Filters and Net-Code for ET:QW ~ got lag?

[SCDS_reyalP]

but the real reason i want to know about client/server authority is to see whether or not people will be able to write client based cheats

That doesn’t have anything to do with client authority. quake 3 engine games are server authoritative, and there are plenty of cheats for them. Some different kinds of cheats are possible if the client has more authority, but with current technology cheating will always be possible in FPS games.

[Etnies]

Is QW gonna use cd-keys to ban people true punkbuster? or is it gonne be more like et where you can get around a ban in 2 seconds

[jah]

Is QW gonna use cd-keys to ban people true punkbuster? or is it gonne be more like et where you can get around a ban in 2 seconds

you’ve answered that question all by yourself. cheers.

J

[ouroboro]

In Q3 games (including ET) sv_maxping tends to screw up and deny low ping players, so shouldn’t ever be set.

I disagree. The majority of players know by now that you can retry a couple times and get in - if your ping is truly under the limit. The fact that those retries are necessary is a flaw in the game, not in the logic of setting the limit. You don’t change sound behavior based on flawed code. You keep doing what’s right until someone fixes the problem.

There are no positive merits to high pings. Keeping them to a minimum is sound logic. That’s a truth as old as online gaming.

Even if that wasn’t the case, you can have a high ping and still have smooth gameplay. It smoothness has far more to do with the quality of the connection than latency. A player on an intercontinental link (say me in the west coast playing on a UK server) can have a solid 200 ping, and still have smooth gameplay.

Yes it can be “smooth,” but what good are nice smooth movements from 200ms ago? With excellent antilag like ETPro has, sure you can get away with it. But who knows what ET:QW will have? I do know that Q4 players are very particular about this issue because that game is unbearable if pings are even moderately high, so unless SD did a major overhaul I’d have to assume that a 200 ping will suck eggs.

I’m not saying high-pingers shouldn’t play. I’m saying they shouldn’t play on servers where they are high-pingers. OK I guess I am saying they shouldn’t play, in a roundabout way.

Q3 games have “cl_maxping” to limit what servers to display. Sadly, it’s set to 800 by default which renders it useless. I don’t have any D3 games installed, but I’m sure there’s something similar. It should be set to 200 or maybe 300 by default in ET:QW. Unfortunately this will never happen because players would think there weren’t many servers and that would look bad. But in all fairness, those “hidden” servers shouldn’t even be considered an option for them to begin with. And I would argue that a first experience at 200ms would have a more negative an impact on a new player than only seeing 2 or 3 servers where they hit everything they aimed at.

Perhaps a message:

“It appears there are no servers near you. Would you like to try a more distant server (note that your experience may not be as enjoyable, and other players may call you bad names)?”

[DG1]

I disagree. The majority of players know by now that you can retry a couple times and get in - if your ping is truly under the limit. The fact that those retries are necessary is a flaw in the game, not in the logic of setting the limit. You don’t change sound behavior based on flawed code. You keep doing what’s right until someone fixes the problem.

So you’re saying that if a problem is a bug then you should pretend the problem doesn’t exist and carry on as if in ignorance? To exaggerate for illustration, would you do the “right” thing and set sv_punkbuster 1 if the current version had a bad bug that would crash out say all players with ATI cards? It’s a flaw in the game, not in the logic of setting it. You don’t change sound behavior based on flawed code. You keep doing what’s right until someone fixes the problem.

I make decisions based on the problem in front of me, not what the problem ‘should’ be.

[SCDS_reyalP]

[quote=SCDS_reyalP]In Q3 games (including ET) sv_maxping tends to screw up and deny low ping players, so shouldn’t ever be set.

I disagree. The majority of players know by now that you can retry a couple times and get in - if your ping is truly under the limit. The fact that those retries are necessary is a flaw in the game, not in the logic of setting the limit. You don’t change sound behavior based on flawed code. You keep doing what’s right until someone fixes the problem.
[/quote]
You are saying that you should use a broken setting because the idea behind it is good. That is very silly.

Even if it weren’t broken, you are still wrong, because the whole concept of sv_maxping is pointless if you have decent antiwarp and hit code. A player with a high ping only hurts themself, not the gameplay of the other players on the server. So it should be their option how high a ping server they play on. sv_maxping (as opposed to cl_maxping) only makes sense if the high ping hurt the other players, which it doesn’t. Server browsers should probably default to sorting by ping, but just about everyone who plays online games knows that lower is better anyway.

[ouroboro]

So you’re saying that if a problem is a bug then you should pretend the problem doesn’t exist and carry on as if in ignorance?

To my knowledge the sv_maxping “problem” hasn’t even been nailed down definitively as a “bug” to begin with. It’s more of a “well-known and easily-tolerated oddity,” if you will. If it is a bug, it’s benign enough that I’m comfortable remaining ignorant, yes.

