Experimental Update 1.08

[SillyJoe 112]

12 minutes ago, helpthedeadwalk said:

Be nice if Nitrado published the specs of those VMs. You need a non-oversubscribed/dedicated  box for 100 slots.

Yea well Nitrado states the following:

Quote

Nitrado currently only installs latest-generation Intel Xeon / Scalable processors. Because we’re an Intel Partner, we often have access to the newest CPU models before they even hit the market, always bringing us one step ahead.

We run up to 48 cores in a single server, which allows us to simply shrug off common fluctuations in resource usage.

For big game servers with many player slots, however, high clock frequency is more important than having many cores. This is why we have a wide variety of different CPU models in our arsenal, and our system will automatically assign your game server to a hardware configuration that ensures a great gaming experience.

 

So I wonder if the server hardware of Nitrado is actualy fine but the (server) engine of dayz can't fully utilize the hardware which indicates a problem of engine itself and not Nitrado. It would be great if someone with knowlege could shed some light about this.

Edited June 21, 2020 by SillyJoe

[KajMak64Bit2 125]

7 hours ago, SillyJoe said:

Yea well Nitrado states the following:

So I wonder if the server hardware of Nitrado is actualy fine but the (server) engine of dayz can't fully utilize the hardware which indicates a problem of engine itself and not Nitrado. It would be great if someone with knowlege could shed some light about this.

yes... DayZ server side is really crappy it's like Discord... looks fine when you look at it... but behind the scenes it's disgusting... Bohemia really needs to optimize the server side... it's literally what this game really needs... optimize the server... 80% of bugs happening are just gone... like cars flying that thing will only happen when internet gets shitty server sided or from what i seen from other people saying... a laggy player is in your vicinity xD

[Uncle Zed 272]

8 hours ago, SillyJoe said:

It seems like that the devs are not able to fix the fps/performance/render issues on current gen consoles but please fix at least the awful server performance or tell your server provider Nitrado to set up better servers for DayZ. Everything above 60 slots is a true lagfest and unplayable but they still offer servers with up to 100 slots which is a bad joke imho!!

 

The devs have said multiple times that the game isn't designed for more than 60 slots.

[KajMak64Bit2 125]

4 minutes ago, Uncle Zed said:

The devs have said multiple times that the game isn't designed for more than 60 slots.

it;s not that it isn;t designed... probably for gameplay purposes sure... but the thing that the game is laggy when 60+ players is an obvious bad server side optimization...if they optimized the servers especially in the rise of AMD and more cores... imagine like 200 players on AMD Threadripper with 64 cores 128 threads... like bruh xD and also no LAG

[jakub_bohemia 70]

On 6/20/2020 at 7:33 PM, hegra said:

Tell me, a metal fence - will it be stronger than a wooden fence? If not, then it's stupid.

We have made improvements, metal walls are now much stronger and not so easily penetrated by bullets.

[hegra 27]

3 minutes ago, jakub_bohemia said:

We have made improvements, metal walls are now much stronger and not so easily penetrated by bullets.

thanks for feed back 

[Blades56 29]

Is there going to be any improvements in car machanics and desyn in the new update

[SillyJoe 112]

7 hours ago, Uncle Zed said:

The devs have said multiple times that the game isn't designed for more than 60 slots.

Ah, well if that is true it's almost criminal that their official server partner NItrado does offer servers with up to 100 slots. I think the problem is more or less bad server side optimisation and this should be fixed asap as it does break the gameplay experience on full pop community servers with over 60 slots.

Keep in mind that the only option on consoles that come close to 60 slots is either 52 or 64 slots for community servers, so if the devs know that their game won't run well with more than 60 slots they should tell their server provider to cap it at 60 slots and don't give people the option to rent servers with up to 100 slots. Otherwise it's a very bad business practice and I would even call this a big scam!

Imho DayZ only gets fun with "at least 60 Players" on the Chenarus map, for Livonia it's fine with a little bit less players but I guess that's a personal thing. I do like interactions with other survivors and as there are no quests in DayZ (vanilla) it heavily relies on interactions with other players. More players on a servers means more fun and a better experience and I bet most of the DayZ players out there do think the same about it...

Edited June 22, 2020 by SillyJoe

[Derleth 1357]

16 minutes ago, SillyJoe said:

Ah, well if that is true it's almost criminal that their official server partner NItrado does offer servers with up to 100 slots. I think the problem is more or less bad server side optimisaton and this should be fixed asap as it does break the gameplay experience on full pop community servers with over 60 slots.

Keep in mind that the only option on console is either 52 or 64 slots for community servers, so if the devs know that their game won't run well with more than 60 slots they should tell their server provider to cap it at 60 slots and don't give people the option to rent servers with up to 100 slots. Otherwise it's a very bad business practice and I would even call this a big scam!

