Community: Message List

Re: To Those thinking about playing league…. a couple notes..

donotreply@activision.com — Thu, 23 May 2013 05:20:56 GMT

owiseguyo wrote:

I just saw 6500 playing league a couple hours ago out of peak hours. It's actually one of the more popular playlists. Why does everyone think league is dead? I've never seen less then 2000 in the playlist.

If Vahn thinks that people care about League play.... he's wrong. The majority have clearly spoken.

If Vahn wanted to make League play relevant.... where are the prizes? If they wanted to actually get people caring about league play... I mean, people actually wanting to win. Where are the prizes? Headsets, paid trips to events, XBOX Live or PSN $, etc...? League Play is nothing more than Pub matches, with a few rules thrown in.

The majority dont care, because there is nothing to care about.

Re: To Those thinking about playing league…. a couple notes..

donotreply@activision.com — Thu, 23 May 2013 02:15:25 GMT

What Vahn and you, apparently dont get.... the majority of COD players dont care. The majority dont care about competitive play. The majority will never care. COD is the number one selling game because it appeals to the majority of gamers. The majority of players, are casual players. You are never going to change that. If COD developers try to.... sales will start dropping.

1 - Players dont control matchmaking. They red bar because its a playlist nobody cares about. Not enough people, means terrible matchmaking

2 and 3 - You cant tell people how to play a game they paid for

4 - You cant make anyone use a mic. Adults dont want to listen to squeakers. Squeakers dont want to listen to adults.

Note - If you actually think league play means something.....play with a group. If you enter as a random....you cant complain about randoms.

Re: Yet another lag post. Current Discussions

donotreply@activision.com — Wed, 22 May 2013 17:41:34 GMT

Nubdub wrote:

I have a theory on the answer and how it may create host disadvantage at times. Also have a possible solution. I think adjusting this calculation could create a much better game play environment for all involved. Less host migrations, less complaints by legitimate players, less WTF moments.

I dont claim to know how the host's anti lag works. I do know this.... sometimes laggy players get the advantage on me, when I host. It is rare for me.... but it happens. I will say that it should be impossible for that to happen. Lowest ping, should always win (both shooting, not missing blah,blah,blah).

All I can really add to this would be that it comes down to the matchmaking. I understand that developers want everyone to play. The problem with that is allowing horrible connections, into MP, degrades everyone's experience. Last week there was someone asking how they could improve their MP experience, because they were using satellite internet. That connection should never be allowed in MP. Never

Re: Yet another lag post. Current Discussions

donotreply@activision.com — Wed, 22 May 2013 17:12:10 GMT

Nubdub wrote:

Okay lets just discuss the host players "antilag" calculation. How do you believe it is determined?

Good question.

Re: People who quit League Play

donotreply@activision.com — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:46:43 GMT

owiseguyo wrote:

yesterday, league had over 7000 players playing it at one point. I find matches instantly. League is for the people who want to be challenged. If you care about your stats, league wont be for you.

I have never seen more than 3000. I question your eyesight. Are you sure it wasnt 700?

Re: Let us choose from Scorestreak classes

donotreply@activision.com — Sat, 18 May 2013 23:12:10 GMT

dtuchpunk wrote:

Don't rely on your score streaks.

Really???

Re: Quickscoping and all the hate towards it...

donotreply@activision.com — Sat, 18 May 2013 06:13:51 GMT

SandSeven wrote:

I've never considered that aspect. It does have logic behind for sure.

I personally do not like the change to Ghost (UAV Jammer only). This was one of my points before the game came out. If you have to move, for Ghost to work..... weapon/game balance dictates - snipers get quickscoping.

Re: Quickscoping and all the hate towards it...

donotreply@activision.com — Sat, 18 May 2013 05:53:13 GMT

thebiindsniper wrote:

This is what I responded with on YouTube:

Quickscoping destroys the concept of a balanced sniper, which is to have a large disadvantage at closer ranges. Black Ops 1 did a decent job to nerf this ability by adding a "bobble sway" when scoping in during the first half second, and it should have been re-introduced and improved upon in Black Ops II. I've asked Vonderhaar via Twitter why quickscoping was allowed in Black Ops II, but I've yet to get an answer. My guess is that keeping QS was a business related decision to produce more profit.

In addition, you are correct in regards to how other weapons fare against a sniper. Yes a sniper may take longer to aim, but the compensation occurs with other non-shotgun/sniper weapons' taking 2-5 shots to kill a target. As a result, it gives a quickscoper plenty of time to place a clean shot while taking damage (with no flinch should they use toughness).

~RUGGED SAVIOR

Quickscoping was put in because of the change to Ghost. Snipers wouldnt be competetive, if you couldnt quickscope, using Ghost.

