test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Patching is awful

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
Downloadspeed seems to bee between 25-50kb/sec. It takes hours to download any bigger update. Why don't you fix this Cryptic?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Jerras wrote: »
    Downloadspeed seems to bee between 25-50kb/sec. It takes hours to download any bigger update. Why don't you fix this Cryptic?

    Because the problem is on your side, not theirs. From the launcher options, click patch via proxy and click ok. If that doesnt work, check your firewall/router/AV software.

    You need to make sure ports 7000 through 7500 are not restricted.

    If you run http://files.champions-online.com/nettest.exe and post the results, that will give us a better understanding of your connection, and can tell you where the problem is.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    tedgp123 wrote: »
    Because the problem is on your side, not theirs. From the launcher options, click patch via proxy and click ok. If that doesnt work, check your firewall/router/AV software.

    You need to make sure ports 7000 through 7500 are not restricted.
    If you run http://files.champions-online.com/nettest.exe and post the results, that will give us a better understanding of your connection, and can tell you where the problem is.
    No, it is not my fault. The ports are not restricted and my internet connection is fine.
    Nettest:
    Port 80: 25/28 KB/sec
    Port 443: timed out/25 KB/sec
    Port 7225: 37/19 KB/sec
    Port 7003: 22/26 KB/sec
    Port 7202: 21/timed out KB/sec
    Port 7499: 21/21 KB/sec
    Port 80: 20 KB/sec

    Normal Connection:
    Cryptic -> Me

    Proxy Connection:
    Cryptic -> Proxy -> Me

    How could this be faster lol?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Jerras wrote: »
    No, it is not my fault. The ports are not restricted and my internet connection is fine.

    Really? Your nettest says otherwise.

    You have something either on your computer or your ISP that is stoppign you from patching. I'm leaning more towards traffic shaping by your ISP.

    Normal Connection:
    Cryptic -> Me

    Proxy Connection:
    Cryptic -> Proxy -> Me

    How could this be faster lol?


    because that isnt how it works.

    It's Cryptic > your ISP routing > You

    Proxy would be Cryptic > Proxy routing > You.


    2 totally different paths to reach your system, but still needs to go through your ISP. But if your ISP traffic shapes you, theres very little you can do to stop them, unless you call them and switch to a different rate.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    My ISP is not blocking anything. Every other application is working flawless. Steam, uTorrent, Global Agenda, Battlefield: BC2,...

    The patching is working, but it's just slow. Any other US-server is working much better.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Jerras wrote: »
    My ISP is not blocking anything. Every other application is working flawless. Steam, uTorrent, Global Agenda, Battlefield: BC2,...

    The patching is working, but it's just slow. Any other US-server is working much better.


    Usually i would insert a facepalm here, but im going to be polite. just because you can play other games fine does not mean you will be able to play STO fine. Especially if your ISP/Firewall is blocking the ports needed for this game to work, which by the results of the nettest, that YOU performed on your connection and system, prove, that something on YOUR side is blocking it.


    Until you get that sorted, you will continue to have slow patch times, and possible, and probably frequent, lag and disconnects while in game.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    More importantly than speed, what is your latency to the nettest server.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    coderanger wrote:
    More importantly than speed, what is your latency to the nettest server.
    150-230ms. I even checked which ports are used by the launcher. For account-service it's using 7004, for patchserver it's using 7225. But for pure downloading it's using http.

    And tedgp123, my ISP is not blocking or filtering anything. Ask them yourself lol.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I can assure you it isn't using HTTP for the download, so your check might be a bit off ;-) Can you run a speedtest to a server in Boston, MA, USA as a test?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    coderanger wrote:
    I can assure you it isn't using HTTP for the download, so your check might be a bit off ;-) Can you run a speedtest to a server in Boston, MA, USA as a test?
    I used http://www.speedtest.net/index.php
    8-12 Mbit
    Lat: 102-112ms
    I tried Boston MA (3800 miles away), Manchester NH, Portland ME
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I have to agree, your patching is very slow, I need over 1hr to download 250MB...
    All other games and applications work nicely (speedwise) for me.

    Speedtest link below:
    U:9,4Mb/s
    D: 0,8Mb/s
    Ping: 189

    721160337.png
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    We had this discussion in a number of threads. Everytime a variety of test methods were invoked and the results provided by players affected. Some showed no problems with latency. For a single time (patch before this one) I was actually able to download the patch in record time. Now it is awful slow again (three hours until now, 95,5 % and not counting).

    The illumination creeps up on me, that Cryptic knows the cause (capacity problems), but cannot tell us this and so they let us ping and nettest and tracert around to keep us busy and emulate the air of doing something.

    Paranoia? Conspiracy theory? Sure...

    http://www.speedtest.net/result/721197694.png
    http://www.speedtest.net/result/721199494.png
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Can have many reasons, I have no clue. It just sucks. Even worse if it was fine some weeks ago and then suddely changed. Keywords here are limited playtime wasted by long patch-times....

    Pls fix, thanks!