Imho DayZ only gets fun with "at least 60 Players" on the Chenarus map, for Livonia it's fine with a little bit less players but I guess that's a personal thing. I do like interactions with other survivors and as there are no quests in DayZ (vanilla) it heavily relies on interactions with other players. More players on a servers means more fun and a better experience and I bet most of the DayZ players out there do think the same about it...

I believe server performance was better a few patches back, and it also depends on how much crap that has been stashed away on the server, how many giant bases there is and so on. This is why performance is better after persistence wipes and why it will quickly degenerate on servers with higher player numbers. Server performance has always been an issue and will most likely continue to be so. Just consider all the stuff a DayZ server needs to keep track of at once, I think it is actually pretty impressive they're running as well as they do at 60 players.

That server providers offer player caps higher than what is officially supported is a bit weird, but keep in mind that the public PC server files leave the player cap entirely up to the server owner. If Nitrado had not been allowed to host 60+ servers there would have been howls for blood most likely. What BI should do is require them to run such servers on hardware capable of maintaining acceptable performance. It is perfectly possible to have a 100/100 server performing well - but it requires a powerful dedicated machine.

Edited June 22, 2020 by Derleth

[SillyJoe 112]

2 minutes ago, Derleth said:

What BI should do is require Nitrado to run such servers on hardware capable of maintaining them with acceptable performance. It is perfectly possible to have a 100/100 server performing well - but it requires a powerful dedicated machine.

+1

[THEGordonFreeman 664]

2 hours ago, Derleth said:

IIt is perfectly possible to have a 100/100 server performing well - but it requires a powerful dedicated machine.

Name one.  I've played on most of them and let me tell you when the server hits anywhere over 40 players, the sheer amount of desync to drive, shoot, or in many cases melee zeds drops at least 25% for ever 10 players over.  And when it gets 100 players, please.  It's playable when you are in the woods, but as soon as you come into contact with a player, it's bad.  I have run DayZ servers since they have been available through GSP's early on, and while many improvements have been made, it's not enough, not even close on the server side after you hit 40 players on fantastic hardware, it's diminishing returns.  On a 9900K with 16 GB of memory and SSD's, the server FPS vanilla is around 11K and after QOL mods and weapons and such, it's usually around 6-7K, which in my experience will handle about 30 players with FPS around 5-600, but then thinks are going south fast for roughly every 8 to 10 players you add from there.

Without a doubt, the server does not scale well with better hardware.  A 4770K can run DayZ Server vanilla at 10K and a 9900K can run it at 11K, 16 GB memory and SSD's on both.   I've tried it on a XEON processor running at 2.7 Ghz, still doesn't matter.  It is a single core server primarily, just like Arma 3.

Edited June 22, 2020 by THEGordonFreeman

[SillyJoe 112]

2 hours ago, THEGordonFreeman said:

Without a doubt, the server does not scale well with better hardware.  A 4770K can run DayZ Server vanilla at 10K and a 9900K can run it at 11K, 16 GB memory and SSD's on both.   I've tried it on a XEON processor running at 2.7 Ghz, still doesn't matter.  It is a single core server primarily, just like Arma 3. 

I think that's one of the main problems with DayZ servers and they have to fix this! We are in 2020 and we should use our modern hardware efficiently...

Edited June 22, 2020 by SillyJoe

[Uncle Zed 272]

Soooo...  stable tomorrow? Please?

[kirlen 3]

No chance @Uncle Zed, they made this patch for 4 mounths. Rest of patches were almost every 1 mounths  + 1 week for test, this time if they made it 4 mounths, they will propobly test it for like 4 weeks as well, or even more 🙂  So if we are lucky meybe it will come out in 2 weeks. They also do not want to express their own opinions about when they want to introduce it, so that we can prepare the servers, so I guess only that this is a very distant date.

 

[radamantyz 83]

7 hours ago, kirlen said:

No chance @Uncle Zed, they made this patch for 4 mounths. Rest of patches were almost every 1 mounths  + 1 week for test, this time if they made it 4 mounths, they will propobly test it for like 4 weeks as well, or even more 🙂  So if we are lucky meybe it will come out in 2 weeks. They also do not want to express their own opinions about when they want to introduce it, so that we can prepare the servers, so I guess only that this is a very distant date.

 

That depends on the problems that the build has, not on the time that they have to work on it, in fact with more time we could think that they could polish certain things better, I think that a stable version this week is not something crazy.

