things, from stuff on your own PC (if, like me, your rig isn't an Origin special costing more than my car is worth) to stuff on your local network (nice router, did it come free with a box of corn flakes?) to stuff on your ISP's network to stuff on the internet backbone, to stuff on the server's ISP's network to stuff on the server's local network to stuff on the other player's ISP's network to stuff on the other player's local network to stuff on the other player's PC. Sure, it could also be the network stack in BF4, but there are so many different possible causes that it just looks silly when you see people in chat on these games talking about how it's definitely the "netcode" and how DICE made a mess of things and so on.

I work in networking and in a industry that's heavily reliant on a stable flow of packets. I saw all the talk of "netcode" and tbh your right. Its pretty unlikely that any of them know what they are talking about. Even on the networking side jitter, packet loss and latency add so many complications to what is basically a man in the middle decision box with at least 100ms between both clients. It kinda hurts my head a little trying to think how you would code it.

To me, BF4 seems to be trying to reach a middle ground where if it thinks both client actions happened within the same time frame, it accepts both. Hence those moments where you both end up taking each other out. Or where you get shot when you ducked behind cover. I suppose with actual bullet travel times its easier to work out. Rather then games like the original CS which seemed to favor heavily the first action received, which also made the game very latency reliant.

tim3000

Sparks wrote: »

If I understand it correctly, you get level one of that perk all the time; levels two through four are given in the game as your squad completes various squad level tasks. Get wiped as a squad and you lose those perks. Since the double capacity for mines is level three, you wouldn't expect to have it all the time.

I see, I was wondering why it worked sometimes and not others. That is annoying. I dont like having to depend on others for the usage of my equipment. I liked having 6 mines I was very good with them in BF3. So that explains the use of the green bar over the squad then.

Thanks

Sparks

Gaellords went boom. Le sigh. Still though, got a few good rounds in there first. I'm liking this ACW-R+stubby grip+muzzle break combo, Levelcap was right about it.

Timmyctc

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

64 man Obliteration on Operation Locker. My new favourite cluster****. Throw in some of Youtube#s funniest ****ers and this match was 1 hour and 15 mins of hilarity. I somehow managed to snatch all 3 bombs as well. lol

I subbed the **** out of your account

Mr Freeze

Quick questions lads, on the XBOX.

Where can you configure your loadouts? can you only do in the menus of a live game?

chickenboy

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Quick questions lads, on the XBOX.

Where can you configure your loadouts? can you only do in the menus of a live game?

I think you can do it from the "My Soldier" option on the main menu. And you can certainly do it on the battlelog website or using their app.

TerrorFirmer

God I hate that map Dawnbreaker. Such a chore to play.

Dcully

Sparks wrote: »

Ah to feck.
Look folks, unless you have access to the BF4 source code, you really can't be sure that whatever's causing your problem is down to netcode (and "netcode" isn't even a word for pete's sake). It could be any one of a hundred things, from stuff on your own PC (if, like me, your rig isn't an Origin special costing more than my car is worth) to stuff on your local network (nice router, did it come free with a box of corn flakes?) to stuff on your ISP's network to stuff on the internet backbone, to stuff on the server's ISP's network to stuff on the server's local network to stuff on the other player's ISP's network to stuff on the other player's local network to stuff on the other player's PC. Sure, it could also be the network stack in BF4, but there are so many different possible causes that it just looks silly when you see people in chat on these games talking about how it's definitely the "netcode" and how DICE made a mess of things and so on.

I mean, how many of those players even know what language the "netcode" is written in or would be able to read it if they saw it?

C'mon lads...

We dont need access to BF4 source code to know the game has netcode issues, DICE said themselves it has issues, lol what part of that dont you understand?
You dont need an origin PC to know if a game has issues,thankfully i have a very good PC and no my car costs a lot more, nice car too btw
I know for a fact its not my PC,all other games are fine.
BF3 had similar issues until they addressed them as had BF2 and BFBC2 before that.
DICE have said the netcode is their number one priority and recognizes it has issues, that coupled with almost 15 years of multiplayer gaming,configuring servers, i know only too well if a game has netcode issues or not and BF4 certainly has.

