Connection Hosts

[Houdini]

Historically, connection issues have been frustrating. The current system of the defending army hosts the lobby is fair, but we should be prioritizing the experience of the majority over "fairness." Is it fair to degrade somebody else's experience in the community?

The host advantage is most notifiable when the connection is bad, if the connection is perfect (impossible) then there would be no advantage to being host. If we can attempt to make all lobbies as close to perfect connection as possible everybody would have a better time and hopefully we wouldn't have to worry about disconnections except in exceptional circumstances.


The rough idea of my suggestion is to have a roster of "certified" lobby hosts with demonstrated good connections for hosting lobbies. Then when matches are setup if there is somebody in the lobby on this "certified" host list, that person will be the connection host (regardless of army affiliation). If there are multiple people or no people on the "certified" host list, then the defending army could choose (probably choosing one of their people).

Requirements to be certified:
1. Demonstrated ability to host 12 members (6v6) or whatever the largest lobby size FC decides to host.
2. Has all gametypes and maps downloaded (BEFORE 6:00pm EST on Sundays)

Anti-Requirements:
3. Reported disconnections on Battle Night


Details:
1."Demonstrated" means that we actually test that persons host with a lobby of 12 people. There are a couple of options with this.

A. We could have a battle night designated as a "host tryout" ran like normal, and document who was the connection host and then have all players give a rating on the host. If the connection was good, that host is added to the "certified" host list.

B. We could designate a specific time during the week for community practice/activities where anybody who wants to join the "certified" host list can show up and do a test run hosting a lobby. This would be dependent on the number of people who want to join the host list plus the number of people who just want to play Halo and show up to test the connections. It might be worth having a scheduling system to make sure enough people show up so we can have a good test since it doesn't make sense to test a persons connection with only 3 people.

2. This shouldn't be a big deal, but it would be a responsibility of all certified hosts to be prepared to host the lobby (i.e. they should show up to battle night at least 5 minutes early to ensure that they have the maps downloaded)

3. If players report that a host wasn't good on battle night then that host would then be removed from the list of certified hosts. There is a possibility of this being abused, but I think overall people will be more interested in playing a stable game than trying to find an advantage by false reporting hosts. We could also implement an appeals system where false reports are dealt with if this ever becomes an issue.


This may sound complicated but it could be implemented almost seamlessly. Next week could be the host tryouts and the week after we would start implementing the host regulations.

A very positive side effect of this would be that the community would be able to come together to practice/play customs during the week for host tryouts which would hopefully increase community unity and foster a healthy inter-army relations.

[TeriyakiSoul]

I think host checking should be done before every match anyway to make sure it is sufficient for both sides; good idea houdini

[CAW0139]

I cannot stress enough that crashing and lagging is the most infuriating and unfair event during battle night since no one has control over whether they will randomly disconnect from the game. While i know that we can't prevent every time this happens, players who have demonstrated a steady connection and ability to host a stable lobby would allow for much more fair battle nights That being said i 150% support this idea and would like to see it implemented as soon as possible.

[silversleek]

or, have someone on green team with the host and have them spawn in a box in the sky and afk for the night. People that aren't otherwise playing could do this, like war directors, FM's, whatever.

[NervyDestroyer]

or, have someone on green team with the host and have them spawn in a box in the sky and afk for the night. People that aren't otherwise playing could do this, like war directors, FM's, whatever.

The amount of times this has been suggested lol.

Also downloading the appropriate map and gametype takes literally 2 seconds. Being a requirement is silly. Just go to Myth's file share. It's much easier with the update lol.

As for my opinion. It wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea except for this accounts for the majority and not the minority. People in the UK who's connection is fine will get bottlenecked because "overseas." That's something you should definitely speak with them about before even considering this.

[Solus Exsequor]

I disagree with this tbh, the system works. It has it's kinks but it's all part of the game.

Someone may moan about my connection, but I have a squad of new recruits. None of them can take host. I don't want this to be a witch hunt for Barry and I. I can see it ended in an argument over whether people like each other's host or not. With one army saying yes the other no. I can also see the complaining on verified hosts being flawed too. A further potential argument is that two verified hosts or more are in a game and they all argue over having host, with others split on who they prefer.

This seems to me like a pointless addition which will only extend the length of battlenights and increase drama

[Barry Soap]

I feel like this is a petty attempt at barring EU people from having host. We never had host on the 6v6, and with H4 running as fast as it is on the X1 now, host is just a bad excuse. I've personally played on American hosts for 2 years and sure, I'll complain about it to myself but I would never go to this length to actually persecute and bar someone from being the host. The fact that people won't let people from EU host a few games on one map of each week is pretty awful.

[Houdini]

or, have someone on green team with the host and have them spawn in a box in the sky and afk for the night. People that aren't otherwise playing could do this, like war directors, FM's, whatever.

I think the problem with this is that WarDirectors/FMs have to play because we have such low numbers. Anybody who gets online is almost always playing because there are simply not enough people.

- - - Updated - - -


Also downloading the appropriate map and gametype takes literally 2 seconds. Being a requirement is silly. Just go to Myth's file share. It's much easier with the update lol..
The requirements to be host aren't meant to be hard. They are meant to keep things running smoothly.


As for my opinion. It wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea except for this accounts for the majority and not the minority. People in the UK who's connection is fine will get bottlenecked because "overseas." That's something you should definitely speak with them about before even considering this

Would your argument be that it is better to degrade the experience for the majority for half of the battle night so that the minority doesn't feel left out?

- - - Updated - - -


Someone may moan about my connection, but I have a squad of new recruits. None of them can take host. I don't want this to be a witch hunt for Barry and I. I can see it ended in an argument over whether people like each other's host or not. With one army saying yes the other no. I can also see the complaining on verified hosts being flawed too. A further potential argument is that two verified hosts or more are in a game and they all argue over having host, with others split on who they prefer.

