EPTIf I was as leetskeet as you I'd totally hack TL and steal your icon !
Some notes regarding SC2 networking - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ToeJam
United States282 Posts
If I was as leetskeet as you I'd totally hack TL and steal your icon ! | ||
|
FrostedMiniWeet
United States636 Posts
I'm on windows 7 64-bit and I see a DWORD (32-bit) and a QWORD (64-bit) R1CH says to use DWORD but I'm assuming he's on a 32 bit windows program. Should I use QWORD since I'm on a 64-bit? using a DWORD or a QWORD in the registry has nothing to do with the cpu architecture. The registry is like a simple database, and a DWORD or QWORD is just the size on disk that the field will occupy. This would only become a problem if the value is too large to fit in the DWORD, and the program reading the registry truncates the QWORD value by casting it to a DWORD. Stick with DWORD, since that is the size of the field that is expected. | ||
|
sword_siege
United States624 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
 | ||
|
Beardfish
United States525 Posts
Setting the TcpAckFrequency may improve your apparent ping but will not improve your actual network speed. If anything, it may make it worse by increasing the number of actual packets being transmitted by your machine for the same amount of data. When a computer connects to another computer using TCP it performs what is known as the TCP Three-way Handshake. what happens is this: 1. Client computer sends a SYN (synchronize) packet to the server computer 2. Server computer sends a SYN-ACK (SYN-acknowledged) packet to the client computer 3. Client computer sends a final ACK (ACK acknowledged packet to the server computer. Thus begins the TCP connection. All these SYN, SYN-ACK, and ACK packets carry no actual data. The Windows network stack, since Windows 2000 has, by default, only responded to every other TCP SYN packet unless additional data packets are not received within a specific period of time (per RFC-1122). This reduces the total number of non-data packets that must be sent. Changing the referenced registry value to 1 will cause Windows to respond to every SYN packet, thus doubling the TCP overhead for a connection. While this will likely improve the "ping" rating you get in online games (since it takes a SYN packet less time to be ACKed) it will not increase the actual speeds of data transfer but reduce it. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
As R1CH said in the first post and the blurb you quoted reiterates, increasing TCPAckFrequency will increase the overhead associated with a connection because it increases the number of non-data packets that are sent. Adding in these extra non-data packets reduces the amount of actual data packets that can be delivered, which reduces your potential max bandwidth. For our purposes, we want to reduce TCP latency at the expense of bandwidth. Lower latency is better. Essentially, there's a tradeoff involved, and the default setting is geared towards what is best for most people. We're tweaking the default setting to get better performance in our particular game scenario because bandwidth is not a concern for us. edit: to be a little more accurate (but R1CH already explained it), increasing the ACK frequency just reduces the latency in the case that a TCP packet was lost. By requiring more ACKs, you find out sooner if a packet was lost, so it can be retransmitted (and received) faster. | ||
|
spinesheath
Germany8679 Posts
On March 25 2010 05:00 R1CH wrote: "Drop hacks" / Lag ... In theory this should allow a large number of spectators to be in a game without impacting the latency for the players - if a spectator lags, who cares? I could be wrong, but I think I remember seeing lag screens where observers were lagging, particularly during Zotac streams. Is there a special reason for those lags or did Blizzard not actually implement observer slots the who-cares-if-they-lag way despite being rather simple to implement? | ||
|
Neo27
United States154 Posts
| ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
I have a beta key from a friend, but i can't download it , ( i believe my school blocks p2p sharing ) . I tried disabling p2p and that didn't work I guess they blocked the ports for sc2 ... or something... Wondering if anyone has an idea of what i could do  | ||
|
Metaspace
Austria670 Posts
Thats's what we expect of a multibillion dollar software firm. The decision to use TCP when it's an industry standard to use UDP in comparable games (for obvious reasons!) is another epic fail. And: Why did they choose a central server with all disadvantages (bottleneck, latency) and then not make use of advantages this setup would offer (prevent maphacking etc.)? Answer: They want to control network play, and give a shit about a good game. | ||
|
Marksman
Malaysia523 Posts
On March 25 2010 05:00 R1CH wrote: You may notice there is still the "Waiting for players" screen. Rather than allow the server to continue if one player is lagging, it pauses the game for everyone. This was done out of fairness I imagine, since if someone is lagging it would not be fair for them to have to engage the other players army. Technically there is no reason why the game can't keep going similar to how HoN handles latency where only the player lagging experiences any lag. In theory this should allow a large number of spectators to be in a game without impacting the latency for the players - if a spectator lags, who cares? Can someone kindly explain to me in detail on this? Sometimes I find games stop sometimes with this window and sometimes it stops without this window at all. So I'm wondering what's causing the second case. Note: Game wasn't paused by a player. Thanks. | ||
|
wintergt
Belgium1335 Posts
| ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
sword_siege
United States624 Posts
On March 29 2010 23:55 CharlieMurphy wrote: Yes, this has been answered already. In fact, in the original post. For your convenience, it increases your bandwidth but increases your responsiveness or latency as well. ok this is awesome, but are there any drawbacks to doing the ack registry thing? Sorry if this has been asked already. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
On March 29 2010 17:53 HeavOnEarth wrote: Um, a semi- sc2 related question. I have a beta key from a friend, but i can't download it , ( i believe my school blocks p2p sharing ) . I tried disabling p2p and that didn't work I guess they blocked the ports for sc2 ... or something... Wondering if anyone has an idea of what i could do quite offtopic, but did you try downloading the installer to a usb or external drive and transporting it over? I used my 80g ipod for stuff like this all the time. In fact I even have scbw installed with chaoslauncher on my ipod and I can plug it in and play anywhere without installing. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
Change TcpAckFrequency to 1: How Run registry editor (Start, Run, regedit) and navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters\Interfaces. You will see a list of random looking keys, find the one that has the "IPAddress" value that matches your current IP. Right click on the right side and go New -> DWORD. Call it TcpAckFrequency with a value of 1. Why this works Usually TCP delays sending acknowledgments of received data until either more data has been received OR a timeout period elapses. This timeout period may be because the sending side is waiting for the ack before sending more data. By setting TcpAckFrequency to 1, you send an acknowledgment immediately rather than waiting, preventing miniature "stalls" in the data stream. Note that this WILL reduce your bandwidth, as you will be sending more ack packets, thus using more network resources. If i'm on a wifi router connection, do I need to find the computer IP or my network IP? So like 192.168.1.103 which would be specific , or 22.172.226.22 which would be my whole house. Also, in the case of the specific one, it seems to change from time to time for whatever reason. Will I have to change the registry setting every time as well? In every directory, I'm seeing 0.0.0.0 for the IP , but in a couple of them I do see the DhcpIPadress value at 192.168.1.103  On March 25 2010 18:05 Qiin wrote: Usually the folder with the MOST stuff is the right one. I've got 11 folders, 3 of which have a lot of shit. what kind of vague/uneducated reply is this >.< On March 25 2010 19:04 SoleSteeler wrote: http://www.wowinterface.com/downloads/info13581-LeatrixLatencyFix.html Just run that script. Very simple, easy to use, easy to remove etc. also, anyone who is having the same problems the download from this link is here http://www.wowinterface.com/downloads/dl.php?s=a7d40c29ec44de35bad9006f38adfeb7&id=13581 | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
On March 30 2010 00:17 CharlieMurphy wrote: quite offtopic, but did you try downloading the installer to a usb or external drive and transporting it over? I used my 80g ipod for stuff like this all the time. In fact I even have scbw installed with chaoslauncher on my ipod and I can plug it in and play anywhere without installing. yea im just gonna go to my friends apartment and do this later. just wondering if anyone hosted it somewhere, not trusting any cracked stuff. | ||
|
fonger
United Kingdom1218 Posts
On March 29 2010 21:10 Metaspace wrote: This design sucks! A game which needs manual registry tweaking to function properly, awesome. Thats's what we expect of a multibillion dollar software firm. The decision to use TCP when it's an industry standard to use UDP in comparable games (for obvious reasons!) is another epic fail. Remember that this is still beta. Assuming sensible modularity, it wouldn't be difficult for Blizzard to rework the network engine to use UDP before release. And: Why did they choose a central server with all disadvantages (bottleneck, latency) and then not make use of advantages this setup would offer (prevent maphacking etc.)? Answer: They want to control network play, and give a shit about a good game. I think you might want to do some research on exactly what foolproof maphack-prevention in an RTS of SC2's scale would entail before bashing them like that. I'm pretty sure it's already been discussed in this thread. Edit: ehh, was browsing and didn't notice the dates. Anyway, thanks R1CH for the info ^^ | ||
|
Shadowfury333
Canada314 Posts
On April 02 2010 12:40 fonger wrote:Remember that this is still beta. Assuming sensible modularity, it wouldn't be difficult for Blizzard to rework the network engine to use UDP before release. Perhaps, but keep in mind that using UDP, as has been discussed, requires constructing a sufficiently reliable Application-layer netcode for StarCraft 2 to work properly with packet loss/re-ordering/etc. Basically, Blizzard would have to write a bunch of code to handle what TCP does automatically. However, if they do this, it would be very appreciated. At the very least they could scale the forced command lag to match network conditions. I think you might want to do some research on exactly what foolproof maphack-prevention in an RTS of SC2's scale would entail before bashing them like that. I'm pretty sure it's already been discussed in this thread. Although I doubt this is possible given how many machines would have to be dedicated to maphack prevention, what about threading? Why not have some independent thread be created for every Nth packet of the game, which is analyzed for map-hacking independent of the routing thread? Should one of the players be found to be map-hacking, then it is simply a matter of dropping that player. The flaws of this are somewhat obvious, though. The most notable is practicality. Blizzard would probably require a room of computers just for checking each game for maphacking, independent of the server (some sort of RPC setup would be needed here). | ||
|
space_yes
United States548 Posts
On April 03 2010 09:00 Shadowfury333 wrote: Perhaps, but keep in mind that using UDP, as has been discussed, requires constructing a sufficiently reliable Application-layer netcode for StarCraft 2 to work properly with packet loss/re-ordering/etc. Basically, Blizzard would have to write a bunch of code to handle what TCP does automatically. It's not that bad for a company like Blizzard. On March 25 2010 05:00 R1CH wrote: Things that will NOT help There is a huge amount of useless information on the Internet that offers supposedly improved performance. The following will NOT improve your network quality at all: Opening your ports. Changing "TCPNoDelay" registry setting. The TCPNoDelay enables/disables the Nagle algorithm. This can be disabled dynamically by an application using winsock. SC2 probably does this automatically. You guys may want to set your TCPAckFrequency back to its default when you're not gaming if you stream lots of data and don't have a sick internet connection. | ||
| ||
