I understand it just fine, I'm not the one stating something and then
pointing to a document that doesn't come close to stating the same
thing as proof...
On 7/24/05, Whisper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I think you clearly misunderstand the
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Some how I doubt you have even bother to read it
On 7/25/05, Clayton Macleod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand it just fine, I'm not the one stating something and then
pointing to a document that doesn't come close to stating the same
doubt all you like, the document clearly spells out what cl_interp
is/does. It's got to do with you and your view of the server's data.
Your view of the server data has nothing to do with my view of the
server data. You can alter *your* 'delay' all you like, it doesn't
affect me, as I have my own
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Look, it is quite clear that you haven't even bothered to look at the
dicument let alone read the section I specifically quoted
What part of *command execution* don't understand?
On 7/25/05, Clayton Macleod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
doubt all
Can two take this pissing contest somewhere else please, it got old
about 6 posts ago.
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
I've read and understood it. You, obviously, have done one of those.
Your client is not my client. Read that last sentence about 100 times.
On 7/24/05, Whisper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Look, it is quite clear that you haven't even bothered to
once again you fail to understand what's going on. I'm not disputing
what you're saying about client view interpolation. I'm trying to
point out to you that this only affects communication between *you*
and the server. The communication between *me* and the server isn't
affected by *you* one iota.
You both have each others email addresses, why not leave the rest of
us out of this one?
On 7/25/05, Clayton Macleod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
once again you fail to understand what's going on.
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view
[rant]
My god, two days after a message - how pathetic.
Yes, client interpolation DOES have to do with netcode, and here is
the REASON that neither of you seem to have the decency to produce for
each other.
[/rant]
Interpolation does several things which effect netcode, these will be
summarised
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Hey I agree with you James.
My stupidity allowed me to get sucked in to Claytons baiting tactics.
On 7/25/05, James Tucker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[rant]
My god, two days after a message - how pathetic.
Yes, client interpolation DOES
I am interested to hear opinions over the viability of client rate
regulation at the server side by means of server regulated client view
extrapolation. Would this be a better solution?, or does it simply
produce too much regulation on the low rate client?
On 7/25/05, Whisper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
But I cannot see what the technical problem (other than maybe it might be
computationally intensive for the server) would be to automate the clients
various rate settings, to best suit the clients connection and the servers
settings.
On 7/25/05,
again, that won't affect me and my view of the world if you have
changed your value. It will change how things behave for your view of
the world and your commands sent to the server. It won't affect the
communication between me and the server at all. It only makes your
view worse, doesn't change
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
You said:
I thought cl_interp only affects that client's view, *and not anything
to do with actual network communication*, no?
It is patently clear that *cl_interp* *IS* critical to network
communications, and is used by the server to decide
then you clearly misunderstand the document you referred to.
On 7/24/05, Whisper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
It is patently clear that *cl_interp* *IS* critical to network
communications, and is used by the server to decide how the in game
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I think you clearly misunderstand the document I refer to
On 7/25/05, Clayton Macleod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
then you clearly misunderstand the document you referred to.
On 7/24/05, Whisper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
[ Picked
: [hlds] rate toggle
I've been getting my fair share of cl_cmdrate exploiters as well,
using the Mani admin plugin to check up on suspected exploiters has
been a big help. I haven't seen any undue impact on server
performance due to clients using a cmdrate that low... if anything,
you'd
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
cool
--
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
I thought cl_interp only affects that client's view, and not anything
to do with actual network communication, no? Why would it affect
anything on my side if you changed cl_interp on your machine?
On 7/23/05, James Tucker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I disagree however, the fact that people are
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
If I read this correctly
http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Source_Multiplayer_Networking
cl_interp is a key component to whether you hit something or not according
to the server!
I get 'em every day with the 5 pings. I use Mani and just toggle
cmdrate back to 30. I don't know about stopping people from EVER
toggling, doubt you can do that.
Since you brought up rates, I have been wanting to ask. Does
cl_cmdrate 0 on a client really impact server performance? I would
love
or set a min/max range on some of
these settings we're discussing here?
- K2
http://www.hardfought.org
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris K
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:22 AM
To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: Re: [hlds] rate
Could I have a synopsis of the problems you are seeing please.
- Alfred
Original Message
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of K2 Sent:
Thursday, July 21, 2005 11:39 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: RE: [hlds] rate toggle
I've been getting my fair
Hi!
only a restriction is needed, that clients
are not allowed to set their cl_updaterate and cl_cmdrate lower
than 10 or 20.
Like in CS 1.6
Cu,
Sir D.
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I think there should be 3 minimum settings (rate, cmdrate, updateratre) that
are set server side that is enforceable on the client as well as something
that makes it not possible for somebody to continously change their rates,
i.e. Only when they
PM
To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: Re: [hlds] rate toggle
I get 'em every day with the 5 pings. I use Mani and just toggle
cmdrate back to 30. I don't know about stopping people from EVER
toggling, doubt you can do that.
Since you brought up rates, I have been wanting to ask. Does
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marco Hombach
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 9:12 AM
To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: RE: [hlds] rate toggle
Hi!
only a restriction is needed, that clients
are not allowed to set their cl_updaterate and cl_cmdrate lower
than 10 or 20.
Like in CS 1.6
Cu,
Sir D
/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Grimstead
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:53 AM
To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: RE: [hlds] rate toggle
The problem is, people are exploiting the game by setting lower rates.
This makes
be
done for HL1 too?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rick Payton
Sent: 21 July 2005 21:38
To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: RE: [hlds] rate toggle
Why not just lock the client to match the servers tickrate? Are these
variables
-1745
http://www.mai-hawaii.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Grimstead
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 10:49 AM
To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: RE: [hlds] rate toggle
Cant do that, people on isdn and 56k would just lag
:P
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Suck.
Sent: 21 July 2005 22:46
To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: RE: [hlds] rate toggle
This is the best that I can explain it. I'm sure you're aware of much of
this Alfred, but this should help
Thanks guys, we will check it out.
- Alfred
Original Message
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Whisper Sent:
Thursday, July 21, 2005 12:02 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com
Subject: Re: [hlds] rate toggle
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative
32 matches
Mail list logo
