Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account | 2025-07-27 08:59 UTC | ![]() |
My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap | Zandronum Issue Support Ranking | Rules | My Account |
View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||
ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||
0001100 | Zandronum | [All Projects] Suggestion | public | 2012-10-04 23:32 | 2013-06-08 19:08 | ||||
Reporter | Watermelon | ||||||||
Assigned To | |||||||||
Priority | normal | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | have not tried | ||||
Status | closed | Resolution | no change required | ||||||
Platform | OS | OS Version | |||||||
Product Version | 1.0 | ||||||||
Target Version | Fixed in Version | ||||||||
Summary | 0001100: Less of a tic delay for teleporting | ||||||||
Description | Zandronum has a few extra tics when you go through a teleporter. This is critical in duels, as it gives the opposing player enough time to eradicate the effectiveness of teleporters. ZDaemon allows players a much quicker response time when exiting a teleporter. Therefore, is it possible to control it via a new cvar like sv_teleportdelay [tick value], or possibly a new compat flag like compat_fastteleports? | ||||||||
Steps To Reproduce | 1. Go through a teleporter on Zandronum 2. Go through a teleporter on ZDaemon (try shooting when you go through and moving and notice a slight less tic delay | ||||||||
Additional Information | This can mean the difference between winning/losing duels when its close. I'd go through and then try to aim quick and shoot, though due to it locking you facing straight you cannot combat the player as easily. | ||||||||
Attached Files | |||||||||
![]() |
|
Blzut3 (administrator) 2012-10-04 23:41 |
Wouldn't the more important question here be which port is actually closer to vanilla? |
Watermelon (developer) 2012-10-05 01:21 edited on: 2012-10-05 01:21 |
I think Skulltag is closer to vanilla, but from a competitive standard it hurts players bad on this port. Many people who play from ZD complain about the teleporter delay being slightly longer on here, which makes play in maps like IDL2012-.wad MAP14 much more irritating to retrieve the flag. For those of us who play on all three ports competitively, a simple few tic delay completely changes the gameplay on a dramatic scale (or rather for something it was not intended). Therefore by adding something like sv_teleportdelay in gametics, it would allow servers to emulate ZDaemon behavior and assist in our competitive CTF and duel scene. I can't stress enough how this miniscule thing -- while seeming small -- is a very huge game-changer when playing duel or CTF maps. |
Qent (updater) 2012-10-05 04:31 |
I am curious about exactly what the difference is. Is Zandronum really closer to vanilla? Assuming it is, how many balance hacks from other engines is enough? Will we need compat_zdaemonsupershotgun and compat_droppeditemsfallthroughbridgethings? While more features and accommodation of typical competitive play are good things, I wouldn't call perfect ZDaemon emulation per se a worthy goal to strive for. Which brings up another question: how do Zandronum and ZDaemon compare to Odamex in this regard? Emulating ZDaemon might be premature. |
Watermelon (developer) 2012-10-05 14:46 |
So far the following are the only things required for meeting the competitive standards from ZD/Oda: - ssg (easily modifiable through decorate [check]) - rocket physics (committed [check]) - old random (in zandronum [check]) - teleport delay There is only one left on the list. |
Blzut3 (administrator) 2012-10-05 18:24 |
