+sv clockcorrection msecs 0: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

Version vom 11. November 2012, 14:54 Uhr

Interpolate Bug FIX bei CKRAS CS:GO aktiv

Cvar "sv_clockcorrection_msecs" defaults to "60" So this is something I discussed a while ago, as spotting this in the SDK struck me as somewhat odd. The result was in VALVE not changing this.
I understand why there is a need for jitter correction like this, but I've never liked this implementation.
I feel it should be down to the client to decide how much they need, this basically performs the same feature as "cl_interp" but isn't being configurable.

All zBlock match-servers currently have this set to "30" and Verygames DM have been running with "0" on their servers for months now.
It's also presently set at 0 in a couple of competitive league configs.

If you were to remove this cvar (or set it to 0 in CSGO) I'd be happy if the result was more relaxed cl_interp restrictions, so that "cl_interp_ratio" could be between 1 and 3, instead of the current forced competitive values min 1 and max 2.

Reducing this value should have the largest impact on the game for competitive players.
For example I have a average jitter of between 2-10ms on my home Internet connection and a latency of about 15ms to many game servers.
There is no need for me to have the 60ms jitter correction, it's increasing position latency by about 4x! So I could easily get away without the jitter correction and rely on a tiny amount of extrapolation.

If I wanted a slightly smoother more accurate game I could increase cl_interp_ratio to 2.
I'd really appreciate it if this in particular could be reviewed."

Wir würden uns über Euer Feedback in unserem Forum oder via support @ ckras . com freuen.

@@ Zeile 2: / Zeile 2: @@
 Cvar "sv_clockcorrection_msecs" defaults to "60"
-So this is something I discussed a while ago, as spotting this in the SDK struck me as somewhat odd. The result was in VALVE not changing this.
+So this is something I discussed a while ago, as spotting this in the SDK struck me as somewhat odd. The result was in VALVE not changing this.<br>
-I understand why there is a need for jitter correction like this, but I've never liked this implementation.
+I understand why there is a need for jitter correction like this, but I've never liked this implementation.<br>
-I feel it should be down to the client to decide how much they need, this basically performs the same feature as "cl_interp" but isn't being configurable.
+I feel it should be down to the client to decide how much they need, this basically performs the same feature as "cl_interp" but isn't being configurable.<br><br>
-All zBlock match-servers currently have this set to "30" and Verygames DM have been running with "0" on their servers for months now.
+All zBlock match-servers currently have this set to "30" and Verygames DM have been running with "0" on their servers for months now.<br>
-It's also presently set at 0 in a couple of competitive league configs.
+It's also presently set at 0 in a couple of competitive league configs.<br><br>
-If you were to remove this cvar (or set it to 0 in CSGO) I'd be happy if the result was more relaxed cl_interp restrictions, so that "cl_interp_ratio" could be between 1 and 3, instead of the current forced competitive values min 1 and max 2.
+If you were to remove this cvar (or set it to 0 in CSGO) I'd be happy if the result was more relaxed cl_interp restrictions, so that "cl_interp_ratio" could be between 1 and 3, instead of the current forced competitive values min 1 and max 2.<br><br>
-Reducing this value should have the largest impact on the game for competitive players.
+Reducing this value should have the largest impact on the game for competitive players.<br>
-For example I have a average jitter of between 2-10ms on my home Internet connection and a latency of about 15ms to many game servers.
+For example I have a average jitter of between 2-10ms on my home Internet connection and a latency of about 15ms to many game servers.<br>
-There is no need for me to have the 60ms jitter correction, it's increasing position latency by about 4x! So I could easily get away without the jitter correction and rely on a tiny amount of extrapolation.
+There is no need for me to have the 60ms jitter correction, it's increasing position latency by about 4x! So I could easily get away without the jitter correction and rely on a tiny amount of extrapolation.<br><br>
-If I wanted a slightly smoother more accurate game I could increase cl_interp_ratio to 2.
+If I wanted a slightly smoother more accurate game I could increase cl_interp_ratio to 2.<br>
-I'd really appreciate it if this in particular could be reviewed."
+I'd really appreciate it if this in particular could be reviewed."<br><br>
+Wir würden uns über Euer Feedback in unserem [https://forum.ckras.com/thread.php?threadid=3521 Forum] oder via support @ ckras . com freuen.