Guild Wars 2

I posted about this problem the very first day the forums were open: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post56969

I’ve also posted in that thread collecting all the other threads on this problem. This will be thread #14.

There’s been no response or even acknowledgement from ArenaNet yet.

I made a post about this the first day the forums opened: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post56969

I’ve also been collecting other threads that discuss this issue and adding links to them in that thread.

Including this one, there are now 13 threads about this problem.

er. Given how you’ve described that, it’s impossible. If you have IP A, and the attacker has IP B, they cannot spoof A unless they’re physically connected to your network. And unless you’ve got a Chinese hacker in your guest room, they aren’t.

It’s just not how TCP/IP works.

I’ve added yet more threads about this same problem to the post above. Hopefully someone from ArenaNet will at least acknowledge that this is a problem soon. Including this thread, there are at least 11 threads about this problem posted so far.

I made a post about this the day the forums opened, and have also tracked other posts on the same problem. There’s been no official response yet.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post56969

I made a post about this the first day the forums were open:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post56969

I’ve also collected in there links to numerous other threads here on these forums discussing the same problem. There’s been no official response or acknowledgement.

Widowmaker.5812:

mcl – your idea is plausible but it’s unlikely here. While we don’t have data I can tell you this as fact,

When my account was taken the first time, I blamed myself. I ran Avast boot-time scans, Microsft Security Esstentials scans, installed a keylog scanner, ran it and monitored for activity. I found nothing during the 5 days my account was lost. After I got my account back, I created a brand new email, used a trusted security site for generating random ASCII passwords and created a 32 character password. I updated my account with the new information and validated my email.

24 hours later my account was taken again.

This time while I’m waiting, I’ve deleted my C drive, formatted my drive and have only reinstalled Avast!, Office, and Guild Wars 2. I’ve been logging and watching my network and there’s been no local access attempts. The only conclusion I can come to is that ArenaNet’s compromised not me. Anything else is pure speculation as there’s nothing more a customer could or should have to do to use their product….

If that were the case, all ArenaNet accounts would be hacked. But they haven’t been. Since the attackers exhibit a pattern of compromising an account and then immediately using the account, it would appear that the attackers are using the accounts as they obtain them. This is not the behavior of an individual or group that has access to every account on ArenaNet.

beafnuts.7960:

they really should invest in the same system (or similar) that blizzard uses to protect accounts. i havent had a single issue (knock on wood haha) since i’ve gotten mine back when it first came out (years ago) so i’m sure its safe to say it is a working system.

You mean besides the well-publicized penetration of battle.net earlier this year that resulted in Blizzard customers’ account information being stolen?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57490533-83/e-mail-lists-encrypted-passwords-stolen-in-battle.net-hack/

Alexixiv.4582:

@mcl I can google just as you can, your ignorance is showing through your insecurity of your knowledge compared to a random forum person. I have nothing to prove, you seem to have a lot. I choose to use my powers for good, not trolling

You can claim I’m wrong all you want. Your claims are meaningless without some factual basis for them. You’ve yet to make anything but unwarranted and unsupported assertions that are nothing more than fear-mongering.

Widowmaker.5812:

The disturbing thing to me is how easily most people dismiss security threats on this scale as random customer faulted attacks.

- It must be your unsecured wireless and someone hacked you
- It must be that you reused a UID/PW
- It must be that you have a key logger
- It must be that someone is using a packet sniffer and got your credentials
- It must be that you have multiple AVs running
- It must be that you dont use an AV
- It must be that…..

So if any of these are true please explain how the attacks are resulting in French IPs, Chineese IPs, Korean IPs, US IPs, and so on…..

The vector is an unknown from where I’m sitting and the dispersion is wide. Logic doesn’t direct this as script kiddies and organizaed attacks are not likely this broad. It’s more likely that an ArenaNet vulnerability was posted on several foriegn hacker sites and it’s being exploited. It’s also plausible that the hackers have an email list but not everyone being hacked is using old reused passwords.

I don’t claim to know what’s going on but I sure have a lot of free time to speculate since my primary account (this is a 2nd one I purchased) has been taken twice and I’ve had no access for 8 days.

It’s also possible that attackers are simply brute-forcing email addresses. You have no information on the number of failed attempts at account access based on account name rather than password.

It’s entirely possible that attackers are using email addresses harvested from the recent compromise of battle.net. Or the recent compromise of Bioware (and, by extension, EA). Or any of the various gaming forums and websites.

You also have to realize that email addresses are extremely easy to guess. The number of domains used for email (the string on the right hand side of the “@”) is quite limited (not counting people who buy and manage their own domains for email and other purposes). With that in mind, guessing at the left-hand-side — the username for the email account — is relatively easy since most people use some variant of their name, and/or a common set of word variants. The same dictionary attacks that may be applied to passwords may also be applied to finding valid email addresses. Researchers in the spam community have done numerous studies on this, since that’s one way in which spammers find valid email addresses.

The attacks originate primarily from China because that’s one of the major locations for gold-selling operations. You have to understand that these things are run like a business there, with a payroll and employees. It’s an organized, concerted effort. Their livelihood depends on being able to obtain fresh accounts on a regular basis.

