Feedback Request on Network Delay

[R0ssdaddy]

Sorry if this was already posted, will post again with my info when i get home. This video show the problem quite clearly.

the 1-10 analogy of only reporting 1, 4, 8, 10 is an easier way of understanding, and this video shows it exactly.

[Bahn]

Sorry if this was already posted, will post again with my info when i get home. This video show the problem quite clearly.

the 1-10 analogy of only reporting 1, 4, 8, 10 is an easier way of understanding, and this video shows it exactly.

THANK YOU! I was looking for this video. This is exactly what I meant - it simply isn't updating often enough. I honestly don't understand what these traceroutes will do (some of us have pretty acceptable pings of 150-200 ms to the final trace/ping server). Also, I don't understand why we're doing a traceroute to this server instead of each of our worlds, which would be a more accurate representation of our performance to each server (though I imagine they're all being hosted at the same provider and data center). Regardless, as I stated before, I think it's less of a network routing issue than it is a client-server issue.

Edit: SE_James - Here is the original thread where this discussion appeared in question:

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...ressed./page10

PLEASE forward this to the higher ups. This is absolutely important as a lot of constructive information and discussion was made in this thread that will help the devs know what's going on. The bottom line is it's not the latency or packet loss (though that may be the case for some playesr with really bad ADSL/low budget connections) that is causing our issues with being unable to dodge enemy WSes, but rather an inability for the client to update the server often enough on position changes.

[Geesus]

The bottom line is it's not the latency or packet loss (though that may be the case for some playesr with really bad ADSL/low budget connections) that is causing our issues with being unable to dodge enemy WSes, but rather an inability for the client to update the server often enough on position changes.

While this may be true, it's not the users fault that the service provide here, especially in the States is as crappy as it is. So while your statement again may be true, you can't count out the issue occuring for 90% of the players in such a broad general statement. While our Gov wants to believe this is the greatest country in the world, the fact they and the companies providing the service are coniving jerks and theives and provide awful service to those of us paying ridiculous prices is not the issue.

[Bahn]

While this may be true, it's not the users fault that the service provide here, especially in the States is as crappy as it is. So while your statement again may be true, you can't count out the issue occuring for 90% of the players in such a broad general statement. While our Gov wants to believe this is the greatest country in the world, the fact they and the companies providing the service are coniving jerks and theives and provide awful service to those of us paying ridiculous prices is not the issue.

Oh, I know. ISPs are a business, and like any business, they will go to the absolute extremes to make profit within legal means, even if it involves screwing customers and the "little guy" over. Subscribe as many customers as possible, keep their bandwiths to the lowest a customer can tolerate before they move to another network, and charge through the nose for "upgrades". And just to add salt to the wound, here's a recent article from DSL Reports stating that the US is ranked 12th in the world in Internet broadband speeds: https://secure.dslreports.com/showne...d-Speed-116718

Do note I said *some*, not all, users may just have an ISP with a poor connection into the Internet, and yeah most likely than not they're a minority, but my experience with ADSL vs Cable generally goes to show that ADSL tends to run off of backbones that are farther away from the "main" backbones that go through our country. The farther away you are from a backbone, the more hops your data has to make, the more hops your data makes, the worse ping times you get (among other things). It's cheaper to get an ADSL line into a rural area than it is for another company to run cable lines. Anyone who has more network experience than me (as I'm just a lowly technician) feel free to chime in on this.

Anyway, yeah, I definitely agree this is an issue with the way Square programmed their client/service architecture, and has little to do with traceroutes or ping times.

[Geesus]

Oh, I know. ISPs are a business, and like any business, they will go to the absolute extremes to make profit within legal means, even if it involves screwing customers and the "little guy" over. Subscribe as many customers as possible, keep their bandwiths to the lowest a customer can tolerate before they move to another network, and charge through the nose for "upgrades". And just to add salt to the wound, here's a recent article from DSL Reports stating that the US is ranked 12th in the world in Internet broadband speeds: https://secure.dslreports.com/showne...d-Speed-116718

Oh don't I know it LOL. *sigh

[Echo]

Sorry if this was already posted, will post again with my info when i get home. This video show the problem quite clearly.

the 1-10 analogy of only reporting 1, 4, 8, 10 is an easier way of understanding, and this video shows it exactly.

Wow... I wasn't aware of this. That is... scary bad. Explains everything.