I will say on some servers its barely noticeable and and others very noticeable so as you say there is more than likely a lot of factors at work here but dont be so quick to dismiss what DICE themselves have said is an issue.

Mad_Dave

Don't know much about netcode or the like, but would it be too simplistic to suggest that the way to combat this issue is simply to invest in more localised servers and include a region lock ?

rd1izb7lvpuksx

Dcully wrote: »

, i know only too well if a game has netcode issues or not and BF4 certainly has.

How could you possibly know that without the source, or some serious profiling? The issues could be anywhere in the stack. I think that you're proving Sparks point here.

The developers are saying that they'll address the netcode because that's what people are complaining about.

Dcully

Fiona White Sperm wrote: »

How could you possibly know that without the source, or some serious profiling? The issues could be anywhere in the stack. I think that you're proving Sparks point here.

The developers are saying that they'll address the netcode because that's what people are complaining about.

I know there is something wrong,are you saying there isnt?
I know things are fine my end so it has to be the game,simple concept really.
The stack you speak of is netcode,Netcode is in laymans terms how chunks of date are sent to and from the client and server.
That includes so many different paramaters as has been said but it all falls under the bracket of netcode so yes it could be anything within this "stack" or netcode.

Sparks seems to be the expert,im far from one id like to know if its not netcode then what is causing people to be shot round corners etc?
Genuine question.

I will say the sheer scale of BF and the many amazing things that happen that remind me of an action movie that happen all the time must be near to impossible to program and keep hit reg etc perfect,it must be nearly impossible.
Ive always had a hunch that the BF series will always be lacking compared to smaller scale games in this area,i guess its the price we pay for such scale and diversity all taking place with players from allover the world.

MajesticDonkey

Yes, the issues are NETCODE. The exact issues people are having are referred to as netcode issues. Netcode is simply the communication between server and clients, and how in or out of sync that communication is. In BF4's case, it is out of sync the majority of the time.

The fact that so many people are having these issues is generally enough to say that it's not on the users' end.

Some examples: http://bf4central.com/2013/11/new-videos-show-just-bad-battlefield-4-net-code/

I wouldn't be surprised if it's because of these issues that servers are crashing, e.g. a server waiting for data which the client hasn't sent yet, which causes a delay in sending back the response data to EVERY client, which results in more delays and eventually the server crashes. Just a theory.

TheFairy

Slide yer network optimizer to zero, some people lag then yes, but they are now where you see them in the game, hits now register the way they should.

Now shoot them in the face, end of really!!!

rd1izb7lvpuksx

Dcully wrote: »

I know there is something wrong,are you saying there isnt?
I know things are fine my end so it has to be the game,simple concept really.

I'm talking about the tachnology stack, not the network stack. The "netcode" is a lay term for the protocol stack responsible for network communications, but you can't possibly tell from "almost 15 years of multiplayer gaming,configuring servers" where in the application the issues are. There could be perfect "netcode", and another component of the application could be causing network IO to block. You can't know.

Again, you're just highlighting how correct Sparks is when he says that people are talking outside their area of understanding.

Dcully

Again, you're just highlighting how correct Sparks is when he says that people are talking outside their area of understanding.

Im sorry but that is utter BS and your just nitpicking.

There is an issue with how data is been sent to and from clients and servers in BF4, end of story.
Nobody needs a degree in anything to know if a game doesnt feel right.
15 years of MP gaming sure helps suss out if there is an issue, but doesnt help suss out what that issue is.

Are you saying there is no issue?

Sparks

Dcully wrote: »

There is an issue with how data is been sent to and from clients and servers in BF4, end of story.

Prove it.