Just as it doesn’t have to always fall to the fault of the user, it doesn’t necessarily point to some sort of security breach at ArenaNet, either.

Alexixiv.4582:

mcl.9240:

You seem to misunderstand how positions are put forth in discourse: they are, by definition, positions backed by fact (your “technical details” which you claim are “clouding my opinionated argument”).

If you have fault to find with what I’ve said, please do so.

But don’t sit there and act like you’re trying to “help” and “encourage the guild wars 2 community” by trying to make GW2 users afraid that packet sniffers may be used to obtain their account information. That’s the very height of FUD, and anyone with an once of technical expertise would know that.

Which is, I believe, the difference here. I actually possess extensive security experience and can speak authoritatively on the matter. You, unable to counter my position, act as though I’m being argumentative because you dislike someone pointing out that your assertion is not only inappropriate, but borders on scare-mongering.

Who’s helping more, the person who’s attempting to instill an appropriate level of caution in the average user by pointing out appropriate and inappropriate areas of concern (me), or the person who’s trying to make them afraid of all sorts of things (like packet sniffers) that they have no need to fear with respect to compromise of their account details (you)?

If you have something relevant to contribute, by all means do so. Start by explaining how and why your obsession with packet sniffers is a credible threat in the specific scenarios of 1) GW2 account information being stolen by casual hackers, and 2) GW2 account information being stolen by organized groups who use the information to further their interested in illegally monetizing in-game items and currency.

I’ve already explained why that particular attack vector is not one to be concerned with. You seem to have a contrary opinion, though you seem to lack any sort of factual basis for it. Since you claim to be capable of writing at length on this issue, by all means do so.

Or kindly retract your position.

Thanks for proving my point

So you have no means to actually back up your claim that packet sniffers are a legitimate threat to GW2 account details?

I thought as much.

You need to realize that there are people out there with a great deal more knowledge on certain subjects than you, and every now and then you might get caught out by one of them if you happen to make an incorrect statement about their area of expertise. The correct response in such situations is to thank them, not to act indignant and insult them, or act like you’re somehow superior in your ignorance.

Like you’re doing now.

Making baseless assertions about potential security threats in a subforum full of people who are currently quite concerned about their account security distracts them from more meaningful, appropriate areas they should focus on and also wastes the time of the support personnel, who start fielding tickets about things like packet sniffers. GW2 users need to be concerned about using unique email addresses, and unique, strong passwords (“strong” being defined by me on the previous page; length alone is not adequate). They do not need to worry about packet sniffers, as the cost:benefit ratio for the attacker is too high.

Please consider the ramifications of making such statements in the future.

a buck fifty isn’t going to buy much.

You seem to misunderstand how positions are put forth in discourse: they are, by definition, positions backed by fact (your “technical details” which you claim are “clouding my opinionated argument”).

If you have fault to find with what I’ve said, please do so.

But don’t sit there and act like you’re trying to “help” and “encourage the guild wars 2 community” by trying to make GW2 users afraid that packet sniffers may be used to obtain their account information. That’s the very height of FUD, and anyone with an once of technical expertise would know that.

Which is, I believe, the difference here. I actually possess extensive security experience and can speak authoritatively on the matter. You, unable to counter my position, act as though I’m being argumentative because you dislike someone pointing out that your assertion is not only inappropriate, but borders on scare-mongering.

Who’s helping more, the person who’s attempting to instill an appropriate level of caution in the average user by pointing out appropriate and inappropriate areas of concern (me), or the person who’s trying to make them afraid of all sorts of things (like packet sniffers) that they have no need to fear with respect to compromise of their account details (you)?

If you have something relevant to contribute, by all means do so. Start by explaining how and why your obsession with packet sniffers is a credible threat in the specific scenarios of 1) GW2 account information being stolen by casual hackers, and 2) GW2 account information being stolen by organized groups who use the information to further their interested in illegally monetizing in-game items and currency.

I’ve already explained why that particular attack vector is not one to be concerned with. You seem to have a contrary opinion, though you seem to lack any sort of factual basis for it. Since you claim to be capable of writing at length on this issue, by all means do so.

Or kindly retract your position.

lozerette.2153:

mcl.9240:

If you were educated on the subject, you’d realize that worrying about packet sniffers in this context is foolish. Which has been my entire point all along, and you seem to have missed it repeatedly.

If you were paying attention, you would realize that he wasn’t saying “worry about packet sniffers,” only that it is a tool available to people today. If you re-read the initial post, you’ll see that he was agreeing with you.

Everyone, calm down. Take a deep breath. Walk outside for a bit. (Unless it’s eleventy-billion degrees, then just look out a window or something.)

I swear, you techno-geeks and your pride… (said the techno-geek.)

And if you were paying attention, you would see that there are any number of tools available to people today, many of which you and others are completely unaware. And yes, he WAS saying he was worried about packet sniffers.

