bani masterbate yourself insthead modify et pro

Dersaidin · Post by **Dersaidin** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:10 pm

I praise etpro hit detection as the best ever.

/me praises

sponge · Post by **sponge** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:17 pm

ET needs more lens flares.

Fusen · Post by **Fusen** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:12 pm

ET needs more cowbell

antman · Post by **antman** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 11:17 pm

Fusen wrote:ET needs more cowbell

indeed, I have a fever and the only prescription is to have more cowbell

WeblionX · Post by **WeblionX** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:31 pm

That's for <a href="http://wolfwiki.anime.net/index.php/MullET">MullET</a>!

MorsTua · Post by **MorsTua** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:41 am

i still see alot of people bothering for the antilag ...
and this is a fact not a personal opinion

zinx · Post by **zinx** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:53 am

MorsTua wrote:i still see alot of people bothering for the antilag ...
and this is a fact not a personal opinion

I suspect what you may be seeing is people with unstable connections complaining about the antiwarp, but I don't even see much of that here. Maybe it's just your little clique that cares.

Xeon_vl · Post by **Xeon_vl** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 pm

There's a lot of whine about the net settings, like cl_maxpackets < 100 making you 'warp' and 'unhittable', mostly because you will just create yourself a better ping. And i believe there have been a lot of topics/journals/news topics/articles/collumns on any site/forum about it so far.

ouroboro · Post by **ouroboro** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 4:15 pm

But do you have any evidence that the increased ping you see at higher packet values is real? I've heard that it is most likely not an accurate representation.

As long as a player sends >=20 packets they should be perfectly smooth and hittable, because the server only updates player positions 20 times per second anyway. When they don't, b_antiwarp will help keep things smooth.

P.S. ETPro needs "realping"!

deej · Post by **deej** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:08 am

ouroboro wrote:P.S. ETPro needs "realping"!

ETTV already has that - but it's not quite correct all the time.

Xeon_vl · Post by **Xeon_vl** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 9:48 am

ouroboro wrote:But do you have any evidence that the increased ping you see at higher packet values is real? I've heard that it is most likely not an accurate representation.

As long as a player sends >=20 packets they should be perfectly smooth and hittable, because the server only updates player positions 20 times per second anyway. When they don't, b_antiwarp will help keep things smooth.

P.S. ETPro needs "realping"!

well on whatever which server i go , even if its etmain/etpub/etpro/whatever else, a higher maxpackets makes my ping move a bit up. It can be like + 10 ping on good servers, to extremely +50 (mostly when ping is already just high when i connect). For others i notice the same. When hole server lags completely i sometimes ask to go a bit less packets, and it generally improves the situation.

zinx · Post by **zinx** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 11:39 am

Xeon_vl wrote:well on whatever which server i go , even if its etmain/etpub/etpro/whatever else, a higher maxpackets makes my ping move a bit up. It can be like + 10 ping on good servers, to extremely +50 (mostly when ping is already just high when i connect). For others i notice the same. When hole server lags completely i sometimes ask to go a bit less packets, and it generally improves the situation.

cl_maxpackets controls the maximum amount of packets the clients send the server, so if there are enough players sending flooding the server with full 100fps worth of packets (maxpackets 100, with a framerate >= 100), this isn't surprising.

Ping increase may be a side-effect of how the ping is calculated though - if you send later in the server frame, you get "higher" ping, even if you sent packets earlier that frame too. If you're sending more packets, you're likely to hit closer to the end of the frame.

MorsTua · Post by **MorsTua** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 3:48 am

about the evidences the answer is yes, i have evidences about what i say.

try yourself and see what happens when u put snaps 20 and 40

with 20 ping and lag >
with 40 ping and lag <

cl_maxpackets <100 = more lag
rate <18000 = more lag

and if u think that they dont make any difference,well from my 6 years in wolf and 2 in et, i can say you are wrong or just a noob.
------------

Anothe thing, etpro hitboxes SUCK! and THIS DEMO made yesterday night, proof it..

And now, try to deny what i said.

wipeout · Post by **wipeout** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 5:23 am

MorsTua wrote:try yourself and see what happens when u put snaps 20 and 40

with 20 ping and lag >
with 40 ping and lag <

With sv_fps 20 the server will send 20 snapshots in either case.

MorsTua wrote:cl_maxpackets <100 = more lag
rate <18000 = more lag

cl_maxpackets is fps dependent. So saying "<100 = more lag" is a pretty stupid statement as you don't know how many packets someone really sends.
With the server creating 20 snapshots/s, 20+ packet/s by the client should be perfectly fine.
Too low rate will only make "your world" lag.

When will he be reunited with his long lost brother LilleBror?

deej · Post by **deej** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:15 am

MorsTua wrote:and if u think that they dont make any difference,well from my 6 years in wolf and 2 in et, i can say you are wrong or just a noob.
------------

Anothe thing, etpro hitboxes SUCK! and THIS DEMO made yesterday night, proof it..

And now, try to deny what i said.

I deny what you say with my 6 years in Wolf and 3 years in ET.