Zandronum 3.0

News and events are posted here. Threads also show up in the Latest News section.
User avatar
WhiteAce
Forum Regular
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:20 am
Location: Not in this world

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#61

Post by WhiteAce » Sun Sep 10, 2017 5:18 pm

Yeah there's definitely no difference between the frame rate dip in GZDoom 1.8.6 and Zandronum 3.0, they run pretty much the same which means I might have to wait until I get a better computer or wait until a release that brings that brings the performance up to a later version of GZDoom.

On the bright side I noticed that RandomPlayerStarts works in Zandronum 3.0 which helps out quite a bit, I thought I'd have to do a script at the start of the map in order to address this.

User avatar
Dusk
Developer
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 9:59 pm
Location: Turku

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#62

Post by Dusk » Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:42 pm

We also have a link to GZDoom 1.8.6 and other builds of relevance like this in the upstream downloads folder:
https://zandronum.com/downloads/upstream/

User avatar
Tormentor667
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:53 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#63

Post by Tormentor667 » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:12 pm

Thanks for your hard work and dedication!

User avatar
WhiteAce
Forum Regular
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:20 am
Location: Not in this world

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#64

Post by WhiteAce » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:17 pm

Dusk wrote:We also have a link to GZDoom 1.8.6 and other builds of relevance like this in the upstream downloads folder:
https://zandronum.com/downloads/upstream/
I might try a few versions later up from 1.8.6 to see if they work and if they do, I'll post what works to make it easier.

grrfield
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 7:52 am

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#65

Post by grrfield » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:42 am

grrfield wrote:but Torr, the spycam in survival mode is lagging like hell....
Can you elaborate? This works fine for me. Also, it won't hurt to try with a fresh INI.


I seriously thought it was a general problem. My first post was just to verify if other people were experiencing the same problem (this does not seem to be the case apparently). I won't raise a ticket yet, as i'm currently collecting further information.

To further elaborate on the matter: Since i mostly die early on in the coop/survival stuff (due to not enough skills), i get a lot to spectate the remainder of the round. With zan 3.0 (as opposed to the testing versions and 2.1.2), it seems that in spectator mode the movement of the guy i'm following is stuttering heavily now (all doomguys, all pings). Otherwise this was very smooth (taking into account the ping of other players). I said "lag" in my first post, but this seems not to be a correct description, i really is stuttering, not lag. "Heavily" means: "very unpleasant to watch comfortably", "like a streaming movie you watch on the internet, but better should lower resolution, since you are exceeding slightly your bandwith". Not a huge problem, but very noticeable....

I keep you posted, but most likely it is just my configuration (server-side or client side) i have to dig in some further. Oh yeah, I started with a new config. ini (client side).

regards,

User avatar
Gul Dukat
New User
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:58 pm

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#66

Post by Gul Dukat » Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:08 pm

It'd be nice that grandvoid updated their servers to 3.0.

Konda
Forum Regular
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#67

Post by Konda » Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:14 pm

Gul Dukat wrote:It'd be nice that grandvoid updated their servers to 3.0.
It usually takes them a week or two. But a highly accurate estimate would be "under a month".

User avatar
Afrit
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 1:15 pm

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#68

Post by Afrit » Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:35 pm

that's sad to hear :^(

User avatar
ibm5155
Addicted to Zandronum
Posts: 1628
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
Contact:

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#69

Post by ibm5155 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:43 pm

WhiteAce wrote:I am actually experiencing a lot of frame rate dipping between 0-5 FPS in single player while attempting to play what seems like almost every mod (Nazi Zombies: Doom Edition namely has the worst frame rate dip), now I tested all of these on GZDoom and ZDoom they worked just fine and without frame rate dipping keep in mind this is not a gaming PC and I probably shouldn't even be playing anything on it in the first place, should I submit a ticket?
do you have windows 10 AND an intel hd 4000 and older? if so I have a bad news for you.
Projects
Cursed Maze: DONE, V2.0
Zombie Horde - ZM09 map update: [3/15/13]
Need help with English? Then you've come to the right place!

<this post is proof of "Decline">

User avatar
WhiteAce
Forum Regular
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:20 am
Location: Not in this world

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#70

Post by WhiteAce » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:08 pm

Yes it appears both of those are the case, ever since windows 10 has been constantly forced down my throat through a feeding tube, I am also 100% sure I will jump with joy at the bad news.

User avatar
ibm5155
Addicted to Zandronum
Posts: 1628
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 9:32 pm
Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
Contact:

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#71

Post by ibm5155 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:38 pm

At least its reported here https://zandronum.com/tracker/view.php?id=3116
We cant do nothing but pray for intel :rolleyes: :evil:
or, type vid_fps 1 on console all the time you start zandronum

EDIT: if it doesnt hurt, Torr, could 3.1 have a support to store the vid_fps cvar so I could always start with that enabled or disabled?
Projects
Cursed Maze: DONE, V2.0
Zombie Horde - ZM09 map update: [3/15/13]
Need help with English? Then you've come to the right place!

<this post is proof of "Decline">

User avatar
WhiteAce
Forum Regular
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:20 am
Location: Not in this world

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#72

Post by WhiteAce » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:48 pm

I could possibly make a custom script myself and make it so it autoloads with the mods when I want to play single player, I'd just have to find the time and attention span for it, I am pretty sure consolecommand doesn't work anymore? Or at least not that I know of but I'll find a way, I should also let you know it worked regardless, now I can finally get on with my work to some extent.

