Zandronum TDM League : Discussion

[Nati46]

Well for the record I am one of the ZDC organisers so you only complimented me there, IDE :)
Also being a duel tourney it was simpler to set rules and such (it is a continuation of the STDL which Legion organised so it already had a stable foundation to start from)
Ch0wW You do have some good points there but this thread has had its fair share of slack in it already as you can see, I think you should try and make forum topics/svn requests regarding the issues in zandro, because this is filling the thread too quickly....

[Torr Samaho]

JCD & I are 2 veteran DOS DOOM.EXE players, and we can respawn
instantly if we've been killed. That's the way Doom handled respawns.

And this is exactly what compat_instantrespawn is doing. You are complaining about the behavior of sv_forcerespawn though, but I don't recall that Vanilla Doom forced you to respawn. So you can't use Vanilla Doom as argument for or against our force respawn handling simply because there is no forced respawn behavior of Vanilla Doom.

Now, please allow me to ask a question. When Zandronum's DMFLAGS DF_FORCE_RESPAWN is on, you have to wait 2 seconds before respawning. But why forcing INSTANTLY if the dmflag for instant respawn is on?

As I said, sv_forcerespawn forces players to respawn as soon as they are allowed to respawn voluntarily. I don't say that this is the best way to handle this, but the definition is precise and reasonable.

Why not simply keeping the traditionnal respawn behaviour with DMFLAGS on? Everyone then would be happy for that.
I'll be happy if I could give at least some help ; that's after all a hobby I'm having with opensource game projects :)

Surely, it would be great to have another flag so that the players can further customize the behavior and get closer to what they are used from ZDaemon, if they want to. Just don't try to argue for this under the disguise of being more like Vanilla Doom, when Vanilla Doom never forced you to respawn.

Just look at the desync of the bullets and the puffs! Do you accept such a problem while playing TDM/CTF/1o1 , seeing none of your bullets were on the target, but that the target managed to be dead somehow?

Can you elaborate this? The server handles hit management and puff spawning, so this shouldn't happen. Or are you talking about the decals which are estimated by the client?

[Catastrophe]

Ch0wW, when you talk about respawning do you mean like how it was in that quakecon tournament where it acted like cl_instantrespawn was on but if you attempted to stall for time while dead it would force respawn you after 3 seconds?

Edit: Puffs are completely cosmetic and don't actually show where your bullets hit, they are off and a bit delayed in > 120 ping. Pay attention to the decal left over by your bullets instead, it has almost no delay and is exactly where your hitscan ends up going.

[Dusk]

Edit: Puffs are completely cosmetic and don't actually show where your bullets hit, they are off and a bit delayed in > 120 ping. Pay attention to the decal left over by your bullets instead, it has almost no delay and is exactly where your hitscan ends up going.

This could not be more wrong. The puffs are correct, decals are just client-estimated. They delay because it's the server spawning them on the clients.

[Catastrophe]

So I'm assuming if you shot at a wall, that delay between decal and puff should still be there?

Because when I play in GV, I see the decal of my SSG "hit" a player and then damage is struck a split second afterwards when the puff itself spawns. So, from my experience, if the decal actually hits a player from your clientside perspective, it's a guaranteed hit.

[Dusk]

The delay is there because the decals are client computed (and thus show up immediately) while the puff position information comes from the server and thus is subject to network lag. Same applies for blood sprites. Because the puff information comes from the server it shows exactly where the bullet actually hit. Your impression of the decals being right is probably just unlagged at work.

[IdeIdoom]

And this is why our ZDC is better than this tournament. Better organization, better admins, and no specific servers, just pick NJ, UK GV, FR GV, what ever you want to play on and do your matches.

Promoting another tournament like that... Just... WOW.
When some servermakers have been contacted when a tournament has been created, they're having at least one thing: constant support and quality for players, thing that any "what ever you want" server won't do.
So, I'll make it "WOW" too: my servers have been created only for competition purposes for players, having constant support and suggestions from players. Quality over Quantity. Guess that's why BaseQ is getting more and more popular when doing TDM/Duel in Europe rather than GV ones.

Eh, sorry for not including BaseQ in that countdown. But I am no server hoster or anything, but doesn't it mean if you make more servers from the same host, will you use more internet power (I guess) and would give out loss of packets? (Stupid question but what ever).

Also creating additional servers for nothing (Training ones, while you could've made just 1 single server to be trained and played on).

[Kara Kurt]

IdeIdoom im1phu0 Kiwi capo, hope you all will be able to play today.

Xaver Fsn76 when can we play?

[Ch0wW]

I am no server hoster or anything, but doesn't it mean if you make more servers from the same host, will you use more internet power (I guess) and would give out loss of packets? (Stupid question but what ever).

That can be right, but if you want to know, I'm a little paranoiac about stability, and packetlosses. We are using 2 machines for that, to limit such problems, and to be sure that we won't have such packetlosses.
At this very moment, I've heard no problems here or on IRC for any of the games we're hosting, ie: QW, CPMA, ZD, Zand. If it happened, we're comparing this with another "stable and trusted" player to make sure it's the server, or the client itself that is the cause of those packetlosses.
And if that was the case, we would have talked with the hoster about those problems, he would have fixed that for us.

Also creating additional servers for nothing (Training ones, while you could've made just 1 single server to be trained and played on).

Think in this way: One server is already used? Oh noes, how could we train, as GV UK sucks, and other servers have high ping?
That's like on Zdaemon: I made Zddl4 x2, Zduels32 x2, because if one was playing, others couldn't play if they had to make one. And that's right: if some are dueling, others go to the second one, and everyone is happy doing their match.

TBH, I don't care much of such unfounded reactions, but let me clarify this:
I hear lots of complain about some servers sucking (L@P, GV FR|UK, SDA mostly), or servers being impossible to play because other players are doing their game (that was last year with us, even during a private CTF, for a clan vs clan).
If you don't find a utility why some servers are there, then it must be you. And if some are really useless (we're deciding this with Fsn76, JCD, Oxyde, or even Chr0nique about those situations), then we're removing the server, and making another one that suits both us and the community.

And as I don't want to be off-topic, if there was any suggestion, there is a >> A THREAD << about our servers, so feel free to do so, and to continue this discussion.

[Nati46]

As Ch0wW Said, having a training server in addition to the tourney server prevents such a situation where the server is occupied and thus matches become delayed, or a result, not played in the first place.
I don't know if the current OvH (baseq/frgv's host) is as good as it was in supergod's days, but I recall him mentioning the cpu load not being higher than about 5-10% at peak times, and that he could probably host double the amount of servers he had at the time and still not have any problems. Obviously with AoW/ZH crowded servers hogging more resources than they did then the load is not as light, but rest assured that adding another 2 tdm servers won't make a noticable difference.

[Zakken]

IDL always had at least 4 servers for either practicing or housing actual games. Any tournament should have at least more than one server (preferably in the same cluster) dedicated to it.