"Please stop." You are (yet again) not contributing with your message, instead you just uselessly spammed tons of inboxes.
It is indeed a legitimate question, and in the right place. Sent from my iPhone On 02.05.2013, at 23:31, Absurd Minds <goabs...@absurdminds.net> wrote: Please stop. On May 2, 2013 5:24 PM, "Timur 'grammaton' Celikkesen" <gramma...@gmail.com> wrote: > In the past Valve argued in a very reasonable way why they forced the > tickrates for other Source-Engine Games. > > We also know from the CS:GO changelog that we already had Bugs related to > Tickrates higher than 64. > > One of the causal conclusions from Vitalys explaination could be that it > is generally better to leave it on 64. > > Valve is running their own Servers on Tickrate 64. > > So the question is why are the logical arguments for other Source-Engine > Games not taken into consideration for CS:GO? > > Unfortunately the last real information regarding netcode is more than a > year old (a tweet from Chet Faliszek via the csgo_dev Account) and that > CS:GO uses an updated Version from the Netcode done by Kirsch (who also did > the original Code for 1.6) > > If this “updated” means that arguments for other source-engine games are > not effective for CS:GO and that documentation like the Latency > Compensation Methods from Bernier or other older informations from Kirsch > are obsolete related to this specific subject... i am fine with that... > > I just want to know where is the technical difference between other > Source-Engine Games and CS:GO > > So please stay cool....it’s generally just a legitimate question after > reading Vitalys Mail ....not an attempt to start an unnecessary discussion > ;-) > > > Cheers > *From:* Saul Rennison <saul.renni...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, May 02, 2013 9:56 PM > *To:* csgo_servers@list.valvesoftware.com > *Subject:* Re: [Csgo_servers] csgo update > > Let's not start a "discussion" on tick rate, please! > > > On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Timur 'grammaton' Celikkesen < > gramma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> This is really a very good explaination and as i understand it – you >> can take this also as an argument to finally force CS:GO to a specific >> tickrate. >> >> I was always a bit confused why the argumentation for the tickrate 66 >> force at CS:S (which is logical) was not used for CS:GO (with 64 Ticks). >> >> Related to this i want to call up one specific point in a previous >> changelog... >> >> -Limiting physics timestep to 64 to eliminate high tickrate physics bugs, >> such as bouncing guns >> >> >> As long as you give the choice to select the tickrate, the community will >> always choose the higher value – regardless if it makes sense or not. The >> competative part of the community will always discuss about it. >> >> ...but as we all should remember.......it took just some few days after >> the tickrate force or fps cap... to end years of unnecessary discussions. >> >> just my 2 cents >> >> >> Cheers >> >> >> *From:* Vitaliy Genkin <vita...@valvesoftware.com> >> *Sent:* Thursday, May 02, 2013 6:56 PM >> *To:* csgo_servers@list.valvesoftware.com >> *Subject:* Re: [Csgo_servers] csgo update >> >> >> The value for *sv_maxusrcmdprocessticks* specifies maximum user commands >> that server will handle from a client in a single server frame tick. >> >> E.g. if you run a 128-tick server with max 3 usr cmds per tick, but your >> client runs at sub-64 fps then the client might experience incorrect >> prediction on movement and what you refer to as “lag”. The solutions here >> would be to: >> >> 1) disable the user commands limit completely on the server with >> *sv_maxusrcmdprocessticks >> 0* >> >> This would use old behavior and allows clients with any low framerate or >> high packet loss to fully execute all queued up movement packets on the >> server and allows clients to maliciously inject additional movement packets >> for execution on the server thus possibly attaining a higher than maximum >> movement speed or movement speed bursts observed by other players. >> >> 2) increase the user commands limit to allow slack for clients running >> with low fps with e.g. *sv_maxusrcmdprocessticks 16* >> >> The higher the value the higher “movement burst speed” can be observed by >> other clients and can be attained on a single server tick by a cheater or >> user with severe packet loss or low fps. >> >> When running 64-tick server with default setting of max 3 user commands >> per server tick clients might observe incorrect prediction on movement when >> running with sustained fps below 25 fps or when running at 64 fps but >> dropping 30% of packets or a combination of these unfavorable conditions. >> Even when a local client encounters incorrect prediction on movement all >> other players in the server still see their movement as smooth and from >> other players’ perspective the movement speed is always within max movement >> speed. >> >> To diagnose the case of clients being affected by the setting of max user >> commands you can use “sv_maxusrcmdprocessticks_warning” convar, setting it >> to 0 will spew all server ticks and clients for whom user commands are >> being dropped, setting it to 1 will spew no more than 1 message per second, >> setting it to default -1 disables the spew. Once you narrow it down to the >> client you can disable competitive min spec on the server and capture the >> client statistic with “net_graph 5” on the client. Let us know if you >> encounter clients running at sustained fps >= server tickrate without any >> packet loss that experience dropped user commands and we’ll be able to >> investigate further from here. >> >> Thank you, >> >> -Vitaliy >> >> *From:* csgo_servers-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto: >> csgo_servers-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] *On Behalf Of *Loïc Péron >> *Sent:* Thursday, May 02, 2013 9:23 AM >> *To:* csgo_servers@list.valvesoftware.com >> *Subject:* Re: [Csgo_servers] csgo update >> >> >> >> *sv_maxusrcmdprocessticks "3" makes players lag when moving.* >> >> >> >> *sv_maxusrcmdprocessticks "0" fix it.* >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Csgo_servers mailing list >> Csgo_servers@list.valvesoftware.com >> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/csgo_servers >> > > ------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Csgo_servers mailing list > Csgo_servers@list.valvesoftware.com > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/csgo_servers > > > _______________________________________________ > Csgo_servers mailing list > Csgo_servers@list.valvesoftware.com > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/csgo_servers > _______________________________________________ Csgo_servers mailing list Csgo_servers@list.valvesoftware.com https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/csgo_servers
_______________________________________________ Csgo_servers mailing list Csgo_servers@list.valvesoftware.com https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/csgo_servers
