James Tucker wrote:
IMHO
cl_interpolate could be locked, but i dont really see the need, what
does need to be done is to ensure that all players (ideally) are
playing the same game tick at the same time.
cl_interp should be locked at 0.1 or lower, any longer starts to get
quite noticeable. I play on 0.05 regularly right now, but I am a
broadband user.
cl_smooth surely should default to 0, or in the very least not be FORCED to 1.
I'd like to know:
cl_lagcomp_errorcheck, does it work? it feels good, but that may just
be a placebo. can't see anything on showhitboxes or showimpacts.
On 6/28/05, Ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree completely, cl_interp and cl_interpolate should be locked or at
least a cheat cvar.
I can see no reason why you should be able to change them apart from for
debugging purposes perhaps.
Alfred can you shed any light on this?
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Tucker
Sent: 28 June 2005 12:23
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [hlds] Re: sv_unlag and Ping
I thought as clayton did for quite some time, and the reason is simply
due to the use of the word "interpolation" and the fact that some
documentation (alhtough I cant find it) suggested cl_interp was a
'maximum' value.
The documentation at the link posted explains that the value of
cl_interp is a delay value, by which all game world representation is
re-wound prior to rendering. Unfortuantely, this means that the fight
is for lower values of cl_interp (you will see your enemies before
they see you). I don't know many other peoples direct opinions but I
know that it's possible to die in less than 50ms. It does beg the
question though, why cl_interp is not locked for internet gaming. I
would imagine it is similar however to the state of cl_smooth and the
choices of default updaterate and cmdrate values.
So much for cheats really, when you can clearly gain advantage by
optimising your cvars.
On 6/28/05, Ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's not how it works I'm afraid ;) It's all explained in this guide:
http://www.valve-erc.com/srcsdk/general/multiplayer_networking.html
It explains the interpolation, prediction, and lag compensation.
Regards,
Ben
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27 June 2005 17:59
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [hlds] Re: sv_unlag and Ping
I'm not totally sure about this, so anyone can feel free to correct me. I
think if you turn cl_interpolate of, but set cl_interp 0.5, then the
hitbox lags .5 seconds behinds the player. Some players might use this to
hit players that appear to have already hidden behind a wall, or run
through a crack in the doors... I've never tried it, as I try to get my
models and hitboxes in the same place, but thats what I've kind of
gathered.
Again, not totally sure on this...
Thanks for input though
On Monday, June 27, 2005 2:01 am, Ben said:
What are you worried about exactly? People using high interp values to
cause
annoyance to other players? Seems like a strange thing to worry about.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Dalberg
Sent: 26 June 2005 23:24
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [hlds] Re: sv_unlag and Ping
Would turning sv_unlag down to the highest acceptable limit on our
server keep people from using interpolate to have hitboxes lag behind
models? We usually accept a 125ms-140ms ping, and start kicking at
higher than that... (mainly as a way for the regs to get in). So should
we set sv_unlag to 0.140?
Thanks,
Steve
iceflatline wrote:
well, obviously...
Clayton Macleod wrote:
well, obviously, sv_unlag is what turns on the compensation for
clients' latency. It's what makes it so you don't have to lead your
shots in front of the model you see, so you can actually aim at the
model as if you had no latency at all. Turning it off just brings you
back to the quake 1 days when there was nothing done to compensate
for
latency at all. The only situation where you might consider turning
this off is on a LAN, but even then it makes no sense to turn it off,
really.
On 6/25/05, iceflatline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i agree. i run hl and tfc servers (iceflatline.homeip.net) with that
cvar enabled and it does seem to help clients with latency issues.
--
Clayton Macleod
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list
archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
i'm new to this and i've been reading this thread with interest as i
have a 16k upload and a 128k download on my connection (1 megabit fibre
optic cable) and i want to run 8 players on my cs 1.6 server (currently
6) now my rates are set low to around 6000 but it get's really laggy
when 7 ppl are playing. I also have 2 computers on the same lan as the
server but it wuld seem that that effects the lag to (as if they were
talkin to it form outside the network) now i would like to know what
value's i should use to try and compensate for the realitivly low
general connection speed. any thought's welcome but please try and be as
descriptive as you can. i need to know exactly what to do
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
