Ralph Karam hosted a race last night via GSB 1.99.10 and forced
communication parameters. We did not notice any clock smashing, warping, or
any of the other problems 1.1 has introduced.
Could the main problem simply be an issue of everyone using different
core.ini settings? Has anyone else hosted via GSB 2 and STILL had problems
with 1.1?
--
-/- Walk Walker
Official HAL Backmarker
very interesting.....since the sample core that came with the patch is
set for 84/2 by default I wouldnt have any reservations that others have
changed thier's like I did back to an 84/3 core like I did.Since there
are some that can not even rename a file in windows i doubt if they have
changed very much on thier core and it is my suspicion that this is
leading to some unpredictable results.On one race I hosted last night
with my new 84/3 core,the frame rate was solid but many of the other
cars were very unstable(wiggling all over the track)and it makes me
wonder if that is not the cause of it.
what we need and i am sure we will finally get to is a universal core
that everyone can live with and use but with any new software it just
takes time to achieve that.
Quoted text (11 lines)
> Ralph Karam hosted a race last night via GSB 1.99.10 and forced > communication parameters. We did not notice any clock smashing, warping, or > any of the other problems 1.1 has introduced. > Could the main problem simply be an issue of everyone using different > core.ini settings? Has anyone else hosted via GSB 2 and STILL had problems > with 1.1? > -- > -/- Walk Walker > Official HAL Backmarker% very interesting.....since the sample core that came with the patch is
% set for 84/2 by default I wouldnt have any reservations that others have
% changed thier's like I did back to an 84/3 core like I did.Since there
% are some that can not even rename a file in windows i doubt if they have
% changed very much on thier core and it is my suspicion that this is
% leading to some unpredictable results.On one race I hosted last night
% with my new 84/3 core,the frame rate was solid but many of the other
% cars were very unstable(wiggling all over the track)and it makes me
% wonder if that is not the cause of it.
% what we need and i am sure we will finally get to is a universal core
% that everyone can live with and use but with any new software it just
% takes time to achieve that.
What would make sense is that the host's settings would be passed onto
the client when it connects. I am only talking about the following
lines in the core.ini
net_lan_client_send_every = 2 ; Client packet freq on LAN
net_lan_client_send_size = 132 ; Client packet size on LAN
net_lan_server_send_every = 2 ; Server packet freq on LAN
net_lan_server_send_size = 388 ; Server packet size on LAN
net_mdm_client_send_every = 3 ; Client packet freq on dialup
net_mdm_client_send_size = 84 ; Client packet size on dialup
net_mdm_server_send_every = 3 ; Server packet freq on dialup
net_mdm_server_send_size = 84 ; Server packet size on dialup
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