Nobody needs a degree in anything to know if a game doesnt feel right.
15 years of MP gaming sure helps suss out if there is an issue, but doesnt help suss out what that issue is.

How about a degree in computer engineering and 15 years of writing network code for a living at pretty much every level of the stack from assembly to erlang? Would you think that might give someone insight into the problem?

The point I'm making is that yes, it might be something in their stack that's not tuned well enough yet, but there are so many other components in BF4, and they're all so interdependent, that you cannot just play the game, see one or two issues, and immediately diagnose it as a "netcode" issue. And you look silly to anyone who knows that field if you do so.

Are you saying there is no issue?

Nobody's saying that.

Mad_Dave

TheFairy wrote: »

Slide yer network optimizer to zero, some people lag then yes, but they are now where you see them in the game, hits now register the way they should.

Now shoot them in the face, end of really!!!

Spent some time looking into exactly what this does, can someone who knows answer me this - should your network smoothing factor be set to the same value (roughly) as your ping ?
If so, does anyone know how to get a numerical ping value on console ?

Dcully

Sparks wrote: »

Prove it.

How about a degree in computer engineering and 15 years of writing network code for a living at pretty much every level of the stack from assembly to erlang? Would you think that might give someone insight into the problem?

The point I'm making is that yes, it might be something in their stack that's not tuned well enough yet, but there are so many other components in BF4, and they're all so interdependent, that you cannot just play the game, see one or two issues, and immediately diagnose it as a "netcode" issue. And you look silly to anyone who knows that field if you do so.


Nobody's saying that.

So your telling me to prove there is an issue then telling me nobody is denying there is one :eek:

mozattack

Hey guys, in 17 days I will be able to try my first 64 man game... YES!

So to the PC guys here are all maps great on 64 player conquest on BF4. It seems to me that they are apart from O. Locker possibly?

What are the top three conquest large maps?

- Paracel?
- Zavod?
- Flood Zone?

MajesticDonkey

Sparks wrote: »

Prove it.

Now the developer has for the first time responded to the netcode situation, with DICE’s Gustav Halling saying that the “netcode issues I’ve seen in a few videos is a top priority”, and added that that they are working on it.

...

We’re not sure if the upcoming patch will include both netcode optimization and crash fixes. The netcode is notoriously difficult to change and fix, and it took several patches for BF3 before its issues were resolved. By comparison the netcode in Battlefield 4 is even worse, but at least it’s confirmed that DICE are aware of the issues and are working on it.

http://bf4central.com/2013/11/dice-battlefield-4-netcode-top-priority/

DICE have confirmed there are netcode issues. Is that not proof enough? I don't really care what degree you have or how much experience you have, if you can't tell the issues are specifically netcode-related from playing the game, then there's no point in arguing.

Sparks

Dcully wrote: »

So your telling me to prove there is an issue then telling me nobody is denying there is one :eek:

No, I'm saying prove that your diagnosis of what's causing the issue is correct.

I mean, can you even prove that there is just one issue and not several similar issues, or several dissimilar issues which are being seen simultaneously?

mozattack

Riddle me this, what is the difference between the muzzle brake and the compensator (apart from the name)???

Dcully

No, I'm saying prove that your diagnosis of what's causing the issue is correct.

Its simple, the game is nowhere near as sharp as every other MP fps ive played in terms of shots registering etc.
To me and any other gamer that translates to an issue between my rig [which is perfectly fine] and the server im playing on.
My understanding in laymans terms this is referred to as netcode.
DICE have said the netcode is their number one objective right now, what part of that dont you understand?
With respect if they say there is an issue with netcode ill accept that before some random guy online claming to be an expert [not saying you arent]
Maybe you should go and tell DICE they are wrong.