Look, this has nothing to do with pride. It has to do with accurately communicating the appropriate level of concern to a largely tech-ignorant userbase. And having someone on here telling people that packet sniffers should be of concern is useless, irresponsible and inflammatory, because — and let me be quite clear about it this time, since a few of you seem determined to not hear this — packet sniffers are not of use in this scenario to obtain your game account information. Not unless you also assume that those using packet sniffers also have a means to move the extremely large amount of data collected by packet sniffers off of the target network undetected (highly unlikely) and then use sophisticated crypto cracking hardware after reassembling the packet flows for a single customer to expose the account name and password, which are not sent in plaintext (also highly unlikely). And all of this presupposes the attacker has administrative access to a switch between the customer and ArenaNet’s servers, and physical access to connect the necessary hardware to collect the data. Or that the attacker has installed a packet sniffer on the individual customer’s machine, which still has all the problems just listed above to be overcome, not to mention the completely obvious and constant disk access caused by running a packet sniffer in that manner, and the very large amount of space necessary to store the resulting files.

I can formulate any number of attack scenarios that are possible, using off-the-shelf software and hardware and publicly-available techniques. the vast majority of these scenarios also have likelihoods so close to zero as to be pointless to bring up. The use of a packet sniffer to collect an individual’s videogame account information falls squarely into that category.

Alexixiv.4582:

Holy essays batman, cool your jets,
simply being educated is not the same being paranoid. Every individual should determine the extent that their content should be secured based on their contents value to the world. We are protecting civilian email accounts, virtual possessions, and credit card information typically not exceeding $10k in available funds. This does not justify the extravagant methods you highlighted above… you ok man, sounds like you might need a hug?

If you were educated on the subject, you’d realize that worrying about packet sniffers in this context is foolish. Which has been my entire point all along, and you seem to have missed it repeatedly.

Teknobug.3782:

I used to be a system administrator for large unix servers, and worked for Sun Microsystems for years. I also was part of a project group some years ago that went around residential blocks with laptops to scan open networks and so forth, the results were incredibly shocking- waaaaaaaay too many insecure networks, and same goes for the email/login/password method on the internet… there’s way too many of those that uses simple or uses the same ones.

Putting blame on the general public aslide, Anet still should’ve added a layer of security, nearly every single game that requires an account to login has security of a sort.

Heh. Wardriving. Peter Shipley and I pioneered that particular area. I had a working wardriving (actually warwalking; I’m not certain, but I may have coined that term back then) rig that you could fit in a pocket and take into buildings as well back in 2000 or so, based on a Windows CE handheld running Linux, or a Libretto 50ct. I’ve long since sold the handheld, but I still have the setup I used on the Libretto.

It was particularly amusing since I lived in the heart of Silicon Valley at the time, and could walk into or drive past every big name tech company you could care to name: Intel, AMD, Sun (my ex-wife worked at their HQ for a decade), nVidia, ATi, Cisco (which I lived a block from), Polycom (and if you don’t think they’re a big tech company or a worthwhile target, go into just about any corporation’s meeting rooms and have a look at what’s on the table), and myriad other instantly-recognizable tech companies.

…and then there were the various security conferences full of fairly well-known attendees, and their woeful approach to personal security. Let’s just say I was surprised to discover that 1) the range of stock, unassisted Bluetooth antennas is greater than I thought, 2) Steve Wozniak was only a few rooms away from me at the Alexis Park and didn’t really care to secure his Bluetooth setup, and 3) that he still had an AOL account. Which is amusing, since that year several of the talks were specifically about Bluetooth security.

There is a tool in the mail system to report them. It’s the stop sign with a “!” in it.

Alexixiv.4582:

mcl.9240:

lozerette.2153:

Alexixiv.4582:

@mcl.9240: Dood, you…are not…my nemesis

My nemesis is Captain Hammer. (Couldn’t resist!)

Seriously though, I’m always going to disagree with anyone that says “Don’t worry about [method of getting your account data], no one does that/it’s too complicated/that never happens/etc.”

Assume nothing; secure everything. It’s better to be worried about things that probably won’t happen than to not worry and have your account compromised.

Best to stop using computers altogether then; nothing is actually secure.

Or, live in reality with the rest of us. Actual risk assessments take into account the likelihood of a given attack vector. In this particular case, the likelihood of someone using a packet sniffer (and the likelihood of the account information being contained in packet payloads unencrypted) is vanishingly small.

If you truly believe that there is a real possibility that there are packet sniffers at every hop between you and any particular destination, you must never shop online, or use online banking, or log into any websites…except that you had to log into this website just to post that response. So someone here is being hypocritical, and it’s not me.

lol you are blowing this way out of perspective. I never implied a frequency of packet sniffers being used, simply that it is still a possibility and that they are still used…
and no I do not believe that there are packet sniffers at every hop, just stating that they are out there and to say that it isnt a concern is ignorance that I refuse to submit to.

The post you’re responding to was in response to lozerette, not you.

There are all sorts of tools “out there”; you would not sleep nights if you were aware of some of the tools I’ve seen. A packet sniffer is one of the least effective and most effortful tools to use to compromise an account in the manner you’re concerned about. And as I’ve mentioned several times, the account information used in game and for the website is not sent in the clear, so the attacker would need to crack that encryption first.

But, if you want to be paranoid, be paranoid.