    If this helps:
    Routenverfolgung zu patchserver.crypticstudios.com [208.95.184.25]
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I second that i would appreciate if tedgp123 doesn't enter every thread stating "fault is on your side" without using some brain in first place....maybe he takes the "patched xy MB" value as math base (thats only the amount of game data that are changed by the patch), but the patch size is displayed in the "recieved xy"line..

    The patching IS very slow compared to ALL other games/platforms/websites/DL sites. For myself patching STO is on average recieving the patch with ~40KiB/sec, today it was bit better (200KiB/sec) as i patched directly after it was applied on server side (13 GMT).

    @coderanger: Thanks that you acted with a serious reply :)

    Boston values:
    Download: 7,06Mbit/s
    Upload: 1,01MBit/s
    Ping: 76ms
    Distance: 3650miles

    And no...no firewall blocking ports, no port/bandwith restriction from ISP (forbidden in EU) etc in place.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Still at 95.5% and not counting
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    And no...no firewall blocking ports, no port/bandwith restriction from ISP (forbidden in EU) etc in place.

    I'll just go ahead and state that is entirely wrong, and most EU ISPs do have packet shaping in place.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    coderanger wrote:
    I'll just go ahead and state that is entirely wrong, and most EU ISPs do have packet shaping in place.

    Consulting the EU ISPs that handle 80% of the traffic i assure you are wrong. Packet shaping isn't the same as blocking ports or throttling bandwith in general for a specific end customer. Doing this without pre-warning the end customer incl. a reason why and deadline for changing "behaviour" is strictly forbidden by law since 01.08.2005.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I never need to open ports on my upnp router, such advices never help as of my experience :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Just for comparison: started steam, selected US-Dallas as download server to use, selected a demo for DL: 749KB/s DL avg., 825KB/s peak.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Consulting the EU ISPs that handle 80% of the traffic i assure you are wrong. Packet shaping isn't the same as blocking ports or throttling bandwith in general for a specific end customer. Doing this without pre-warning the end customer incl. a reason why and deadline for changing "behaviour" is strictly forbidden by law since 01.08.2005.
    This.
    The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Packet shaping isn't the same as blocking ports or throttling bandwith in general for a specific end customer. Doing this without pre-warning the end customer incl. a reason why and deadline for changing "behaviour" is strictly forbidden by law since 01.08.2005.

    What on earth are you talking about? EU ISPs use traffic classification the same way as everybody else. State what law you think is relevant, so we can correct you. I can't find anything relevant to the internet on that date.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    my patch finished in 3 mins from the uk so some strange problems going on i think
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Not sure what the problem is with some people on here I live in the UK and with VirginMedia and dont have a problem downloading the patch downloaded 251mb in about 5 mins tops
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    coderanger wrote:
    I'll just go ahead and state that is entirely wrong, and most EU ISPs do have packet shaping in place.

    Source? (10chars)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    HeroesWar wrote: »
    Not sure what the problem is with some people on here I live in the UK and with VirginMedia and dont have a problem downloading the patch downloaded 251mb in about 5 mins tops

    Just some minor correction for "geniuses" like you and Miiru: the patch has a size of 70,2MB. This 70,2MB have the effect to change 251MB of locally stored game data. Just learn to read and differenciate between "recieved" (what you need to DL, 70,2MB) and "patched" (what your local PC needs to alter [251MB], i think my Postville RAID0 is fast enough to handle some MB per millisecond). Take your thought transmission speed and divide it by factor 3, then you get the real speed. So 234KB/sec is fast? Hmm for really fast servers, no matter if US, Canada, China, India or Australia i have 1,3MB/sec. Do you really think Cryptic servers are fast?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I am currently having no problems with updates on my end.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    coderanger wrote:
    More importantly than speed, what is your latency to the nettest server.

    Is there a place to download the updates other then from the launcher ? Im currently in iraq and so far i have been trying to download from the launcher for 2 days not and i still have on recieved about 300MB from the 1110MB's
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    xanathon wrote: »
    We had this discussion in a number of threads. Everytime a variety of test methods were invoked and the results provided by players affected. Some showed no problems with latency. For a single time (patch before this one) I was actually able to download the patch in record time. Now it is awful slow again (three hours until now, 95,5 % and not counting).

    The illumination creeps up on me, that Cryptic knows the cause (capacity problems), but cannot tell us this and so they let us ping and nettest and tracert around to keep us busy and emulate the air of doing something.

    Paranoia? Conspiracy theory? Sure...

    http://www.speedtest.net/result/721197694.png
    http://www.speedtest.net/result/721199494.png

    Your theory sounds good......



    ..... until you see the nettest results which prove otherwise.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    tedgp123 wrote: »
    ..... until you see the nettest results which prove otherwise.
    The nettest results prove, that Cryptics server suck TRIBBLE.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I also face the same problem but if I take my router out of the equation the patcher litterally vomits on my hard drive. Something between STO and my DLink router doesn't agree. And the ports are clear.

    I also have to agree having tedgp123 drop into every thread is disconcerting.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Jerras wrote: »
    The nettest results prove, that Cryptics server suck TRIBBLE.

    I'd love to see how you came up with that conclusion. Please elaborate.
Sign In or Register to comment.