 

PD. Please, the light at some point has to be repaired, it can continue like this, it goes through the walls if you see it from a distance or at certain angles, it is a problem that has years

[Derleth 1357]

18 hours ago, THEGordonFreeman said:

Name one.  I've played on most of them and let me tell you when the server hits anywhere over 40 players, the sheer amount of desync to drive, shoot, or in many cases melee zeds drops at least 25% for ever 10 players over.  And when it gets 100 players, please.  It's playable when you are in the woods, but as soon as you come into contact with a player, it's bad.  I have run DayZ servers since they have been available through GSP's early on, and while many improvements have been made, it's not enough, not even close on the server side after you hit 40 players on fantastic hardware, it's diminishing returns.  On a 9900K with 16 GB of memory and SSD's, the server FPS vanilla is around 11K and after QOL mods and weapons and such, it's usually around 6-7K, which in my experience will handle about 30 players with FPS around 5-600, but then thinks are going south fast for roughly every 8 to 10 players you add from there.

Without a doubt, the server does not scale well with better hardware.  A 4770K can run DayZ Server vanilla at 10K and a 9900K can run it at 11K, 16 GB memory and SSD's on both.   I've tried it on a XEON processor running at 2.7 Ghz, still doesn't matter.  It is a single core server primarily, just like Arma 3.

I'll take your word for it, the only "overcrowded" servers I've personally played on is the Core and Spaggie's vanilla servers and to be fair neither have shown any performance problems that I have noticed. I suppose servers with a large amount of mods will be struggling a lot more. It is a bit funny that the config files have a setting to make the server better utilise multiple cores but it doesn't seem to have much effect...

Edited June 23, 2020 by Derleth

[THEGordonFreeman 664]

6 hours ago, Derleth said:

 It is a bit funny that the config files have a setting to make the server better utilise multiple cores but it doesn't seem to have much effect...

Oh, it's a lot funny.  Leaving that as default is probably the best thing to do even if you have cores to spare.  Granted, they have task worker threads that can use an additional core or two I think, but there is no measurable gain by adjusting this value even the slightest bit under load.  It is my belief that, just like Arma 3, the biggest strain on the server is Zed AI, and thus the reason why having fewer AI makes the server run better, which 100 person servers MUST do to have a chance.   Arma 3 had the ability to use a "headless" client that you could use JUST to calculate AI.  It was a convoluted mess to configure, but servers that used it could have hundreds of AI present making the server feel like a real battlezone, but man was it a bitch to get setup right.  A headless client meant that it wasn't a playable client, no graphics rendered.  I believe if they did something like that in DayZ, we could have LOTS more zeds, it makes sense since the game mainly uses one core, if a headless client worked the same, like it did in Arma 3, then we could move zed AI off to another core, or another server instance to be calculated.  In my mind, that would be a performance winner.

[Derleth 1357]

2 hours ago, THEGordonFreeman said:

Oh, it's a lot funny.  Leaving that as default is probably the best thing to do even if you have cores to spare.  Granted, they have task worker threads that can use an additional core or two I think, but there is no measurable gain by adjusting this value even the slightest bit under load.  It is my belief that, just like Arma 3, the biggest strain on the server is Zed AI, and thus the reason why having fewer AI makes the server run better, which 100 person servers MUST do to have a chance.   Arma 3 had the ability to use a "headless" client that you could use JUST to calculate AI.  It was a convoluted mess to configure, but servers that used it could have hundreds of AI present making the server feel like a real battlezone, but man was it a bitch to get setup right.  A headless client meant that it wasn't a playable client, no graphics rendered.  I believe if they did something like that in DayZ, we could have LOTS more zeds, it makes sense since the game mainly uses one core, if a headless client worked the same, like it did in Arma 3, then we could move zed AI off to another core, or another server instance to be calculated.  In my mind, that would be a performance winner.

That sounds really interesting, I wonder if there is anything like that - or just improvements of any kind - on the horizon for DayZ, or if we'll have to live with the current state of affairs.

[KajMak64Bit2 125]

2 hours ago, THEGordonFreeman said:

Oh, it's a lot funny.  Leaving that as default is probably the best thing to do even if you have cores to spare.  Granted, they have task worker threads that can use an additional core or two I think, but there is no measurable gain by adjusting this value even the slightest bit under load.  It is my belief that, just like Arma 3, the biggest strain on the server is Zed AI, and thus the reason why having fewer AI makes the server run better, which 100 person servers MUST do to have a chance.   Arma 3 had the ability to use a "headless" client that you could use JUST to calculate AI.  It was a convoluted mess to configure, but servers that used it could have hundreds of AI present making the server feel like a real battlezone, but man was it a bitch to get setup right.  A headless client meant that it wasn't a playable client, no graphics rendered.  I believe if they did something like that in DayZ, we could have LOTS more zeds, it makes sense since the game mainly uses one core, if a headless client worked the same, like it did in Arma 3, then we could move zed AI off to another core, or another server instance to be calculated.  In my mind, that would be a performance winner.

one thing i like about DayZ is that the fps is not server depended... you will still get a lot of FPS even if the server is struggling and lagging... in ArmA if server is overloaded with AIs and shit you get 20fps when you have like 60fps in Singleplayer? xD FPS in ArmA is really server dependend

[TacticallyPractical 3]

2 hours ago, THEGordonFreeman said:

It is my belief that, just like Arma 3, the biggest strain on the server is Zed AI, and thus the reason why having fewer AI makes the server run better, which 100 person servers MUST do to have a chance.  