The defending representative always has host selection. It doesn't matter how many or how few hosts are in the lobby. The only rule is that if there are any "certified" hosts in the lobby one of them must be selected. If there are no certified hosts, then it goes back to the current system of defending representative selecting the host.

If there is complaining about verified hosts, then we could easily address it with some sort of official appeal system. If people are trying to game the system and manipulate host selection, then they probably don't belong in the community and should be punished accordingly.

- - - Updated - - -


I feel like this is a petty attempt at barring EU people from having host. We never had host on the 6v6, and with H4 running as fast as it is on the X1 now, host is just a bad excuse. I've personally played on American hosts for 2 years and sure, I'll complain about it to myself but I would never go to this length to actually persecute and bar someone from being the host. The fact that people won't let people from EU host a few games on one map of each week is pretty awful.

This isn't an excuse to bar people from having host. If EU people (or any other country) can demonstrate a good host, then they are added to the certified host list like anyone else. If NA people (or any other country) can't demonstrate a good host, then they aren't added to the certified host list.

It shouldn't matter where you are from at all.

[Barry Soap]

As an advocate of another community that promotes the corruption of this one, suggestion threads like this shouldn't appear from you. You can't automatically assume that the opinion of the OP is the opinion of the majority. It's probably pretty damn close but seeing things like this saddens me.

[Solus Exsequor]

As an advocate of another community that promotes the corruption of this one, suggestion threads like this shouldn't appear from you.[./QUOTE]

Agreed

[QUOTE=Barry Soap;172409]You can't automatically assume that the opinion of the OP is the opinion of the majority. It's probably pretty damn close but seeing things like this saddens me.

Agreed

[Nicholas Sapien]

I don't see the point of all this UK minority thing.

If your connection is good then you should be the host
If your connection is bad then someone else should be host

[AbnormallyLilith]

I don't see the point of all this UK minority thing.

If your connection is good then you should be the host
If your connection is bad then someone else should be host

The point they are making is that Euro Connection will always be bad to a north American player. The host will be great for the European Players but not the American. But the American Host will always be bad for the European player.

[UnfoldedFreedom]

almost all of the community members in here are American it makes no sense to have EU host because those one or two people will have such an advantage in the game. I rather sacrifice a few people experience then everyone elses. The majority of players ping in a match should never be above a 100

MATH LOGIC
EU HOST = 1 player having a big connection advantage compared to everyone else because everyone else lives in america ( This gives one team a huge advantage because most likely the other team has no EU players)

NA HOST = 1 player having a smaller advantage because everyone lives in the same country and one or two EU people has a dis advantage

If i was in a EU community i would understand that i can't be host and i shouldn't even expect it because it makes no sense. Its the sacrifice i made when i decided to join a EU dominated community.

If people can't see this they are either being selfish or immature.

[Barry Soap]

almost all of the community members in here are American it makes no sense to have EU host because those one or two people will have such an advantage in the game. I rather sacrifice a few people experience then everyone elses. The majority of players ping in a match should never be above a 100

MATH LOGIC
EU HOST = 1 player having a big connection advantage compared to everyone else because everyone else lives in america ( This gives one team a huge advantage because most likely the other team has no EU players)

NA HOST = 1 player having a smaller advantage because everyone lives in the same country and one or two EU people has a dis advantage

If i was in a EU community i would understand that i can't be host and i shouldn't even expect it because it makes no sense. Its the sacrifice i made when i decided to join a EU dominated community.

If people can't see this they are either being selfish or immature.

lmfao tl;dr

[Guzzie]

lmfao tl;dr
If it was too long to read, what are you lmfaoing about? Lol

anyways, the point of houdini's post is not to single out any players in particular. This isn't About not playing on a UK host or an Australian host, or Canadian host. This is about playing on a good host, in which most of the people would benefit from a clean connection. If your fear is that you won't be able to host, someone else in your squad can host. No one is taking the right of a squad to host as a defending team, stop taking a Simple suggestion so personal. This isn't just about UK hosts; A lot of people in America have terrible connections and thus, would not be certified if this or something similar were to be implemented. I used to have the worst connection and I would never dream of hosting or pulling host, not would I have "applied" to be a certified host. Unfolded freedom lives in Canada, so he never hosts during battle nights and he doesn't complain about playing on American hosts.

take this as a warning for anyone that feels like derailing this thread. A lot of Houdini's posts have become argumentative, please show some respect. He is putting a lot of effort into these posts.

[JamiDJ]

take this as a warning for anyone that feels like derailing this thread. A lot of Houdini's posts have become argumentative, please show some respect. He is putting a lot of effort into these posts.

[UnfoldedFreedom]

lmfao tl;dr

If it was too long to read, what are you lmfaoing about? Lol.

Because LOGIC

[Barry Soap]

If it was too long to read, what are you lmfaoing about? Lol

anyways, the point of houdini's post is not to single out any players in particular. This isn't About not playing on a UK host or an Australian host, or Canadian host. This is about playing on a good host, in which most of the people would benefit from a clean connection. If your fear is that you won't be able to host, someone else in your squad can host. No one is taking the right of a squad to host as a defending team, stop taking a Simple suggestion so personal. This isn't just about UK hosts; A lot of people in America have terrible connections and thus, would not be certified if this or something similar were to be implemented. I used to have the worst connection and I would never dream of hosting or pulling host, not would I have "applied" to be a certified host.

I saw Unfolded's name. So it's complete coincidence that we hear complaining of UK host on battle night, constant pleas to change host even though everyone is playing fine and now this thread? Riiiiiiiiiight. I think a UK host gets complained about every week

[UnfoldedFreedom]

I saw Unfolded's name. So it's complete coincidence that we hear complaining of UK host on battle night, constant pleas to change host even though everyone is playing fine and now this thread? Riiiiiiiiiight. I think a UK host gets complained about every week

what are you talking about? i haven't ran into EU host yet only shitty Florida host but the fact is EU host is not a optimal host for an American dominated Community.

