When I was host I never noticed any disadvantage or advantage then. Well actually change that.
A lot of people assumed they were host but never had any info to show how they knew they were host. So I did not have any definite info, just assumptions. Lets just say before Ghosts I paid attention "as host" and when I had a longer start time before the match than normal I notice no difference in hitmarkers, game play.
But I originally WAS going to say what you said since they did before mention host advantage / disadvantage in their patches. Couldnt get out the right wording. I would assume that whatever advantage / disadvantage tweak they made for the host wasnt a good enough amount because not every hosts connection was probably set up the same.
I spawned inside the lethal radius of a grenade the other day. Not much to understand about that.
I also don't understand why Ghosts runs on the same damn engine as MW2, but has game breaking latency issues that MW2 didn't have.
I also don't understand why features were completely removed for absolutely no reason.
You can call it a "misunderstanding" if you want, but I think most people would tell you that CoD has been going the wrong direction since IW left to form Respawn.
But you do understand what the "engine" is, right?
SO why doesn't the host have a major advantage in this game ?
as I recall the system is set up to add a very minor gimp to the host. it brings their connection down to the best connection after them (the guy who will likely pull host if you leave) or atleast thats what I recall I might be mistaken as its 3 am here . It does not give a host a disadvantage and they still retain a TINY advantage, but its not the same advantage that they enjoyed in the past
Oh ps, I love how Ghosts the perfect connection game HAS NO PING BARS OR NUMBER.... I guess they don't want people to see the 200+ ms users in the lobby :> oh inb4 you say that doesn't matter (ill give you a clue, those high latency players are the ones with high jitter coming from 5000miles away)
Who said Ghosts had the perfect connection ? Not me. You twisted peoples words to state that . Inaccurate ping bars mean nothing.
That link I posted wasnt your proof of how the code works. All it really does is show rewind time has been there all along. Two years before the release of COD.
No where on that page that I linked does it say rewind time or lag comp punishes players with good connections. So again here we are back to square one with you having no proof or explanation how you are getting punished. All that page shows is a call to StartLagCompensation and doesnt show you what StartLagCompensation actually does.
IF lag compensation back when that was written punishes players for connections it that would mean that in ALL COD games that players were punished, even your precious number 2 thru 6.
Oh and counter strike source uses rewind time. So in your theory you are going to get punished there for having a good connection too. Slothy used rewind time in MW2 which you agreed with so its pretty safe to assume he will use it again as well.
"only thing that matters to me is netcode and from COD2-6 the netcode was as close to perfect as we would ever get. I will forever struggle to understand why they changed the method of compensation to rewind time."
See you contradicted yourself there. You state that the link where Slothy posted was "only" talking about MW2 where "they got it right" talked about using MW2s rewind time. So why would it be hard to understand that they changed the method of compensation to rewind time if they already had it in MW2 ? As a matter of fact Slothy even admitted to adding lag comp (anitlag) to COD since COD2 when he got to IW and improved it in COD4 and MW2.
Now one last thing. Lets just say that lag comp DID punish players for, lets say, the last three games and this one. How come there is not a quote from ANY developer stating thats possible. Sure we have provided proof that it is not possible in some way or another, but from the people that think it IS possible have yet to show a single shred of proof for 3 years from a developer.
Or a GOOD Youtuber. Even Driftor has admitted his videos had mistakes in it but people like OvenBakedMuffin will only post a link to his video with no discussion and never admit his video had some mistakes. .
The engine is'nt the same as MW2. People has this misunderstanding about this game and all COD.
The engine is heavly modified every year. Like most game engines it makes more sense to improve and expand then to start over.
Here are a list of engines that do the same thing.
1) Id tech engine (the mother of most engines)
2) Unreal engine (the other engine that's commonly used)
3) Crytech engine (Famus open world engine)
4) Chrome engine (used on allot of low budget FPS)
3) Uncharted engine (used for the series and the last of us)
4) Frostbyte (BF games, MOH and even some NFS)
5) Source engine (Valves wonderfull engine created from the quake engine, still used today)
It takes years to make an engine, the engine often gives the games its over all feel. You don't want a new engine.
As far as the game goes its vast improvment over BO2, in regard to connectivity. BF4 currently suffers from more issues with its newer engine.
To be honest, you are doing exactly what he said people were doing. Mw1,2 and 3 all ran on the same engine. Ghosts (about time) runs on a brand new one. It was built from scratch which is why some things might appear under worked. Building a new engine and a new game in 2 years is a seriously tight deadline. Things need to be fixed and will be. Ghosts is not a bad start. But with 3 companies working on this, I'm sure it will improve.