I understand that a small item like this could be a game changer, but I keep being told that competitive players like oldschool (aka vanilla accuracy). If you're going to demand the old random number generator, old rocket physics, etc why would you not want the old teleportation time? Honestly, I'm the last person to be talking about vanilla accuracy, but I do think this kind of thing crosses the line between intentional changes and accidental changes to fix bugs/support new features. Assuming Zandronum's behavior is correct and ZDaemon's is not anyways. That said, tuning the teleport delay may be a useful as a moding feature, so perhaps some kind of generic way of implementing it should be suggested for ZDoom? |
Torr Samaho (administrator) 2012-10-05 20:00 |
Quote from Watermelon I'm pretty sure this list will be extended as soon as the last missing part is implemented ;). Anyway, before we decide what to do with this somebody should find out how Vanilla Doom handles this. |
unknownna (updater) 2012-10-06 07:33 edited on: 2012-10-06 08:22 |
I think that this is caused by the teleport/spawn/respawn prediction in Zandronum.Quote from Torr Samaho I recently tested ZDaemon 1.09 and can tell you that it's worse there under the same circumstances (600 ping) when it comes to teleporting. You jitter around when using teleporters. But perhaps it's desired by low-ping users to not have any teleport/spawn/respawn prediction. On a side note, I noticed that the client prediction for doors was a lot better in ZDaemon. You don't jitter there compared to Zandronum. Edit: Quote from Watermelon I'd be very interested in hearing how you're going to emulate the vanilla blockmap behavior (compat_hitscan) with DECORATE. Also, you forgot about the bridge thing issue and the silent spawn issue. |
Torr Samaho (administrator) 2012-10-06 09:01 edited on: 2012-10-06 09:03 |
Quote from unknownnaI don't think that the prediction has a noticeable effect on this (at least not with a reasonable ping). ZDoom itself (and possibly also Vanilla Doom) prevents the player from moving for 18 tics (about .5 seconds) even in single player, I'm pretty sure that this artificial delay is the reason for this ticket. We could easily reduce this delay with a dmflag if we want to. I'd still like to know though whether we are emulating Vanilla Doom or ZDaemon with this change. Quote from unknownnaFeel free to make a new suggestion ticket for this (in case there is no ticket yet). |
Dusk (developer) 2012-10-06 11:17 edited on: 2012-10-06 11:17 |
Quote from Doom source code So I suppose Zandronum is correct. |
unknownna (updater) 2012-10-06 12:03 |
Is it any different in ZDoom 1.23b33? |
Watermelon (developer) 2012-10-06 15:39 edited on: 2012-10-06 15:39 |
> I'd be very interested in hearing how you're going to emulate the vanilla blockmap behavior (compat_hitscan) with DECORATE What does that do? Actually I tried emulating the ZD SSG the other day, and for some reason I just cannot do it right... maybe that compat_hitscan does something -- though what does it do exactly? I tried googling it and looking at diff's to see what the change was but all the sites won't load. |
Watermelon (developer) 2012-10-06 17:05 |
As a side note, based on the above discussion... does that mean I'm getting an illusion due to lag (or possibly lackthereof lag) that there is more of a delay but clients are on par with other servers, or is there actually a physical delay happening? |
Torr Samaho (administrator) 2012-10-06 17:21 |
I think I don't understand exactly what you are asking. After being teleported, Vanilla Doom prevents the player from moving for 18 tics. To keep things synchronized the client will wait for exactly 18 tics before it allows movement while the server waits for 18 tics + the player's ping. So on the client it should look like exactly an 18 tic delay. |
Qent (updater) 2012-10-07 01:28 |
Since desirability of the delay depends on the player's ping, maybe it would be better as a client option, instead of a DMFlag? |
Torr Samaho (administrator) 2012-10-07 07:38 |
I think it's safe to say that players would always want to have as little delay as possible, so clients shouldn't be deciding this. |
Blzut3 (administrator) 2012-10-07 16:32 edited on: 2012-10-07 16:33 |
