Time required to receive a packet

hummerz5 · 2016-08-28 22:34:49

Why isn't it all players? if you get each player's first packet, and match it against each finishing player's end packet, aren't they all properly distanced?

Tomahawk · 2016-08-28 22:56:05

hummerz5 wrote:

Why isn't it all players? if you get each player's first packet, and match it against each finishing player's end packet, aren't they all properly distanced?

???

Either I'm wrong or you're misunderstanding. Players won't all attempt a mini at the same time. You can hop in and try it whenever you want, and your time will be recorded.

The two received packets to start and stop the timer will not have the same latency. The first might arrive 10ms after the switch is touched, and the second, 25ms after. Overall one player's run might be recorded as up to 50ms slower than they actually did it, due to the difference between the two times, but another player's might be 100ms slower if they lag more, regardless of how fast they did the mini.

It's not good enough for my standard of bots.

hummerz5 · 2016-08-28 23:01:04

You mention the lag; I thought the personal start and stop flags handle the latency well enough. If their connection actually sucks that bad, and they're beyond lag and into some fluctuations where sometimes they have 10ms ping and then 300ms ping (hey that's me!) then their best bet is simply to repeat the mini enough (which you are already doing) to hope they roll the dice at 10ms twice in a row.

Ah well. Provided we understand each other, but that's not fit for your project, then I can let this rest easy.

Tomahawk · 2016-08-28 23:11:37

hummerz5 wrote:

their best bet is simply to repeat the mini enough (which you are already doing) to hope they roll the dice at 10ms twice in a row.

I'm thinking about the players with connections that would make their recorded times range from 50ms to 100ms slower than the true times, as opposed to 10ms to 50ms slower for other players. The former group could never hope to compete in this BAL, if their latency never fell below 50ms.

Koya · 2016-08-29 16:59:24

Hexagon wrote:

You'd probably be better off getting a VPS for this, preferably one close to the PlayerIO servers (San Diego perhaps.)

https://who.is/whois-ip/ip-address/69.175.21.2 - Chicago(?)

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#26 2016-08-28 22:34:49

Re: Time required to receive a packet

#27 2016-08-28 22:56:05, last edited by Tomahawk (2016-08-28 22:57:34)

Re: Time required to receive a packet

#28 2016-08-28 23:01:04

Re: Time required to receive a packet

#29 2016-08-28 23:11:37, last edited by Tomahawk (2016-08-28 23:12:29)

Re: Time required to receive a packet

#30 2016-08-29 16:59:24

Re: Time required to receive a packet

Board footer