Jump to content
Dante Unbound: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

Indication Who Is Host? Peer2Peer Hurts.


BelieverZ
 Share

Recommended Posts

Anyone else think we should have some indication to who is the host? Like a Gold name? or some symbol next to their name to show who the host is?

 

With host migrations happening and losing some of your bonus exp and rewards, shouldn't we have the option to leave with the host so we don't risk losing everything. (See when the host is leaving) 

 

In most if not all MMO's we can clearly see who the party leader is? So, why can't we have the same to identify who the host is?

 

I recently lost some rewards in a archwing interception as my previous round rewards was lost after the host left including less bonus exp.

 

I would happily leave when the host leaves as i won't lose the bonus exp/rewards or mission failing because of failed host migration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else think we should have some indication to who is the host? Like a Gold name? or some symbol next to their name to show who the host is?

 

With host migrations happening and losing some of your bonus exp and rewards, shouldn't we have the option to leave with the host so we don't risk losing everything. (See when the host is leaving) 

 

In most if not all MMO's we can clearly see who the party leader is? So, why can't we have the same to identify who the host is?

 

I recently lost some rewards in a archwing interception as my previous round rewards was lost after the host left including less bonus exp.

 

I would happily leave when the host leaves as i won't lose the bonus exp/rewards or mission failing because of failed host migration.

i think the real solution here is to fix the bug that drops our rewards and some exp during the host migration, but we could use a indication of host in the mean time ( fixing it could be weeks or months,who knws)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's RNG...too.

Not really. But sometimes uses a weird system to choose.

 

Anyway, it's a good idea. Right now, only indication is that every mission I have played this last month, only the host could skip the second intro to the mission (the deploying, not the lisets one).

Edited by Kachocalvo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed entirely.

I can understand not giving a Ping display (or even a "bar" indicator) since both of those can deter players from joining or playing through missions, but I can't exactly find any reason to not indicate who the host is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, I would like that so I know who to berate when I'm getting lag.

 

How is it the host's fault?

 

Do you think he/she is choosing to make it laggy? Do you think he/she chose to bring you into his/her session? Do you think he/she chose to be host?

 

The answer to all questions except the first is "No.". Unless you're joking and i'm completely missing the point,  you should be ashamed for actually doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is it the host's fault?

 

Do you think he/she is choosing to make it laggy? Do you think he/she chose to bring you into his/her session? Do you think he/she chose to be host?

 

The answer to all questions except the first is "No.". Unless you're joking and i'm completely missing the point,  you should be ashamed for actually doing that.

 

Pretty sure he's joking and you're completely missing the point. XD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. But sometimes uses a weird system to choose.

 

Anyway, it's a good idea. Right now, only incation is that every mission I have played this last month, only the host could skip the second intro to the mission (the deploying, not the lisets one).

 

...forgot the "/sarcasm off" end line .)

Edited by perfectStranger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be good, they also mentioned the possibility of the game choosing the lowest lag host rather than the one that joined first/created the group - I would really like this.

A lot of the time playing missions (e.g. void) I, and my whole team, find the game unplayable due to low ping - I and others in the team on the other hand would have made suitable hosts if the game had chosen them. This usually leads to the host dc'ing and the game ending...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be good, they also mentioned the possibility of the game choosing the lowest lag host rather than the one that joined first/created the group - I would really like this.

A lot of the time playing missions (e.g. void) I, and my whole team, find the game unplayable due to low ping - I and others in the team on the other hand would have made suitable hosts if the game had chosen them. This usually leads to the host dc'ing and the game ending...

 

It tries to do that currently, it is just really bad at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be good, they also mentioned the possibility of the game choosing the lowest lag host rather than the one that joined first/created the group - I would really like this.

A lot of the time playing missions (e.g. void) I, and my whole team, find the game unplayable due to low ping - I and others in the team on the other hand would have made suitable hosts if the game had chosen them. This usually leads to the host dc'ing and the game ending...

 

The game already do that (no matter who forms the squad in my clan, I almost always end as host). But only if you all enter the mission at the same time. Once the mission has started, host is fixed to prevent host migrations whenever a new player joins in.

 

And it do not always works right.

Edited by Kachocalvo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It tries to do that currently, it is just really bad at it.

 

People said it does this in missions that I asked and some said yes, so I almost added in 'I'm not sure whether this feature is in already...' but yeah, then, it really does not work right yet.

They also mentioned an option (pretty certain this one at least isn't in yet...) to opt-out of hosting, which would help players with worse connections since often, as you say, it really doesnt work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That has been suggested for a long time, still nothing...

 I really hope they do add a indication to who the host is, or atleast fix the rewards being lost doubt it will happen dueto connectivity issues. But I would leave the game if i saw the host exiting so i don't risk losing my rewards earned during that mission (defense/interception) 

 

Maybe with more awareness they'll add this to the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before the mission starts, the best host is (usually) selected for the group to play with. However, if you start a mission with a few slots open, then only one of those in the seat when the missions starts will get host and late comers will likely be all over the place in term of connection quality.

 

But yeah, we'd need a ping display at least. No 'cell bar' thing, an actual, numerical ping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It tries to do that currently, it is just really bad at it.

 

The system determine the host by a simple latency measurement at the lobby.

Which is mostly insignificant. A good host needs at least a upstream bandwidth of 1 Mbit/s (~100 kB/s).

At least for missions like Survival, Defense and Mobile Defense...

It doesn't matter if the idle ping is 50 ms or 500 ms - as soon as the game is under load and the net code

is trying to shove 1 Mbit/s through the 0.1 Mbit/s line, the host/client latency skyrocket into the thousands to

the point where the connection drops.

 

This is why the max ping settings in the options is almost useless. It only works if you join a running game

under load. The really sad thing about this is: I highly doubt there is a 1:3 (host:clients) ratio of people with connections

>1 Mbit/s and people with connections <1 Mbit/s. That means there will always be heavy lag in public matches,

as long as the current upload requirements aren't changed. We really need a better system to choose

(and display) the host - to counter that a bit. That is the least thing DE should implement, if they aren't able to

optimize the net code by a large portion!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dedicated Servers. For Plat.

 

1 Plat allows you to host 5 games, saves all your progress, no migration problem, and allows any dropped player to reconnect by waiting at the end of a wave, by pausing the game, if everyone agrees.

 

Then we can add Gold Tier Dedicated hosting. Which costs human blood.

 

God Tier hosting requires a human Soul. But not necessarily yours (NUDGE NUDGE WINK WINK)

 

... anyway, It would make more sense to eventually have a system that migrates sessions better then to add kludges like "color the host", since they can just yank a cord out and nothing will save the game anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably belongs in feedback rather than general but yes, I'd like to know who the heck is running on dial-up still so I can avoid joining their games in the future.

 

Would also be fantastic if, as the host, you can manually change the host with a slash command.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...