The cry babies wanted Ghost changed..... blame them.

Re: Lag Compensation Is Back Again & This Time It Means Business.

donotreply@activision.com — Fri, 17 May 2013 21:19:41 GMT

Zyncx wrote:

Fine, the game code is the same for all.
Then why are so many people complaining about bad connections, being 0.5seconds behind the camera, host disadvantage? It can only be the game thats at fault.

I have tried MANY, read, MANY combinations of upload speeds, DMZ, open ports, wifi, not wifi ect.
I have not come across a setting yet that gives me a stable reliable connection. And no, its not my connections. I have high speed internet, very little ping and close to 0% jitter on my line.

Im not talking about lag. I have 4bars 99% of the time, yet the game does not feel smooth. It feels out of sync. Like anything i do doesnt matter anyways.It feels sluggish and dull. Can you releate to any of this?

Why is that, high speed internet people are complaing about not being able to react, that what they are seeing has ALREADY happened? WHY?

You want an example of what im talking about?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPNvKQYJsfE

Just to keep my response short.... the death, the commentator said was the worst of all - going up the stairs, shock charge, shot in the back = the guy was coming down the stairs, plain as day. He was at the bottom of the stairs and he just didnt see him. His complaint should be about how fast the players move.... not lag.

Re: Lag Compensation Is Back Again & This Time It Means Business.

donotreply@activision.com — Fri, 17 May 2013 19:38:57 GMT

maccabi wrote:

The host player is only updating the server as to what its doing, whereas the host server is still updating all the players with all the players updates to the host.
Yes the host player would send and receive updates quicker but the ones to the host player would still only be as good as the updates the server had based on the other 11 updates.

I think alot of the complaints people have as host boil down to two main things
1) lack of understanding as to what does and does not happen if you host and
2) an assumption that they should have an advantage as host and not have the same expereince as the other 11 players

Would you say that in the past... the games didnt do as good of a job compensating for lag? What I mean is that lagging players would be at more of a disadvantage?

I dont get the host "disadvantage" that some claim to get. Im just trying to understand why they perceive it to be so.

Re: Lag Compensation Is Back Again & This Time It Means Business.

donotreply@activision.com — Fri, 17 May 2013 19:22:42 GMT

maccabi wrote:

mdub wrote:

maccabi wrote:

Nubdub wrote:

THE HOST DOES NOT HAVE LAG. If the host is experiencing lag type symptoms, they are artificially induced.
why do you assume the lag is your end added as a delay?
when you play as host you are subject to exactly the same influences and affects of lag as every other player as a result you get into an encounter with someone who is lagging.. this is the result

You know pro tip you'd find it alot easier as would alot of people if you stopped over analysing stuff and assuming
Just trying to wrap my brain around this one thing Macc. Generally speaking.......

If the host encounters a lagging player, shouldnt the host actually be ahead of what the other players sees? Wouldnt the lagging player be the one getting the "WTF" moments, while the host mows them down?

nope because the host is just another player, not saying you do but alot of people mistakenly think as they are host whats on their screen is the true game state it isnt.

You have the host (server ) then 12 players (including the host player) connected to the server.

Each of those 12 players has there own unique version of the game which is offset with everyone else by 10's of ms.

in a 2v2 encounter the host SERVER will mash those unique states and its own true game state (order it recieives updates from players) to work out as close to possible the outcome of an event

it doesnt matter if you are the host player or just a player the same rules apply (the only difference is the host player has the lowest ping, BUT is still affected by lagging players,

The host players gameworld is still generated by the updates from the server, which are in turn generated by the updates from the other players.

Would the host's game state not be the "king of the hill", so to speak? Would the host's updates not be "first in line?"

I am only going off of older COD games and remembering the blatant advantage, the host seemed to receive. Am I just crazy?

Just trying to understand why so many people think the host gets screwed now. I think being host is still an advantage.... just not so obvious anymore.

Re: To all the "Good Players"

donotreply@activision.com — Fri, 17 May 2013 19:30:19 GMT

Chicago2121 wrote:

To all of you who dont camp in bases and hard scope(Or quickscope in genaral), Or camp in room with Lmg's and target finders. Who dont camp in corners with shotguns or constantly throw all types of flashes and stuff through the map. Thanks for playing the game and not being a dick lol

I take it you speak for the "bad players" then. Tell them to keep on feeding me kills!!