[Guzzie]

Yes, people complain about UK hosts because playing on a host on the other side of the world is bound to be problematic, it truly is as simple as that. I am sure you remember when you were in Blue, and some reds complained about playing on a UK host. This isn't a new issue brought up because of last night. It has been a present issue ever since MCC came out. Now that we have the ability to select hosts, rather than letting the game decide based upon its own list of prerequisites.

I for one hate playing on southern hosts. They are notorious for being problematic and have a history of lagging and low shot registration. Even though people might play "fine" from your perspective, playing on a sub par host changes the experience of the game. A 4 shot suddenly becomes a 5-6 shot, it's just not the same.

I am interested to seeing why you seemed to be getting upset over this. If you are in fact not upset, then i apologize, that is just the impression I am getting from your posts. Do you feel like you are being picked on for being a UK member? Do you not want to give up host on BNs? Would you not feel comfortable with another member of your squad, with a better host take the responsibility under your guidance? If you don't feel like answering me here, then feel free to PM me. I am just a little confused as to why giving up host is such an issue for you.

[Barry Soap]

I am interested to seeing why you seemed to be getting upset over this. If you are in fact not upset, then i apologize, that is just the impression I am getting from your posts. Do you feel like you are being picked on for being a UK member? Do you not want to give up host on BNs? Would you not feel comfortable with another member of your squad, with a better host take the responsibility under your guidance? If you don't feel like answering me here, then feel free to PM me. I am just a little confused as to why giving up host is such an issue for you.

I think confused is a better word rather than upset, I was host for a couple of games yesterday and I asked my team multiple times if they were lagging and the unanimous response was no. I thought this community was based on fun and respect, and having such a comprehensive focus on host shows how competitive we are becoming tbh. I was keeping a constant eye on the Skype chat for people asking to end the game, and it only happened once, coincidentally with the creator of this thread.

[NervyDestroyer]

I have never once had an issue with someone's host on BN. I have played on Barry's, Solus's, and Nova's host. The only issue is with Nova's host and the ping issues. On BN, I played on Barry's host and it wasn't as big of a deal as people made it out to be. Christ, you're all acting like host is forcing you to be terrible. Barry has killed me not because he had host but because he fucking ruined all my hopes and dreams of being MLG Superpro. The reason this is being brought up is because I don't care what any of you say, this will be used against EU players. It's a fact and don't deny it. This was never an issue before EU players started hosting and tbh, it shouldn't be an issue at all.

[Solus Exsequor]

I have never once had an issue with someone's host on BN. I have played on Barry's, Solus's, and Nova's host. The only issue is with Nova's host and the ping issues. On BN, I played on Barry's host and it wasn't as big of a deal as people made it out to be. Christ, you're all acting like host is forcing you to be terrible. Barry has killed me not because he had host but because he fucking ruined all my hopes and dreams of being MLG Superpro. The reason this is being brought up is because I don't care what any of you say, this will be used against EU players. It's a fact and don't deny it. This was never an issue before EU players started hosting and tbh, it shouldn't be an issue at all.

Agree completely. Especially about Barry tuning hopes and dreams.

I've proved that I've been a good host but clearly some people can't take losing and convince themselves that it's lag. I can guarantee that 90% of the complaint of being killed due to lag are not lag. They're just butthurt people who can't take getting killed.

[UnfoldedFreedom]

I think confused is a better word rather than upset, I was host for a couple of games yesterday and I asked my team multiple times if they were lagging and the unanimous response was no. I thought this community was based on fun and respect, and having such a comprehensive focus on host shows how competitive we are becoming tbh. I was keeping a constant eye on the Skype chat for people asking to end the game, and it only happened once, coincidentally with the creator of this thread.

Its never been an issue because you couldn't choose host before, its an issue now because you guys are now choosing EU host.

What ever happend to logic

Here some people that left comments complaining about it : https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ivURUj8A4jOeVw3qgM61bDin 4sw6wmbiUui8QnaVTh8/viewanalytics?usp=form_co nfirm

-Would be nice to keep host to US members only. Nothing against our European members, but this is a community where 99% of the population is US based. Please have US members host.

-Remove silence SMG secondary. No UK host. Score limit.

-Overall, not bad. Remnant was a good fight in our matches, and BLUE pulled through. Complex was odd though - BarrySoap neglected to swap hosts after we requested it, and of course, REDD stacked both Equinox and REDD Mix.

[Houdini]

I don't see the point of all this UK minority thing.

If your connection is good then you should be the host
If your connection is bad then someone else should be host

For more context, last war VM probably wouldn't have had a single person as a certified host. I was on crappy college wifi, metkil's connection sucks, Ominous' is even worse. Mos has a crappy connection too. VM hosts were so bad that multiple times we would just give party lead to the other squad because we couldn't even connect to each other.

Honestly, I couldn't care less about laggy host. I played on Ominous host for practices and battle nights last war. I know what crap host is like and I'm conditioned not to care. I posted this because I have had multiple people come up to me complaining about hosts, justifiably so when they can't connect to lobbies or lag out mid-game. I don't mind taking crap for suggestions, so I write things up and let other people support silently without having to be attacked for their opinions.

This is a really simple suggestion. People like being able to shoot people who don't lag around. People like to be able to finish games without lagging out. It really doesn't matter where you are from and this was never meant as an attack on people from middle of no-where America or overseas.

[Barry Soap]

Its never been an issue because you couldn't choose host before, its an issue now because you guys are now choosing EU host.

What ever happend to logic

Here some people that left comments complaining about it : https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ivURUj8A4jOeVw3qgM61bDin 4sw6wmbiUui8QnaVTh8/viewanalytics?usp=form_co nfirm

-Would be nice to keep host to US members only. Nothing against our European members, but this is a community where 99% of the population is US based. Please have US members host.

-Remove silence SMG secondary. No UK host. Score limit.

-Overall, not bad. Remnant was a good fight in our matches, and BLUE pulled through. Complex was odd though - BarrySoap neglected to swap hosts after we requested it, and of course, REDD stacked both Equinox and REDD Mix.