For God sake i can play Planetside2 with 5,000 people on a server with no issues whatsoever , go figure :rolleyes:

Grumpypants

Dcully wrote: »

I know there is something wrong,are you saying there isnt?
I know things are fine my end so it has to be the game,simple concept really.
The stack you speak of is netcode,Netcode is in laymans terms how chunks of date are sent to and from the client and server.
That includes so many different paramaters as has been said but it all falls under the bracket of netcode so yes it could be anything within this "stack" or netcode.

Sparks seems to be the expert,im far from one id like to know if its not netcode then what is causing people to be shot round corners etc?
Genuine question.

I will say the sheer scale of BF and the many amazing things that happen that remind me of an action movie that happen all the time must be near to impossible to program and keep hit reg etc perfect,it must be nearly impossible.
Ive always had a hunch that the BF series will always be lacking compared to smaller scale games in this area,i guess its the price we pay for such scale and diversity all taking place with players from allover the world.

Basically if you take my connection it is a terrible eircom line that can upload 0.2 bits a second but can't upload and download at the same time without having a heart attack.

Then you have someone who has a super fast crisp UPC fiber connection who can upload 50mb a second without any interruptions.

What we see has to travel down the line to the server most likely in London (which is kinda far away) and then back again. It is very likely that his will get there first.

The game has to balance that so that it is not unplayable.

It also has to compute what 62 other players all with different locations, (even different countries) different ISPs, PCs, routers, cabling, wi-fi etc are doing. Then it has to add in a bunch of vehicles driving around the place, every single bullet that is being fired in game is tracked, every building that can be destroyed, every bit of concrete or wood that can break.

It has to do this for people all around the world, thousands of KM apart in a fraction of a second. So if once in a while it takes 1/4 of a second to let me know what it has decided I'm ok with that. Even if I have taken a step around a corner.

Sparks

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

DICE have confirmed there are netcode issues.

Yeah, since that's one of their level designers (seriously, look up the guy's resume) not one of their coders, I'm still not going to go round saying it's all the netcode's fault
Haven't you ever worked for a software company? They tend not to let their engineers near the press for a good reason, they tend to tell you the answer to your questions while everyone else tells you what you want to hear. Tends to be bad for business

I don't really care what degree you have or how much experience you have, if you can't tell the issues are specifically netcode-related from playing the game, then there's no point in arguing.

There sure isn't if that's what you think!

Dcully

Grumpypants wrote: »

Basically if you take my connection it is a terrible eircom line that can upload 0.2 bits a second but can't upload and download at the same time without having a heart attack.

Then you have someone who has a super fast crisp UPC fiber connection who can upload 50mb a second without any interruptions.

What we see has to travel down the line to the server most likely in London (which is kinda far away) and then back again. It is very likely that his will get there first.

The game has to balance that so that it is not unplayable.

It also has to compute what 62 other players all with different locations, (even different countries) different ISPs, PCs, routers, cabling, wi-fi etc are doing. Then it has to add in a bunch of vehicles driving around the place, every single bullet that is being fired in game is tracked, every building that can be destroyed, every bit of concrete or wood that can break.

It has to do this for people all around the world, thousands of KM apart in a fraction of a second. So if once in a while it takes 1/4 of a second to let me know what it has decided I'm ok with that. Even if I have taken a step around a corner.

Agreed but Planetside 2 has to do it with 5,000 players

Sparks

mozattack wrote: »

Riddle me this, what is the difference between the muzzle brake and the compensator (apart from the name)???

The former reduces vertical recoil, the latter horizontal recoil.

rd1izb7lvpuksx

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

if you can't tell the issues are specifically netcode-related from playing the game, then there's no point in arguing.

To anyone who has written a networked application, if you think that you can possibly tell what part of the application is causing the issue from playing the game, you highlight your own misunderstanding.

Dice will say that they're fixinf the netcode because that's what's being complained about about. It doesn't mean that's the problem.

ShadowHearth

Sparks wrote: »

The former reduces vertical recoil, the latter horizontal recoil.

