Validation Hit Tech
Comments
-
Pretty good job so far.
14 -
I got to say i didn't mind it but now showing that, they need to fix it so that it only revert a hit if you are on the other side because now that ######### makes no sense.
10 -
Ok,that's interesting lol
7 -
Clearly Bhvr did far more than just a 'whos action got to the server first' re: the survivor stunning the killer even on the same side of the pallet.
8 -
I'm kind of surprised people have never seen a reverse pallet stun before, as if they have only just been introduced.
9 -
Well they used to be very doable when vaccum pallets existed but before this update you would occasionally get the stun from doing it but the chances are you would be hit. From the looks of this video, it seems like it could make a bit of a come back.
9 -
It's so adorable to see that there are so many new players that don't know that pallet reverse stuns existed way before the pallet stun validation.
Great to have you here!
6 -
it's good to see blind main survs not realizing the actual problem presented on the video....
3 -
Of course people know what reverse pallet stuns are - the problem is they're making you functionally invincible during them. Lunge in to get a hit, even from away, and you'll get stunned and the survivor will take no damage.
They're meant to be risky, but now there's no real way to hit somebody who knows about this. They'll just drop it on your side and bypass the hit.
7 -
Enduring new meta i guess ?
1 -
People know what they are.
However this update feature readded in a form of pallet vacuum to them AND IFRAMES!
6 -
Can defo see that happening.
1 -
You can hear Felix scream right before the stun happens LMAO. The game just said "yeah you hit him but we're going to take it away and give him the stun." This is such a terrible system that needs to be reverted now. I know it's not fair for either side to deal with this but this is just too much.
9 -
I think a lot of Killers are feeling a lot of initial shock to having their hits overrode or getting unfairly stunned because the game has pretty much always just sided with the Killer. Survivors are giving the issue the cold shoulder because this is not anything new to us. We have been dealing with this and worse for five years.
That's not to say it is okay. It is really frustrating! I genuinely hope that they fix it for everyone - but not by just rolling it back. I went back to Killer to test it out and will say I had a few frustrations but still got 4k literally 7/10 of my rounds. And 3k 2 of them. I mention this only because I noticed it wasn't constantly happening. And the game is still VERY playable.
At least now as Survivor I'm sometimes able to leap from a two story window and take a few steps and that actually mean I'm safe.
Hang in there, everyone! Happy gaming!
1 -
if the survivor throws the pallet before you hit him on the server that’s what should happen…
The new pallet hit validation it’s working properly
if you don’t want this to happen try to get better latency
3 -
You didn't watch the video did you...
10 -
Yes I did
the pallet stun is registered first on the server
even tho he hit them in his screen.
that’s just how latency works…
3 -
Sure they did, but in their mind the killer in this video both somehow didn't hit the survivor before the pallet was dropped, and also the killer must have 300ms ping. That way, their ignorant statement is actually true
0 -
Lol the problems isn’t stun is the hit not registering and the ability reproduce it easily .
1 -
You do know this happens with sub 30 ping Vs 200+ ping survivors right?
Ping doesn't matter nor does who gets it first as this video proves. Its entirely survivor sided despite what the developers have said.
3 -
It has nothing to do with the server just as normal hits have nothing to do with the server. A normal hit is generated on the killers client and whatever the survivor does after that is ignored. This is why you can run behind a wall and still get hit by a ranged attack.
All they did was swap it to the survivors client and if they see the stun no matter what their ping is then stuff what the killer sees. I only say this because if it was ping based then i should not lose to someone with triple my ping. But i have.
Don't worry though. They are going to mask it to stop people complaining.
4 -
Yeah so fair, Killers get to see the auras of everything minus Survivors for free so why not just reveal those on a perpetual basis?
0 -
We don't see any ping indicators in the video, so how is the video proving anything at all except that the killer seems to have had worse latency to the servers than the survivor?
Do you have some solid evidence that actually proves that the killer ping to the server is lower than the affected survivor ping to the server at the very moment when the pallet stun happens (and yes, the "at the very moment" is actually very important, because we're connected via Internet, so Jitter is a thing)?
1 -
KYF.
In KYF, the Killer is the one most likely hosting.
Meaning that the Killer has a lower ping than the survivor.
Or do you want to dispute that somehow?
