PLEASE IGNORE : test

[npvnet]

test

Server welcome message _without_ using Admin Mod

[Marcel Beringer]

Hi all,

When a server has a basic Admin Mod install, and you connect to the
server, you get the following message in your screen ( after the motd ) :

Welcome to the Real World ...

Very cool line indeed :), but ... is it possible to have that same line of
text pop-up in your screen the same way like Admin Mod is doing, _WITHOUT_
using Admin Mod ???

Can't wait for your replys 'bout this !!!

Grtz,

Marcel

--
God may be my Co-pilot ... but the Devil's my Bombardier.

funny radio noise abuse

[Buddha-Pest]

here's a nasty side effect of the "hear the enemy using the radio" feature.
i'm a terrorist on a cs_ map.  i suspect a ct nearby.  so i kill a hostage.
enemy says: "hostage down" i hear him and i know where he is.

it's kind of funny :0

best way to fix?  just stop having cts say that.  it's silly anyway.  how
would the cts know if they're not there to see it anyway?  i never liked
that "feature".

~j

Re: sv_clienttrace

[Casey Zacek]

Well, I don't set sv_clienttrace in my .cfg files anywhere, and when I
query my servers, it returns a value of "1".  That's all I can tell
you about it.

Nathan Woodcock spoke forth with the blessed manuscript:
>
> lo all...in previous CS games I am sure the sv_clienttrace default has
> always been 3.5, and that's what we've always used.   I have players
> tellingm e now the default (and proper) value is 1, and that 3.5 makes the
> game totally different and people much easier to hit as it makes the
> hitboxes bigger.
>
> Is this true or bollocks?   What is the true function of sv_clientrace?
> Has it been superceded by other variables?   Any useful info appreciated.
>
> cheers,
> n
>
>

--
-- Casey Zacek (Zippo)
   Beer for Breakfast servers 
   209.41.98.2:27016 (multi-map), 27017 (militia), 27019 (DoD) (Dallas, TX)
   207.106.65.68:27015 (de_ maps), 27016 (dust/dust2) (Washington, DC)

Re: sv_clienttrace

[botman]

> lo all...in previous CS games I am sure the sv_clienttrace default has
> always been 3.5, and that's what we've always used.   I have players
> tellingm e now the default (and proper) value is 1, and that 3.5 makes the
> game totally different and people much easier to hit as it makes the
> hitboxes bigger.
>
> Is this true or bollocks?   What is the true function of sv_clientrace?
> Has it been superceded by other variables?   Any useful info appreciated.

sv_clienttrace sets the bounding box of the player for collisions (with
world objects).  This is not the same as setting the size of the hitbox
(used for bullet hits).

Jeffrey "botman" Broome

sv_clienttrace

[Nathan Woodcock]

lo all...in previous CS games I am sure the sv_clienttrace default has
always been 3.5, and that's what we've always used.   I have players
tellingm e now the default (and proper) value is 1, and that 3.5 makes the
game totally different and people much easier to hit as it makes the
hitboxes bigger.

Is this true or bollocks?   What is the true function of sv_clientrace?
Has it been superceded by other variables?   Any useful info appreciated.

cheers,
n

Re: Disabling Speech

[Rob Abbott]

sv_voiceenable 0



Scott Teipe wrote:

>Is there a way (cvar?) to totally disable the speech on the Linux server
>side in 1108??
>
>Thanks
>
>--Scott
>
>
>
>.
>

Disabling Speech

[Scott Teipe]

Is there a way (cvar?) to totally disable the speech on the Linux server
side in 1108??

Thanks

--Scott

Re: Found hitbox problem

[Rob Sanders]

If CS were like that it would suck.  I dont have a problem with the hitboxes
either.  I admit, it took some time to get used to, but im back to my usual
playing now.

- Original Message -
From: "Buddha-Pest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 6:01 AM
Subject: Re: Found hitbox problem