And both hit you in accuracy, so stuby grip or potato grip is the best option to compensate for that.

MajesticDonkey

Grumpypants wrote: »

It also has to compute what 62 other players all with different locations, (even different countries) different ISPs, PCs, routers, cabling, wi-fi etc are doing. Then it has to add in a bunch of vehicles driving around the place, every single bullet that is being fired in game is tracked, every building that can be destroyed, every bit of concrete or wood that can break.

It has to do this for people all around the world, thousands of KM apart in a fraction of a second. So if once in a while it takes 1/4 of a second to let me know what it has decided I'm ok with that. Even if I have taken a step around a corner.

Except....Battlefield 3 did all this rather well. Battlefield 4 is not doing it well. So what's the problem?

People's internet connections are most definitely NOT the problem. It is some type of code implementation issue, which is more than likely network related.

Sparks

ShadowHearth wrote: »

And both hit you in accuracy, so stuby grip or potato grip is the best option to compensate for that.

Great minds?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqiOGVpYPDE

Sparks

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Except....Battlefield 3 did all this rather well. Battlefield 4 is not doing it well. So what's the problem?

BF3 did not do all this well in the beginning, as I recall

People's internet connections are most definitely NOT the problem.

Prove that everyone's network connections (and their ISP's and their ISP's backbone links and every other link in that chain) are not the problem? That's not a trivial thing to do...

It is some type of code implementation issue, which is more than likely network related.

See, here's the thing - yes, it could well be that. But they've also changed out the game engine completely, reworked their gameplay and graphics and pretty much everything else; why would you just look at the network code without even thinking of all these other changes? Especially when noone outside of Dice has seen the code at all? And they probably haven't even seen all of it unless EA's got a deal with the Frostbite folks to give source code access to the Dice team...

MajesticDonkey

Sparks wrote: »

BF3 did not do all this well in the beginning, as I recall

Which is fair enough...but it did do it well after a few months. So why not use the same/similar implementation as BF3?

Sparks wrote: »

Prove that everyone's network connections (and their ISP's and their ISP's backbone links and every other link in that chain) are not the problem? That's not a trivial thing to do...

Look, obviously no one can prove anything regarding the code of the game. I am coming to the conclusion that it is not player's connections that are causing the network issues through common sense.

1. The issues happen too often.
2. As I said above, the issues did not happen in BF3 (that much).
3. They do not happen as much in other games (PS2, as mentioned).

Yes, there are players with bad connections, but not to the extent that people are seeing.

But they've also changed out the game engine completely, reworked their gameplay and graphics and pretty much everything else; why would you just look at the network code without even thinking of all these other changes?

Well, let's break this down. If they've changed the game engine completely from BF3, and the BF3 game engine worked generally well most of the time (regarding "netcode" or network-related code), and now the BF4 game engine does not work well (regarding "netcode" or network-related code), then can we not come to the conclusion that it is the game code that is wrong and not the clients?

You seem to be nitpicking here a small bit, if I'm honest.

mozattack

Sparks wrote: »

The former reduces vertical recoil, the latter horizontal recoil.

Thank you.

Dcully

mozattack wrote: »

Thank you.

Here you go mozattack.

http://bf4central.com/battlefield-4-attachments-and-accessories/

Sparks

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Which is fair enough...but it did do it well after a few months. So why not use the same/similar implementation as BF3?

Because they compeletely changed the engine, the gameplay, the squadding, the weapons, the graphics, the audio and more? I doubt they could have just cut-n-pasted very much between the BF3 and BF4 codebases, at least not the way you're talking about.

If they've changed the game engine completely from BF3, and the BF3 game engine worked generally well most of the time (regarding "netcode" or network-related code), and now the BF4 game engine does not work well (regarding "netcode" or network-related code), then can we not come to the conclusion that it is the game code that is wrong and not the clients?

