-how does autotimenudge work with ql lag compensation? does it turn it off?(!)
-on what ping autotn stops working?
-why not just unlock cl_timenudge then?

* Neither timenudge nor cl_autoTimeNudge disable the lag compensation (no clientside cvars will disable the antilag).
* Autotn never stops working, but it will only assist up to -20 worth of nudge.
* Both cl_timenudge and cl_autoTimeNudge cap at values of -20. Even if cl_autoTimeNudge allowed for greater amounts of nudge, unlocking cl_timenudge would be a terrible terrible idea. Primarily because players shouldn't be using values greater than -(ping/2), which is why cl_autoTimeNudge exists - to autoregulate it.

Neither timenudge nor cl_autoTimeNudge disable the lag compensation (no clientside cvars will disable the antilag).

Really? Now that's strange... because I showed you how it affects the the lag compensation back in 2010.... And like a year ago (not entirely sure) in a pm I was even more specific in telling you exactly where in the code that happened.

Sure it's not disabled... but it gets less.... It would really really suck if that didn't happen. (like even more stupid than having unlagged work for lg would be to not look at timestamps when performing it).

(edit: rephrased the last line to better fit with the implementation ;p)

this is probably the most disrespectful thing i have ever seen in my entire life

go read a thread where I speak out on this issue in 2011 or something...

I'm getting a bit tired of having to re-explain how their code works to themselves.
They could just listen to me or explain why I am wrong. Not say that I'm wrong -> give one example -> I refute that example by pointing to their code exactly where it shows I'm right -> get ignored.

The one time I was not ignored was already on this topic and around 2010 when they agreed with me that tn affects unlagged.
To now 'try and explain it through not having it disabled' is trying to mislead the players. (Although factually it's only 'negated' rather than 'disabled'.)

Imo I'm being mild by only calling the idea stupid.

dang weird going in

"* Both cl_timenudge and cl_autoTimeNudge cap at values of -20. Even if cl_autoTimeNudge allowed for greater amounts of nudge, unlocking cl_timenudge would be a terrible terrible idea. Primarily because players shouldn't be using values greater than -(ping/2), which is why cl_autoTimeNudge exists - to autoregulate it. "

What the hell, then h8m3 was right. How come he knew that with silencep etc? :p

knew what exactly?

I dunno what h8m3 / silencep said ;)

http://www.esreality.com/?a=longpost&id=2313076&page=1

Read the post and then go through image 1 -> 3.
Do read the post first and think about this stuff yourself.

-where this -15ms (40-25) come from?
Theres no force stopping you from extrapolating further. Basically the error increases -> more warp. But the way it works is the same.
The Q3 code however does not have any extrapolation which means that if you increase tn > snapshot time you'd just only see the latest snapshot. Your actual actions would however still be affected by tn. But because theres no added value for you they put a max of -30 in ql code (-20 in cpma I think).
The QL code does have some sort of extrapolation which works nicely <-- this is actually the "hard part to write" and is the reason why I can't just put 'my proposed solutions' into q3 code and have a nicely playable game. I would have to spend quite some time figuring out how to exactly alter the pmove function (or function calls) for incomming packets etc. (The alteration shouldn't be too large but it would take a while to figure out).


-how does autotimenudge work with ql lag compensation? does it turn it off?(!)
Pretty much turns it off yes.
The "ql lag compensation" works according to the timestamp a packet has. TN is added on the timestamps and thus the lag compensation becomes less (linearly).
There are some minor things that could differ based on implementation of the "ql lag compensation" that might lead to a constant factor but in general what you use in TN gets reduced from "unlagged".
-on what ping autotn stops working?
You can see that in your lagometer... if theres 1 blue dot followed by yellow stuff then it's tn-20. If the yellow increases (gets higher) as your ping increases then it's up to the ping where the yellow stops "growing".
I believe that they put the tn-20 as maximum.

-why not just unlock cl_timenudge then?
Because then the game would be warpy for high ping players (given that they use autotimenudge) and ID fears that this alteration would make people kill themselves or smth.

But the main problem would be that nobody would use timenudge as long as unlagged is in QL....
Nobody wants to give up their own advantage... especially not when it's larger than the opponent's.... Which leads to a Nash Equilibrium exactly like the prisoners dilemma where both actors would defect while cooperation is best simply because the alternate states punish the good guy.

Posting in weird thread.

you must be kinda twisted for that.

Such a weird comment.

wp.
Saviour of the universe, his soul :>

(got nothing better with flashsoul :(... pick a different nick man ;pp)

so should it be set on or off?

onff

too technical a question for someone I've never heard of

pls just add client side lg and rail to quake live 2.0

loadout netcode is too good

having registry done client side makes cheating wayyyy easier, thats a no no

february called... it hates july.

Interresting thread though, great topic, awesome posts.

was linked in another thread kid worry about ur own life thanks

was linked in another thread kid worry about ur own life thanks

god no, never ever should this or will this happen.
I really hope you understand why by now.

i think the reason that he wants it to happen should be obvious.

jigglywiggly? understand? lol

you mean

"keep zoom autotimenudging me you cheating faggot"

i can hear it now

lol'd but not quite lol+'d