A thing to help Australian People

2»

Comments

  • Its better than 300, but the smart BRs go to Westcoast because they have recognized that the trans internet connection is better with the server in LA.

    They havent banned these foreigners for the reason they made the game in the first place: MONEY. The game was initially called CF EN. They intended this game to be catered to NA and UK players.

    I doubt that. Maybe a server in Hawaii, but definitly not a server dedicated to you guys. No offense but the Aussy game population is significantly and definitly smaller than the BRs.

    Personally I feel like somone should just make a CF Austrailia/NewZealand. People would be making BANK if they did so.
    Yeah, that was my main point. Because originally there main focus was NA only servers. But now we know it's not only NA players.
    I'm not talking just about 'us' and New Zealand here, but the countries surrounding as as well, as we have a few countries near us.
    GoMavs wrote: »
    they don't get 300 ping if they have good internet.

    most of the population doesn't live in rio, but the 2 most populous cities are rio and sao paulo so its pretty obvious where the majority of the players come from. as an example, players from canada most likely live around toronto or montreal, the 2 biggest cities in canada. in the us, most of the players live on east or west coast, the most populated areas.
    Yes, partly the reason why br's are known to be laggers is because of the lack of internet connection they have in their country.
    You do make a good point however, as it makes sense that rio and sao paulo are the main cities of Brazil.
    I'm just pointing out..the fact that they make up excuses not to make servers other than NA. When you can see that their main focus isn't about keeping it 'NA only' it's a fact of money. Which is fair enough. But there is no need to..deny it.
    If Smilegate or whoever is in charge of implementing servers, can just take a look at making a server around the Oceania area. In reality, they would profit...but whatever.
  • No thanks i like my current 10 ping there and i want to keep it that way so -1 on the move =/
  • The one possible solution for aussies would be a Hawaiian server, but there are no, to my knowledge, plans of such a server.


    My US geography is pretty weak but isn't LA pretty much as far west as you can go on the mainland?

    Could probably move it a couple miles south but the ping difference would be marginal and our west coast users would probably disapprove of it being down for weeks to get a 1ms lower ping.
  • Broskiiii wrote: »
    Yeah, that was my main point. Because originally there main focus was NA only servers. But now we know it's not only NA players.
    I'm not talking just about 'us' and New Zealand here, but the countries surrounding as as well, as we have a few countries near us.


    Yes, partly the reason why br's are known to be laggers is because of the lack of internet connection they have in their country.
    You do make a good point however, as it makes sense that rio and sao paulo are the main cities of Brazil.
    I'm just pointing out..the fact that they make up excuses not to make servers other than NA. When you can see that their main focus isn't about keeping it 'NA only' it's a fact of money. Which is fair enough. But there is no need to..deny it.
    If Smilegate or whoever is in charge of implementing servers, can just take a look at making a server around the Oceania area. In reality, they would profit...but whatever.
    well there are already a decent amount of players from that region so they probably don't wanna spend the money to get a license for that region since they already have a lot of income
    [MOD]dot wrote: »
    The one possible solution for aussies would be a Hawaiian server, but there are no, to my knowledge, plans of such a server.
    they'd get 160 ping. that's not a solution.
  • it's funny how westcoast server is basically 75% australians. most aussies are zp wh0res too (from what i've seen, i am myself) so i don't see why they wouldn't give us a hawaii sever :P.

    even small improvements like 20 - 30 makes a huge difference for reg. straight to the point, hawaii server, yeah sure why not :].
  • GoMavs wrote: »

    they'd get 160 ping. that's not a solution.

    lots of aussies already get 160 - 180 ping for your information lol, more than half i'd say. it'd be a solution, anything better would be, i'd say.
  • s7yx wrote: »
    lots of aussies already get 160 - 180 ping for your information lol, more than half i'd say. it'd be a solution, anything better would be, i'd say.
    180 ping at least with average internet (10 mbps). there would be absolutely no point of adding a hawaii server. you wouldn't notice a difference between 160 and 180 ping. you'd notice something like 120 to 100 but not 180-160.
  • GoMavs wrote: »
    well there are already a decent amount of players from that region so they probably don't wanna spend the money to get a license for that region since they already have a lot of income

    they'd get 160 ping. that's not a solution.
    Clearly just an estimation.
    More factor in than mere distance, although 3655 miles (Sydney-Maui) vs 7497 miles (Sydney-LA) would make a nice difference on its own.


    LA, being the second largest city in the USA, is of course a huge network of routers, all of which decrease ping.
    Maui for example, doesn't even come close to that.
    What you're looking for is lack of interference. While distance will decrease ping, its not the deciding factor.


    And I said "the one possible solution", not "the solution".
    The solution would obviously be an Australian server, but that isn't happening.
  • [MOD]dot wrote: »
    Clearly just an estimation.
    More factor in than mere distance, although 3655 miles (Sydney-Maui) vs 7497 miles (Sydney-LA) would make a nice difference on its own.


