Live data from Hacker News

Riot Games: Artificial Latency for Remote Competitors

lolesports.com

1–10 of 160 posts

Re: Riot Games: Artificial Latency for Remote Competitors

#3

Reminds me of the cable lengths for black boxes connected to the network in Wall Street. Each cable is the same length regardless of which computer is closer to the access point.

That's neat, I didn't know about this. Very cool.

Re: Riot Games: Artificial Latency for Remote Competitors

#4
The part I was interested about the most was glossed over.

In what situation can this happen?

> we realized that there was a calculation error that only manifested in scenarios where the actual ping was significantly lower than the target latency. In this situation the actual latency would be considerably higher than what is displayed on the overlay on the player's screens.

Re: Riot Games: Artificial Latency for Remote Competitors

#5

Reminds me of the cable lengths for black boxes connected to the network in Wall Street. Each cable is the same length regardless of which computer is closer to the access point.

Perhaps apocryphal/silly, but amusing nonetheless. Story goes that this means you want to be in the computer furthest from the interconnect because light travels slightly faster in straight fiber than in coiled fiber.

Re: Riot Games: Artificial Latency for Remote Competitors

#8
As context this was a big international fiasco. Nobody was acting maliciously but fans of RNG and other teams felt wronged. RNG didn't want to attend due to covid restrictions on travel but Riot really wants Chinese viewers in international tournaments, hence all this online latency work. Pros on other teams were lied to by the false latency information which must be almost paranoia inducing to be told it's only 35ms even when it (correctly) feels higher. In the end RNG had to replay their games, which was not as bad as it could have been since they were vs much weaker teams, but still annoying.

Anyways, by "scenarios where the actual ping was significantly lower than the target latency" do they mean like if the ping from Busan-server is 10 but they want it to feel like 35? I feel like that's the one scenario you'd care about, making the Busan players have 35 ping was the whole point.

Edit - also the other scenario, where the actual ping is significantly higher than the target latency...well in that case your latency service would be some sort of magical time travel box! Adding latency is literally the only thing it can do right? It's not possible to lower it. Maybe the it depends what they mean by "significantly" but idk the target latency was 35ms so like at most they could be 35ms lower than that.

I guess they didn't catch it because the bug was in the latency service itself which gave the wrong value to both the in game display and to the old network monitoring system. Idk in hindsight it's easy to say if you're going to introduce this new ping equalizing service it might break how you test ping especially because it hasn't been tested in soloq. But meh a lot easier to see what happened in hindsight after they write it all up.

Re: Riot Games: Artificial Latency for Remote Competitors

#9
A good software lesson here.

They built a complex system to tweak tens of ms (at most) of ping to equalize. And they had a bug and it disadvantaged on team. Thus, they have to replay due to unfairness introduced by Riot itself.

They could've gone Option 1 - all teams at their natural ping. While it wouldn't be as perfect in theory, it wouldn't have resulted in replaying matches. Plenty of other esports and fighting games play at natural ping and have real results. There is unfairness due to location, but only scrubs blame 5-15ms ping advantage for a loss in a game as strategic as LoL.

People play Melee with ping differences bigger than that and it works fine lol. Waaay more technical game shows that there's tolerance.

Not to mention that the server option could've had some system to distribute across advantageous servers over the course of a series.

Re: Riot Games: Artificial Latency for Remote Competitors

#10

Reminds me of the cable lengths for black boxes connected to the network in Wall Street. Each cable is the same length regardless of which computer is closer to the access point.

Perhaps apocryphal/silly, but amusing nonetheless. Story goes that this means you want to be in the computer furthest from the interconnect because light travels slightly faster in straight fiber than in coiled fiber.

Not apocryphal; IEX has 38 miles of wire in their building. Tom Scott did a video a few years ago about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8BcCLLX4N4
Post reply on HN