People also left comments asking to ban VBD last week and this week. It's almost like a lot of people aren't taking it seriously. I read those comments and see endless saltiness, and a few good good/reasonable comments. I did not, in any way, neglect changing host.

5096

If this is neglecting then fine, I'm in the wrong but after I started it up not one thing was said.

As for stacking, one member said he didn't want to play because of certain issues, so I literally joined the squad I lead and get excused of stacking. like wtf logic yep. That team for the last game was comprised of all the Equinox members we had on for the night, so a 'stacking' argument can't be used...

It's just saltiness everywhere

Also want to point out that I hosted multiple times last war and nobody said a thing about it.

[Maxdoggy]

Also want to point out that I hosted multiple times last war and nobody said a thing about it.
To be fair, I remember calling you a dirty Scot in the BN chat about it. :P


For the issue at hand, all I care about is not having laggy gameplay. If it can be avoided by selecting one host over another, then we should do that.

I'd have preferred not blackscreening during a game on Remnant last night for ~30 seconds, but at least the gameplay was smooth.

[Nicholas Sibley]

I like Barry and all the EU people and I want them to have a good time. For the sake of clarity, however, I would like to point out that myself and many other Legacy members have always been unhappy with EU hosts.

[Barry Soap]

I like Barry and all the EU people and I want them to have a good time. For the sake of clarity, however, I would like to point out that myself and many other Legacy members have always been unhappy with EU hosts.

^ Can't people just say it like that??

[GAMExSOLID]

I was keeping a constant eye on the Skype chat for people asking to end the game, and it only happened once, coincidentally with the creator of this thread.

I asked you to end the match on CTF but nothing happened and it was very clear the team was confused as to what to do with that flag floating in the air. But that's nothing to do with connection.

[Synaster Wolf]

Is this all really that big of a deal who even cares anymore.

[Solus Exsequor]

I asked you to end the match on CTF but nothing happened and it was very clear the team was confused as to what to do with that flag floating in the air. But that's nothing to do with connection.

That's down to you being unorganised and unfamiliar with the gametype. That's not an issue that's came from MCC or our squad or host. That is a lack of knowledge on your part.

Also. Barry didn't neglect to swap host, he had host for the first time to start the game. Before the game was started at all he was asked to swap host. There was no grounds for it to be demanded. If it had lagged out then yeah sure, we would've swapped but probably to me.


I think many people are confusing lag with bad skill. Skill lesser than that of the person who killed them. Some people just can't take being killed legitimately. I'll admit that 11/10 Guzzie would kill me in a 1v1 BR battle. Not because of lag, because he's better than me. Same with Barry is for most people.

[UnfoldedFreedom]

That's down to you being unorganised and unfamiliar with the gametype. That's not an issue that's came from MCC or our squad or host. That is a lack of knowledge on your part.

Also. Barry didn't neglect to swap host, he had host for the first time to start the game. Before the game was started at all he was asked to swap host. There was no grounds for it to be demanded. If it had lagged out then yeah sure, we would've swapped but probably to me.


I think many people are confusing lag with bad skill. Skill lesser than that of the person who killed them. Some people just can't take being killed legitimately. I'll admit that 11/10 Guzzie would kill me in a 1v1 BR battle. Not because of lag, because he's better than me. Same with Barry is for most people.

Sounds like bossnasti lol but on a serous note

No that's FC fault for not making it clear on that gametype . Lag gives you an unfair advantage and when your playing against an equally skilled player its the deciding factor . Since you believe it has something to do with skill why people are complaining then why don't you just give them host and prove them wrong?

[NervyDestroyer]

Why is this suddenly a problem? Lol Barry used to host ALL the time on Halo 4. I was in his squad and explicitly remember him hosting every game BLUE defended. Nobody gave a shit. Why is this such a big deal now? Seriously...

[UnfoldedFreedom]

Why is this suddenly a problem? Lol Barry used to host ALL the time on Halo 4. I was in his squad and explicitly remember him hosting every game BLUE defended. Nobody gave a shit. Why is this such a big deal now? Seriously...

you couldnt choose host in halo 4 the game decided nothing you can do about it without blowing up the lobby and praying for a new host.

[NervyDestroyer]

you couldnt choose host in halo 4 the game decided nothing you can do about it without blowing up the lobby and praying for a new host.

Point still stands. Haven't had an issue with EU host since the game came out. It's a big deal out of nothing. I've seen these dudes work their asses off to create their squads from scratch and then continue to dedicate themselves to it unconditionally. It's rather sad that so many people forget this and are sooooo quick to condemn and bar. Is EU host a minor inconvenience? Yes. Is it as big of a deal as people are making it out to be? Not even in the slightest. So go ahead, put it in and bar them. Can guarantee you it will end very poorly and drive more dedicated members out. But I suppose it doesn't matter because host. Gotta have that host.

[UnfoldedFreedom]

Point still stands. Haven't had an issue with EU host since the game came out. It's a big deal out of nothing. I've seen these dudes work their asses off to create their squads from scratch and then continue to dedicate themselves to it unconditionally. It's rather sad that so many people forget this and are sooooo quick to condemn and bar. Is EU host a minor inconvenience? Yes. Is it as big of a deal as people are making it out to be? Not even in the slightest. So go ahead, put it in and bar them. Can guarantee you it will end very poorly and drive more dedicated members out. But I suppose it doesn't matter because host. Gotta have that host.

Host is a big deal to the enjoyment of the game and just because your connection is fine does not represent everyone else in the community. People are complaining now because we have the ability to change it. Makes no sense to have the one player in the lobby that's EU to be host. The team he is on will have a big advantage and to many peoples eye it will be a unethical advantage because the other team is purposely choosing a EU player host when the other team is all american.

[NervyDestroyer]

Host is a big deal to the enjoyment of the game and just because your connection is fine does not represent everyone else in the community. People are complaining now because we have the ability to change it. Makes no sense to have the one player in the lobby that's EU to be host. The team he is on will have a big advantage and to many peoples eye it will be a unethical advantage because the other team is purposely choosing a EU player host when the other team is all american.