1 -
Ping has nothing to do with it, I made a post how my 40ping was not good enough to get hits on 60+ping and then people started ping doesnt really matter
2 -
Video proves you need better internet provider
2 -
Can you provide a link to a video that does show the latencies (killer to server and survivor to server)?
If you really want to help to resolve this (if there is something to resolve at all), then provide solid evidence. Though, to be honest, my hopes for that are pretty low.
"most likely hosting" reads like "I don't know for sure".
Is it there actually a consensus or even better an official statement that Custom Games are still P2P? And to give you an answer, I absolutely question everything people say in this forum. Especially in this case, people claim to have a lower ping than the survivor(s) they went against and yet we don't see any real evidence (why not just show the numbers and a video of the recorded live action to make a solid case?).
So far, all presented "evidence" is not making a case against pallet stun validation but for it.
1 -
I never said ping didn't really matter. I said it wasn't the only thing that factors into whether or not you get the hit at the pallet. But I'll help you out on this one.
@Pizzaman it is not only about killer and survivor ping. Just because a killer player gets stunned and didn't get the hit does not mean they have worse ping than the survivor. When the actions were first pressed in real time matters, as well as length of time actions take, as well as server process time all matter in the interaction. If the pallet was dropped at the exact same time in real time that the killer swings and time to hit the survivor is the same as time for the pallet to reach 50%, the person with the better ping will win. But it is unlikely that both the survivor and killer player both press their buttons at the exact same time and I don't know what the official times are for swing to hit and pallet to 50% are but they might not be the same and probably aren't. Because of this, it is possible for a survivor with worse ping to have the pallet stun reach the server first.
4 -
Look, I'm not saying it's happening, I'm not saying it's not happening. All that is needed to understand the situation is EVIDENCE.
Take EntitySpawn's post as an example. It says that it's happening, even though there was a 40 ping and that it looks like it was not good enough. Also what about the survivors latency? If someone makes a post with a concrete information ("40 ping"), then why not just put that it into a video together with some live action and show it to the world? Clearly the number 40 must come from somewhere, why not just show that? Is it really that hard? I'm not blindly believing people that just make claims in a "post" (and until there's evidence, it's just a claim), and nobody else should either.
"Just because a killer player gets stunned and didn't get the hit does not mean they have worse ping than the survivor." Yeah, so even more important to show those numbers in the evidence *.
Again, if someone claims that he/she got robbed of a hit (or even multiple hits) while his/her latency to the server was indeed lower than the suvivors latency to the server, then why would that person not put up the evidence *? Understand, everyone can make claims by making a post. If you want get heard, provide evidence *. Everything that is said, is just a claim until there's solid evidence *. And just putting text in this forum is not evidence *.
If this is an actual issue, and people know exactly that their latency to the server is lower than the latency to the server of other players (as they claim), yet they still get robbed, then it shouldn't be too hard to put up some solid evidence *. If a person can't provide any evidence *, but still claims they got robbed that's just a big red flag to me.
* What is solid evidence in this case: a live action gameplay recording with an indication that shows the killers latency to the server and the survivors latency to the server.
1 -
Why would someone go to that much work when we can continue down this train of logic and say 'nope, didnt have all the info'? We don't know what the code running on the server is doing so we need to have behavior show us the actual implementation of the code. Oh and also we need to know where the server is based and what OS and version of that OS is running on it. Also the hardware of the machine, also the dependencies of DBD and also the versions of those. Also the manufacturer of the hardware. Also any kind of network blips on the day of between each client and also the server as well as the general network traffic of all networks in that area at the exact moment of the 'test'.
1 -
There's already a montage, it's just missing the most vital part, which is the latency numbers. The whole "pallet stun validation" topic is just about the latency of clients to the server. Yet, nobody actually showed proof/evidence of those numbers. It's all just claims that the latency should not have been an issue, yet they "got robbed".
Also, the "pallet stun validation" never was about "OS", "hardware of the machine", etc. just latency. Let's stick to the topic, shall we?
2 -
Except your OS is what is handling taking in those network packets off of ports, doing what it needs to do and passing them off to the applications behind those ports. If a particular OS version has a .0034 second delay due to a coding issue of that than any network traffic that hits a machine with that version of the OS on it will suffer that delay in network traffic. Hardware of the machinery combined with certain library issues can cause delays as well. It is not as simple as DBD Client -> Server -> Client. There are tons of moving parts in between that can easily add delay. If you are going to make such a big deal about a ping value we should clearly care about ALL variables that can impact that time.
