MechWarrior: Living Legends
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Virtual LAN  (Read 569 times)
CryingFist
Bondsman
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


View Profile
« on: May 19, 2008, 03:42:06 PM »

Hi everyone,

hope it's not a "noob question", but, it'll be possible to host MWLL games using virtual LAN programs such as Hamachi, or it'll be mandatory to stick to MWLL servers?

Hope the post it's in the right place, and thanks for your answers!
Logged
ToeBall
Code Monkey One
Lead Dev
Star Captain
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1163



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2008, 03:55:35 PM »

It's possible but unnessacary and worse yet, inefficient since it adds overhead and you'll really want as much bandwidth as you can get.
Logged

death_grin
MWLL DEV
Star Captain
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 851


Level Design/Enviromental artist


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2008, 05:05:57 PM »

so yes it would be possible Tongue
Logged

ToeBall
Code Monkey One
Lead Dev
Star Captain
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1163



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 19, 2008, 05:49:12 PM »

Actually, just thought of another possible problem with tunneling. If Crysis thinks you're playing on a LAN it uses ALOT more bandwidth because it shares more data with the server and does not compress it. This is to save processing power and provide smoother gameplay. Crytek also did some really cool things on the client side to make internet gameplay smoother like object lead hit detection, which isn't used on LAN games quite so much since there's far less latency. If you do tunnel over the net you'd better have an unbelivably bad ass ping before trying. The answer is still yes, you could, but really should play an internet game over the internet and just password protect the server.
Logged

CryingFist
Bondsman
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2008, 01:35:58 AM »

Thanks for the answers, my curiosity is now more than satisfied!  Smiley
Logged
Seraph
Apprentice Dev
Star Captain
*
Online Online

Posts: 765


Steven "Seraph" Grimm


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2008, 06:31:29 AM »

Thought about the compression thing - if the VPN connection itself is compressed that should make up for it, wouldn't it? Not that I am going to use that one since I am not able to share my bandwidth with 16 others players ... Smiley
Logged

In the heat of battle, legends are born ...

ToeBall
Code Monkey One
Lead Dev
Star Captain
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1163



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2008, 07:22:45 AM »

No, the specific data streamed is different on LAN and internet games. Specifically, there's alot more of it used. Also using tunnel compression would add even more latancy yet.
Logged

Seraph
Apprentice Dev
Star Captain
*
Online Online

Posts: 765


Steven "Seraph" Grimm


View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2008, 07:31:13 AM »

Specifically, there's alot more of it used. Also using tunnel compression would add even more latancy yet.

That would explain the ~100 ping on games like Supreme Commander when I played with 2 of my friends ... Smiley Without VPN it was a bit better (~60-80 ping). Didn't think that compression will add so much latency. Glad you don't feel it on remote desktops.

EDIT: Actual ping command returns me a ping of 80ms on a VPN connection. Funnily though it has the same response times when using no VPN connection and hitting the ext. interface directly. I am guessing adding more data will stress the connection way more than just a single ICMP packet ... Smiley
« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 07:35:09 AM by Seraph » Logged

In the heat of battle, legends are born ...

PanzerBoxb
Captain Cheese™
Star Captain
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1163



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2008, 09:05:02 AM »

Pretty much.  You have to remember that the endpoint of the VPN/tunnel has to transition the packet and that takes processing time.
Logged
KorJax
Level Design (Reader of Stickies)
Apprentice Dev
Lance Captain
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 605


Memento Mori


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2008, 06:38:09 PM »

Specifically, there's alot more of it used. Also using tunnel compression would add even more latancy yet.

That would explain the ~100 ping on games like Supreme Commander when I played with 2 of my friends ... Smiley Without VPN it was a bit better (~60-80 ping). Didn't think that compression will add so much latency. Glad you don't feel it on remote desktops.

EDIT: Actual ping command returns me a ping of 80ms on a VPN connection. Funnily though it has the same response times when using no VPN connection and hitting the ext. interface directly. I am guessing adding more data will stress the connection way more than just a single ICMP packet ... Smiley

Supreme Commander can run relatively smoothly/well with 400-500 ping.  It's an RTS that doesn't have a strong focus on clicks-per-minute so you don't need lightning quick reflexes or ping to get it done.

I've played games perfectly fine with over 300 or so ping from everyone on SupCom.

Connection problems start to occur higher than that, and late game might be bottlenecked by the lower ping when alot of units are flying around on games with plenty of players.
Logged


ToeBall
Code Monkey One
Lead Dev
Star Captain
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1163



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 20, 2008, 07:21:25 PM »

That's correct, and Crysis works beautifully even with a 500 ms ping, but over the internet. If you use a VPN you're using the LAN protocol which is VERY DIFFERENT and does not play quite so well with 1/2 a second of latancy.
Logged

Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Metallic Abyss Theme by SMFers
Powered by SMF 1.1.7 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!