Then bar them from hosting. Oh and when another loss happens, blame someone else's host. Just keep blaming everything and everyone. Keep the negativity. It's real healthy for the community

[JamiDJ]

*ahem* **cough, cough**

lets keep it civil folks

[VerbotenDonkey]

<sigh> Keep it pertaining to the topic at hand and include constructive criticism please. No personal attacks. Warnings will be handed out if things continue south.

[NervyDestroyer]

-_-

Neither me nor Unfolded made a personal attack...

[UnfoldedFreedom]

-_-

Neither me nor Unfolded made a personal attack...

Their getting passion confused with aggressiveness and are probably reading it like we are yelling at each other.

[Guzzie]

I am going to go ahead and dissect a few of the things you have said simply because I think you are a bit misinformed and may be contradicting yourself:


Why is this suddenly a problem? Lol Barry used to host ALL the time on Halo 4. I was in his squad and explicitly remember him hosting every game BLUE defended. Nobody gave a shit. Why is this such a big deal now? Seriously...

Every halo up until now, being the party leader did not equal to being host (connection host). I think you are mistaking Barry having had leader of the lobby with him being host. Being under that impression, it would be easy to see why you had no problem with the connection back then, because Barry was not host. I will say that again; Barry was party leader, but not the host of the game. Please do not confuse that. It seems like that is your main counter argument to everything that has been said thus far.

You also go on to say, "why is this suddenly a problem...", which is false. A few members have come forward and posted on this thread and said that they have had issues with a UK host in the past. I believe Maxdoggy and NicSib said something along those lines. It has indeed been brought up in the past. Maybe not to the same magnitude as now, but it has in fact been brought up.


I've seen these dudes work their asses off to create their squads from scratch and then continue to dedicate themselves to it unconditionally. It's rather sad that so many people forget this and are sooooo quick to condemn and bar.

Yes, I agree with you on your accolades to Barry and Solus. Yes, they have done great work in each army. I have said it many times before, they are great, very dedicated members of this community. However, that has nothing to do with how viable their connections are to American players, thus, that statement holds no weight in this argument.


Is EU host a minor inconvenience? Yes. Is it as big of a deal as people are making it out to be? Not even in the slightest. So go ahead, put it in and bar them. Can guarantee you it will end very poorly and drive more dedicated members out. But I suppose it doesn't matter because host. Gotta have that host.

You are contradicting yourself here. You are saying that host is not a big deal, "not in the slightest". Having said that, you then go on to saying that if we "ban" our UK members from having host, they may potentially leave the community. Which leads me to think that having host is in fact a big deal? If they are willing to leave the community because, in your own words, we would be banning them from having host, well then that fully contradicts what you just said.

I will reiterate.... On older halo titles (h2-h4), being the party leader DID NOT equal to being the host. This is a feature only present in MCC.

[NervyDestroyer]

You are contradicting yourself here. You are saying that host is not a big deal, "not in the slightest". Having said that, you then go on to saying that if we "ban" our UK members from having host, they may potentially leave the community. Which leads me to think that having host is in fact a big deal? If they are willing to leave the community because, in your own words, we would be banning them from having host, well then that fully contradicts what you just said.


I was making a point that people are making a big deal about EU hosts and are then going to these lengths with it. That's what would cause them to get pissy and leave. I frankly don't blame them. I was mistaken on my previous post though.

[Breezy]

Let's be honest here and civil here for we are really off topic. Now, as Houdini generally suggested in this thread that we create a certified list of hosts are able to sustain a stable connection for all players in the game. This thread is not here attacking anyone with bad hosts inside NA and outside NA. Anyone can have bad connections to anyone: Good, Moderate, Bad NAT; if your download is twice as higher than your upload than you will have some issues. Higher upload than download is sustainable eg 45 D and 65+ upload. You can download games or anything else faster with higher download speed. Performance comes from the upload speed. Anyone can argue about this but lets get back to some facts.

At first, people complained about guzzie when he hosted VBD lobbies or other squads. Yes, it was a terrible event but we overcame it... did we not? Now his connection is much better than last time. I'm not lagging, not blackscreen, nor being kicked from the game and he is on American host. On another note, Barry I've played with you a couple of times and against you. It is in fact, that you gain a skill boost but not only you but the team as well. Same goes for anyone who has host. The host gain a good 45% better performance than anyone in his lobby. I could be wrong but that's my opinion. Doesn't make a difference if you're USA, UK, France, Mexico, Antarctica, etch. People will have host advantages and disadvantages. If I'm host, I can get 3 to 5 kills in 1 minute because I get an advantage. That's a typical host thing.

Honestly, why are people afraid to try out something new? It can either better the community or wound it. In any case, we have to support it anyway. Halo 5 is on its way and its providing dedicated servers for customs as well. Do I trust this? Not really. Why? Because anything can happen, its common sense. Having a certified host can help sustain games. If the player is not able to host it then we go back to the system as Houdini and Guzzie said. I would rather play in a fun fair game than a laggy game where the other team is nearly spawn killing and teammates lagging out or get frustrated and leave. Remember and please remember for the sake of this community future... nobody is here to attack you or bring you down; if they are, you have to be the mature one and leave it alone and go on your way. We need more ideas in this community and Houdini is the only one bringing them in and some people are resisting.

- - - Updated - - -

I see an unfinished painting on the wall and the painter (which is ALL of you) must finish it together.

[Guzzie]

Just a couple of things about your post raptor:

Download speeds of 45 would be a decent compromise. Although you don't need anything nearly that fast to host a viable custom game lobby. Also, 65+ upload is a ridiculous prerequisite lol. I don't think anyone in this community would have that upload speed. Unless they live in Kansas city and have Google fiber.

Also, back in H4 when I was lobby leader of VbD games, I was not pulling host. My connection was so bad that I would never pull host. Only very rarely on 1v1s would I pull host.

Just a couple of things I wanted to touch on on your post.

