No problem. One more thing. I notice the game tends to switch to a higher buffer when the network becomes unstable. Then once the network does become stable again, the game takes a moment then returns back to lowest buffer. Is it possible to have this as a stat as well?
No problem. One more thing. I notice the game tends to switch to a higher buffer when the network becomes unstable. Then once the network does become stable again, the game takes a moment then returns back to lowest buffer. Is it possible to have this as a stat as well?
Yes actually - we're planning to add a graph showing that buffering as part of this investigation. :]
Would it be possible or practical to have a stat that shows whether shots are being rejected by the server?
We've actually talked about adding this a few times in the past, but never prioritized it. We weren't sure whether it would be valuable or just triggering, especially since dropping some shots is unavoidable around death (and you usually already know when it happened). I'll bring it up again with the team though - thanks for the suggestion.
Hello! Appreciate the detailed post! Have a quick one for packet loss if you don't mind.
Why is packet loss intermittent for my games? Some games I jump in and get around 30% packet loss which is just unplayable tbh. So I quit my client, reconnect my lan cable, get back in the game and mostly solves my packet loss down to 0% so I don' t think it has something to do with my ISP maybe? Any in-game solution I can do to prevent packet loss?
Hey Jaux, it's hard to say with packet loss, since it's typically an issue with your network or ISP. Packets could get dropped anywhere along the route between you and the game server. If the issue persists for a while, your ISP or network admin are usually your best bet to help diagnose where the issue is occurring. Letting them know may also help them identify or confirm a hardware problem if other folks in your area have reported similar issues.
The only valorant-related packet loss issue that I've come across recently was due to a few players' networks not being able to keep up with Val's packet send rate when running at high framerates (>144 FPS). As an experiment, you could try limiting your framerate to 60 when you're seeing packet loss. Limiting framerate also reduces packet send rate, so that test would help you determine whether it's send-rate related.
Wow, thanks for giving us some insight into how things work behind the scenes!
I've had one personal observation (that might be just in my head) which could be responsible for some of the inconsistency. When counterstrafing it feels like sometimes I'm at my most accurate when I take a shot in the middle of the counter strafe (when effectively stopped), but other times it feels like I'm much more accurate if I shoot later, after I've already started moving the other direction. Is movement inaccuracy calculated on the server side? And, if so, is it possible that in some situations the server thinks you're moving when you took the shot, but on your client you took the shot when standing still?
hey, Sad. In theory, the server should be playing back your movement, triggers, and other inputs at a delay but otherwise synchronized to how you played them on your client. Having said that, we'll still go add some extra checks to our client/server shot result validation to double check that movement and inaccuracy states agree. Appreciate the tip!
Read moreHey!, thank you for the indepht explanation on your approach to this problem. I figured I would use this to maybe get an answer on something that has been annoying me ever since you added the option to choose wich servers to queue on.
What is bothering me the most in my games (EU Immortal 2-3) is peekers advantage when playing against players with a high ping (60+). You basically have to swing as you just get killed with no time to react when holding angles. The guy that swings gets a way to big advantage. Being forced to swing certain angles that you would rather be holding due to high ping players just takes away from the tactical experience one would expect from a tac shooter at the high ranks.
I have had so many games were the the top fragging duelist had a ping of 80-100+, which I have never experienced in say CSGO (playing with high ping in CS is just a horrible experience, whereas in valorant you are completely fine as long as you are the one peeking for som...
Hey blubbi, thanks for sharing that. It’s a good point about how allowing server selection can negatively impact match quality. That’s one of the unfortunate consequences of peeker’s advantage - players with high ping are very disadvantaged if they try to hold angles. It incentivizes those high ping players to always run around corners, which as you say, takes away from the slower, more methodical experience that you tend to see on LAN or low ping environments.
We try to balance the benefits that players & parties get from being able to specify server preferences with the impact that could have on other players' experiences. Server preference is just one factor that gets fed into the matchmaker, which gets considered alongside other match quality factors to put you in a game.
I'm not an expert here, so I can't personally speak to any changes we'd consider. I'll bring up your feedback and suggestions with others on the dev team who know more though. We may also...
Read moreRead moreThanks for the answer!
- As for the Shazam's clip - I actually meant attacker's PoV being much slower than what Shaz as defender got to see.
If you look closely - Attacker firstly peeks, notices Shaz, performs a 'stutter step' again like short peek and then shoots.
What defender sees? Just ferrari peek and insta shoot. Shaz had 0 time to react, even tho on attacker's PoV we clearly see Shaz should have been able to kill him as he had enough of time.
About that 4/5 bullet - Sure, it's a common thing. Shazam was already dead to server.
Still - such 'ferrari' peek looking diffent with 0 time to react is common, especially in DM.
What's the theory behind it? Shouldn't it work slightly different way? Why the peekers advantage feeling is so huge in Valorant even tho while watching one of Riot's video(december2021) about server etc it seems like the manufacture is pretty solid and peeker's advantage should really be minimized.
...
If you look closely - Attacker firstly peeks, notices Shaz, performs a 'stutter step' again like short peek and then shoots.
What defender sees? Just ferrari peek and insta shoot. Shaz had 0 time to react, even tho on attacker's PoV we clearly see Shaz should have been able to kill him as he had enough of time.
This clip is a good illustration of the tradeoffs for visualizing damage immediately vs delaying it to sync to character movement.
The build they were playing on is from before we synced movement and damage, so you see AZK's initial step out from cover, then Shaz's client learns that he died from the server and we show it immediately. As Shaz's body starts to cover the camera, you can see AZK start to step, continuing his movement to where he had fired the shot on his screen.
In VAL today, we'd wait to show Shaz that he was dead until AZK completed the sidestep, but any shots Shaz fired during that window would be...
Read moreThis tells me there aren't enough Guardian skins in the game.
I really like the idea of a top frag glow and I hope it comes back, but I didn't love the skin. u/Riot_Preeti if you're reading this I will pay 93 million dollars for a singularity vandal with a top frag glow. If it was on a more "normal" skin it'd be hype. They probably want to keep it special though
93 million dollars!?
devtrackers.gg
