Somehow the reasoning behind this logic of yours will spark quite a debate, I don't agree with you, but I don't have the energy at this time of night to elaborate as to why I don't agree with you either
*dan dan dan daaaaaaa*
Toxin to the rescue........... actually I'm just really bored.
well if that was on an eight meg line, a 16 meg would almost cut it down by half, giving you atleast around 100 - 120 ms ping.
if one was to connect directly to another computer while one connection is 12 meg and one connection is a 4 meg and you get that ping of 170 - 300, then you can divide by 3 if they are to be both on a 12 meg, leaving you with a ping of around 66 ms average, so a 40 meg line is most definitly going to get you somewhere
Unfortunately this is a common misconception. What people need to understand is that data packets can only travel so fast through copper and fibre.
To put it simply data packets travel roughly at 2/3 the speed of light through copper. It's a bit faster in fibre but let's take 2/3 as the average.
2/3 Speed of light = 200 000 000 m/s (Again not exact, just a rough estimate)
200 000 000 m/s = 200km/ms
No let's say you wanted to play on a server in New York and that you lived in Pretoria.
Distance from New York to Pretoria = 13157.03 km
Therefore the time it would take an electrical packet to travel from Pretoria to New York:
13157.03km / 200km/ms = 65.78515ms
So around 66ms......
ONE WAY.
With online gaming, latency is measured going both ways so: 2 x 66 = 132ms
This is the best possible latency (or ping) you would have if you lived in an ideal world with you having a direct link (no hops or exchanges) to the server...... which you will never have....... ever.
Latency is not effected by whether you have a 1mb line or a 100mb line. It's effected by the distance the packets have to travel.