If they re-enable fps ill do that test for both fps and tickrate On Sep 22, 2012 10:08 PM, "Steven Hartland" <[email protected]> wrote:
> ** > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Valtteri Kiviniemi > > > I actually interviewed some of the top players in Finland about this > tickrate debate. > > They all argued that there is a clear difference between 64 and 128 > tickrates and > > ESL league does not even allow using other than 128 tickrate servers on > league > > matches. They also said that they have noticed the door problem and that > it is not > > really a problem at all, since everyone at competitive gaming just blow > the doors > > away with a HE grenade. > > So because in most cases pro's use a HE grenade to blow the door that > makes it > ok to just ignore the bug does it? > > How about blind testing instead of getting opinions. We did this with top > teams a > while back with the whole high FPS thing and they actually couldn't tell > or disagreed > with each other. What was very funny was them insisting they could have > rcon to > check it, if it was so obvious as people are arguing when they should > know right? > > Oh and anyone who does blind testing will need to construct the tests > properly which > of course would involve ensuring no maps without doors, or that they > where blown > up with HE grenades before the players joined the server :D > > > They also said that they quit playing CS: Source after the tickrate was > locked and > > moved back to CS 1.6. The tickrate locking was one of the biggest > failure in source > > competitive playing history. > > So the large amounts of major tournaments for quite some time using CS:S > and not > 1.6 make CS:S the biggest failure in competitive history, I'm not sure > numbers > agree with that ;-) > > > I am the biggest game server provider in Finland and I do have good > contacts with > > the top players in the major competitive leagues. I have said this > before but locking > > the tickrate to a lower value would be absolutely a gigantic fuck up and > would absolutely > > without now doubt ruin CS:GO (and Valves) reputation at competitive > playing. > > We all have good contacts with top players, but you should know that > basing things > on what people "say" is not how proper decisions are made. They are > instead made > by examining all the facts and coming to an informed conclusion. > > > CS: Source was a failure of getting the masses move from CS 1.6 so do > not make the > > same mistakes with CS:GO. CS:GO is at the moment very popular in > competitive playing > > I don't think that tick rate had a big impact on this at all, as this was > a change which > came very late in the day, so it stands to reason that there where other > factors involved > most likely the biggest one being people hate change. > > As far as CS:GO being very popular at the moment I don't doubt that, but > if its all down > to tick rate as you infer then why is the peak players for CS:S double > that of CS:GO? > > The numbers seem to disagree with your hypothesis there Valtteri. > > > so do not fuck it up with locking the tickrate because some random > server providers > > (multiplay) are whining about it with no reason. > > Lets be clear this is not Multiply whining, these are my personal > conclusions based on > the facts available. If you think that having bugs because of "optional" > settings is > acceptable, that's your purgative of course. > > My personal opinion is that these issues should be fixed, and likely the > easy way to do > that is removing the option which was removed in source for the very same > reason. > > > And asking about proof how the tickrate 128 is better is the same as > asking that can > > you proof that the 64tick is not crappier? The fact that the top players > in Europe say that > > there is a very noticeable difference is proof enough. > > Exactly they will "say" its noticeable but that's not proof it is? I can't > answer I'm no where > near a pro player so I can only go on the evidence and facts provided, > like everyone > should. > > > If some server hoster (multiplay) has crappy server hardware which is > not capable of > > running 128 tick servers it is not a reason to lock it to everyone. > > Lets clear this up once and for all, Multiplay have some of the fastest > and best hardware > you can buy running their CS:S servers, so there's no question of "not > capable of running > 128 tick servers", you've just jumped to that conclusion without a single > shred of evidence, > instead purely based on my comments that 128 tick servers should be fixed > or removed. > > So get your facts straight before making wild accusations which is highly > unprofessional > / libellous and something I wouldn't expect from any quality GSP. > > > Tickrate should never ever be locked to any value, it should aways be > freely configurable > > option. That way we can host 128 tickrate competitive servers for the > top players in the > > world who travel around the world with different competitions and > represent CS:GO in > > different tournaments and help get the game the most successfull CS ever. > > Again I'll just say "fix OR remove" if they can't be fixed they should be > removed just like > in CS:S. Hell one solution to fixing is to lock it to 128 tick and make > everything work > correctly at that rate instead of 64, but based on your comments above > that still wouldn't > make everyone happy as they would want 256 tickrate servers because the > difference > is "obvious" ;-) > > > And also host high slot public servers with 64 tickrate since they do > not have to be so > > high performance server and that way they use less CPU and we can host > more slots. > > So why should public players have to put up with worse performance? Surely > if its a must > and is so "obvious" then everyone will want this, wont they? > > > Remember this and end this stupid conversation about tickrates. These > are the facts and > > if someone disagrees with me, then he is simply wrong or has some mental > problems > > You cant argue with facts. > > As I've said your so called fact is that top players "say" the difference > is "obvious" however > that doesn't make it fact that the difference "is" obvious, only that they > "say" it is. > > Now I'm not saying its not obvious, I'm just pointing out that someone > saying it is doesn't > necessarily make it so, something I'm sure you understand. > > A study of players doing blind testing on servers e.g. playing matches and > confirming that > 128 tick servers performed better for them would prove this hypothesis and > so make it fact. > > Regards > Steve > > ================================================ > This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and > the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, > the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise > disseminating it or any information contained in it. > > In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please > telephone +44 845 868 1337 > or return the E.mail to [email protected]. > > _______________________________________________ > Csgo_servers mailing list > [email protected] > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/csgo_servers >
_______________________________________________ Csgo_servers mailing list [email protected] https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/csgo_servers