User avatar
Peanut
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 4:15 am

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#73

Post by Peanut » Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:49 pm

Torr Samaho wrote:better support for large maps with many actors due to a new buffering system. Everything else is collected in the detailed changelog below.
Does this mean that annoying displacement bug with sky portals is fixed or closer to being fixed? WDI01 of WhoDunIt for instance, I built that skybox with anchors throughout that entire map without the knowledge of that limitation and it was always a coin toss whether it worked properly or not. This is merely for future reference.

User avatar
Empyre
Zandrone
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 6:41 am
Location: Garland, TX, USA

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#74

Post by Empyre » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:30 pm

Peanut wrote:
Torr Samaho wrote:better support for large maps with many actors due to a new buffering system. Everything else is collected in the detailed changelog below.
Does this mean that annoying displacement bug with sky portals is fixed or closer to being fixed? WDI01 of WhoDunIt for instance, I built that skybox with anchors throughout that entire map without the knowledge of that limitation and it was always a coin toss whether it worked properly or not. This is merely for future reference.
No, that is talking about maps with several thousands of monsters. When you try to connect to a server after a lot of the monsters have been killed or awakened, the server was trying to send all that information in one tic, which it couldn't, so you would be disconnected for losing more than 1024 packets. That is greatly improved now because the server now limits how much it sends in one tic, and the buffer is increased from 1024 packets to 2048. So, if a server is hosting holyhell, for example, and players are halfway through the map, you will now be able to connect and join the game, where that would have been impossible before.

The bug you're talking about might or might not be fixed, but it is not the bug mentioned in the quote you quoted.
"For the world is hollow, and I have touched the sky."

User avatar
-Jes-
Frequent Poster Miles card holder
Posts: 971
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:55 am
Location: Void Zone

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#75

Post by -Jes- » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:50 pm

At last, the glory that is 2.7.1 code in an official stable Zandronum release.

User avatar
Peanut
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 4:15 am

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#76

Post by Peanut » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:16 pm

Empyre wrote: The bug you're talking about might or might not be fixed, but it is not the bug mentioned in the quote you quoted.
Looks to me like the change described is merely between client/server interaction based on the amount of actors in one map, thus how I came to my question on whether or not this would effect the behavior of skybox actors and make them more reliable when the map is loaded in. Considering the issue with the skybox portal seemed to be server side considering whenever the map was loaded in, everyone experienced the same issues in the exact same places. To my recollection, that was the conclusion that was reached when WDI was still in testing. If it was an issue between client/server packet transfer (be it packet size or what have you), I'd think that an improvement like this would help resolve an issue like this. The example in my head being: Clients load into map but the server can't properly spawn in every single anchor actor or something happens between the packets being sent to the clients due to the amount on the map, thus leading to the sky breaking in multiple sectors or just completely so the server resolves to sit there with broken anchors. Of course, I could be mistaken on how this works because as of now I can't really recall any other actors being effected this way, but that's the first thought that popped in my mind when I read about the packet increase.

User avatar
Empyre
Zandrone
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 6:41 am
Location: Garland, TX, USA

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#77

Post by Empyre » Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:05 am

Peanut wrote:
Empyre wrote: The bug you're talking about might or might not be fixed, but it is not the bug mentioned in the quote you quoted.
Looks to me like the change described is merely between client/server interaction based on the amount of actors in one map, thus how I came to my question on whether or not this would effect the behavior of skybox actors and make them more reliable when the map is loaded in. Considering the issue with the skybox portal seemed to be server side considering whenever the map was loaded in, everyone experienced the same issues in the exact same places. To my recollection, that was the conclusion that was reached when WDI was still in testing. If it was an issue between client/server packet transfer (be it packet size or what have you), I'd think that an improvement like this would help resolve an issue like this. The example in my head being: Clients load into map but the server can't properly spawn in every single anchor actor or something happens between the packets being sent to the clients due to the amount on the map, thus leading to the sky breaking in multiple sectors or just completely so the server resolves to sit there with broken anchors. Of course, I could be mistaken on how this works because as of now I can't really recall any other actors being effected this way, but that's the first thought that popped in my mind when I read about the packet increase.
This looks like a job for an experiment!
"For the world is hollow, and I have touched the sky."

User avatar
Peanut
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 4:15 am

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#78

Post by Peanut » Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:53 pm

Empyre wrote: This looks like a job for an experiment!
If I could round up enough people, say a good 12-16 clients and just play that map on a loop , I'd love to see if this change has made any substantial improvements. If so, I can be confident in taking a map like Echo Ridge and doing to it what I had originally intended.

User avatar
SkyBreach
New User
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:55 pm
Location: Spain
Contact:

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#79

Post by SkyBreach » Sat Sep 16, 2017 4:22 pm

I received the good news through the zandronum group of steam, great work my friends! yay!

A new era is coming with great potential for new multiplayer mods.
Image

scrooloose
New User
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 7:58 pm
Clan: HOMOSQUAD
Clan Tag: HOMOSQUAD

Re: Zandronum 3.0

#80

Post by scrooloose » Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:42 pm

I was about to masturbate to porn but then I saw this announcement and instantly blew my load! Thanks for all your hard work!

Post Reply