Multiplayer has serious problems

[Energist]

Once you're in game, it's fine ,but having a friend rejoin is next to impossible.

They can't reclaim their ship , especially if it's in a different system.

[CptnRedstone]

Are you sure that the rejoining player is set to the same "team" as they were before? Reclaiming one's old ships should be working normally as far as I'm aware.

[Energist]

Originally posted by CptnRedstone:

Are you sure that the rejoining player is set to the same "team" as they were before? Reclaiming one's old ships should be working normally as far as I'm aware.

I will try it next time I'm on.

Here are some of the issues we have had


1) new player wants to join an existing mp game, but can't. I have to close the game and let them join from the lobby.

2). Said new player has zero credits in game. I have to give him credits despite me starting with a 65k balance.

3) new players are bound to my ship. It seems as if the game is using my new build feature rather than the new players'. I have to go dock at a station with their required materials and wait for them to build a ship.

4) any time someone dies, we have to reload. I don't expect the game to respawn them in their ship MMO style , but they should be able to go to a station and rebuild their ship without me having to backtrack. As it stands, it is easier to reload.

4) jumping to a new system requires all players to go together or game breaking issues happen. Not sure if intended or not, but I can't seem to be in a separate system from my friends.

5) persistent server would be nice.

6) enemies seem to always target player 1. Makes it annoying in large engagements when the enemies stop what they're doing to focus fire me to the exclusion of other more tactically sensible targets.


These are some issues holding mp back. IMO, this game is fantastic, and a clean up of the multiplayer experience would push this game's potential to the next level.

If I am mistaken as to how Mp works, let me know.

I will double check the teams issue. Perhaps that's why they couldn't select their old ships unless they were in the same player slot at the lobby. Thank you for the help.

[CptnRedstone]

Ok so, for a bit of context as to how multiplayer's netcode works, the game uses a method called "deterministic lockstep" which is *extremely* network/CPU efficient, but doesn't natively support players joining mid-match, and is why one player lagging slows down the game for everyone else. Basically instead of having the host simulate everything and send changes to other people's computers, the host sets up the initial gamestate (when starting a match), then the game's physics is simulated across *all* devices, with player inputs being synced between them. As long as everyone has the same starting RNG seed and player inputs are rendered on the correct frames, this keeps all devices in perfect sync with practically no network load, or issues with high ping. A couple primary downsides are that since inputs need to be rendered simultaneously across all devices, if one player's device can't keep up with the simulation, the rest of the devices need to slow down, otherwise ticks will start being rendered at different times, and sync is lost. Additionally if a player joins mid-way through a match, the existing telemetry means absolutely nothing without knowing what's already loaded in, so the game has to save and go through the setup sequence again to send gamestate information to the new player. With all of that being said:

1. That's mainly due to the way multiplayer is set up; it's possible (and planned) to make the process smoother, but removing the delays isn't really viable without a complete and total (far laggier, buggier) rewrite of multiplayer.
2. Does this happen when creating a new game, or when loading an existing game with a new player?
3. Sounds like you're both set to "player 1" in match setup. Try assigning the other player to "player 2".
4. Yeah, that part of multiplayer is definitely annoying. The issue is known about, but we've struggled to come up with a good respawn/"insurance" system that isn't super exploitable. Since ship destruction drops resources, any sort of respawn system would either be creating a ton of resources out of thin air, or would need to delete the previous ship's, potentially much more expensive set of resources.
4 (5). Players being in different systems isn't currently supported, but it's on the list of things to add. The problem is that either all loaded systems would need to be rendered simultaneously (causing massively increased lag across all players if one person loads a different sector), or the first player to load a new sector would basically have to become their own little mini-host, rendering things asynchronously from other players, and syncing data with anyone else jumping in as if they were the host. The latter is probably the desired solution, but it's by no means a simple addition.
5 (6). External servers are a pretty common suggestion, but again, due to the way multiplayer is set up, the only thing they'd actually accomplish is acting as a smoother way to send an existing save between players. Since the game still needs to be simulated on all devices, it wouldn't help loading times or performance.
6 (7). Right now enemies always try to target the "strongest" ship in their FoV, which mostly comes down to cost. If that's not what you're running into, it'd be helpful if you could use the ingame feedback tool (f11) to send a save file the next time it happens.