But if you’re going to be paranoid, do it correctly. For example, what’s the Shannon entropy of your password for the game? For the dozens (or hundreds) of accounts at various online vendors, websites, and services, you of course have completely random, unique passwords that you have memorized and do not ever write down, and unique email addresses for each one(preferably using a secure, offshore, fully-encrypted anonymous email system such as SecureNym)? And you route all your traffic through encrypted tunnels, with random egress points around the world (e.g., Tor)? You encrypt the contents of your hard drive, run all software in a sandbox, and have a plan in place to destroy the hard drives and RAM in your computer at a moment’s notice, preferably using something fast-acting like thermite (yes, information can be recovered from unpowered RAM these days)?

And of course you only use computers from a windowless SCIF to avoid things like people bouncing lasers off your windows to use vibrations to detect keyclick patterns that can be used to determine what you’re typing? And I’m certain you check all your power cords regularly for unknown devices, inside and out, since minute fluctuations in power can be used by passive devices to decode exactly what you’re doing on the computer?

Were you aware that there’s a book available in libraries and bookstores that contains the full plans, parts lists, and schematics for building a dedicated crypto cracking machine for under $10,000 that can brute force the encryption used to secure banking transactions? Were you aware that book is over 10 years old, and the hardware today would consist of a few high-end graphics cards?

There’s paranoid, and then there’s paranoid. You’re not doing paranoid very well. But hey, don’t take my word for it. It’s not like I’ve got 20+ years in the industry, including being responsible for the computers that ran one of the larger (partially nuclear) power grids in the nation, having a security background that predates the WWW, and having held various government security clearances in the past.

lozerette.2153:

Alexixiv.4582:

@mcl.9240: Dood, you…are not…my nemesis

My nemesis is Captain Hammer. (Couldn’t resist!)

Seriously though, I’m always going to disagree with anyone that says “Don’t worry about [method of getting your account data], no one does that/it’s too complicated/that never happens/etc.”

Assume nothing; secure everything. It’s better to be worried about things that probably won’t happen than to not worry and have your account compromised.

Best to stop using computers altogether then; nothing is actually secure.

Or, live in reality with the rest of us. Actual risk assessments take into account the likelihood of a given attack vector. In this particular case, the likelihood of someone using a packet sniffer (and the likelihood of the account information being contained in packet payloads unencrypted) is vanishingly small.

If you truly believe that there is a real possibility that there are packet sniffers at every hop between you and any particular destination, you must never shop online, or use online banking, or log into any websites…except that you had to log into this website just to post that response. So someone here is being hypocritical, and it’s not me.

Alexixiv.4582:

You forgot packet sniffers
But yes you have a good point, many many tools in a hackers (data miners) arsenal today.

I didn’t forget them, I simply don’t consider them relevant, since actually sniffing a switched network requires administrative access to the switch at either the ingress/egress point or the border of one of the endpoints, and the ability to reconfigure the VLANs to add a span or mirror port, not to mention a way to get all the sniffed data out of the network without anyone noticing a doubling in network traffic. Plus, any half-decent protocol handling secure data (e.g., usernames/passwords) isn’t going to transmit that information in the clear, so the packet payloads would be useless.

Not to mention the fact that if someone had enough access to install a packet sniffer, whoever controls that network has much, much bigger problems than someone sniffing a videogame password. That’s like watching a house burn down and telling the owner he’s screwed because his grass is getting a little high and the HOA might not like it.

And please don’t lump data mining in with hacking. It’s bad enough people misuse the word “hacker”. Let’s not start associating data mining, which is a perfectly legitimate pursuit both in research and in business, with what is these days generally used to describe illegal activities.

Alexixiv.4582:

Angelkitten.3674:

Alexixiv.4582:

Wow your name is a good reflection of your disposition lol. No really I work for Verizon for 4 years as 1 of 5 tier2 email/portal support, worked very closely with security every day. Today I am in charge of Frontier Communications chronic third party circuits.
brag brag brag believe me lol

Really not sure how that is relevant, you got an email that your account was blocked for a game you never had right? if you ask me it looks like them guys tried to get your account details and that got your account, no need to start acting like a know it all sir…

I have been getting them emails for the past 3 months on my email and I don’t even have a battle.net account on it. Unless they bought you a free game.

You challenged my observation that it was a legitimate email. I was stating my credentials to back up my claim. You on the other hand are acting like a know it all by making a claim without having the email in your possession. I am well versed in spotting spoofed emails. You should not be so quick to shoot down something if you do not have all the facts to back it up.

So, you checked and verified all the Received: headers, and ruled out any potential fake ones as well? These days it’s surprising that people are even aware of Received: headers, let alone how to analyze them properly when examining email origins. Too many people spending too many years using nothing but GUI MUIs and having little to no actual knowledge of SMTP/eSMTP.

Widowmaker.5812:

Even if I was compromised there are only 2 stealth methods to steal my account, 1-key logger and 2-root kit. Both are hardly the tools of a game hacker. These are tools of espionage or commerial theft not the tools of kids stealing wow or guild wars accounts.

You’d be surprised.

