Lack of UDP support in the new Graal Client

Rufus · #1 03-07-2011, 04:16 AM

Remade as a thread instead of a post as per Stefan's suggestion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stefan

- removed UDP support because it doesn't work for most people anymore

Removing UDP support is not going to be received well on classic servers such as Unholy Nation. I understand that it won't affect Graal in a wider sense, but for activities such as sparring, the UDP support we had/have in the Graal v5 client plays an important role as it provides smoothness. Not only that but I am from the United Kingdom and while I don't use UDP for data packages everyone just appears to be skippy in general, as I do to them.

I don't think removing this feature is going to sit well with players.

EclipsedAngel · #2 03-07-2011, 04:22 AM

Instead of removing UDP altogether, how about working to improve the coding? UDP works fine with all my other applications, so it has to be the coding.

Latency when using TCP is very annoying, and adjusting yourself to time the delay when sparring is absolutely annoying. It's a bunch of mind games, and the best way around it was using UDP.

I also liked the microphone function, but I guess that's gone now too.

Hiro · #3 03-07-2011, 04:29 AM

holy **** that is ridiculous. why would you remove support for something so crucial to the smoothness of gameplay? if anything, you should add more support for UDP instead of getting rid of it

seriously stop ruining what little we have left

Crono · #4 03-07-2011, 04:29 AM

stupid choice but stefan doesnt play graal so whatever

Talbourn · #5 03-07-2011, 04:30 AM

I happen to find UDP to be very beneficial when playing Graal with other players who use it. It cuts down the latency and sword delay between players. Especially since UN seems to lag a lot more since Maloria has been put back up on the Classic server list.

ffcmike · #6 03-07-2011, 04:38 AM

I fully understand how the removal of UDP would ease the streamlining of the client, I even see a scripting benefit it would provide such as with more accurately appearing damage involving triggers, where the use of UDP might make it appear inaccurate.

The problem I see in removing it is that there is alot of players that highly favour the use of it when sparring, PKing or playing events with the basic sword combat etc.
I have experienced seemingly real time spars when myself and a geographically nearby opponent have both used UDP, it's even improved the quality of sparring when facing somebody a long distance away that would usually have very unpredictable lag.

When you consider that it is community based content such as spars and events that keeps the majority of players occupied (and this is coming from somebody who highly stresses the importance of solid content), a change like this could possibly do more damage than good.

fowlplay4 · #7 03-07-2011, 05:38 AM

It seems stupid to me that I would have to open a port for a game that I'm not hosting.

Hopefully streamlining the client means improving the networking code as well, and other improvements to return the "smooth" feel that apparently UDP (I don't use it) gives.

WhiteDragon · #8 03-07-2011, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fowlplay4

It seems stupid to me that I would have to open a port for a game that I'm not hosting.

Hopefully streamlining the client means improving the networking code as well, and other improvements to return the "smooth" feel that apparently UDP (I don't use it) gives.

I'm considerably sure the reason UDP was any smoother was not because it was UDP, but because it was a direct connection to the other client, which could also be done with TCP.

Ares · #9 03-07-2011, 05:54 AM

just when you think this game cant get worse..

fowlplay4 · #10 03-07-2011, 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteDragon

I'm considerably sure the reason UDP was any smoother was not because it was UDP, but because it was a direct connection to the other client, which could also be done with TCP.

So I decided to try out the V5 Client and wanted to confirm this. I am seeing other players IPs in my list of active UDP connections.

It would be cool if Stefan had regional nodes for this kind of setup instead of forcing everyone to connect to each other.

Inverness · #11 03-07-2011, 06:26 AM

The only way UDP can not "work for most people anymore" is if it is badly coded. This is ridiculous.

Not using UDP for things like player movement is terrible and simply asking for trouble.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ffcmike

I fully understand how the removal of UDP would ease the streamlining of the client, I even see a scripting benefit it would provide such as with more accurately appearing damage involving triggers, where the use of UDP might make it appear inaccurate.

No. UDP is an optional unreliable but fast protocol. There is no need to use it for things like triggers which need to be reliale. You seem to be implying that people would have to choose between UDP or TCP, which is not the case.

Player movement is something that needs to happen using UDP.

Also, there are awesome libraries like RakNet that provide reliable and optionally ordered UDP.

ffcmike · #12 03-07-2011, 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inverness

The only way UDP can not "work for most people anymore" is if it is badly coded. This is ridiculous.

Not using UDP for things like player movement is terrible and simply asking for trouble.

No. UDP is an optional unreliable but fast protocol. There is no need to use it for things like triggers which need to be reliale. You seem to be implying that people would have to choose between UDP or TCP, which is not the case.
.

I don't think you understand where I'm coming from, when you're scripting a form of damage there's a very narrow range of mechanisms that support UDP, the way the Default aswell as Classic's custom HD works is to scan other players gani's to see if it is an attack and then process the appropriate hitboxes, UDP is obviously fine with this as it is sending players coordinates and gani data, another method which also works via UDP is a direct triggeraction on a coordinate that can be received by other players within a weapon.

When it comes to triggering to the server and handling damage from there UDP can often cause confusion, as the coordinate you may see a player on your own client may vary highly from the coordinate you'd receive from the server, which is ofcourse handling the damage.

Admins · #13 03-07-2011, 02:05 PM

The way Graal was using UDP was fast but doesn't work for most people: people behind NATs, also on iPhone, Android, Flash/Facebook. It's also possible to use UDP for exchanging data between server and client, we can try that in the future. This kind of data exchange was previously used in Graal3D.

Crono · #14 03-07-2011, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stefan

The way Graal was using UDP was fast but doesn't work for most people: people behind NATs, also on iPhone, Android, Flash/Facebook. It's also possible to use UDP for exchanging data between server and client, we can try that in the future. This kind of data exchange was previously used in Graal3D.

UDP makes players much much smoother. On UN there was a big movement to help fix everyone's UDP, to the extent where the majority were using UDP over TCP. This helped keep spars fair, as TCP is too skippy which only makes it worse if it's a North American player vs a European.

dmhabe · #15 03-08-2011, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ares

just when you think this game cant get worse..

I agree....
The addition to Maloria on the classic list has already made UN laggy and I see a dramatic decrease in sparring because of it. Removing the UDP function of Graal will Cripple sparring,Pking, maybe even some events. I wouldn't advise it.

ffcmike · #16 03-08-2011, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talbourn

Especially since UN seems to lag a lot more since Maloria has been put back up on the Classic server list.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmhabe

The addition to Maloria on the classic list has already made UN laggy.

Maloria is hosted on a different machine than UN, can't say I've noticed an increase of lag on Classic either, which is also on the same machine as UN.

Crono · #17 03-08-2011, 12:58 AM

UDP now UDP forever!!

nullify · #18 03-08-2011, 04:15 PM

Like Maloria was the root of UN's lag problems.

Crono1508 · #19 03-08-2011, 09:11 PM

This is a huge deal for gameplay. If you remove this protocol, I think it will be the end for many people who spar, especially me!

DustyPorViva · #20 03-08-2011, 09:15 PM

uPNP support would be good for people who aren't familiar with port forwarding since most routers come with it enabled by default.

Crono · #21 03-08-2011, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

uPNP support would be good for people who aren't familiar with port forwarding since most routers come with it enabled by default.

go stefan go

WhiteDragon · #22 03-08-2011, 09:32 PM

I'm under the impression that if Stefan were to add client-to-client UDP back, he would rewrite it. It could take some time. If it happens though, UPnP support would definitely be a good idea.

I think using UDP for talking to the server about certain things (player location, ganis, etc) would also be an improvement (instead of TCP all the time).

Either way, the networking is somewhere where Graal could use some improvement and I'd like to see it worked on now that it's being touched.