Warzone Why do I die so much quicker than my enemies???

[psujohnny03]

I am playing Warzone on a powerful gaming PC and a gigabit connection. It seems like in a toe to toe fight, about 80% of the time my enemy wins. When I watch the kill cam, it literally looks like my operator died on the second or third bullet, despite being full health and full armor. However, when I get a kill, a majority of the time, it seems like I had to hit my enemy with atleast 10-15 bullets. How can this be? I remember also observing this in Black Ops I but not many other games. I have been playing first person shooters for decades, I may not be the best in the world, but I can aim pretty good. I've noticed this with a variety of weapons including when my enemy and I are using the same weapon. And I've observed in the kill cam this happening without my enemy landing a headshot, body shots only. Would be great if someone could explain to me what this issue is and if there is a possible fix? Thank you!

 

[ProjectMyhm4130]

I (and everyone else I talk to) have the same problem. It has a lot to do with ping, latency etc. In a head to head fight within 30 metres or so, it always seems like a flick of a coin to me. Sometimes my aim is all over the place but I still get the kill, other times I lock onto the head and control the recoil perfectly but still die.
There really is no consistency in close-mid range gun fights in this game, it's why I prefer to move through areas that are more open. It seems like at range I win far more gunfights, or if I don't its simply because the opponent did a better job than me, which I'm fine with.

 

[GregM]

Having a gun that is at least as good as the opponent and landing your shots is a huge part of it. I spent about a week trying to level up the AMAX but ended up going back to the Grau because of exactly what you're talking about. Landing my shots and pulling the trigger first I was hearing plenty of hit marker sounds, the enemy would start shooting me after I started shooting him, and then I'd die seemingly after three rounds were in me.

Watching the kill cam though, I heard more hit marker sounds from the enemy's point of view than I did from my own. After watching the kill cam it seemed like he got at least as many rounds into me as I did him, and I put the blame more on the gun and my own ability.

 

[atanasdobrev]

I have the same problem and I think that the opponent is cheating or boosting

 

[psujohnny03]

I (and everyone else I talk to) have the same problem. It has a lot to do with ping, latency etc. In a head to head fight within 30 metres or so, it always seems like a flick of a coin to me. Sometimes my aim is all over the place but I still get the kill, other times I lock onto the head and control the recoil perfectly but still die.
There really is no consistency in close-mid range gun fights in this game, it's why I prefer to move through areas that are more open. It seems like at range I win far more gunfights, or if I don't its simply because the opponent did a better job than me, which I'm fine with.

I agree, at range, I do far better too. Weird!

Having a gun that is at least as good as the opponent and landing your shots is a huge part of it. I spent about a week trying to level up the AMAX but ended up going back to the Grau because of exactly what you're talking about. Landing my shots and pulling the trigger first I was hearing plenty of hit marker sounds, the enemy would start shooting me after I started shooting him, and then I'd die seemingly after three rounds were in me.

Watching the kill cam though, I heard more hit marker sounds from the enemy's point of view than I did from my own. After watching the kill cam it seemed like he got at least as many rounds into me as I did him, and I put the blame more on the gun and my own ability.

The other day I was shooting someone as they were climbing up a ladder right in front of me. They managed to climb to the top, stand up, pull their gun out, and killed me. During that whole time I was landing shots on them with an SMG from about 3 feet away. Crazy!

 

[CMCFLYYY]

I have the same problem and I think that the opponent is cheating or boosting

That is absolutely not what is happening so stop flooding their system with false reports because you don't like dying.

This is because the CoD franchise has always had notoriously poor netcode that introduces a ton of latency between what's happening on your machine, your enemy's machine, and how both of them are communicating between the server. What you are seeing on your screen is not the literal position of where your enemy is, it is where your enemy was a fraction of a second ago. Because when he takes a step around a corner his machine has to communicate that data to the server, and then the server communicate it to you, and by the time you see it he's taken another step. And by the time you press ADS start firing "first", he's already started firing at you but the time delay between communicating between machines and the server make it look like you shot first. This also affects the accuracy of your shots as well because you might think you were hitting the very edge of his head but the server says nuh-uh he wasn't actually standing there so the bullet whizzes past and you die.

This is why you always feel like you're dying behind a wall even though you thought you got into cover. It's because according to the server and this fancy game of telephone it's playing between your machine and your enemy's machine, you were not yet in cover when you were shot even though on your screen it looked like you were. So that extra few frames that it is delayed allowed your opponent to land a few extra shots to kill you before the server says you got into cover.

This changes from game-to-game depending on your connection to the game server and whatever location your enemies are playing from. I had games when I was leveling the Kar/AMR where I felt like a god and literally every quickscope where I felt like I was on target was a hit/kill. Then the literal next game I feel like 2/3 of the shots I take, even though they felt on target when I shot them, the majority of them are missing. And that just has to do with those fractions of seconds where enemies are moving according to the server being delayed in telling my machine their locations as well as relaying the fact that I'm shooting at them.

This has been a CoD problem for over a decade ever since they introduced their godawful lag compensation. Normally when a player with slow connection reacts, his actions are delayed getting communicated to you, just as your actions are delayed getting communicated to him. This made them easier to kill because, when you peek him and start firing, if his connection was slow enough he might not even see you peek before he dies. Your machine communicated to the server that you peeked, the server communicated to you the enemy location while also sending communication to your enemy that you peeked, your machine communicates that you start firing and kill him, all before his machine even receives communication from the server that you came around the corner.

This creates a situation where the player with the bad connection cannot properly enjoy the game. So instead of just being satisfied with the notion that you need a competent internet connection to play online games, certain games like CoD decide to introduce higher lag compensation to "compensate" for those slow connections. To be clear, I believe just about every game now has lag compensation to a degree - some just have it more than others. CoD is very guilty in this case, as their M.O. has always been to appeal to as many gamers as possible, even the ones who still play over dialup.

Lag compensation allows the server to essentially rewind time to see where your enemy was when you peek and start shooting at him, to "compensate" for his bad connection and to try and "level the playing field" between your good connection and his shitty one. So back to our scenario above, you peek first and your machine communicates that to the server. However now when it communicates your location to your enemy and he reacts and fires back, even though you've already killed him on your end, the server has rewound time and said "no wait", technically the other player reacted faster than you did and killed you, his machine was just really delayed. That logic is fine in a vacuum, but it breaks down for a couple reasons. First it means when you "lost" you were fighting an enemy that wasn't even reacting to you peeking, because his connection was delayed. Second it means the player with the slow connection got to react to you in real time and the server rewound time to put him on a level playing field. So in essence, bad lag compensation reversed the situation from the player with the bad connection having a bad time, to the player with the good connection having a bad time.

Bad lag compensation punishes good connections by essentially reporting false information to you, because while it's rewinding time for your enemy and letting him react in real time, you are not getting the same experience any longer. This is why in the early days of Pubg, players were intentionally playing out of their region because it made their connection worse, which made the game easier. That is how stupid lag compensation is. Instead of saying "too bad you can't enjoy playing this game because you won't pay for decent internet" CoD says "no we will hamper the experience of every other player in order for you to enjoy this game as well". This would be like if Netflix said "oh we don't care that you pay for gig internet so you can stream 4K, little Johnny over here is on dialup so we're going to reroute your bandwidth to improve his experience and we'll just cap everyone at 1080p".



Here is an example of lag compensation. The red is the actual location of the enemy, the blue hitbox is where the server has rewound time to compensate for a poor connection. So if you were to shoot at his red front leg, the bullet would miss because according to the lag compensation of the server, his front leg is actually in the blue location. This is how what I described above happens. When I feel like I'm sniping someone in the head but it misses, sure sometimes I just missed. But other times it's because there was a fraction of a second delay between what the server is saying happened vs what physically happened on my screen, so a bullet that might've hit the edge of the hitbox on my screen and should've been a headshot, now misses completely because the server said so.

 

[psujohnny03]

This is because the CoD franchise has always had notoriously poor netcode that introduces a ton of latency between what's happening on your machine, your enemy's machine, and how both of them are communicating between the server. What you are seeing on your screen is not the literal position of where your enemy is, it is where your enemy was a fraction of a second ago. Because when he takes a step around a corner his machine has to communicate that data to the server, and then the server communicate it to you, and by the time you see it he's taken another step. And by the time you press ADS start firing "first", he's already started firing at you but the time delay between communicating between machines and the server make it look like you shot first. This also affects the accuracy of your shots as well because you might think you were hitting the very edge of his head but the server says nuh-uh he wasn't actually standing there so the bullet whizzes past and you die.

This is why you always feel like you're dying behind a wall even though you thought you got into cover. It's because according to the server and this fancy game of telephone it's playing between your machine and your enemy's machine, you were not yet in cover when you were shot even though on your screen it looked like you were. So that extra few frames that it is delayed allowed your opponent to land a few extra shots to kill you before the server says you got into cover.

This changes from game-to-game depending on your connection to the game server and whatever location your enemies are playing from. I had games when I was leveling the Kar/AMR where I felt like a god and literally every quickscope where I felt like I was on target was a hit/kill. Then the literal next game I feel like 2/3 of the shots I take, even though they felt on target when I shot them, the majority of them are missing. And that just has to do with those fractions of seconds where enemies are moving according to the server being delayed in telling my machine their locations as well as relaying the fact that I'm shooting at them.