Also, password length by itself is not adequate security for a password. For example:

aaaaaaaaaa is a length-10 password. It’s also horrible.

thisisatest is a length-11 password. It is just as bad, because dictionary attacks are trivial to do.

7h1515@7357 is the same length-11 password using leet-speak character substitution (which people seem to think is somehow secure). Password cracking and brute-forcing software has been able to do these sorts of dictionary substitutions for YEARS.

Q2W3E4R5T6^t%r$e#w@q is a length-20 password, using a keyboard pattern mnemonic. Password cracking/brute-forcing software has been able to suss these types of password schemes for years as well.

Add to the mix things like general-purpose GPU computing to greatly accelerate things, and rainbow tables plus years worth and millions upon millions of accounts’ worth of cracked passwords, and today’s script kiddie has at his disposal extremely sophisticated tools and a gargantuan corpus of raw data from which to work, not to mention enough data to do some fairly sophisticated analysis on password choice behavior that allows some rather intelligent guessing as well as advanced mnemonic attacks.

And that’s just the script kiddies. Now, imagine what someone with a profit motive (e.g., businesses whose sole purpose is to steal accounts and convert items into gold or real money, and use the stolen accounts to farm for and/or sell gold) would be willing to do.

Don’t think a length-32 password protects you. If that length-32 password was unique AND actually high-entropy (i.e., random, which means you’d have to use rote memorization or a third-party secure password program, e.g., 1password or keeppass or similar), THEN and only then might you begin to consider yourself safe from the above.

Yup. The issue with players not appearing is a common one, that seems to have started on 9/1. I posted about it when the forums opened, here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post56969

I posted about this the day the forums opened over in the Bug Reporting forum. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post56969

I’ve got a post in that thread also collecting other threads about this issue. I’ll add yours to it.

Draghmar.2594:

It’s really annoying and breaking the game. There were many times when I couldn’t see players from opposing worlds. Sometimes I had to stop and watch what is going on to get the idea where I should go to find anything to hit. And I wasn’t alone with this problem! Sometime players from my own team didn’t appear…And this include both models and names!
How can you play in WvW when you’re moving from point to point on open space only to find out that there are invaders coming right at you when there’s no time to react in any way then die. (I really had this once)

I posted about this issue the same morning the support forum went live. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post56969

I’ve also got a post in that thread collecting all the other threads on the issue. I’ll add yours to it.

Many of us have been having the same problem. I posted about it the morning the support forum went live: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post56969

I’ve since added a post in that thread collecting all the other threads on the issue as well. I just added yours to it.

Sulmith Greysin.5124:

mcl.9240:

Sulmith Greysin.5124:

mcl.9240:

It’s not lag, and my FPS is routinely in the 60-80fps range, including in situations where it’s occurring.

It’s a common attempt by MMO developers to try to alleviate server load, and it almost always gets reverted because of the gameplay problems it causes.

lag has NOTHING to do with framerate

NOTHING AT ALL

this is why i know it’s lag, because most people have no clue what lag is. if there is a delay in how long it takes information from the game server to reach you, the game is still going on but on your screen you may be standing there staring at a mob that is standing there too

or you may walk into a zone that hasn’t rendered on your screen yet because the information to render it hasn’t made it to you, but the information from you to the server

fps has nothing to do with lag whatsoever

I realize that. You said “people who disagree will think it’s FPS”. I don’t think it’s FPS, and I was pointing out that, in fact, my FPS is fine.

However, I disagree that it’s lag. As I stated in my OP, I routinely monitor my packet RTT to various sites. It is always in the tens of milliseconds.

However, feel free to continue to insist it’s lag. Nobody else in this thread is having lag-related problems, nor in the other 4-5 threads related to this exact problem. It hasn’t been lag-related in any other game that has instituted this SERVER-SIDE ATTEMPT TO OPTIMIZE GRAPHICS PERFORMANCE FOR CUSTOMERS…which is exactly what this particular problem happens to be. It’s a poor optimization and needs to be reverted because it has detrimental effects on play.

I’m sorry you keep getting disconnected due to lag, but this thread has nothing whatsoever to do with lag. I suggest you post a separate thread, in the Tech Support forum, to get help with your networking problems.

your reply even mentioned FPS. if you knew what lag was, you’d never bring up FPS to “prove it’s not lag”

i’d appreciate it if you’d just get whatever last word you wanna get and then move on, you’re wrong, me and you both know it, now we can move on

this is a network issue. i’m sure they know about it. i’m sure they’ll fix it. that’s why they haven’t touched it because they’re way ahead of that point.

it’s not even a bug

My reply mentioned FPS because you pre-emptively decided that anyone who disagreed with your answer that the problem was lag-related would think lag has something to do with an FPS drop.

At this point your responses are counterproductive to this discussion, and I’d politely and respectfully ask that you post in the appropriate forum (the Tech Support forum) to get assistance with your networking problem. There is no network-related problem being discussed in this thread.

Sulmith Greysin.5124:

mcl.9240:

It’s not lag, and my FPS is routinely in the 60-80fps range, including in situations where it’s occurring.