[Breezy]

Just a couple of things about your post raptor:

Download speeds of 45 would be a decent compromise. Although you don't need anything nearly that fast to host a viable custom game lobby. Also, 65+ upload is a ridiculous prerequisite lol. I don't think anyone in this community would have that upload speed. Unless they live in Kansas city and have Google fiber.

Also, back in H4 when I was lobby leader of VbD games, I was not pulling host. My connection was so bad that I would never pull host. Only very rarely on 1v1s would I pull host.

Just a couple of things I wanted to touch on on your post.

I may have exaggerated a bit but that's for clarifying that out for me. Halo 4 era, I assumed you pulled host at least one or two games before but that could have been someone else. Least I hope some people here, get my message out my post.

[Wolf Demon Lee]

This no longer matters.

1. For all of MCC's flaws amended by 343I's fixes and tweaks to up-and-coming Halo 5, the first is that all multiplayer games are hosted on dedicated servers (Yeah, custom games are multiplayer. Big shock? I know.). This eliminates the peer-to-peer custom game shittiness that you are experiencing on the Master Chief Collection.

2. You have survived doing MCC nonsense without a dedicated list of hosts for this long. All you're adding is more parameters to a straightforward process. Games need less bureaucracy.

3. Effectively you're limiting the amount of hosts that can be in a lobby. Not all of us can afford solid gold CAT-7 cable running to the demarc. It's simply silly to say "these people take host priority because we say so."

I'd think this was a great idea if we weren't a more open community. But we're not a rigid group.

tl;dr Calm it, wait it out. H5 will be better than MCC, because at this point E.T. for the Atari is better than MCC.

That's just my opinion though, not like I know anything.

[Solus Exsequor]

This no longer matters.

1. For all of MCC's flaws amended by 343I's fixes and tweaks to up-and-coming Halo 5, the first is that all multiplayer games are hosted on dedicated servers (Yeah, custom games are multiplayer. Big shock? I know.). This eliminates the peer-to-peer custom game shittiness that you are experiencing on the Master Chief Collection.

2. You have survived doing MCC nonsense without a dedicated list of hosts for this long. All you're adding is more parameters to a straightforward process. Games need less bureaucracy.

3. Effectively you're limiting the amount of hosts that can be in a lobby. Not all of us can afford solid gold CAT-7 cable running to the demarc. It's simply silly to say "these people take host priority because we say so."

I'd think this was a great idea if we weren't a more open community. But we're not a rigid group.

tl;dr Calm it, wait it out. H5 will be better than MCC, because at this point E.T. for the Atari is better than MCC.

That's just my opinion though, not like I know anything.

Agree with most of that.


For all of your interests I just ran my Xbox speed check and it brought back 11 upload and 11 download back.



BEFORE you jump in and think that's what I run on BN, it's not. I'm not dumb, I always play BNs wired up via Ethernet.

I just checked it while plugged in and it's running at roughly 80-120 Download and 25-40 Upload. Taken from the lowest I've saw to highest. I'm paying for a ridiculous wifi package as it is but no one can deny that my host would work fine. I can also guarantee that no one has had issues with my host, reference the custom nights and scrims I've held in both REDD and BLUE. So, if the registered host list is made we can then see a clear bias if I don't make it. That's the bar I'm setting. I've proven over months that it's stable.


Also in reference to Corbin's point. Why should I sacrifice host on battle night for your peace of mind? Why should I sacrifice my host just to prove you wrong? I don't know what Barry runs at but I'm sure that any advantage he gains is no different from the one any US, UK, AUS, FRA, GER or CAN player gets. Every host will most likely have an advantages. You're all just being opportunistic in singling us out. That's what this is. It's the same situation for hosts with us all. You're just looking to far into the subject and refuse to blame yourself. I didn't know how narrow minded and tunnel vision a group of people could be. It's as if the rights of us as a minority are less than that of the majority simply because we are the minority.



Go figure.

[UnfoldedFreedom]

Agree with most of that.


For all of your interests I just ran my Xbox speed check and it brought back 11 upload and 11 download back.



BEFORE you jump in and think that's what I run on BN, it's not. I'm not dumb, I always play BNs wired up via Ethernet.

I just checked it while plugged in and it's running at roughly 80-120 Download and 25-40 Upload. Taken from the lowest I've saw to highest. I'm paying for a ridiculous wifi package as it is but no one can deny that my host would work fine. I can also guarantee that no one has had issues with my host, reference the custom nights and scrims I've held in both REDD and BLUE. So, if the registered host list is made we can then see a clear bias if I don't make it. That's the bar I'm setting. I've proven over months that it's stable.


Also in reference to Corbin's point. Why should I sacrifice host on battle night for your peace of mind? Why should I sacrifice my host just to prove you wrong? I don't know what Barry runs at but I'm sure that any advantage he gains is no different from the one any US, UK, AUS, FRA, GER or CAN player gets. Every host will most likely have an advantages. You're all just being opportunistic in singling us out. That's what this is. It's the same situation for hosts with us all. You're just looking to far into the subject and refuse to blame yourself. I didn't know how narrow minded and tunnel vision a group of people could be. It's as if the rights of us as a minority are less than that of the majority simply because we are the minority.



Go figure.

Get your facts straight i have not played against a EU host (only in Match making and yes their can be peer to peer to mcc ) but the problem isn't about how good your internet is because EU blows america out of the water when it comes to connection the problem is ping. The farther you are the bigger the ping ( not a good thing). Keep the host in America where almost everyone lives and the ping will be smaller regardless of how much faster EU internet. This isn't about internet performance its about location. Stop taking everything so personal. Most people from america have slower internet so when the play a EU host it takes longer for their internet to get to you then it is for you to get to them.

You could have the best internet in the world and i would still rather have some mediocre west coast host

You don't see Pro players scrimming EU players online do you? no? that what i thought

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMhtKo__Vmo explaining ping

[Solus Exsequor]

The system works. Don't change it.