See, you're glossing over the bit where you identify the problem as being in the network code in BF4 there as though that was an obvious, trivial point. It's not, is what I'm saying, and "but of course it is" doesn't count as a rebuttal argument
How do you know it's not some other part of the BF4 codebase that's not working right? How do you know that it's not the case that the network code is fine but some other component isn't feeding it data correctly or responding to data correctly?

You're talking about a non-deterministic distributed system as though debugging it was the trivial part, believe me, it is not!

You seem to be nitpicking here a small bit, if I'm honest.

In the same way that a doctor disagreeing with a patient that a small cough was obviously being caused by the lungs, yes


You know what would fix all of this?
If you just said "BF4's broken".

Seriously, that's it. That statement's perfectly accurate, it's perfectly correct, it's fine. What gets up my nose is when people who don't - and can't - have the data they need to identify the problem start talking about the cause of the problem as though it was as obvious as a hammer. And mainly it gets up my nose because they sound like every bad manager I've ever had when they do that and work has no place in BF4

MajesticDonkey

Sparks wrote: »

How do you know it's not some other part of the BF4 codebase that's not working right? How do you know that it's not the case that the network code is fine but some other component isn't feeding it data correctly or responding to data correctly?

Well fair enough then, I get what you're saying. But I still think all this crap about players' connections is nitpicking

BF4's broken :pac:

PS. I just realised your player name is Gun_ie - I believe I knifed you the other night

Sparks

That you did I think (had I just run out of ammo after another rush on locker as support?), but didn't I C4 you off one of the towers on Rogue Transmission after parachuting in from the gunship?

Grumpypants

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Well fair enough then, I get what you're saying. But I still think all this crap about players' connections is nitpicking

BF4's broken :pac:

PS. I just realised your player name is Gun_ie - I believe I knifed you the other night

Well that would be down to the bad netcode

MajesticDonkey

Sparks wrote: »

That you did I think (had I just run out of ammo after another rush on locker as support?), but didn't I C4 you off one of the towers on Rogue Transmission after parachuting in from the gunship?

No, I think it was on the forest/tank factory map. I've played nearly 25 hours and still can't remember the map names

For the moment I'm only playing at weekends. I just added ya on Battlelog

Sparks

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

No, I think it was on the forest/tank factory map.

Oh, on the roof? Yeah, I was running up behind you to get my knife on and it all went pear-shaped Next time I stop being fancy and just take the points with the carbine

fergus1001

I believe I blew a Gun_ie away in a corridor cluster fudge on locker granades, granades everywhere!

Sparks

You probably did, I had only the one round on locker last night (but it was a doozy). Run-n-gun with the M249 (w/stubby&break) and the xm25. I almost had a 3:1 k/d ratio by the end because everyone would stack up at an entrance to C and nobody'd run in, so you could get in, surprise two, three or even four people with the pointy end before all their mates piled on; and they were also trying to dig in in the corridors between B and C so if you just nipped off to the side, you wound up pointy end to face with a few people Thing was, sooner or later you ran out and had to reload and with the 249's reload time, you're toast when that happens

(it's Guns_ie btw, same as the website but s/\./_/ )

fergus1001

Ha I remember running around the outside and coming in from behind and four lads there got a dx error just as I was about to knife my first victim

James74

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZNxbzEwB5k

MajesticDonkey

ktulu123

My opinion on the "netcode" issue, there are obviously some issue's with the client/server communication which can cause some outrageous things to happen in game. But "netcode" is not the ONLY reason people are killed every time. It's just that you are ****e at the game :P I know I do it, I give out about something in the game for the reason I died when I was simply crap in that situation.

KERSPLAT!

It's strange that I don't rage when I die in BF, or atleast no where near as much as CoD

ktulu123

Princess Petulia Pissy Pants wrote: »

It's strange that I don't rage when I die in BF, or atleast no where near as much as CoD

I did when I was **** when it first came out, well not rage but just WTF kinda thing. I don't care now, I just get on & enjoy the game