Sorry for the late reply.
I agree.
In 1.1, the size of the position packet is about 9-10, in 1.0 it is about 14-15... Thanks to stef, because he created a bit compression tool, but this bit compression tool uses a lot of operations (more cpu usage). Idk if this affect old systems (increasing the FPS), but I think it shouldn't affect. There was another reduction in the shot packet too.
The 1.1 have dozens of changes in relation to 1.0 (which increases CPU LOAD), and no change in client side is related to anticheats. All anticheats are server side.
This can be explained by the conjunction of "more cpu load" and a "stupid enhancement" I did in the position packet to reduce it by 1-2 bytes. This last one CAN affects the overall smoothness of the movement IF the lagger is YOU, but this is not always true (because we tested a lot before make the change). Anyway, this "enhancement" is better handled in the 1.1.0.3 (trunk), but you need to play it in hte pubs to feel it (which will not happen until the next release).
The anticheats do not affect the client side FPS. All anticheats are server side.
It is needed a "bird's eye view" to check all the points were it is dropping the FPS. But again, anticheats are not related to this.
(19 Sep 10, 04:13PM)DES|V-Man Wrote: Most of those changes dealt with memory conservation and enhancing the speed of calculations, as well as the communication between server and client. Honestly, due to those changes, I'd expect 1.1 to be less laggy than 1.0.
I agree.
(18 Sep 10, 10:11AM)Luc@s Wrote: Now if someone could explain what's the difference between 1.1 and 1.0.4 on this point, would be nice ;)
In 1.1, the size of the position packet is about 9-10, in 1.0 it is about 14-15... Thanks to stef, because he created a bit compression tool, but this bit compression tool uses a lot of operations (more cpu usage). Idk if this affect old systems (increasing the FPS), but I think it shouldn't affect. There was another reduction in the shot packet too.
The 1.1 have dozens of changes in relation to 1.0 (which increases CPU LOAD), and no change in client side is related to anticheats. All anticheats are server side.
(19 Sep 10, 02:03AM)XFA Wrote: yer i lag like a mofo in 1.1
way worse then 1.0
This can be explained by the conjunction of "more cpu load" and a "stupid enhancement" I did in the position packet to reduce it by 1-2 bytes. This last one CAN affects the overall smoothness of the movement IF the lagger is YOU, but this is not always true (because we tested a lot before make the change). Anyway, this "enhancement" is better handled in the 1.1.0.3 (trunk), but you need to play it in hte pubs to feel it (which will not happen until the next release).
(19 Sep 10, 04:13PM)DES|V-Man Wrote: It might have something to do with the extra load of the anti-cheat system, but I'm not fully sure of how it works, so I couldn't say what about it needs to change. Maybe y'all should just quit cheating. :-P
(19 Sep 10, 02:58PM)Gibstick Wrote: Is there noticeable drop in framerate? By how much?
I get this too, not network lag but slow graphics, especially if I turn off dynamic shadows. Yes, strange, with dynshadows on I get 60-140fps with dynshadow off I get 70-90 fps.
The anticheats do not affect the client side FPS. All anticheats are server side.
It is needed a "bird's eye view" to check all the points were it is dropping the FPS. But again, anticheats are not related to this.