[Energist]

Originally posted by CptnRedstone:

Ok so, for a bit of context as to how multiplayer's netcode works, the game uses a method called "deterministic lockstep" which is *extremely* network/CPU efficient, but doesn't natively support players joining mid-match, and is why one player lagging slows down the game for everyone else. Basically instead of having the host simulate everything and send changes to other people's computers, the host sets up the initial gamestate (when starting a match), then the game's physics is simulated across *all* devices, with player inputs being synced between them. As long as everyone has the same starting RNG seed and player inputs are rendered on the correct frames, this keeps all devices in perfect sync with practically no network load, or issues with high ping. A couple primary downsides are that since inputs need to be rendered simultaneously across all devices, if one player's device can't keep up with the simulation, the rest of the devices need to slow down, otherwise ticks will start being rendered at different times, and sync is lost. Additionally if a player joins mid-way through a match, the existing telemetry means absolutely nothing without knowing what's already loaded in, so the game has to save and go through the setup sequence again to send gamestate information to the new player. With all of that being said:

1. That's mainly due to the way multiplayer is set up; it's possible (and planned) to make the process smoother, but removing the delays isn't really viable without a complete and total (far laggier, buggier) rewrite of multiplayer.
2. Does this happen when creating a new game, or when loading an existing game with a new player?
3. Sounds like you're both set to "player 1" in match setup. Try assigning the other player to "player 2".
4. Yeah, that part of multiplayer is definitely annoying. The issue is known about, but we've struggled to come up with a good respawn/"insurance" system that isn't super exploitable. Since ship destruction drops resources, any sort of respawn system would either be creating a ton of resources out of thin air, or would need to delete the previous ship's, potentially much more expensive set of resources.
4 (5). Players being in different systems isn't currently supported, but it's on the list of things to add. The problem is that either all loaded systems would need to be rendered simultaneously (causing massively increased lag across all players if one person loads a different sector), or the first player to load a new sector would basically have to become their own little mini-host, rendering things asynchronously from other players, and syncing data with anyone else jumping in as if they were the host. The latter is probably the desired solution, but it's by no means a simple addition.
5 (6). External servers are a pretty common suggestion, but again, due to the way multiplayer is set up, the only thing they'd actually accomplish is acting as a smoother way to send an existing save between players. Since the game still needs to be simulated on all devices, it wouldn't help loading times or performance.
6 (7). Right now enemies always try to target the "strongest" ship in their FoV, which mostly comes down to cost. If that's not what you're running into, it'd be helpful if you could use the ingame feedback tool (f11) to send a save file the next time it happens.

Thank you so much for the detailed information. Truly appreciated.

Let me see if I can give valuable feedback. It seems you're on the development team correct?

Just want to let you know that I think this game is superb, and I hope my feedback helps make it the best it can be. I'm by no means dissatisfied with the MP experience, but it could be better.

1) Fair enough. It's not the biggest issue. Once in game it works pretty well, but every few reloads atleast one client does crash and we have to reload.

2) When I first created the game with a friend, we both had credits to work with, but bringing a third friend in later in the campaign meant he started with zero credits. If this is intended, then not a big deal. I understand not wanting to allow people to spawn in endless amounts of credits. For us, it was a bit of an economic hurdle to get him a basic ship though.

3) We were all different player slots. If a player's ship is destroyed, or if they load to a ship in a different solar system, they will instead have their view placed over my ship (Player 1). They can create a new ship, but it seems to only work near me. I can retest this if you'd like. I personally haven't experienced this since I'm the host, but it's what has been described to me as we tried to figure out how to get someone back into the action. It's possible they simply didn't know what to do. I merely took notes about it.

3 b) As a secondary point, if player 2 leaves, or if I resume a game without a player who was previously playing, I cannot take back control of their ship. Not sure if that's intended or not.



3 c) A related point, a friend said he could see the inside of my ship, but I was unable to see the inside of his. He could select my ship ( though not control it). I however could not do the same. He was player 3, I was player 1.

4) I think this issue would best be solved by simply allowing them to go back to a station without the rest of the players having to stop what they're doing. Perhaps their camera respawns at the nearest station or something. I agree that ship respawns are bad news. I personally LOVE the "everything has a cost" economics of the game, and free stuff works against that. I don't think there should be a respawn ship button. The fact that the station is required to have the right components to remake the ship is a nice touch.

IMO, just perhaps a clean up of the MP experience and clearer explanations as to what players are supposed to do should their ship blow up. Maybe a " go to nearest station" button? Or a menu like hyper drive that allows them to select a station to jump to. It could even be the same menu. Perhaps "dead" players have free hyper jump capability so they can pick what station to fall back to.

If this feedback is redundant, I apologize. I've never done more than try to help friends walk through the process over voice chat. It can be frustrating to troubleshoot that way.

5) I hear you. From a business standpoint, I can tell you that seamless multiplayer will catapult this game to new heights. It's already perfectly usable, but I will say that it isn't the most intuitive. Once we gained understanding, it is much easier to work with. A solution that allows players to be in different solar systems at the same time would be really great.



