The comparison is malformed.
First of all, 130ms is still negligible. The only problem left is that "average world wide" ping is undefinable, or at least doesn't really make sense.
Of course it makes sense. A reputable 3rd party service monitors the server from fixed monitoring locations around the world every 5 minutes, the numbers I provided are the average pings provided by that service. Pings from Europe to your badly routed, oversold network are high, pushing the average up. Pings to my server in New York are fast from not only America, but from Europe, meaning the average is low. I'm just going to assume you understand averages.
An oversold network? You have to be loving kidding me. I get a solid 39ms ping to my server. The distance (measured by several cities, Edison, NJ -> Hackensack, NJ -> Bethpage, NY -> JFK -> Chicago -> St Louis) is 1,076 miles. That is NOT high latency. That is extremely good latency.
Lol please, your provider is bottom of the barrel, they use the cheapest transit providers and their peering is awful. Routing from the UK to your server is poor, the routes aren't efficient at all. Regardless of your low latency from America, it's still poor from Europe because your server is in central America, which is
not a good location.
You picked your provider purely based on price, it's clear you don't understand how distance in terms of network topology affects response.
You're getting very defensive Kalph, I don't want you to quit before I have to chance to wipe the floor with your service :(
Edit: just ran some MTR (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTR_(software) read up buddy!) tests from a couple of servers to yours, then to mine. Multiple nodes on your route have high jitter, terrible for performance to a game server. Can't say the same about my server though!
Poll