[Houdini]

I just checked it while plugged in and it's running at roughly 80-120 Download and 25-40 Upload. Taken from the lowest I've saw to highest. I'm paying for a ridiculous wifi package as it is but no one can deny that my host would work fine. I can also guarantee that no one has had issues with my host, reference the custom nights and scrims I've held in both REDD and BLUE. So, if the registered host list is made we can then see a clear bias if I don't make it. That's the bar I'm setting. I've proven over months that it's stable.

I'm confused. If your host is good, then what are you complaining about?

They way I listed the requires is that:

1. Get 12 people in a lobby, play a game. If everybody is happy and can connect you are a "certified" host.
2. Host on BN. If everybody is happy and can connect you are a "certified" host.

The only caveat is to remember that connections change with time. If a "certified" host starts dropping players or having issues with lag, then they are removed from the list (not banned from the list, removed until their connection is better).

Something that is important to see with this, is I want a "whitelist" not a "blacklist". We don't keep track of people with crappy connection to ban from hosting. We keep track of people with good connections and select them as host over people of "unknown" connection rating.

If you have a bad host and like hosting anyway, you have a lot to lose with this. If you have a good host, nothing will change for you except you may be asked to host when you are the attacking team if you are playing a squad like MCC:L1 VM.

It's really simple and not suppose to target anybody individually. If people can't connect to you (not Solus, but "you" in general), lag out, black screen etc. then what makes you think that you should be hosting the lobby on BN? You are clearly degrading somebody else's experience when there is most likely a superior alternative.

[Legendary Nova]

The problem then comes with how we define "happy with the connection". From what I hear, "happy with the connection" means that if anyone from the testing team doesn't like the slightly larger ping from a UK guy, then it gets denied?

[Solus Exsequor]

I'm confused. If your host is good, then what are you complaining about?

They way I listed the requires is that:

1. Get 12 people in a lobby, play a game. If everybody is happy and can connect you are a "certified" host.
2. Host on BN. If everybody is happy and can connect you are a "certified" host.

The only caveat is to remember that connections change with time. If a "certified" host starts dropping players or having issues with lag, then they are removed from the list (not banned from the list, removed until their connection is better).

Something that is important to see with this, is I want a "whitelist" not a "blacklist". We don't keep track of people with crappy connection to ban from hosting. We keep track of people with good connections and select them as host over people of "unknown" connection rating.

If you have a bad host and like hosting anyway, you have a lot to lose with this. If you have a good host, nothing will change for you except you may be asked to host when you are the attacking team if you are playing a squad like MCC:L1 VM.

It's really simple and not suppose to target anybody individually. If people can't connect to you (not Solus, but "you" in general), lag out, black screen etc. then what makes you think that you should be hosting the lobby on BN? You are clearly degrading somebody else's experience when there is most likely a superior alternative.

I'm complaining about the fact that I won't make the list not down to connection but down to being UK. People will object on that premise

[GAMExSOLID]

That's down to you being unorganised and unfamiliar with the gametype. That's not an issue that's came from MCC or our squad or host. That is a lack of knowledge on your part.

I've already spoke to Barry personally on this. It wasn't a huge deal. If he could of ended the match within the first 30 seconds to explain why the flag was floating that'd of been great haha. I had to wait for Mythonian to respond to me before I knew what was up. How does that have anything to do with me being unorganized? (UNFAMILIAR with the gametype?) Are we forgetting that I've not played FC gamemodes in over a year. Stop taking things so personally Solus.

[Houdini]

The problem then comes with how we define "happy with the connection". From what I hear, "happy with the connection" means that if anyone from the testing team doesn't like the slightly larger ping from a UK guy, then it gets denied?

Connection is inherently a personal experience, we can't measure player-to-player ping to have a standard metric to measure who has the "best" connection.

I can't image any way to determine the "goodness" of a connection other than asking people.

There are a couple possibilities for determining if a connection is good. The first is using a hard limit of approval votes. So the lobby is 11 people + 1 host. 10 out of the 11 people must report a positive experience to qualify as "certified." This will prevent that one person from "banning" somebody's host on impartial grounds. Unfortunately we may also lose a minor opinion where a connection simply isn't good for that player.

Another option would be electing a committee to officiate the host selection process. Anybody who is interested in testing connection applies and we put up a poll where people vote for who they think will be impartial in judging connections. The committee could also be somehow normalized to be representative of the entire FC population (i.e. representatives from a variety of ranks and representatives from a variety of squads)

I personally would prefer solution one because solution two seems like way more work than is necessary to figure out who we want hosting lobbies.

[Silko]

This no longer matters.

1. For all of MCC's flaws amended by 343I's fixes and tweaks to up-and-coming Halo 5, the first is that all multiplayer games are hosted on dedicated servers (Yeah, custom games are multiplayer. Big shock? I know.). This eliminates the peer-to-peer custom game shittiness that you are experiencing on the Master Chief Collection.

Basicly this. Yeah it kinda sucks when someone has a shitty host. We have survived for 9 damn years with games that had shit host. I think we can survive 2-3 more months guys. We are 97 days away from H5. If we survived MCC for as long as we have so far I think we can handle 97 more days.

[Breezy]

Basicly this. Yeah it kinda sucks when someone has a shitty host. We have survived for 9 damn years with games that had shit host. I think we can survive 2-3 more months guys. We are 97 days away from H5. If we survived MCC for as long as we have so far I think we can handle 97 more days.

[EagleOne]

You guys will experience with Halo 5 what Destiny players have already with dedicated servers...

You can't kill players with laggy connections to the server.

Just read about all the complaints about lag switches for Trials of Osiris and players getting ddos'd.

Oh yeah, and I'll be back in FC for Halo 5 Guardians.

Eagle out.

[GAMExSOLID]

You guys will experience with Halo 5 what Destiny players have already with dedicated servers...

You can't kill players with laggy connections to the server.

Just read about all the complaints about lag switches for Trials of Osiris and players getting ddos'd.

Oh yeah, and I'll be back in FC for Halo 5 Guardians.