It’s a common attempt by MMO developers to try to alleviate server load, and it almost always gets reverted because of the gameplay problems it causes.

lag has NOTHING to do with framerate

NOTHING AT ALL

this is why i know it’s lag, because most people have no clue what lag is. if there is a delay in how long it takes information from the game server to reach you, the game is still going on but on your screen you may be standing there staring at a mob that is standing there too

or you may walk into a zone that hasn’t rendered on your screen yet because the information to render it hasn’t made it to you, but the information from you to the server

fps has nothing to do with lag whatsoever

I realize that. You said “people who disagree will think it’s FPS”. I don’t think it’s FPS, and I was pointing out that, in fact, my FPS is fine. The direct quote of you is:

“it’s lag. you don’t want to hear that, but that’s what it is. i’ve had it happen 2 or 3 times, but it was an obvious lag spike.

the people who will disagree think that FPS drop is lag."

However, I disagree that it’s lag, and I do not think that FPS drop is lag, nor do I have a problem with FPS (i.e., I’m not even suffering from FPS drop). As I stated in my OP, I routinely monitor my packet RTT to various sites. It is always in the tens of milliseconds.

However, feel free to continue to insist it’s lag. Nobody else in this thread is having lag-related problems, nor in the other 5 threads related to this exact problem. It hasn’t been lag-related in any other game that has instituted this SERVER-SIDE ATTEMPT TO OPTIMIZE GRAPHICS PERFORMANCE FOR CUSTOMERS…which is exactly what this particular problem happens to be. It’s a poor optimization and needs to be reverted because it has detrimental effects on play.

I’m sorry you keep getting disconnected due to lag, but this thread has nothing whatsoever to do with lag. I suggest you post a separate thread, in the Tech Support forum, to get help with your networking problems.

To be excruciatingly clear: None of us are seeing “freezes” of the players or graphics in the game, but you are. None of us are experiencing lag spikes or getting disconnected due to lag, but you are. All of us are discussing an issue that’s entirely different from the one you’re experiencing. You are unfortunately not understanding the problem I and the rest of us are discussing, and you are — for some reason — insisting on shoehorning the issue we’re discussing into the problem you’re having.

It would be nice if there were a response to this.

There actually appear to be several threads on this issue, none of which have any official response. Here is one:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/Invisible-non-rendered-people/first#post54277

I’ll try to keep the list updated.

EDIT:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/tech/draw-distance-for-players-npc-s/first#post47356

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/tech/NPC-Players-appearing-out-of-thin-air/first#post47329

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/Too-many-players-on-screen-players-not-appearing/first#post14828

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/WvW-Enemies-Not-Displaying-Until-In-Close-Proximity/first#post6297

EDIT: Yet another thread on the issue: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/Invisible-enemies-and-players-during-PvE

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/Disappearing-players-in-WvW/first#post58844

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/massive-encounters-fighting-ghosts-in-EU-servers/first#post58717

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/WvW-new-mechanics-causing-lag (the second half of this post — the part NOT about lag — deals with this “pop-in” problem)

EDIT: Even more:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Randomly-loading-in-players-when-near-them-this-is-ruining-WVW/first#post79599

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Culling-in-WvWvW

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/ArenaNet-can-we-talk-invisible-players-in-WvWvW

AND STILL MORE:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Clipping-makes-WvW-bad/first#post87737

Yet another thread: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/reduced-SFX-in-WvW-please

Kratuln.9608:

This needs to be addressed or atleast give us the option to enable it or disable it freely.

You can’t enable or disable it. It’s not a client-side option. It’s part of the engine running on the server.

I actually posted this as a bug the very first day the official forums opened: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post25485

I’m a bit confused. It seems to me that the main complaint here is that people are selling things for less than what you want to sell them for, and you can’t make money.

Is that an accurate statement?

If so, I don’t think you quite grasp the concept of a free market.

I don’t mean that as a jibe; merely a statement of fact. One cannot simply pound their fist on the table and insist other people stop impeding their ability to make a profit in a free market. One must be more creative than that.

It seems odd to me that SPI would cause these issues, since SPI is passive. Unless there is something in some of these routers’ firmware that is acting on the contents of certain packets associated with GW2. Which isn’t necessarily a problem with the router, but rather its configuration (or, possibly, in default settings chosen by the manufacturer).

For the record, I use a router (Asus RT-N16) with no issues whatsoever. And there are many devices connected to it, including a 16-port gigabit Ethernet switch with several devices connected to it as well. And another RT-N16 in WDS mode.

Your graphics card generally has zero influence over network lag.

You can’t put a slider on this. It’s something set on the server side, not the client side.

It’s not lag, and my FPS is routinely in the 60-80fps range, including in situations where it’s occurring.

It’s a common attempt by MMO developers to try to alleviate server load, and it almost always gets reverted because of the gameplay problems it causes.

I posted on this problem the first day the forums were opened: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post25485

It’s not part of UOC, unless UOC was only added on 9/1. Since it’s a fundamental component of the engine used for GW2, that’s not possible, therefore the effect can’t be due to UOC. Q.E.D.

It’s also been seen in other games (e.g., WoW, back in vanilla early on when they were doing some engine optimizations), and has uniformly been viewed as a bad decision and reverted.

