• Welcome to Battlezone Universe.
 

News:

Welcome to the BZU Archive dated December 24, 2009. Topics and posts are in read-only mode. Those with accounts will be able to login and browse anything the account had access granted to at the time. No changes to permissions will be made to be given access to particular content. If you have any questions, please reach out to squirrelof09/Rapazzini.

Main Menu

What is the difference between WARP and JUMPY?

Started by aougli, March 05, 2004, 04:31:43 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

OvermindDL1

Actually I find 1.3 less 'warpy'.  I have a 3mbit connection, average of about 40 ms latency with the people I play.  In 1.2 we would still warp around, jump occasionally.  In all my time in 1.3 with the people I have 40ms latency with, I have seen a warp once, and that was a hickup in my connection from downloading files at the same time.

GJC

Quote from: aougliI wouldn't want to prevent anyone discussing bf42 or how other games behave, or aspects of BZ2 that people do or don't like.

I simply wanted to explain what the crux is with internet gaming. You either have a client prediction or have to predict yourself. I prefer the latter one.

Spacecomber

Getting back to what can be adjusted in the game through gameprefs or console commands, as aougli suggested, the network.velsmooth [value] command still works.  The default is currently 0.  The numbers seem to work in the opposite direction of the network.maxsmooth [value] setting.  (I hope I'm remembering what I saw right.)  With a high network.velsmooth number (lets say 2 or 4), when you watch a human pilot take a step, after this stepping behavior has stopped, they seem to slowly slide into their actual new position.  With lower numbers, less than one, like .4, at the end of the stepping action they don't continue to slide into their position.  Network.maxsmooth seemed to work in the opposite direction.  You would see human pilots doing their sliding with low values, less than one, but stepping and moving would stop simultaneously with higher numbers.

I know no one really cares about these pilot actions, but I give them as a way to try and get a sense of what these settings do.  Hopefully, it will provide a better sense of whether the settings need to go up or need to go down in order to have the proper effect on what you are seeing in dogfights with human pilots.

aougli

@Silver: yes, warp symptoms in the game are not consistent.  But as I am experimenting with my settings, and the same people are not in the server each time, perhaps that is to be expected.

@Over: I find warp in 1.3 is definately different; I'm not sure whether it is better or worse.

@Space: thanks for the info.  If I've understood correctly, velsmooth is by default at its lowest possible setting, and that this is the one that provides the greatest positional accuracy for aiming an incoming shot.  And as maxsmooth covers similar territory, is there any point to using both variables, especially as one may contradict the other?


The experimentation continues!  8)

Spacecomber

I really don't know much about the two variables; so, I can't say how much they are basically doing the same thing by different routes versus how much they really are different variables.  Commando probably has the most hands on experience with experimenting with them prior to the public release.

I've not gotten beyond trying to figure out an easy way for me to observe the effect of these settings using my two computers over a LAN connection.

aougli

Had some more games with stock 1.3 with maxsmooth = 1 and timeskew = true.

Basically it's OK.  From my own experience and asking others after the game, 1.3 is not much worse, not much better, than 1.2 when it comes to warp.  However, it is different.  Seems to be necessary to acclimatize to the new environment, which is neither better nor worse, but different.  The games I've had are fairly typical for me: me as server, most people on broadband, one or two 56k people in as well.  Even with 56k across the Atlantic ocean the game is playable and fun.  56k people report the most variation in performance, with some saying there is a noticeable improvement in network performance, and other saying it is markedly worse.

I've lowered the server's MWF from my usual 5 to 3.  Didn't make much difference to me, but others in the server wanted it and say it is better.

technoid

Do we have any data on what the possible/closest values are for these smoothing commands in 1.2?   Maybe it's somewhere in the closed beta section?

Regardless if it's strat/dm/mpi/ctf/race, I do kinda see lots of warpage in 1.3.  Apart from that, the best thing I've noticed (as I mentioned in another thread) is that my dialup ping settles about 5 times faster than in 1.2 right after joining the gameworld. That's pretty slick to me.  :)

aougli

There are some notes in GamePrefs.ini itself by the various variables.

1.3 seems a lot more tolerant of joiners and leavers to a game than 1.2.

Dirty Rooster

Host setting mwf low is CRUCIAL to 1.3's enjoyment in
strats.
I have played plenty of stock 1.3 games now and when mwf2 the
doggyfights are excellent, predictable movements and minimal
warp being the norm.
When Aug hosts at mwf5 the warp is considerable to me, having
a 56k modem connection.

I think ALL players having same mwf actually may reduce load on
the server in some occult way, never mind what the mwf is set to.

Try mwf2 Aug, it is good so far and your comp should do it fine.

OvermindDL1

Well good thing 1.3 sets everyone's MWF to what the host chose :)
Perhaps the default should be lower though...