Re: Lag Compensation Is Back Again & This Time It Means Business.

donotreply@activision.com — Fri, 17 May 2013 18:37:09 GMT

maccabi wrote:

Nubdub wrote:

THE HOST DOES NOT HAVE LAG. If the host is experiencing lag type symptoms, they are artificially induced.
why do you assume the lag is your end added as a delay?
when you play as host you are subject to exactly the same influences and affects of lag as every other player as a result you get into an encounter with someone who is lagging.. this is the result

You know pro tip you'd find it alot easier as would alot of people if you stopped over analysing stuff and assuming

Just trying to wrap my brain around this one thing Macc. Generally speaking.......

If the host encounters a lagging player, shouldnt the host actually be ahead of what the other players sees? Wouldnt the lagging player be the one getting the "WTF" moments, while the host mows them down?

Re: I wish they had a vote to kick option

donotreply@activision.com — Fri, 17 May 2013 02:06:25 GMT

Gunzby wrote:

All in unmodded classes are legit (pick 17). My complaint has nothing to do with the class, but what ppl do with it. Complaining to Treyarch because of douchey play is like complaining to Farberware because someone went on a killing spree with a spoon....it makes no sense.

I don't care for campers, but no real issues with it. The worm is trolling and yes I know it's easily beaten. I figured out how to exploit ppl doing it the first time I saw it and that was a couple weeks before I saw ppl posting videos about it here and other cod sites.

Regardless I still think it's trolling and wouldn't have any problems booting them. Considering that I don't think that feature should be in the game it's a moot point.

That is why we will never get a vote to kick option. Someone shouldn't be kicked, because they have an annoying play style.

The squirm is a legit class. Annoying...... but legit.

Re: I wish they had a vote to kick option

donotreply@activision.com — Fri, 17 May 2013 00:47:37 GMT

Gunzby wrote:

Hmmm when I said I didn't have as much faith in the community concerning kicking players I thought it was apparent I didn't want the option. Obviously I was wrong.

As far as booting ppl doing the worm squirm...yes I am all for that because they're trolling. Sorry if I couldn't be more clear.

You actually believe people should be kicked for doing the squirm? Seriously?

Im not saying that I condone that style of play but think about what your saying. Your saying that people, using a legit class set up, should not be allowed to play?

Your complaint should be with Treyarch, not the players.

Re: Lag Compensation Is Back Again & This Time It Means Business.

donotreply@activision.com — Thu, 16 May 2013 19:54:24 GMT

deamonomic wrote:

ge0rdiemark wrote:

In response to the original post, you should not be pre aiming at doorways, the lag benefits the aggressor.

So, always be the guy turning the corner or coming through the door, not the camper aiming at the door.
if thats true why does everyone still whine about campers ALL the dam time?

Everyone doesnt. Its an excuse used by those that suck.

Re: I wish they had a vote to kick option

donotreply@activision.com — Thu, 16 May 2013 19:08:28 GMT

Gunzby wrote:

The last fps game I played before mw3 was Rogue Spear (Rainbow Six) on pc. The host had moderator power and it worked well. The only ppl I saw booted were bad connections, campers, glitchers and ppl using cheats.

I don't have as much faith in the community that plays this game. I'd be all about booting anyone doing the worm squirm though

So what your saying is.... if someone doesnt play the way you want them to, you want to be able to kick them.

Nope!!!!

Re: quick scope garbage and host lag, split screen lag

donotreply@activision.com — Thu, 16 May 2013 19:05:25 GMT

zmolez wrote:

Uh huh, thats not correct, watch the killcams

Really???

Re: quick scope garbage and host lag, split screen lag

donotreply@activision.com — Thu, 16 May 2013 18:33:24 GMT

zmolez wrote:

Its stupid and unfair, try it in real life..it doesnt work

Really???

Re: quick scope garbage and host lag, split screen lag

donotreply@activision.com — Thu, 16 May 2013 18:22:00 GMT

zmolez wrote:

Quick scoping is totally unfair, its not realistic its cheating and exploiting please get rid of this crap or turn off aim assist on sniper rifles, ITS NOT FAIR, please make it fair with the connections, I dont want to play with lagging Canadians, overseas people, and americans with slow connections, when I get host I cannot kill anyone, ITS NOT FAIR,make the kids that have bad and cheap internet pay the price for it, not us people who have a good connection that we pay extra for ITS NOT FAIR,why would you put lagging split screeners in multi player? They are cutting into profits and lagging and almost impossible to kill..think of all the console sales, live gold accounts and game sales lost... geez..thought you wanted to make money and provide good game play. ..??? ITS NOT FAIR or logical! It just might be a Battlefield fall for me...they got one thing right call of duty will be nothing but a "ghost" soon because alot of people I talk to are SICK OF THESE ISSUES! GET WITH THE PROGRAM TREARCH AND ACTIVISION

What is your definition of good internet vs cheap?