6) I see. Well, I don't think the way it's implemented now is bad at all.. The lobby issue also isn't a big deal, but it would be neat if someone could load into the game without having to go back to set up, even if that paused the action and initiated a sync event for 30 seconds or so. Just a thought. Server support is a minor issue as long as the small group experience is fluid and intuitive. I think it's close.

7) Hmm, well, they seem to be biased towards me ( player 1), but it could be that my ship was the highest value at the time. Even so, I think the AI could use some tweaks. They don't prioritize targets well. It's really easy to go behind and enemy and pop their core while another player kites them around. I like how enemies seem to rotate to cover their failing shields and soft spots. That's a nice touch. If they could also do some simple target prioritization, such as orienting their defenses towards the player doing the most damage, that would be a huge improvement.

Another issue with them targeting a single ship is the abuse that can create. I could create a high value ship and use it as bait for example. IMO, ships need to be a bit smarter about how they target enemies. Focus Fire should be a thing for sure, but it should be situational. I think it would be neat if AI ships had some personalities. Perhaps oone targets ships with missile launchers, another might go for ships with more armor, or ships further away. Doesn't have to be extreme, just some simple ways to make the AI a bit more dynamic and challenging.


This game is fantastic, and I love the road map. I've already gotten 3 people to buy it, and I bought a gift copy for a friend as well. It reminds me of factorio in all the best ways. The one area where I think factorio feels better would be multiplayer. It's just more streamlined.

There isn't much more I could add idea wise that isn't already in the road map. More content is good, more economic simulation is great! Love it!

Some positive feedback:

The UI is so good! I can't remember the last time I played a complex space simulator and didn't have to look up a single thing online to learn how to play it. Stellar!

Love the economics of ship design, that everything has a cost.

Ship battles are extremely satisfying.

The art style is superb.

The music overall is solid.

[Emanu1674]

Originally posted by CptnRedstone:

Ok so, for a bit of context as to how multiplayer's netcode works, the game uses a method called "deterministic lockstep" which is *extremely* network/CPU efficient, but doesn't natively support players joining mid-match, and is why one player lagging slows down the game for everyone else. Basically instead of having the host simulate everything and send changes to other people's computers, the host sets up the initial gamestate (when starting a match), then the game's physics is simulated across *all* devices, with player inputs being synced between them. As long as everyone has the same starting RNG seed and player inputs are rendered on the correct frames, this keeps all devices in perfect sync with practically no network load, or issues with high ping. A couple primary downsides are that since inputs need to be rendered simultaneously across all devices, if one player's device can't keep up with the simulation, the rest of the devices need to slow down, otherwise ticks will start being rendered at different times, and sync is lost. Additionally if a player joins mid-way through a match, the existing telemetry means absolutely nothing without knowing what's already loaded in, so the game has to save and go through the setup sequence again to send gamestate information to the new player. With all of that being said:

1. That's mainly due to the way multiplayer is set up; it's possible (and planned) to make the process smoother, but removing the delays isn't really viable without a complete and total (far laggier, buggier) rewrite of multiplayer.
2. Does this happen when creating a new game, or when loading an existing game with a new player?
3. Sounds like you're both set to "player 1" in match setup. Try assigning the other player to "player 2".
4. Yeah, that part of multiplayer is definitely annoying. The issue is known about, but we've struggled to come up with a good respawn/"insurance" system that isn't super exploitable. Since ship destruction drops resources, any sort of respawn system would either be creating a ton of resources out of thin air, or would need to delete the previous ship's, potentially much more expensive set of resources.
4 (5). Players being in different systems isn't currently supported, but it's on the list of things to add. The problem is that either all loaded systems would need to be rendered simultaneously (causing massively increased lag across all players if one person loads a different sector), or the first player to load a new sector would basically have to become their own little mini-host, rendering things asynchronously from other players, and syncing data with anyone else jumping in as if they were the host. The latter is probably the desired solution, but it's by no means a simple addition.
5 (6). External servers are a pretty common suggestion, but again, due to the way multiplayer is set up, the only thing they'd actually accomplish is acting as a smoother way to send an existing save between players. Since the game still needs to be simulated on all devices, it wouldn't help loading times or performance.
6 (7). Right now enemies always try to target the "strongest" ship in their FoV, which mostly comes down to cost. If that's not what you're running into, it'd be helpful if you could use the ingame feedback tool (f11) to send a save file the next time it happens.

Explain why 9/10 times we load a save in coop the other players get disconnected for no reason?

[CptnRedstone]

Originally posted by Emanu1674:

Explain why 9/10 times we load a save in coop the other players get disconnected for no reason?

I don't believe I've heard of that issue before. Does this happen regardless of who's hosting? Also are you referring to "loading" a game from the match setup, or in an existing launched game?