    LA, being the second largest city in the USA, is of course a huge network of routers, all of which decrease ping.
    Maui for example, doesn't even come close to that.
    What you're looking for is lack of interference. While distance will decrease ping, its not the deciding factor.


    And I said "the one possible solution", not "the solution".
    The solution would obviously be an Australian server, but that isn't happening.
    it is just an estimation based on the distance, an accurate one if you compare the pings that people have from other areas close to the same distance as sydney to maui.

    i said "that's not a solution." not "that's not the solution"
  • GoMavs wrote: »
    180 ping at least with average internet (10 mbps). there would be absolutely no point of adding a hawaii server. you wouldn't notice a difference between 160 and 180 ping. you'd notice something like 120 to 100 but not 180-160.

    there's a huge difference. trust me.
  • s7yx wrote: »
    there's a huge difference. trust me.
    there isn't a noticeable difference between 130 and 150 so there wouldn't be one between 160 and 180. once the ping is that high, you won't notice the difference. same goes for when you have 70 ping and it drops down to 50.
  • I live in California on the Direct West Coast of the United States

    On normal servers like Alpha, Foxtrot, etc. my ping stays around the 90-100 range and never goes above or below that range.

    On the West Coast Server (I rarely play on it, because it feels like I'm actually lagging) my ping stays around 13 - 27 range.

    I say give the Australians what they want, but they probably won't :)
  • GoMavs wrote: »
    there isn't a noticeable difference between 130 and 150 so there wouldn't be one between 160 and 180. once the ping is that high, you won't notice the difference. same goes for when you have 70 ping and it drops down to 50.
    You can't just rationalise it.

    I used to get 160 ping in WC and therefore ~240 in Alpha, etc. It was the best time I've had, I actually had proper reg and could expect kills. Right now I'm stuck at around 180-200 in WC and 260-280 in Alpha, the difference is significant.
  • aimboxdll wrote: »
    You can't just rationalise it.

    I used to get 160 ping in WC and therefore ~240 in Alpha, etc. It was the best time I've had, I actually had proper reg and could expect kills. Right now I'm stuck at around 180-200 in WC and 260-280 in Alpha, the difference is significant.
    you did not get proper reg. i can tell you that much.

    the ping is too high to notice a difference. for example. at one point i had 130 ping in the uk server and now i have 150. there is no difference. switching guns takes as long as it did and so does killing someone.

    if it drops from 180 to 130 then you'll notice a difference, but not 180 to 160.
  • GoMavs wrote: »
    it is just an estimation based on the distance, an accurate one if you compare the pings that people have from other areas close to the same distance as sydney to maui.

    i said "that's not a solution." not "that's not the solution"
    You can't compare like that, so I don't see a point in there.
  • GoMavs wrote: »
    it is just an estimation based on the distance, an accurate one if you compare the pings that people have from other areas close to the same distance as sydney to maui.

    i said "that's not a solution." not "that's not the solution"

    Umm..you said before people have different internet connections. So idk how that would work.
  • GoMavs wrote: »
    you did not get proper reg. i can tell you that much.

    the ping is too high to notice a difference. for example. at one point i had 130 ping in the uk server and now i have 150. there is no difference. switching guns takes as long as it did and so does killing someone.

    if it drops from 180 to 130 then you'll notice a difference, but not 180 to 160.
    You can't use your anecdotal evidence to disprove my anecdotal evidence.

    It's different, my game very much revolves around the kind of reg I can expect with 180 ping. 160 made it a breeze, 200 made it infuriating. Today I had ~215 in West Coast (this is too high comparatively with Alpha, so I'm taking this isn't an issue on my end), and I wouldn't get sniper reg.
  • [MOD]Rory wrote: »
    because they do...

    and moving the servers sounds kinda pointless, it would help by about 10-30 ping if that.
    10-30 ping is a big difference to me, that would basicly mean you MIGHT be able to kill someone while there walking backwards or with a grenade :)
  • [MOD]Rory wrote: »
    because they do...

    and moving the servers sounds kinda pointless, it would help by about 10-30 ping if that.
    THIS GAME REALLY ****ES ME OFF SOO MANY PEOPLE ARE QUITING (FROM AUSTRALIA) DUE TO LAG AND REGISTER WHEN YOU SHOOT SOMEONE IN THE HEAD OR BODY THIS SUCKS MAN AND PLEASE MAKE AN AUSTRALIAN SERVER WHO CARES ABOUT THE BRs WEVE BEEN WAITING FOR YEARS NOW AND BRs Are FIRST?!
  • dkgmasd wrote: »
    THIS GAME REALLY ****ES ME OFF SOO MANY PEOPLE ARE QUITING (FROM AUSTRALIA) DUE TO LAG AND REGISTER WHEN YOU SHOOT SOMEONE IN THE HEAD OR BODY THIS SUCKS MAN AND PLEASE MAKE AN AUSTRALIAN SERVER WHO CARES ABOUT THE BRs WEVE BEEN WAITING FOR YEARS NOW AND BRs Are FIRST?!

    Then don't play. This game isn't meant for Aussy's. ******.
This discussion has been closed.