This has been a CoD problem for over a decade ever since they introduced their godawful lag compensation. Normally when a player with slow connection reacts, his actions are delayed getting communicated to you, just as your actions are delayed getting communicated to him. This made them easier to kill because, when you peek him and start firing, if his connection was slow enough he might not even see you peek before he dies. Your machine communicated to the server that you peeked, the server communicated to you the enemy location while also sending communication to your enemy that you peeked, your machine communicates that you start firing and kill him, all before his machine even receives communication from the server that you came around the corner.

This creates a situation where the player with the bad connection cannot properly enjoy the game. So instead of just being satisfied with the notion that you need a competent internet connection to play online games, certain games like CoD decide to introduce higher lag compensation to "compensate" for those slow connections. To be clear, I believe just about every game now has lag compensation to a degree - some just have it more than others. CoD is very guilty in this case, as their M.O. has always been to appeal to as many gamers as possible, even the ones who still play over dialup.

Lag compensation allows the server to essentially rewind time to see where your enemy was when you peek and start shooting at him, to "compensate" for his bad connection and to try and "level the playing field" between your good connection and his shitty one. So back to our scenario above, you peek first and your machine communicates that to the server. However now when it communicates your location to your enemy and he reacts and fires back, even though you've already killed him on your end, the server has rewound time and said "no wait", technically the other player reacted faster than you did and killed you, his machine was just really delayed. That logic is fine in a vacuum, but it breaks down for a couple reasons. First it means when you "lost" you were fighting an enemy that wasn't even reacting to you peeking, because his connection was delayed. Second it means the player with the slow connection got to react to you in real time and the server rewound time to put him on a level playing field. So in essence, bad lag compensation reversed the situation from the player with the bad connection having a bad time, to the player with the good connection having a bad time.

Bad lag compensation punishes good connections by essentially reporting false information to you, because while it's rewinding time for your enemy and letting him react in real time, you are not getting the same experience any longer. This is why in the early days of Pubg, players were intentionally playing out of their region because it made their connection worse, which made the game easier. That is how stupid lag compensation is. Instead of saying "too bad you can't enjoy playing this game because you won't pay for decent internet" CoD says "no we will hamper the experience of every other player in order for you to enjoy this game as well". This would be like if Netflix said "oh we don't care that you pay for gig internet so you can stream 4K, little Johnny over here is on dialup so we're going to reroute your bandwidth to improve his experience and we'll just cap everyone at 1080p".

Wow! Thank you for that great response. I have been playing COD for 18 years and never knew they introduced a thing called lag compensation, doesn't surprise me though. How the hell can these developers make such a horrible decision like that and still keep their jobs? Also, shortly after making this post, at the advice of a fellow Warzone player, I started using the Grau with the Alabaster blueprint set up. I am noticing some big differences, maybe the weapon is just overpowered but I am back to getting way more kills than before. Still notice lag issues here and there but at least I can enjoy the game again. It just sucks that if I switch back to any other weapon I get destroyed, lol. More great programming. Cheers!

 

[CMCFLYYY]

Wow! Thank you for that great response. I have been playing COD for 18 years and never knew they introduced a thing called lag compensation, doesn't surprise me though. How the hell can these developers make such a horrible decision like that and still keep their jobs?

It's because for every player that lag compensation hurts, it helps out a player or two with a poor connection. In most cases where everyone has decent internet, you don't notice anything fishy because their isn't much latency between your machines and the server. But for every player complaining about lag compensation rewinding time, there are 1-2 players with poor connections who are getting to play the game when they wouldn't if this lag compensation didn't exist.

This is why the killcams look so off sometimes. On your screen you obviously shot first and hit him with like 23 bullets. But on the killcam he shot first and you only got 6 shots off before he killed you. That's because, on your end you were looking and reacting to at a delayed image of your enemy, from the server's perspective. So you think you reacted faster and started shooting first and hit him like 23 times, but the server says nope, no sir. It rewound time a fraction of a second so that your enemy could react in real-time and then he reacted faster. But the catch is, as mentioned above, he is reacting to you in real-time while you are reacting to a delayed image because of the latency between him and the server. I can't count how many times I've emptied 20+ bullets into someone only to watch the killcam and I look like an idiot with a short-bus type reaction time and I only get 2 shots off.

So long story short, they keep their jobs because lag compensation allows more players to play Warzone whereas otherwise their poor connections would prevent them from doing so. So the trick is to keep the compensation low enough to where you don't notice and complain loud enough to actually quit playing, while also allowing for players with those bad connections to play. So they've maximized their playerbase and made more money. Activision is entirely profit-driven and literally every decision that goes into this game is to make it appeal to as many players as possible, quality of the game be damned.

Also, shortly after making this post, at the advice of a fellow Warzone player, I started using the Grau with the Alabaster blueprint set up. I am noticing some big differences, maybe the weapon is just overpowered but I am back to getting way more kills than before. Still notice lag issues here and there but at least I can enjoy the game again. It just sucks that if I switch back to any other weapon I get destroyed, lol. More great programming. Cheers!

Never used the Alabaster because it doesn't appear as floor loot in Warzone and I don't bother with any blueprints. But after looking it up, I can understand why you like it. Mono suppressor, Archangel barrel, Commando grip, 50-Round mag is literally how I would build my ideal Grau. The only decision to make after that is what to do with the 5th attachment (Laser, VLK, or No Stock). But IMO the Commando is the best grip for recoil control on a rifle you plan to use at mid-to-longer ranges. The Merc is the best for short-range combat and SMGs, but the Commando's ability to reduce side-to-side bounce is more important for longer range combat than reducing vertical recoil. Vertical recoil is much easier to predict and counter.

Also the Archangel barrel is reducing recoil itself, while it and the Mono suppressor are both increasing your range and bullet velocity which makes the weapon more like hitscan. Ease of use is the most important thing for effective TTK, that's why the Grau has always been so popular. Hitscan bullet velocity means not having to counter bullet drop or lead targets, and super low recoil makes it stupid easy to just spray full-auto at range and remain on target.

Plus I always stick with the 50-Round mags because the 60-Rounds hurt your ADS and movement speed too much.

I would throw a VLK on that blueprint and call it a day.

 

[psujohnny03]

It's because for every player that lag compensation hurts, it helps out a player or two with a poor connection. In most cases where everyone has decent internet, you don't notice anything fishy because their isn't much latency between your machines and the server. But for every player complaining about lag compensation rewinding time, there are 1-2 players with poor connections who are getting to play the game when they wouldn't if this lag compensation didn't exist.

This is why the killcams look so off sometimes. On your screen you obviously shot first and hit him with like 23 bullets. But on the killcam he shot first and you only got 6 shots off before he killed you. That's because, on your end you were looking and reacting to at a delayed image of your enemy, from the server's perspective. So you think you reacted faster and started shooting first and hit him like 23 times, but the server says nope, no sir. It rewound time a fraction of a second so that your enemy could react in real-time and then he reacted faster. But the catch is, as mentioned above, he is reacting to you in real-time while you are reacting to a delayed image because of the latency between him and the server. I can't count how many times I've emptied 20+ bullets into someone only to watch the killcam and I look like an idiot with a short-bus type reaction time and I only get 2 shots off.

So long story short, they keep their jobs because lag compensation allows more players to play Warzone whereas otherwise their poor connections would prevent them from doing so. So the trick is to keep the compensation low enough to where you don't notice and complain loud enough to actually quit playing, while also allowing for players with those bad connections to play. So they've maximized their playerbase and made more money. Activision is entirely profit-driven and literally every decision that goes into this game is to make it appeal to as many players as possible, quality of the game be damned.



Never used the Alabaster because it doesn't appear as floor loot in Warzone and I don't bother with any blueprints. But after looking it up, I can understand why you like it. Mono suppressor, Archangel barrel, Commando grip, 50-Round mag is literally how I would build my ideal Grau. The only decision to make after that is what to do with the 5th attachment (Laser, VLK, or No Stock). But IMO the Commando is the best grip for recoil control on a rifle you plan to use at mid-to-longer ranges. The Merc is the best for short-range combat and SMGs, but the Commando's ability to reduce side-to-side bounce is more important for longer range combat than reducing vertical recoil. Vertical recoil is much easier to predict and counter.

Also the Archangel barrel is reducing recoil itself, while it and the Mono suppressor are both increasing your range and bullet velocity which makes the weapon more like hitscan. Ease of use is the most important thing for effective TTK, that's why the Grau has always been so popular. Hitscan bullet velocity means not having to counter bullet drop or lead targets, and super low recoil makes it stupid easy to just spray full-auto at range and remain on target.

Plus I always stick with the 50-Round mags because the 60-Rounds hurt your ADS and movement speed too much.

I would throw a VLK on that blueprint and call it a day.

You would think in the year 2020, a lag compensator would not be at all necessary! On occasion, I play test COD games for Activision, would probably be play testing the new one right now if it wasn't for the China Virus. Anyway, next time I am back in there I am going to bring up some of these issues and just see what they say, especially issues involving lag compensation. Cheers! Thanks again for the great info!

Yea, I love the Grau, just hope I don't get bored of it anytime soon, lol. Would love to have some fun using a marksman type weapon but with the whole lag thing I don't stand a chance using a weapon like that.

 

[marianuk]

The other day I was shooting someone as they were climbing up a ladder right in front of me. They managed to climb to the top, stand up, pull their gun out, and killed me. During that whole time I was landing shots on them with an SMG from about 3 feet away. Crazy!

It seems that you are loosing data

 

[psujohnny03]

It seems that you are loosing data

No shit, lol.