1 -
I believe what I see...and from what I have seen the killer got robbed of hits...Can I see what the server "sees", nope so I don't care. If I hear a scream and see blood splatter it should be a hit.
3 -
@EntitySpawn didn't say the killer in the video had a ping of 40 and the survivor had a ping of 60+. He said he has been in a match himself with a ping of 40 and a survivor with a ping of 60+ and had a hit cancelled at a pallet. He said this because you said "how is the video proving anything at all except that the killer seems to have had worse latency to the servers than the survivor?". Why should you not believe him?
You don't need a video to prove this can happen either. All you need is math.
I don't know what a pallet drop time is so just to give it a time, let's use .25 seconds or 250 milliseconds. If someone knows the official time, let us know. Using that and knowing a stun occurs at 50% that means it would take 125 milliseconds from start of pallet throw to get to 50% and initiate a stun. Let's look at a scenario using time stamps in HH:MM:SS:SSS. Assume the survivor has a ping of 65ms and the killer has a ping of 40ms at the time of their actions in game. Just to keep it simple, let's assume zero server processing time.
Survivor drops a pallet at 12:58:50:942
With a ping of 65ms, the pallet drop start arrives at the server at 12:58:51:007.
With our pallet drop time assumption, the server sees the pallet at 50% at 12:58:51:132.
On the killer side, they swung at some point and the hit occurs at 12:58:51:093. They see blood splatter and a scream because killer actions get instantaneous feedback as verified by a mod in one of the threads about this.
With a ping of 40ms, the killer hit gets to the server at 12:58:51:133.
Since the hit is 1ms after the stun, the stun is rewarded and the hit is cancelled.
On the killer screen, the pallet reaches 50% at 12:58:51:172. This is 39ms after the hit occurred on their screen.
So by the math, the killer with the better ping still sees the hit on their screen and has it cancelled because the server still received the stun before the hit. I believe EntitySpawn when he says he has been in games with survivors with worse ping and had his hits cancelled because the math proves that it can happen. It is not all about who has the best ping and absolutely killers with better ping can have this happen.
8 -
EntitySpawn was the killer, claims to have had a ping of 40, survivor a ping of 60. I get that. Still no proof was delivered. It's all just talk. No proof. I could claim to have had a match as killer with a ping of 20 and survivors had a ping of 200 and I got robbed of my hits through all those pallets (which I did not, but I could claim that).
Again, it's all just talk. Walls of text. No solid evidence. Calculations based on hear-say. We are on Page 2 of this discussion (in one of many discussions), yet there's no single piece of valid evidence. Looks like this is the status quo, and nobody can actually prove that this is unintended behaviour.
0 -
Did you look at my example? You don't need to see it on a video to prove it is possible. And since you can prove it is possible with math why would you just assume he/she is lying?
Are you saying the numbers I used are based on hear say? I used 40 ping and 65 ping to match what EntitySpawn said they had. The rest of the numbers I chose to use for the example to prove with math that a lower ping killer can have this happen. You are correct. The timestamps are not what occurred in the posted video. They don't have to be to prove this. Math is valid evidence.
2 -
why do you even bother...you are dealing with someone in denial; he doesn't even care about "proof", that's just his argument armor to avoid the idea he could be wrong. He's just been saying the same thing since the first comment "proof proof proof".
0 -
Mostly I did it to help out EntiySpawn because I was at least one person that said they could get hits cancelled even though they have better ping than a survivor. But you are right, I am getting the feeling I could tell them I am sitting in a chair as I type this message and they would say they don't believe me because I didn't post a video, with a valid ID clearly showing I am who I say I am, and a current day newspaper to prove I didn't record it 2 weeks ago.
And honestly I think we are on the same side as it pertains to the update. I like the new pallet stun/hit validation because I feel it is fairer. But I also see how people can be frustrated to see hits on their screens and having them cancelled. And telling anyone who complains about it on the forum that it is because they have worse ping than the survivor and need to get better internet might not be true because it can happen to killers that have better ping than the survivor.
2 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
haha yep. I had this happen to me. literally hit them in the back and they drop it and it gets taken away. dumbest garbage.
0 -
Just show me one example of this happening from the survivor's side and the we can talk. Right now it's a broken record of WiFi killer mains who don't want to accept any explanation and just want their ez hits through pallets back.
1