Eagle out.

Best thing I've read since returning :D

[Nicholas Sapien]

You guys will experience with Halo 5 what Destiny players have already with dedicated servers...

You can't kill players with laggy connections to the server.

Just read about all the complaints about lag switches for Trials of Osiris and players getting ddos'd.

Oh yeah, and I'll be back in FC for Halo 5 Guardians.

Eagle out.

Halo 5 is best 5

[Solus Exsequor]

I've already spoke to Barry personally on this. It wasn't a huge deal. If he could of ended the match within the first 30 seconds to explain why the flag was floating that'd of been great haha. I had to wait for Mythonian to respond to me before I knew what was up. How does that have anything to do with me being unorganized? (UNFAMILIAR with the gametype?) Are we forgetting that I've not played FC gamemodes in over a year. Stop taking things so personally Solus.

I didn't know the gametype either, I rushed your flag at first and then kinda stood there wondering why it was floating until it dawned on me it was either one flag or they wanted us to use Jetpacks

[Silko]

You guys will experience with Halo 5 what Destiny players have already with dedicated servers...

You can't kill players with laggy connections to the server.

Just read about all the complaints about lag switches for Trials of Osiris and players getting ddos'd.

Oh yeah, and I'll be back in FC for Halo 5 Guardians.

Eagle out.

Fair enough but I have ran into way less lag issues with dedicated servers then peer to peer connection. No matter what lag will always be a thing until google owns the internet and we all have google fiber. Flipping out now when H5 is just around the corner does us no good. Houdini your suggestion makes a ton of sense and if H5 was another year away then I would be in full support. 3 months (less actually as we all know the war will end before the launch of H5 whether or not someone wins the war) is not worth going through all this trouble.

[GAMExSOLID]

Fair enough but I have ran into way less lag issues with dedicated servers then peer to peer connection. No matter what lag will always be a thing until google owns the internet and we all have google fiber. Flipping out now when H5 is just around the corner does us no good. Houdini your suggestion makes a ton of sense and if H5 was another year away then I would be in full support. 3 months (less actually as we all know the war will end before the launch of H5 whether or not someone wins the war) is not worth going through all this trouble.

This. Agree with every bit.

[TeriyakiSoul]

i currently get 5 mbps and i live in america; my personal experience with last BN was that barry and his team outskilled us on CTF because they practiced the gametype and it was a vgg

[Solus Exsequor]

i currently get 5 mbps and i live in america; my personal experience with last BN was that barry and his team outskilled us on CTF because they practiced the gametype and it was a vgg

Thank you :)

[Anarchy]

As an FYI the limiting factor in most people's halo connection is upload speed, and not download. I see a lot of people quoting download speeds when they're never the bottleneck for these types of things and upload speeds usually vary much more.

[Wolf Demon Lee]

As an FYI the limiting factor in most people's halo connection is upload speed, and not download. I see a lot of people quoting download speeds when they're never the bottleneck for these types of things and upload speeds usually vary much more.

This is a thing.
Being a network engineer, I know that upstream and downstream vary drastically. Easier to send things down, so it's usually faster. However, when games are being played and a barrage of information is being sent up, it really sucks to have the ~1-3Mbps (That's megaBITS, not BYTES [Bits make up bytes], anywhere from a tenth of a Megabyte to a third) that a lot of us US folk have.
In any situation, the British have a better margin, and it's the terrible online infrastructure of the States that fucks everything up. The speed of light cables we have running between us is not the problem. It's the trashy copper wire that US companies insist on using until they can afford to convert the infrastructure to 10G-BASE-T (nerd talk for 10Gbit/s either way, which is 1.25 Gigabytes).
That is all.

[Barry Soap]

This is a thing.
Being a network engineer, I know that upstream and downstream vary drastically. Easier to send things down, so it's usually faster. However, when games are being played and a barrage of information is being sent up, it really sucks to have the ~1-3Mbps (That's megaBITS, not BYTES [Bits make up bytes], anywhere from a tenth of a Megabyte to a third) that a lot of us US folk have.
In any situation, the British have a better margin, and it's the terrible online infrastructure of the States that fucks everything up. The speed of light cables we have running between us is not the problem. It's the trashy copper wire that US companies insist on using until they can afford to convert the infrastructure to 10G-BASE-T (nerd talk for 10Gbit/s either way, which is 1.25 Gigabytes).
That is all.

high 5

[NervyDestroyer]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/4c/0d/88/4c0d88551a94862a2e862b654 bd7d12f.jpg

kek

[Anarchy]

This is a thing.
Being a network engineer, I know that upstream and downstream vary drastically. Easier to send things down, so it's usually faster. However, when games are being played and a barrage of information is being sent up, it really sucks to have the ~1-3Mbps (That's megaBITS, not BYTES [Bits make up bytes], anywhere from a tenth of a Megabyte to a third) that a lot of us US folk have.
In any situation, the British have a better margin, and it's the terrible online infrastructure of the States that fucks everything up. The speed of light cables we have running between us is not the problem. It's the trashy copper wire that US companies insist on using until they can afford to convert the infrastructure to 10G-BASE-T (nerd talk for 10Gbit/s either way, which is 1.25 Gigabytes).
That is all.

This is also why games on the Xbox One with P2P connections instead of dedicated servers are so sub par. Most people have like a 1Mbps upload, which is barely enough to run a connection between 5 people nowadays. The more complex games get, the more it strains that, yet upload speeds improve over time at a snails pace.

But if you play on a host with some solid FiOS with 20Mbps+ Upload (Cough, Houdini) you can literally play an 8v8 H:CE game lag free.

I don't think forcing a list of approved hosts is realistic for FC. But when choosing who has host in a game, at least do some due diligence and give it to the person on your team with the highest upload speeds. Even the jump from 1Mbps standard to 2 or 3Mbps opens a lot of breathing room. Download speeds may as well be irrelevant.

And if someone has 10Mbps+ upload, give them host just for the fact that you'll feel like you're on a dedicated server.