I posted about this the very first day the support forums were opened: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/BUG-Mobs-and-players-suddenly-appearing-pop-in/first#post25485

Phaze Delta One.2834:

I didn’t see it listed. That’s why I made a post about it. Hopefully they make the feature account wide instead of character based. They can easily delete that blocked character and make another one. and bypass the block feature.

“We’ll add an option to report an account for sending spam or otherwise inappropriate in-game mail. Edit: This option will be added in tomorrow night’s update, not tonight’s update.”

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Game_status_updates

it’s on the wiki in the daily status updates.

They’re adding a reporting feature tomorrow night.

They’ll probably close this because it’s not a bug report.

However, you should be aware that ArenaNet have an economist on staff for GW2.

I also have no trouble. Running 602 beta drivers, sparkle calibre gtx580.

It’s not the overclocking. I have a SPARKLE Calibre Series X580 GeForce GTX 580 (Fermi) 1536MB 384-bit GDDR5 which comes OC’d by default, and I don’t have this problem.

And the latest beta driver is 306.02, not 304.79.

I run with all default settings for the driver, and everything in game set to high or ultra (where available, except shadows, which is left at high) at 1920×1080.

Sabas.8431:

Impaler.6204:

Bans for unthinkable things? What unthinkable things are you referring to?

Seriously?

You and I both know that some people here and on other fora are getting banned/suspended for what is concidered mild behaviour within the gaming community.

There is no need to go into specifics as I was talking to Arenanet not you.
And I do say this in a very pollite manner.

“the gaming community” encompasses a very wide variety of people. The small subsection of “the gaming community” that consider that sort of behavior “mild” are those who think it’s perfectly okay to be obscene, harassing, demeaning, and offensive in public chat (e.g., XBox Live Voice Chat, various public WoW chat channels, etc.).

To be blunt, there are quite a few members of the gaming community who do not appreciate that sort of behavior AT ALL. And there are many who have actually either severely restricted their gaming, or stopped altogether because of this extremely vocal and extremely offensive minority.

People who either stopped playing WoW or gave up on using trade chat and world chat altogether due to that sort of thing.

People who have given up entirely on using voice chat on gaming consoles, and may well have passed over buying certain games due to their reliance on that feature.

People who find their enjoyment of various online games diminished greatly by exactly this sort of behavior.

Don’t go painting “the gaming community” as a gaggle of ill-mannered, immature miscreants who not only lack the self-control necessary to refrain from obscenities while they’re speaking in public, but think it’s both acceptable and encouraged.

Bellok.4180:

Impaler.6204:

Bellok.4180:

mcl.9240:

Bellok.4180:

mcl.9240:

Bellok.4180:

mcl.9240:

Bellok.4180:

You guys are looking for good behavior in a video game that supports violence, and talks about genocide against a certain race. I just want to point that out. Do you guys realise how silly this sounds? Let’s go kill someone, and then drink tea and discuss philosophy afterwards. That makes sense.

We’re not looking for anything. We’re merely pointing out what ArenaNet’s policies are.

As analogies go, that’s not a particularly strong one. But to entertain it for a second, you’ve obviously never been in the military and dealt with officers. There are many that expect enlisted men to behave in ways that you would consider ridiculous, for exactly the same reasons you cite. And yet those conditions exist, and they exist in a real-world example of the scenario you present, rather than trying to stretch the analogy to videogames.

I spent 4 years in the navy repairing RADAR on F-14’s, and 2 years teaching sailors how to repair cryptographic electronics on board ballistic missile submarines. I am currently employed at Boeing, which deals with the military on a regular basis. The military is different, you follows rules because they will save your life. Following rules for a video game EULA is different because it is not life saving, and those rules in my opinion are always open for discussion.

I can promise you that some butterbar coming out to my position and demanding my boots are clean when I’m knee-deep in mud constantly is not going to save my life. Perhaps my experience in a combat platoon in the Army differs a bit from yours as a Navy technician.

Corporate rules are always open for negotiation. And the corporation who set the rules may always exercise their right to impose the consequences for the rules as set, and “give your suggestions the due consideration they deserve.”

That is why you have two sets of boots, a nice set, and your work set.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t hump my locker to the field.

Maybe you should try, you might get a commendation, and better yet a higher eval that will help you get promoted so that you are no longer just a low life to a butter bar, but someone worth his salt……

LOL, your entire reputation and respect of your fellow peers is based solely on the shine of your boots! You think that butter bar is going to be worrying about how shiny peoples boots are when gunfire and missiles are landing near him?

Worrying about shiny boots is something you would do when your not at war and your on an ego trip.

Listen you follow commands to the T when it comes to an officer, if there is room for significant risk of life when it is un needed you are free to climb up the chain of command. Good luck with that though you are going to end up pissing that person off and will pay for it in the end anyways. Therefore keep your boots shiny, they are responsible for your life.

You sidestepped my direct question, but based on your assertions, I’m going to go with the assumption that you were indeed an officer in the Navy.

Bellok.4180:

mcl.9240:

Bellok.4180:

Having shiny boots in the military is not life saving, and as you are a fanatic about potty language, there are fanatics about shiny boots in the military. Typically butter bars have just got out of their ocs and are still hardcore. There is a lesson with shiny boots however, it shows that you have pride in your work. You take the time to polish all aspects of your life. To have unpolished boots shows that butter bar that you have no pride, and not enough respect for him/her to keep them polished.

When I’m in the field, the last thing I’m going to do is have a highly-reflective surface on my body.

Perhaps you and I have a different definition of “in the field” as well. When I say it, I mean hunkered down in a foxhole, with a humvee camo’d some distance away, watching for enemy aircraft (many of which use FLiR, in my particular case). Ask me how much I want a reflecting surface giving away my position.

Tell me how “life-saving” that reflective surface is.

The point I was trying to make is that you used a poor analogy to begin with, but I played along for a second to demonstrate that even in your analogy, ridiculous rules are enforced. Do I get to ignore the butterbar? No, I have to appease him or avoid him. Or man up and suffer the consequences of ignoring him. I don’t have to like it, but I’m not going to run around putting blame on anyone but myself, because I evaluated the situation, I knew my options, and I made a choice. That choice came with consequences. Those consequences are nobody’s fault but my own.

And, bringing this back to the original point, in the game, you have to either appease ArenaNet (by abiding by their rules, no matter how ridiculous you think they’re being) or avoid ArenaNet (by not playing GW2). Or suffer the consequences.

That butterbar is directly responsible for your life, and regardless of whether his commands make sense or not you follow them to the T. If he/she gets his squad killed it is solely on that person, and if they survive any pending attack they will have to live with that fact. There is also something called a chain of command, if you have concerns about the safety of this junior officer, there is always someone senior to him.

No, I’m directly responsible for my life. That butterbar shouldn’t even be in a forward position. You clearly never mastered the “smile and nod” approach to handling junior officers. Or…let me guess: you were a Naval officer?

Of course, that same butterbar led a tank battalion into East Germany during peacetime after ordering radio silence, so nobody could point out that he’d just committed an act of war.

Bellok.4180:

Having shiny boots in the military is not life saving, and as you are a fanatic about potty language, there are fanatics about shiny boots in the military. Typically butter bars have just got out of their ocs and are still hardcore. There is a lesson with shiny boots however, it shows that you have pride in your work. You take the time to polish all aspects of your life. To have unpolished boots shows that butter bar that you have no pride, and not enough respect for him/her to keep them polished.

When I’m in the field, the last thing I’m going to do is have a highly-reflective surface on my body.

Perhaps you and I have a different definition of “in the field” as well. When I say it, I mean hunkered down in a foxhole, with a humvee camo’d some distance away, watching for enemy aircraft (many of which use FLiR, in my particular case). Ask me how much I want a reflecting surface giving away my position.

Tell me how “life-saving” that reflective surface is.

The point I was trying to make is that you used a poor analogy to begin with, but I played along for a second to demonstrate that even in your analogy, ridiculous rules are enforced. Do I get to ignore the butterbar? No, I have to appease him or avoid him. Or man up and suffer the consequences of ignoring him. I don’t have to like it, but I’m not going to run around putting blame on anyone but myself, because I evaluated the situation, I knew my options, and I made a choice. That choice came with consequences. Those consequences are nobody’s fault but my own.

And, bringing this back to the original point, in the game, you have to either appease ArenaNet (by abiding by their rules, no matter how ridiculous you think they’re being) or avoid ArenaNet (by not playing GW2). Or suffer the consequences.

Bellok.4180:

mcl.9240:

Bellok.4180:

mcl.9240:

Bellok.4180:

You guys are looking for good behavior in a video game that supports violence, and talks about genocide against a certain race. I just want to point that out. Do you guys realise how silly this sounds? Let’s go kill someone, and then drink tea and discuss philosophy afterwards. That makes sense.

We’re not looking for anything. We’re merely pointing out what ArenaNet’s policies are.

As analogies go, that’s not a particularly strong one. But to entertain it for a second, you’ve obviously never been in the military and dealt with officers. There are many that expect enlisted men to behave in ways that you would consider ridiculous, for exactly the same reasons you cite. And yet those conditions exist, and they exist in a real-world example of the scenario you present, rather than trying to stretch the analogy to videogames.

I spent 4 years in the navy repairing RADAR on F-14’s, and 2 years teaching sailors how to repair cryptographic electronics on board ballistic missile submarines. I am currently employed at Boeing, which deals with the military on a regular basis. The military is different, you follows rules because they will save your life. Following rules for a video game EULA is different because it is not life saving, and those rules in my opinion are always open for discussion.

I can promise you that some butterbar coming out to my position and demanding my boots are clean when I’m knee-deep in mud constantly is not going to save my life. Perhaps my experience in a combat platoon in the Army differs a bit from yours as a Navy technician.

Corporate rules are always open for negotiation. And the corporation who set the rules may always exercise their right to impose the consequences for the rules as set, and “give your suggestions the due consideration they deserve.”

That is why you have two sets of boots, a nice set, and your work set.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t hump my locker to the field.