Quote from Torr Samaho Wouldn't this caused an increased delay for higher ping players? Shouldn't the client be waiting for 18 - ping and the server waiting for 18? |
Watermelon (developer) 2012-10-08 14:24 |
If you spike as soon as you enter a teleporter, will the game add on that possible lag spike? Tic wise, if you go: 30 30 890 30 30 And you teleport on 890, will you get a large delay from the teleporter even though afterwards you've returned to a normal ping and had the proper update from the server? |
Edward-san (developer) 2012-10-09 00:18 |
Quote we should test it: what happens if client teleports with emulated high pings (around 500, for example)? |
ZzZombo (reporter) 2012-10-09 03:09 |
I can say that (ping 300-400): you will frozen for a while (a half of second or so) until your client realize he can move off the teleporter. In v98d it also could show "Connection interrupted" while this is happening. |
Watermelon (developer) 2013-03-20 05:50 |
People could always edit the source, so there's no need for this to really be open. |
This issue is already marked as resolved. If you feel that is not the case, please reopen it and explain why. |
|
Supporters: | ZzZombo |
Opponents: | No one explicitly opposes this issue yet. |
![]() |
|||
Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
2012-10-04 23:32 | Watermelon | New Issue | |
2012-10-04 23:41 | Blzut3 | Note Added: 0004957 | |
2012-10-05 01:21 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0004958 | |
2012-10-05 01:21 | Watermelon | Note Edited: 0004958 | View Revisions |
2012-10-05 04:31 | Qent | Note Added: 0004960 | |
2012-10-05 14:46 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0004961 | |
2012-10-05 18:24 | Blzut3 | Note Added: 0004966 | |
2012-10-05 20:00 | Torr Samaho | Note Added: 0004972 | |
2012-10-06 07:33 | unknownna | Note Added: 0004977 | |
2012-10-06 07:39 | unknownna | Note Edited: 0004977 | View Revisions |
2012-10-06 07:43 | unknownna | Note Edited: 0004977 | View Revisions |
2012-10-06 08:22 | unknownna | Note Edited: 0004977 | View Revisions |
2012-10-06 09:01 | Torr Samaho | Note Added: 0004979 | |
2012-10-06 09:02 | Torr Samaho | Note Edited: 0004979 | |
2012-10-06 09:03 | Torr Samaho | Note Edited: 0004979 | View Revisions |
2012-10-06 09:03 | Torr Samaho | Note Revision Dropped: 4979: 0002722 | |
2012-10-06 09:03 | Torr Samaho | Note Revision Dropped: 4979: 0002723 | |
2012-10-06 11:17 | Dusk | Note Added: 0004984 | |
2012-10-06 11:17 | Dusk | Note Edited: 0004984 | View Revisions |
2012-10-06 12:03 | unknownna | Note Added: 0004986 | |
2012-10-06 12:04 | unknownna | Status | new => feedback |
2012-10-06 15:39 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0004994 | |
2012-10-06 15:39 | Watermelon | Status | feedback => new |
2012-10-06 15:39 | Watermelon | Note Edited: 0004994 | View Revisions |
2012-10-06 17:05 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0005000 | |
2012-10-06 17:21 | Torr Samaho | Note Added: 0005004 | |
2012-10-07 01:28 | Qent | Note Added: 0005011 | |
2012-10-07 07:38 | Torr Samaho | Note Added: 0005014 | |
2012-10-07 16:32 | Blzut3 | Note Added: 0005037 | |
2012-10-07 16:33 | Blzut3 | Note Edited: 0005037 | View Revisions |
2012-10-08 14:24 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0005051 | |
2012-10-09 00:18 | Edward-san | Note Added: 0005053 | |
2012-10-09 03:09 | ZzZombo | Note Added: 0005055 | |
2013-03-20 05:50 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0006150 | |
2013-03-20 05:50 | Watermelon | Status | new => closed |
2013-03-20 05:50 | Watermelon | Assigned To | => Watermelon |
2013-03-20 05:50 | Watermelon | Resolution | open => fixed |
2013-06-08 19:08 | Watermelon | Assigned To | Watermelon => |
2013-06-08 19:08 | Watermelon | Status | closed => feedback |
2013-06-08 19:08 | Watermelon | Resolution | fixed => reopened |
2013-06-08 19:08 | Watermelon | Status | feedback => closed |
2013-06-08 19:08 | Watermelon | Resolution | reopened => no change required |
Copyright © 2000 - 2025 MantisBT Team |