>
> the main problem however is that the humans in this "simulation" don't
have
> real human limitations such as fatigue which would totally change the way
> the action happens.  thus without fatigue the game doesn't really simulate
a
> real SWAT/CT vs T situation.  and i'm not just talking about jumping up
and
> down.
>
> running while shooting accurately is impossible in the real world.  hell,
> even just running all the time is impossible.  a huge part of real world
> strategy accounts for fatigue, how to overcome the effects of fatigue.
> that's why buildings on a hill are more strategic, not just because of the
> visibility aspects.  also because they are much more difficult to storm
> UPWARDS then if they were on a flat surface.
>
> not to mention that a TRULY accurate situation would involve a bunch of
> diplomats and negotiators talking with the Ts while the CTs sit around
with
> orders to cease fire :P
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Brad Ball" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 1:48 PM
> Subject: RE: Found hitbox problem
>
>
> >
> > Ok Ok.  maybe it's not REALLY a simulation, but I would say that it is
> > 'meant to be' a simulation. Wether or not gooseman and the CS team
> actually
> > achieved the goal of making it a simulation can be argued all day long
(I
> > don't quite think they did, but they made more progress than anything
else
> > I've seen). But I do think that most will agree that the goal of CS from
> the
> > beginning was to create a game that simulates
Terrorist/Counter-Terrorist
> > situations, hence all the attempts at realism.
> >
> > If others don't agree that's fine. As I said in my original post, "this
is
> > just MY opinion". Others can have their opinion and that's wonderful. I
> have
> > more important things to do than argue over the simulation factor in CS.
> > Besides, the argument over wether or not CS is a simulation has nothing
to
> > do with the point I was trying to make in my original post. I was trying
> to
> > explain why there are more headshots now and that it's not due to a
hitbox
> > bug, it is due to hitbox bugs being fixed.
> >
> > Brad
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Ken Kirchner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 3:52 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: RE: Found hitbox problem
> > >
> > >  
> > > > All of this is of course, just my opinion.
> > > >
> > > > /me zips up flame-proof suit,
> > >
> > > As you well should.  It was a good post until you got to the
> > > above part.
> > > Simulation my ass. I would classify it as an FPS with a tad
> > > more realism
> > > than most others, but simulation? I dont think so.  Not even close.
> >
> >
> >
>
>

RE: Project GameGuard

[Jez McKinley]

Sweet!

-Original Message-
From: Ketchup [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 03 October 2001 14:00
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Project GameGuard



Greetings,

I just wanted to inform you that after the appearant woes with
Punkbuster another very interesting alternative project has been
launched.

The Project's name is GameGuard
It is run by experienced and dedicated coders, serveradmins etc., some
of which might be recognized as members of the www.counter-strike.de
staff.

The provisional homepage is located at:
http://gameguard.clanhosting.de

The project is concepted as Freeware , of course - it will try to be
more than an alternative or plain replacement for PB, intending to be
more effective both in cheat protection and protection against hacks
itself.

There are some first conceptional technical ideas, which you can find
in the GameGuard forums:
http://gameguard.clanhosting.de/forum/showtopic.php?threadid=18&time=1001772
618

Interested helpers are asked to have a look at it :)!

--

 Peter aka Ketchup
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.pommesbude.org

RE: Project GameGuard

[Luca Grossi]

Great stuff guys :)
Good luck with the project :)

-Original Message-
From: Ketchup [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, 3 October 2001 11:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Project GameGuard



Greetings,

I just wanted to inform you that after the appearant woes with
Punkbuster another very interesting alternative project has been
launched.

The Project's name is GameGuard
It is run by experienced and dedicated coders, serveradmins etc., some
of which might be recognized as members of the www.counter-strike.de
staff.

The provisional homepage is located at:
http://gameguard.clanhosting.de

The project is concepted as Freeware , of course - it will try to be
more than an alternative or plain replacement for PB, intending to be
more effective both in cheat protection and protection against hacks
itself.

There are some first conceptional technical ideas, which you can find
in the GameGuard forums:
http://gameguard.clanhosting.de/forum/showtopic.php?threadid=18&time=1001772
618

Interested helpers are asked to have a look at it :)!

--

 Peter aka Ketchup
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.pommesbude.org

RE: Performance & compatibility test libraries for CS

[Tim Cooper]

I knew there had to be a cheat that was causing this on mine

Timothy H. Cooper
WorldCom
AM&O East
Traffic Engineer
(703)886-1110
V806-1110


-Original Message-
From: Leon Hartwig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 5:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Performance & compatibility test libraries for CS



And for TFC admins, we are working on getting a fix available for the
spectator/grenade/server freeze/server crash cheat.  As soon as we have that
available for you, I'll put together a performance test package for TFC also
(if the CS test doesn't encounter severe problems).


> -Original Message-
> From: Leon Hartwig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 2:16 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Performance & compatibility test libraries for CS
>
>
>
> If any CS admins are interested in testing a HL engine, CS,
> and HLTV build
> that is built with a goal of better CPU performance, please e-mail me
> privately and let me know you are interested.  The feedback
> I'll be looking
> for from people trying these out is whether or not your
> server (or your
> clients) saw performance increases or decreases, server
> stability compared
> to the 3108a release, or any other out of the ordinary events
> you notice.
>
>

Project GameGuard

[Ketchup]

Greetings,

I just wanted to inform you that after the appearant woes with
Punkbuster another very interesting alternative project has been
launched.

The Project's name is GameGuard
It is run by experienced and dedicated coders, serveradmins etc., some
of which might be recognized as members of the www.counter-strike.de
staff.

The provisional homepage is located at:
http://gameguard.clanhosting.de

The project is concepted as Freeware , of course - it will try to be
more than an alternative or plain replacement for PB, intending to be
more effective both in cheat protection and protection against hacks
itself.

There are some first conceptional technical ideas, which you can find
in the GameGuard forums:
http://gameguard.clanhosting.de/forum/showtopic.php?threadid=18&time=1001772618

Interested helpers are asked to have a look at it :)!

--

 Peter aka Ketchup
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.pommesbude.org

RE: Tweaking linux (or a Redhat7.1)

[Conny Brunnkvist / dimac.net]

> What tweaks can you perform on a Redhat 7.1 that will make it
> run as fast as possible with hlds in perspective?

This ain't nothing specific for RH, but anyway:
If you use IDE drives, you shouldn't forget to look if there are any
additional harddrive parameters that can be set (such as 32-bit mode, DMA
mode, multiblock transfers, etc) using the "hdparm" utility.

But keep in mind that since we're messing with the IDE-controller here,
while you can significantly increase disk performance you also run a risk of
corrupting your filesystem *if* you go and change anything that you
shoudln't. :)

So run "man hdparm" before doing anything else!

//conny

Re: Halflife Misbehaving or hacked ?

[Husayn ibn al-Samarqandi]

On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Dennis Koster wrote:

>
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 09:41:14PM +1000, Luca Grossi wrote:
> > Last night I experienced a weird problem, it was reported that my counter
> > strike server suddenly started acting weirdly, causing problems like,
> > players weren't able to chat, couldn't select a weapon or see how much
> > bullets, So I quickly entered the server, and it suddenly stopped, I have a
> > feeling maybe someone else is using another admins access, but I can't seem
> > to find any evidence to suggest that,
> > I'm running Linux, with halfd and adminmod running
>
> got no idea, but it also happend to my server.
> its not a hacked server.
> i think this is a bug in one of the progs (cs, hl or adminmod)
>
> with regards,
>
> Dennis

What shows in your logs? These were/are symptoms of the "no name" cheat.

1. Look for:

changed name to ""

2. On the off chance that it's the "silence server" attack, check for
rapid leave/join teams.

If you don't see any of that it *could* be a bug.


"Insane" Husayn



> >
>
>

RE: Tweaking a Redhat7.1

[Daniel Brandt]

of course.. given the choice, i would transfer the server to a bsd unix.
there you can utilize the kernel option NMBCLUSTERS (8192 is the recommended
value) to boost network performance.

// Daniel

  That which is overdesigned, too highly specific, anticipates outcome;
  the anticipation of outcome guarantees, if not failure, the abcense
  of grace. - Willam Gibson
-Original Message-
From: Dennis Koster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: den 3 oktober 2001 13:54
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tweaking a Redhat7.1



On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:24:07PM +0200, Daniel Brandt wrote:
> recompile the kernel and include only what is necesarry for your hardware.
> standard redhat kernels suffer from serious bloat (they are supposed to
work
> on as much hardware as possible by default). this slimms down the kernel
> memory footprint. when recompiling the kernel, go to the processor
settings
> and choose your processor. if the default kernel is configured to work on
a
> 386 and you recompile it to fit say a pentium 3 it can more than double
the
> performance.

this is a way, but note that a cs server runs better and with
less leg on a FreeBSD machine.

but strip down your linux and only run the programs you really need.
strip your kernel, etc.


Regards,

Dennis

Re: Halflife Misbehaving or hacked ?

[Dennis Koster]

On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 09:41:14PM +1000, Luca Grossi wrote:
> Last night I experienced a weird problem, it was reported that my counter
> strike server suddenly started acting weirdly, causing problems like,
> players weren't able to chat, couldn't select a weapon or see how much
> bullets, So I quickly entered the server, and it suddenly stopped, I have a
> feeling maybe someone else is using another admins access, but I can't seem
> to find any evidence to suggest that,
> I'm running Linux, with halfd and adminmod running

got no idea, but it also happend to my server.
its not a hacked server.
i think this is a bug in one of the progs (cs, hl or adminmod)

with regards,

Dennis
>

Re: Tweaking a Redhat7.1

[Dennis Koster]

On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:24:07PM +0200, Daniel Brandt wrote:
> recompile the kernel and include only what is necesarry for your hardware.
> standard redhat kernels suffer from serious bloat (they are supposed to work
> on as much hardware as possible by default). this slimms down the kernel
> memory footprint. when recompiling the kernel, go to the processor settings
> and choose your processor. if the default kernel is configured to work on a
> 386 and you recompile it to fit say a pentium 3 it can more than double the
> performance.

this is a way, but note that a cs server runs better and with
less leg on a FreeBSD machine.

but strip down your linux and only run the programs you really need.
strip your kernel, etc.


Regards,

Dennis

Halflife Misbehaving or hacked ?

[Luca Grossi]

Last night I experienced a weird problem, it was reported that my counter
strike server suddenly started acting weirdly, causing problems like,
players weren't able to chat, couldn't select a weapon or see how much
bullets, So I quickly entered the server, and it suddenly stopped, I have a
feeling maybe someone else is using another admins access, but I can't seem
to find any evidence to suggest that,
I'm running Linux, with halfd and adminmod running

Any ideas?

Thanks Luca Grossi

RE: Tweaking a Redhat7.1

[Daniel Brandt]

recompile the kernel and include only what is necesarry for your hardware.
standard redhat kernels suffer from serious bloat (they are supposed to work
on as much hardware as possible by default). this slimms down the kernel
memory footprint. when recompiling the kernel, go to the processor settings
and choose your processor. if the default kernel is configured to work on a
386 and you recompile it to fit say a pentium 3 it can more than double the
performance.

remove unneccesary stuff running in the background, such as sendmail,
automount daemons etc.

and by all means; don't run X, you wont need it.

..i'll send more tips if i think of any..

// Daniel

  That which is overdesigned, too highly specific, anticipates outcome; 
  the anticipation of outcome guarantees, if not failure, the abcense 
  of grace. - Willam Gibson

-Original Message-
From: Niklas Göransson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: den 3 oktober 2001 13:07
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OT: Tweaking a Redhat7.1



What tweaks can you perform on a Redhat 7.1 that will make it run as fast as
possible with hlds in perspective?

tia
././Niklas

OT: Tweaking a Redhat7.1

[Niklas Göransson]

What tweaks can you perform on a Redhat 7.1 that will make it run as fast as possible 
with hlds in perspective?

tia
././Niklas

Re: Found hitbox problem

[Buddha-Pest]

the main problem however is that the humans in this "simulation" don't have
real human limitations such as fatigue which would totally change the way
the action happens.  thus without fatigue the game doesn't really simulate a
real SWAT/CT vs T situation.  and i'm not just talking about jumping up and
down.

running while shooting accurately is impossible in the real world.  hell,
even just running all the time is impossible.  a huge part of real world
strategy accounts for fatigue, how to overcome the effects of fatigue.
that's why buildings on a hill are more strategic, not just because of the
visibility aspects.  also because they are much more difficult to storm
UPWARDS then if they were on a flat surface.

not to mention that a TRULY accurate situation would involve a bunch of
diplomats and negotiators talking with the Ts while the CTs sit around with
orders to cease fire :P

- Original Message -
From: "Brad Ball" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 1:48 PM
Subject: RE: Found hitbox problem


>
> Ok Ok.  maybe it's not REALLY a simulation, but I would say that it is
> 'meant to be' a simulation. Wether or not gooseman and the CS team
actually
> achieved the goal of making it a simulation can be argued all day long (I
> don't quite think they did, but they made more progress than anything else
> I've seen). But I do think that most will agree that the goal of CS from
the
> beginning was to create a game that simulates Terrorist/Counter-Terrorist
> situations, hence all the attempts at realism.
>
> If others don't agree that's fine. As I said in my original post, "this is
> just MY opinion". Others can have their opinion and that's wonderful. I
have
> more important things to do than argue over the simulation factor in CS.
> Besides, the argument over wether or not CS is a simulation has nothing to
> do with the point I was trying to make in my original post. I was trying
to
> explain why there are more headshots now and that it's not due to a hitbox
> bug, it is due to hitbox bugs being fixed.
>
> Brad
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ken Kirchner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 3:52 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Found hitbox problem
> >
> >  
> > > All of this is of course, just my opinion.
> > >
> > > /me zips up flame-proof suit,
> >
> > As you well should.  It was a good post until you got to the
> > above part.
> > Simulation my ass. I would classify it as an FPS with a tad
> > more realism
> > than most others, but simulation? I dont think so.  Not even close.
>
>
>