Uh. So.  Like. There is no AI.  lol the AI parameters consist of ‘is that a player?’ No. Keep shuffling.  Mbe? Go to that spot on alert. Yes. Go the last place you saw player.  Is player there? Yes? Attack. No? Radius box search.   And then pathfinding. Which isn’t exactly crazy, as there are no complex structures really.  Lol I mean is game so obviously some AI, but I mean zombies by canon literally have no intelligence.  They can’t think, or assume agency or fear death.  The AI in ArmA can pilot f’ing drones.  
 

I’ve been stalking players at huge distances and game will spawn in zeds treating like i was as close as scope magnification makes it seem.  However there’s nothing for zombies.  It’s super creepy, the entire spawn herd is synced up.  They will shuffle a few feet, pause and move again.  Also game is not shy about despawning them.  Doesn’t give af.  No player within 300m or in direct sight? Will just shit can whole herd.  Spawning them in is easy.  It just does it around corner.  Poof been there whole time lol
 

You’d never notice herd sync unless you were looking at a huge group from really far away at a good top down angle, but as far as I can tell... with no player they sort of become one zombie.  All running As a single unit. You never see more than a few at time so you mostly don’t notice.  Also as you get closer they start to desync from their bros because they catch glimpses of you.  Try it sometime.  It’s not perfect but it’s cool to watch.  

im pretty sure biggest issue is inventory and trying to keep world consistent.  If just you walk into a town and then leave... I think after a pretty short time like 10-15 min... stuff despawns.  But just add three people and one keeps coming back into town... it has to remember every single piece of stupid junk loot That first guy saw because third guy saw it too and is staying within 300m bubble as well as cataloging everything on player and conveying the state of all the objects around that player, (is door open, fruit spawn been taken, yada yada) Everytime new player comes to town and sees that stupid bag and doesn’t take it... one more thing game has to track.  Multipled by how many tiny little towns...

 

Your idea is still on point tho lol. I think we need what you were saying for inventory handshakes.  A basic AI per every ten players that logs just their little group and then does handshakes with other group leader AIs and they all tell each other what everyone has yada yada... but they do it during downtime.   Then when players actually meet, the two minder AIs have already established some short form/set of cookies and maybe even essentially set a local timeline based on player with the most average connection.  Cuz right now it’s just ‘PLAYER ENTERED 300M RING HOLY SHIT UPDATE EVERYTHING.’

but yeah these zombies are so f’ing stupid.  Big potato energy.

 

[sneazzy95 1]

Zombies are often stupides in games or movies, that's a fact lol

Appvalley TutuApp Tweakbox

Edited August 10, 2020 by sneazzy95

[ast65 11]

15 hours ago, Derleth said:

That sounds really interesting, I wonder if there is anything like that - or just improvements of any kind - on the horizon for DayZ, or if we'll have to live with the current state of affairs.

I guess - if at all - we won't see any true AI in Dayz until Arma 4 is out.

(wishful thinking :P)

Edited June 24, 2020 by ast65

[kirlen 3]

5 minutes ago, ast65 said:

I guess - if at all - we won't see any true AI in Dayz until Arma 4 is out.

(wishful thinking :P)

And we will have ArmA4 - DayZ mod, with AI 🙂

Edited June 24, 2020 by kirlen

[dokumenty 2]

Quicker I will expect DayZ 2 on full enfusion than Arma4. This title I`m sure will be released when engine will be able to hold enough AI.

[Monosof 15]

On 6/22/2020 at 7:47 PM, radamantyz said:

That depends on the problems that the build has, not on the time that they have to work on it, in fact with more time we could think that they could polish certain things better, I think that a stable version this week is not something crazy.

 

PD. Please, the light at some point has to be repaired, it can continue like this, it goes through the walls if you see it from a distance or at certain angles, it is a problem that has years

Dayz Twitter said that the update will come to consoles this month. That means within the next 6 days, I assume they have gotten the verification process out of the way with Sony and Xbox and plan to drop the game the same time as the PC as they did once in the past. So hopefully we all go stable within that time.