To exaggerate for illustration, would you do the “right” thing and set sv_punkbuster 1 if the current version had a bad bug that would crash out say all players with ATI cards?

You’re making a mountain out of a molehill. sv_maxping gets the intended job done with a minimum of side-effects, so its use shouldn’t be discouraged in my judgement. Your “illustration” is preposterous.

I make decisions based on the problem in front of me, not what the problem ‘should’ be.

Naturally. I wouldn’t suggest otherwise.

You are saying that you should use a broken setting because the idea behind it is good. That is very silly.

See above.

Even if it weren’t broken, you are still wrong, because the whole concept of sv_maxping is pointless if you have decent antiwarp and hit code. A player with a high ping only hurts themself, not the gameplay of the other players on the server. So it should be their option how high a ping server they play on. sv_maxping (as opposed to cl_maxping) only makes sense if the high ping hurt the other players, which it doesn’t.

Go play on an Australian server and ask the locals how they feel about you. Or, just think back several days to our test on your server.

[carnage]

Even if it weren’t broken, you are still wrong, because the whole concept of sv_maxping is pointless if you have decent antiwarp and hit code. A player with a high ping only hurts themself, not the gameplay of the other players on the server. So it should be their option how high a ping server they play on. sv_maxping (as opposed to cl_maxping) only makes sense if the high ping hurt the other players, which it doesn’t.

are you sure about this. if you had a high ping and step around a corner then dont you have more time to shoot the enemy guy since you can see him instantly and he is not yet aware that you have even moved round the corner and started fireing

[SCDS_reyalP]

Go play on an Australian server and ask the locals how they feel about you. Or, just think back several days to our test on your server.

I suspect ping wasn’t especially relevent to that. I’ve played on aus and UK servers. No one complained. The fact is, if the player you are shooting at is smooth, it doesn’t matter what their ping is. They can be warpy with a 100 average ping, and perfectly smooth with a 250 ping.

sv_maxping doesn’t work, and doesn’t really serve any useful purpose. So the logical thing to do is not to use it. Unless you live in upsidedown ouroboroland, where it is the thought that counts, never mind the facts.

are you sure about this. if you had a high ping and step around a corner then dont you have more time to shoot the enemy guy since you can see him instantly and he is not yet aware that you have even moved round the corner and started fireing

That isn’t how it works, and yes, I am quit sure about it. It is the low pinger who gets the reaction time advantage. The high pinger, by definition, sees things later than the low pinger.

edit: What you describe does happen, but the roles are reversed.

[ouroboro]

sv_maxping doesn’t work, and doesn’t really serve any useful purpose. So the logical thing to do is not to use it. Unless you live in upsidedown ouroboroland, where it is the thought that counts, never mind the facts.

I’d call that simple nonsense, but unfortunately it’s worse than that - it’s misleading lies.

sv_maxping does work, and it serves it’s intended purpose just fine. So the logical thing would be to:

A) Use it if you want to restrict HPBs from connecting to your server, or

B) Don’t use it if you don’t care.

If that’s upside down, you must have played a bit too long in OZ.

This isn’t about thoughts, it’s about the facts that I just laid down.

[kamikazee]

sv_maxping does work, and it serves it’s intended purpose just fine.

“sv_maxping” filters out players with a ping higher than that’s what set, though it sometimes needs some reconnecting. No discussion about the fact that it “works”.

Imo, what reyalP was really pointing to is the “intended purpose” you’re telling about. If there’s no reason to restrict high ping players, there’s no reason to use this kind of thing other than restricting your server to nearly-local players.

[ouroboro]

[quote=ouroboro]sv_maxping does work, and it serves it’s intended purpose just fine.

“sv_maxping” filters out players with a ping higher than that’s what set, though it sometimes needs some reconnecting. No discussion about the fact that it “works”.

Imo, what reyalP was really pointing to is the “intended purpose” you’re telling about. If there’s no reason to restrict high ping players, there’s no reason to use this kind of thing other than restricting your server to nearly-local players.[/quote]

Your post is redundant. I know what it does, I know that it works, and I know what reyalP is trying to say. I’m disagreeing with him. OH NOEZ!

My point is that server admins have a right to make use of all the tools at their disposal to try and craft a certain experience for their visitors. It doesn’t matter whether you or reyalP or anyone else is in favor of limiting pings. It doesn’t even matter if it makes sense or not. All that matters is whether or not admins wish to use it. Since it serves its intended purpose and the minor “niggle” associated with its use is common knowledge, admins should not be discouraged from using it simply because some people are not in favor of ping limitations.

I’m not in favor of skill upgrades. I don’t believe they make sense. I could argue (tongue in cheek) that giving a player reduced spread simply for playing longer than me while showing no particular prowess with light weapons is a “bug.” Its certainly more “backwards” than a ping limit. :moo: