Zandronum Chat on our Discord Server Get the latest version: 3.1
Source Code
My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap | Zandronum Issue Support Ranking | Rules | My Account
  

View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ]
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
0002854Zandronum[All Projects] Suggestionpublic2016-10-04 06:042024-01-29 21:53
ReporterJKist3 
Assigned To 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
StatusresolvedResolutionfixed 
PlatformMicrosoftOSWindowsOS VersionXP/Vista/7
Product Version2.1 
Target Version3.1Fixed in Version3.1 
Summary0002854: Exclude BFG tracers from unlagged reconcilation
DescriptionIt's typical for fps games to apply unlagged reconciliation to hitscan type weapons but to leave projectiles untouched. This is because projectiles are a part of the environment that players must be able to interact with. The hitscan bfg tracers in doom come from a projectile weapon. BFG damage gets dealt due to direction of the bfg projectile, position of the firing player, and position of the opponent player. These are all factors that players need to interact with to deal and avoid bfg damage. When unlagged reconciliation is applied to bfg tracers the opponent player no longer has control over his position in order to dodge the tracers which is undesirable for the same reason unlagged reconciliation rockets are undesirable.

This should not be hard to implement. The question is should excluding the bfg tracers be a server dm_flag or is this unnecessary optionality. For what it's worth, both odamex and zdaemon exclude bfg tracers with no option to enable unlagged for them, and I don't personally have a need for them to ever be unlagged. But zandronum has a larger coop scene than these 2 ports and while unlagging bfg is undesirable in a competitive deathmatch, maybe it may be desirable against monsters?
Attached Files

- Relationships

-  Notes
User avatar (0015753)
Karakurt (reporter)
2016-10-04 11:06
edited on: 2016-10-04 11:12

 Supported. Supported it because I do think getting killed by BFG tracers (unlagged-assisted) behind every single corner can be utterly annoying lengthwise, especially if people are spamming it.

If someone is spamming BFG, he's clearly wanting to kill his opponent as soon as possible and no matter how he does it, which means he most likely doesn't give a damn about applying himself to the game, so why get further more help with unlagged tracers?

Myself I've been experiencing it quite alot agains't high ping players. Here's an example of what it is to get killed each shot while hidden in advance already:'https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNeYaTtqTOc [^]'

So yeah, a Dmflag of it would be a good thing I think.
User avatar (0015755)
FascistCat (reporter)
2016-10-04 16:52

 I think it's equally annoying to get killed with both hitscans and tracers while being behind a wall. The inverse happens when unlagged is off: high ping players get killed behind walls by low ping players.

However, enabling a DMFLAG to exclude tracers could be good for those who consider unlagged tracers are such an imbalance. Although IMHO, disabling unlagged reconciliation in general in such cases should be enough.
User avatar (0015756)
Catastrophe (reporter)
2016-10-04 17:58

 DMflag? Yes please. Completely turn it off? Nah.
User avatar (0016044)
Animal (reporter)
2016-10-18 03:41
edited on: 2016-10-18 03:42

 8 year dueler here! This is something I been wanting the dev team to work on for quiet awhile. It can get tedious and annoying at times when you dodge the tracer successfully and you just end up dead! I fully support this!
User avatar (0016089)
Doomkid (reporter)
2016-10-24 10:20

 This DMflag should definitely be implemented, will make play far more consistent between ports (and is overall just more accurate to lag-free behavior)
(0016090)
capodecima (viewer)
2016-10-24 11:25

 Hmm i dont think this "fix" not dying behind corners when you play higher pinger. Bcz this happened on odamex all time...
User avatar (0016094)
Dusk (developer)
2016-10-27 22:13

 Is there anyone against this behavior? Because to me this sounds like if it's added as a dmflag, it's just going to be enabled on all duel servers anyway so adding a dmflag would be stupid. Rather we should exclude bfg tracers unconditionally.
User avatar (0016102)
FascistCat (reporter)
2016-10-28 02:19

 What about other gamemodes? Are tracers going to be excluded from unlagged reconciliation from all modes because of this? If so, then I'll have to change my stance.

Even so, why is it not viable to make it a DMFlag? What if I some day someone wants to enable U.R. on tracers again on a Duel server?
User avatar (0016103)
Dusk (developer)
2016-10-28 08:56
edited on: 2016-10-28 11:04

 For any dmflag, it is set server-wide. Thus the question of whether it's active or not is not up to a player, but the server host. Also, there's enough dmflags as it is. We're not going to add a flag for every single minor detail someone wants to disable. The more dmflags there is, the more hassle hosting a server becomes. Therefore adding dmflags adds burden to server hosts.

Thus, for a dmflag to be considered I need the host of an actively played duel server to state that they would restore BFG unlagged should such a dmflag actually be added. Otherwise it's going to be an unconditional change.
(0016104)
capodecima (viewer)
2016-10-28 16:15

 Thing is. If you nuke BFG tracers totaly. I am pretty sure >90% players dont see any difference. Not even saying you have this ticket supportin from 3 TOP players on this port so i dont actually understand what we are talking about here. :D
(0016106)
capodecima (viewer)
2016-10-28 18:01

 Guy just added to against this? Just why. Am i missing something. Isnt it common for all FPS games leave their projectile type guns without unlagged? :???: If i understand it right the unlagged just compensate the lag, where you dont have to aim bfr your target but just aim on them. This stuff where you see opponnonent in different position , than is on server bla bla. All this is all useful only for hitscan guns? Like how is actually benefical unlagged for projctile guns besides it create some creepy situations like dying totaly off the bfg tracker...
User avatar (0016108)
FascistCat (reporter)
2016-10-28 20:03

 I'm not against it totally. I'm against making this behavior de facto for all gamemodes with no chance to revert it. I don't care what other games do with their unlagged reconciliation methods right now.
(0016109)
capodecima (viewer)
2016-10-28 20:11
edited on: 2016-10-28 20:11

 OK thing is. It is for sure stupid in duels/CTF (competitive environment). So how is this benefical//useful/needed in lets say survival, coop, mm8bdm i dunno what you guys play here. Enlighten me pleas.
User avatar (0016110)
FascistCat (reporter)
2016-10-28 21:29

 You are missing the point. Why should tracers be excluded from the reconciliation if those are treated as hitscans? The BFG ball is a projectile but the tracers are not. So why must other modes like LMS and DM (you forgot those btw) should be affected by these changes too? If the competitive aspect of a duel or a CTF match is so important then completely turn off unlagged and avoid being killed behind a corner by a tracer or a SSG blast.
User avatar (0016111)
JKist3 (reporter)
2016-10-28 21:30

 A game where non-players are the target of your weapons (monsters are only example I can think of) might make unlagging everything (tracers as well as rockets and plasma) desirable. However, I dont know if unlagged code is even applied to monsters, maybe it's only used on player entities, which would make this a non issue.

I don't think there is a situation where you'd want unlagged tracers but not want unlagged rockets/plasma/etc. But there is currently no option for unlagged rockets/plasma and nobody seems to be asking for it.....
User avatar (0016112)
JKist3 (reporter)
2016-10-28 22:17

 FascistCat: in fps games, point and click guns are usually unlagged while other types are not. This is because point and click guns simply do immediate damage, there is no dodging their attack. Sure, you may move around in a way to try and get your opponent to miss you, but there is no actual dodging them, your opponent has to miss. Because of this, the server can use unlagged code to give the shooting player an accurate point and click shot without hurting other players in the server.

Contrast this with a projectile, say a rocket launcher. When a player fires a rocket, the server spawns a rocket in the map. Other players need to make sure that their position coordinates and the position coordinates of that rocket arent ever the same while that rocket travels through the level. Because players have control of their movement, they have some measure of control over making sure this doesn’t happen. When you “unlag” this rocket, other players may successfully avoid having their positions intersect the rocket position but still get “hit” because their position was at one point in a location the rocket would be in at a later time. Hopefully you can see why this is not good. BFG tracers follow the same principle. When a bfg is fired, other players need to make sure their positions don’t align with their opponents in a way such that when the damage cone comes out they get hit. When you “unlag” the tracers, players no longer have control over this in an accurate manner.

Hope this makes sense.

If you are not fighting another player, unlagged weapons of all types may make sense. See my above post on that. However, since nobody really seems to be asking for the ability to unlag rockets/plasma in these modes, I don’t think it will be an issue for those players if bfg tracers are excluded from unlagged. In fact, they probably won’t notice or care.
User avatar (0016113)
FascistCat (reporter)
2016-10-29 03:54

 I appreciate the explanation. However I don't agree with the part where you say the tracers follow the same principle as rockets or BFG ball as tracers are not projectiles but are attacks treated as hitscans. I agree with you mostly about unlagging rockets and other projectiles, though.

What makes more sense is the part where you actually state the player has to hide from the damage cone. Still, it follows the same principle as avoiding a SSG blast with unlagged turned on, getting off the enemy's FOV or damage cone or actually hide behind a corner to avoid getting hit.

That's why I'm against this change being applied unconditionally and not being able to toggle it on/off via a DMFlag.
User avatar (0016114)
JKist3 (reporter)
2016-10-29 11:17

 “What makes more sense is the part where you actually state the player has to hide from the damage cone. Still, it follows the same principle as avoiding a SSG blast with unlagged turned on, getting off the enemy's FOV or damage cone or actually hide behind a corner to avoid getting hit.”

this is just not true. There is no avoiding an ssg blast . If you are potentially viewable all the ssg player has to do is point at you and click. This is why unlagged works well for point and click weapons, it uses the shooting client’s view angle instead of the real view angle on the server and everything is still fine because you are a valid target at both angles. To get hit by a bfg tracer you have to be in a specific location relative to the bfg firing opponent at a specific time (few tics after the ball explodes). Here the exact angle between you and the opponent matters. You have control over your movement and need to make sure you are not in the cone location. When you unlag tracers you can still get “hit” even if you are not in the damage cone because your player position used to be in a location where the damage cone would be when it came out. It’s just like the unlagged rocket example. You can see the unlagged rocket coming at you, dodge it correctly, and the server can still determine you got hit because your former position coordinates are the same as the future position coordinates of that rocket.
User avatar (0016123)
FascistCat (reporter)
2016-10-30 17:23

 So what you're trying to say is that the tracer attack, aside from being treated as hitscan, is indirect and not initiated by the attacker but the explosion. Seems fair enough and a solid argument.

However for me it seemed that putting the case of being killed behind a corner because of unlagged as an argument for defending this issue was not solid enough as that also happens, as I stated before, with other hitscan weapons like the SSG. Also, you can see in the video KaraKurt provided that the player in this case didn't spam it like crazy.

Why treat the BFG differently? Why not putting the DMFlag? High ping players will have a hard time using it if they are not used to time and anticipate their shots (aka playing without unlagged). For those reasons, if the tracers are an imbalance toggle the DMFlag and presto. Make a sv_nounlaggedtracers flag with default value of 1 and that should ease the burden on hosts having to configure another aspect of the server.
User avatar (0016133)
JKist3 (reporter)
2016-11-01 11:24

 So I have no problem with a dmflag if that's what it takes to get tracers excluded from unlagged. I was trying to explain the reasons to you for excluding tracers because I think your opposition stems partially from you not really understanding the issue.

Why not make a flag? Well this is what Dusk is trying to determine. If there is enough demand for continuing to play with unlagged tracers then a flag makes sense. If the flag will never be used, then it just adds messiness. I think most demand for unlagged tracers will be from people who have no issue with zandronum currently and as a result are hesitant about changes they don't really understand, which i certainly don't blame. I'm just quite confident on my stance of excluding tracers here.
User avatar (0016135)
FascistCat (reporter)
2016-11-01 20:22

 Fair enough. Thanks for taking your time to explain this. After re-reading several times and watching some unlagged videos I've understood at some degree the logic behind your reasoning but my opinion and reasons to implement this via DMFlag stay the same.
User avatar (0018267)
JKist3 (reporter)
2017-09-11 06:55

 This seems to have been sidetracked because of the decision on whether to add excess dmflags. It's a shame because there is clear support for this feature and it can be a deal breaker for some things (for instance there is a planned high profile d5m1 tournament that chose zdaemon over zandronum because of this bfg issue). What is the best step forward? Maybe to make the change in a test version and let FascistCat and others test it and see if they think the old way is necessary as an extra option?
User avatar (0018307)
JKist3 (reporter)
2017-09-18 04:32
edited on: 2017-09-18 04:32

 Talked to Torr and he thinks the dmflag option is best. Hopefully this can get added soon as it is a relatively easy code change afaik.
User avatar (0018485)
AlexMax (developer)
2017-10-08 15:06
edited on: 2017-10-08 15:10

 Count me as one who is not a fan of new flags. But not because I dislike the idea, but more because I feel like there is one version of "unlagged" that actually makes temporal sense, and giving server owners more options gives them more rope to hang themselves with picking the wrong option. Besides, you need to select a default, don't you?

"Unfairness" shouldn't enter into the equation, as unlagged is an inherently shooter-favoring hack. Again, it should be whatever makes temporal sense

After some consideration, I actually agree with JKist's version of things. As long as BFG projectiles aren't unlagged, the tracers that shoot from them shouldn't be unlagged either, because the only 'trigger' for them is something that is only visible through the server. If projectiles are ever unlagged, this should be reconsidered.

However, this brings up a question - is there some way it can be solved in a generic way? After all, disabling unlagged on the BFG tracker attack is easy, but what if somebody makes their own DECORATE weapon that behaves similarly by shooting something based on the position of a projectile? Is there some way that DECORATE's state machine could be "flagged" somehow, so any shot that is initiated directly by a player is unlagged, but if a projectile triggers a shot it's not?
User avatar (0018649)
Leonard (developer)
2017-10-29 16:22

 I think it's important for people to completely understand the issue before using the flag.
Quote from AlexMax
As long as BFG projectiles aren't unlagged, the tracers that shoot from them shouldn't be unlagged either, because the only 'trigger' for them is something that is only visible through the server. If projectiles are ever unlagged, this should be reconsidered.

Now, this would make sense and yes, I would agree with you, if the tracers did shoot from the projectile but what really happens is they in fact shoot from the shooter instead.
We should not forget that the shooter himself has a say.
A good example to illustrate this is: I shoot my BFG ball behind the corner of a wall and immediately after I look behind so as to make my tracers hit my target.
This is exactly what unlagged was made for: when I shoot something that I can see on my screen, I should hit that very thing.
You have to understand: this is exactly the same thing as getting hit by an SSG blast from behind a corner only here I don't need to directly aim at you.
I can agree that the BFG ball being predicted on clients would make things clearer but it would still not make temporal sense as you say.

Anyways, a dmflag was introduced in 3.1 for this.
User avatar (0023043)
Ru5tK1ng (updater)
2024-01-29 21:53

 This was added in 3.1 as a dmflag.

Issue Community Support
This issue is already marked as resolved.
If you feel that is not the case, please reopen it and explain why.
Supporters: Karakurt FascistCat Catastrophe JKist3 DemonSphere Watermelon BackFlips Animal Doomkid capodecima Mr. Crispy AlexMax
Opponents: unknownna StrikerMan780

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2016-10-04 06:04 JKist3 New Issue
2016-10-04 11:06 Karakurt Note Added: 0015753
2016-10-04 11:08 Karakurt Note Edited: 0015753 View Revisions
2016-10-04 11:12 Karakurt Note Edited: 0015753 View Revisions
2016-10-04 16:52 FascistCat Note Added: 0015755
2016-10-04 17:58 Catastrophe Note Added: 0015756
2016-10-09 19:00 Torr Samaho Product Version 3.0-beta => 2.1
2016-10-18 03:41 Animal Note Added: 0016044
2016-10-18 03:42 Animal Note Edited: 0016044 View Revisions
2016-10-24 10:20 Doomkid Note Added: 0016089
2016-10-24 11:25 capodecima Note Added: 0016090
2016-10-27 22:13 Dusk Assigned To => Dusk
2016-10-27 22:13 Dusk Status new => assigned
2016-10-27 22:13 Dusk Note Added: 0016094
2016-10-27 22:13 Dusk Assigned To Dusk =>
2016-10-27 22:13 Dusk Status assigned => feedback
2016-10-28 02:19 FascistCat Note Added: 0016102
2016-10-28 08:56 Dusk Note Added: 0016103
2016-10-28 08:57 Dusk Note Edited: 0016103 View Revisions
2016-10-28 11:04 Dusk Note Edited: 0016103 View Revisions
2016-10-28 11:04 Dusk Note Edited: 0016103 View Revisions
2016-10-28 16:15 capodecima Note Added: 0016104
2016-10-28 18:01 capodecima Note Added: 0016106
2016-10-28 20:03 FascistCat Note Added: 0016108
2016-10-28 20:11 capodecima Note Added: 0016109
2016-10-28 20:11 capodecima Note Edited: 0016109 View Revisions
2016-10-28 21:29 FascistCat Note Added: 0016110
2016-10-28 21:30 JKist3 Note Added: 0016111
2016-10-28 21:30 JKist3 Status feedback => new
2016-10-28 22:17 JKist3 Note Added: 0016112
2016-10-29 03:54 FascistCat Note Added: 0016113
2016-10-29 11:17 JKist3 Note Added: 0016114
2016-10-30 17:23 FascistCat Note Added: 0016123
2016-11-01 11:24 JKist3 Note Added: 0016133
2016-11-01 20:22 FascistCat Note Added: 0016135
2017-09-11 06:55 JKist3 Note Added: 0018267
2017-09-18 04:32 JKist3 Note Added: 0018307
2017-09-18 04:32 JKist3 Note Edited: 0018307 View Revisions
2017-10-08 15:06 AlexMax Note Added: 0018485
2017-10-08 15:10 AlexMax Note Edited: 0018485 View Revisions
2017-10-29 16:22 Leonard Note Added: 0018649
2017-10-29 16:22 Leonard Status new => needs testing
2017-10-29 16:22 Leonard Target Version => 3.1
2024-01-29 21:53 Ru5tK1ng Note Added: 0023043
2024-01-29 21:53 Ru5tK1ng Status needs testing => resolved
2024-01-29 21:53 Ru5tK1ng Resolution open => fixed
2024-01-29 21:53 Ru5tK1ng Fixed in Version => 3.1




Questions or other issues? Contact Us.

Links

Copyright © 2000 - 2024 MantisBT Team
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker