View Full Version : Will Infiltration turn into a lag war?

12th Jan 2001, 04:32 PM
After a bit of a game of CS with a ping of 400+, I have just begun to brainstorm the idea that INF will, perhaps, become like CS, a war of Lag and ping, and not skill and ability. Giving the person with the lowest lag, a distinct advantage over the others.

Also, this may seem a bit stupid, but I do think that with the amount of scopes, and silencers for weapons, this game may turn into a camping/sniping game, which will annoy the hell out of most ppl, and will (more than likely) affect the modification.

I'd like to know what other people think of this prospect, and whether the idea of having a 'general' lag would be accepted.

A general lag is like fake lag. When a player has a ping of LOWER than 100 say, their ping will be increased to 200 - their current lag.

What do you think?

13th Jan 2001, 01:53 AM
I played INF 2.75 fine with a 550+ ping on my winmodem, it was fine. If you stick to the auto's you should be fine.

As 2.85 is slower than 2.75, it should be even better for HPB's.


13th Jan 2001, 03:10 PM
I'm not going on about the speed.

I'm just posing the question, do you think that LPB's will eventually take over INF, like they have done with CS

13th Jan 2001, 03:18 PM
Well, I think ping will always be a factor, and a low ping will be an advantage, of course...but I think skill will play a much bigger role. I usually get sub-100 pings on the servers I use with 2.75, and I still get owned by skilled 56K users... ;)

DennyK AKA LordDeimos

13th Jan 2001, 05:39 PM
Considering the time thats gone into the net code its probably safe to assume that lag won't be a problem.

14th Jan 2001, 06:28 AM
well, they said that with Counter-Strike and the new netcode, it would be fair?

Played CS recently???

14th Jan 2001, 10:28 AM
the netcode in CS is made for 56k'ers the netcode in UT/INF is made for people that use cable modems, so if you don't have a high bandwith connection you'll probably lag a bit.


14th Jan 2001, 10:36 AM
Why, after that post do I seem a little out my depth.

How many ppl here have cable/adsl/t1's?

cos I got a 56k modem, and I'm feeling a little bit pathetic :(

14th Jan 2001, 11:25 AM
:) i have cable. ANd i usualy never lag on a server. I usualy have a sub 100 ping or arround 130. :)


14th Jan 2001, 12:57 PM
You live in america yeah??

Well, I live in england, and at the moment, there aren't many places/people wired up with ADSL or cable, yet.

But no one has answered my question:

DO you think that INF will turn into a lag and ping war??

"Who Shouted 'MEDIC!'?"

14th Jan 2001, 03:47 PM
Its very doubtful. Infiltration, unlike CS, has realistic recoil, so automatic weapons like the MP5 can actually be used well. That should make it somewhat easier for someone with a laggy connection to take someone down, since full auto would let you strafe them with fire. If you use stealth and only attack at the right time even a laggy connection should be sufficient to take someone down before they even have a chance to fight back.

14th Jan 2001, 04:15 PM
Im in the Uk, and on my hardware 56K modem I can ping 150 no problem, even on shítty BT Internet.

Just stay away from the M16 and robar and you'll be fine. Learn to love the AKMSU, cos I have a feeling that gun will rock for 56K'ers.


14th Jan 2001, 04:54 PM
Why does everybody always say the UT netcode sucks. I've played them all and it's by far the best. I used 33.6 for a year and could still rank #1 every game.

FreeBSD: The Power to Serve - www.freebsd.org (http://www.freebsd.org)

14th Jan 2001, 06:15 PM
Hmmmmm.... What ping would you need to play INF online so that it runs just like your playing bots? Me and my 56k connection are getting worried as I count down the days to the release. :D

Happy Out

"Just Keeping It Happy"

14th Jan 2001, 08:54 PM
It all comes down to skillz....
I used to play 2.75 online with my 56k and had SOME lag but you learn to play in it after awhile....http://unreal.infopop.net/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


14th Jan 2001, 09:28 PM
well, what about bullet lag, thats basicly what lag is, right?
any way, i can not stand a ping over 170, thats almost 2 seconds of lag time, people say that because of INF's realizm, lag wont be a problem
i guess people dont get it but 4 shots 1 kill wont do crap if lag is at hand
2 shots with a m16
2 seconds of lag
2 second for the other person to reslize whats happening
some on would have to be very good with leed shots and have to have a buttload of cover


14th Jan 2001, 10:12 PM
we'll have to wait and see to find out if the their is lots of lag. IT also depends on the servers.


14th Jan 2001, 10:37 PM
ok, I see more and more users on the net going from 14.4, to 5.6k to now broad band DSL. most of my friends who used to say there pings where crapp, now are either in college, got DSL, or cable. even my friends who make minimal money. IMO the only people I really see with crappy pings are weekend gamers, and those who don't have the means for broad band. if you are hardcore, you will be running broadband


14th Jan 2001, 11:36 PM
I talked to some INF peepuls after their testing today and apearantly there is very little lag...even with a 56/k


15th Jan 2001, 06:10 PM

'give me a sig and a smoke because ill blow this joint'

16th Jan 2001, 10:41 AM
lag is a problem to me
when ever i am playing a another game (i cant say CS because you'll flame me) i waist a clip on one guys head, and then i get cover to reload, i see the dead body flashing between aliva and dead, and then i see all the bullets i shot ricochet off the walls in front of me
dont call me stupid because 2 people were in that game, he and i. I have a cable modem also, and i did a msn speed test thingy right before playing and i was running 600k
so now i dont play cs at all and im waiting here solomly waiting for 2.85 (i check the page like 6 times a day!!!) in the mean time ill make myself do with Tactical Ops (oops now ill get flamed)
ahhh well, any way, i just hate lag :p

'We are the wakeful, wry and watchful. Were awaiting'

16th Jan 2001, 12:47 PM
Hey folks, one can't always design a game based upon the lowest common denominator, right? If that were the case, we'd all still be playing Doom to keep the 486 users happy. Of course bandwidth, packet loss, latency and so on will effect the `playabilty' of the game. Those who can't afford a fast connection or find a fast server to connect to will just have to suck it up and deal. This is unfortunate, sure, but bitching about it won't fix the problem - the current situation of broadband rollout in your country/state/city/whatever.

Anyway... That all being said, current testing of Infiltration 2.85 has been very favourable. The team doesn't all have high speed connections. Fundamentally, we have had a good time online.

The above opinions are mine, and may not be the team concensus.


16th Jan 2001, 01:48 PM
well, what about bullet lag, thats basicly what lag is, right?
any way, i can not stand a ping over 170, thats almost 2 seconds of lag time, people say that because of INF's realizm, lag wont be a problem
i guess people dont get it but 4 shots 1 kill wont do crap if lag is at hand

You have got to be kidding on this one. Ping is measured in miliseconds. What does "mili" stand for? It stands for 1000. Correct me if I'm wrong but I've always assumed that this meant that there is 1000 milisconds in 1 second. So if that is correct 170 ms ping would mean that it takes on average .17 seconds for a packet to get from the client to the server and from the server back to the client. (Ping is not a measure of how long it takes your packet to get to the server but how long it takes before you get the response from the server).

I've played quite well on alot of servers from which I get 170 ms ping. Yes you have a distinct disadvantage to people with lower ping but only if you're used to playing with low pings. However, if you learn to adapt to the lag, 170 ms is not at all that big of a disadvantage. Some people even play better at these kind of pings than on very low pings because they have learned to anticipate how the lag will affect their movements and their firing. This is all of course based on Unreal Tournament. Some games just handle ping so badly that you will time out and get out of sync easily even on a LAN.

In conclusion Net Code is important, but I believe that Infiltration won't really need to mess around too much with Unreal Tournaments Netcode. In addition, unless there are things that will cause flooding of information (ie. sending information on where each fragment of a grenade actually falls <if there are alot of them> instead of handling this client-side, I don't think the change in code from Infiltration will mess the Net Code up enough to make a noticable difference. In fact, I would think that it should be a bit better than Unreal Tournament (since there are no multiple rockets, ammo, explosive blobs, etc. to keep track of during the game).

But then again, that's just my opinion. :p

17th Jan 2001, 02:43 PM
Damn Commoner, you beat me to it :)

I find the INF netcode the best Ive ever seen. Its by far the best netcode for HPB's.


24th Jan 2001, 04:59 PM
i still like avp. the aliens rock when you got a bad ping. they'll only show up monmentarily. so you'll see them at one end of the room, then the other. then you see somebody get ripped apart. it relly balances the ping to have somthing like that that acctually has an advantage whith a higher ping.


25th Jan 2001, 05:56 AM
Phatcat, you said, ". IMO the only people I really see with crappy pings are weekend gamers, and those who don't have the means for broad band. if you are hardcore, you will be running broadband."

You forgot another explanation, some people don't have access to broadband. I would love to have DSL or cable, but the best I can get where I live is I$DN (yes, it's very expensive for a measly 128K that never performs nearly up to that during busy times like weekday evenings). I won't have the option for anything faster for probably another year.

Regarding the discussion about whether a slow ping is a disadvantage: I used to have DSL (moved to my present location a year ago and was very disappointed to learn there was no DSL or cable here). So, I used to play with a fairly reliable ping of around 100 - 130. I am now, for the past year, playing with a ping that ranges from 120 (at 4 AM, very sweet) to 600 or worse (weekday evenings), and I can see a big difference in my scores. When you give up 100 ms or more to your opponent, he can see you before you can see him. If you are already taking a fatal wound before you even see the person who came around a corner and shot you, that's a huge disadvantage. Stealth and skill can make up for some of it, but given two players of EQUAL SKILL but significantly different pings, the lower ping player will usually win.

-- Vipe -- http://rl.fireplug.net/post/viper.jpg


25th Jan 2001, 11:19 AM
from my house in the boonies all that's available is modem. and it'll only run at 28k. i've tried 56 but the phone service is overloaded and it becomes to unstable. I'd even take a 56k if i could i've got a 56k modem but like i said dosn't do me much good. i'm not about to move eiteher.


27th Jan 2001, 11:55 AM
Iv played SF and Tacops on the net loads and as long as my ping has been less than 300 i have no problems to speak of. I think your all worrying about nothing. Of course i envy LPB but it matters little in the heat of battle. You get a spike and get killed. big deal your back in next round.
Oh and i have many times had me and my brother sharing my puny 56k over the LAN and playing net games at the same time both with 250 pings.

28th Jan 2001, 01:20 PM
Ut is THE best 56K netcode have ever seen. It pings better than every other game on my 56K (on both modems Ive had), and it plays better than all other fps'ers with a high ping.


30th Jan 2001, 11:11 PM
Thats the truth Khaine.
I also played the weekly war server test the other night and we played extreme prejudice with 2.75 and beside the fact it was one of the best maps iv ever played online my ping was stable as it is on any other map and i had an enjoyable game.
56k can get you by if thats all you have.
But im still counting the days till NTL make cable available in my area(about 3 months).

1st Feb 2001, 08:36 AM
Im happy with my 56K right now. Which is a good thing cos it looks like its gonna be a long time till ADSL or cable gets to my town :(


1st Mar 2001, 09:41 AM
You always will be at a disadvantage with a low quality connection. But as said above, the same applies to having a bad PC.
And the first point about lagging the high speed connections ot even up the game is a bad idea to say the least. Usually these people pay a lot of money for there connection and would not put up with being lagged so people without the decent connections have a fair game.
If you want to be at an advantage with the LPB's, you'll have to sort yourself out with the relevent connection.
I find CS (HL) to have the best netcode for modem users (trusting the client really anoys LPB's), once you figure out how to set up all the command line options for your connection.

1st Mar 2001, 01:05 PM
I have got DSL and played recently TO with various pings.
With a ping of about 600 it was not playable, but everythings < 250 is okay and runs fine.
I don't know if you can compare TO and INF (in an online code way), but even with rather high pings it was okay. AND I think, that the INF-team had enough time to get things right.


Party's over ! *grin*

7th Mar 2001, 03:10 AM
A LPB will have an advantage over a High Ping 'Loser', but that's only if you are equally skilled players or relatively new. An experienced 56ker (ie someone who has gotten used to the 'lag') is more than a match for any LPB as long as the lag isn't that bad.
I've been fragged by people with a crappier ping (400-500 for example) just because they were better players than me.

Either get used to this (initial) disadvantage or find a server with either a better ping or players with a ping more equal to yours.

Punishing the LPB's so that they have the same lag as the 56kers is bad. We pay for our fast connection. You might as well introduce waitstates in the game because someone with an ultrafast (expensive) cpu/graphics card/whatever might have an advantage over your crappy pc.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It is not the lag, but packetloss that really kills you ...[/quote]
As long as the lag is relatively stable it is possible to get used to it.
Packetloss (which even affects us LPB's) is worse, because you can never compensate for missing information.

- Hindsight is always 20/20 -