Anti-cheat servers

SuperSheep · Post by **SuperSheep** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:19 am

Pyro - 1.0 second reload
Phoenix - 1.2 second reload
Magnum - 1.7 second reload

Pyro Gunpoint distance - 5.6 units
Phoenix - 8.68 units
Magnum - 4.12 Units along X, .9 units along Y

Fusion Radius - 8.74 units.

What's critical here is two things.

1. Overlap. The magnum has 3 blobs with the most overlap. When the fusion bug occurs, this is going to create the biggest effect and the highest amount of damage. The Phoenix has no overlap so each blob is accounted for individually.

2. Firing rate. The Pyro fires the fastest and can therefore can cause the bug more often.

It all boils down to the situation. I'd say the magnum has the most likelihood of causing the bug while the Phoenix has the lowest. In testing, we used all 3 ships and it supported this. The magnum was the easiest to use to cause the bug, while the phoenix was the hardest.

WarAdvocat · Post by **WarAdvocat** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:38 am

Muffalicious wrote:Oh, OK, lets have everyone stop what they are doing and attend to WarA needs.
Dude, its not ALL about you!

I think it's cute how you jump in with these non sequiteurs. Did you miss the point about how there were also other people who want this behavior preserved? Or did that fly (whoosh!) over your cute lil head, girlie?

SuperSheep wrote: As Grendel has already mentioned, making the fusion bug work like the fusion bug without the packet bursting would be not only very unpredictable but would be subject to countless complaints. Either too much damage is applied, or not enough. Who's going to say what the correct emulation is? You? Bunyip? Us?

Make it optional. Make it adjustable. End of problem. And Grendel never said it would be unpredictable if you tried to emulate the RESULTS. His objections are that it's pretty much an instant kill if you apply flat damage. He wants his slight chance to escape I guess.

You're really not getting it. Instead of trying to weasel word it, just say "Screw you guys, I can do whatever I want and you can't stop me".

Or does your self-image require you to rationalize and justify?

Grendel · Post by **Grendel** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:44 am

Foil wrote:For the players here who are good enough to periodcially pull off an intentional fusion-bug multi-kill, which one would give you the most advantage:

- The faster firing rate of the Pyro or Phoenix (essentially giving more chances to land the shot)?

- The larger Tank tri-fusion (essentially increasing the odds of the shot boundary including multiple ships)?

None of the above. The tripple lob nicely compensates for the faster firing rate.

Testiculese wrote:Oh, I thought the charge mattered.

It does a bit -- you may survive being hit w/ an uncharged fusion in a crowd if the damage is applied only 2-3 times.

Krom wrote:Comparing the fusion bug to the omega bug isn't even remotely fair, the omega bug is almost random, you have no idea when it will hit and when it won't. The fusion bug is 100% reproducible and VERY predictable, they are almost completely different from each other even if they are both related to how the D3 engine handles damage. If you get rid of the packet bursting but preserve the effect of the fusion bug, nobody would be complaining here.

In a controlled setting the omega bug is as reproducable as the fusion bug. In an uncontrolled setting (aka "game") both are VERY unpredictable w/ the exception that both cause an exessive amount of damage.

I only see two people complaining/arguing so far -- Bunyip & Krom. The others are "x2". So, if you guys want it changed, how about you code it then ? I'll be happy to help w/ that w/in a reasonable timeframe.

Krom wrote:And Ferno, that reply at Grendel is because he managed to take complaining about BP microwave to an all new all time low. If BP MW is enough to disconnect you from a server, that server must have serious connection or processor issues. The idea that microwave is enough to flood out a server is just plain stupid.

Huh ? Where did I complain ? And why is that idea stupid ? When have you been the last time in VV w/ 3 BP's flooding MW at you ? Last time that happened to me I got disco'ed w/ a "reliable buffer overrun".

WarAdvocat wrote:And Grendel never said it would be unpredictable if you tried to emulate the RESULTS. His objections are that it's pretty much an instant kill if you apply flat damage. He wants his slight chance to escape I guess.

Well, since the bug is unpredictable (from the clients POV) the emulation would be too. W/ the exception that now you wouldn't get the full feedback (super "clank", bounce & red screen) so people would just blow up. And yes, I'd like to be able to survive the blast that wouldn't kill me w/o the oscillation effect.

WarAdvocat · Post by **WarAdvocat** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 12:15 pm

Actually, it only takes one BP with rapidfire to crash me if I have weapon effects enabled. Haven't tried it with the new card, but I'm sure it's the same.

code for optional fusionbug

if FBF = 1 then
call FBFIX()

Apparently the

Code: Select all

 tag causes unpredictable, chaotic behavior.

Behemoth · Post by **Behemoth** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 12:59 pm

I think the bug fix is for the kind of people who constantly cry fusion whore!

SuperSheep · Post by **SuperSheep** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 2:40 pm

WarAdvocat wrote:Actually, it only takes one BP with rapidfire to crash me if I have weapon effects enabled. Haven't tried it with the new card, but I'm sure it's the same.

code for optional fusionbug

if FBF = 1 then
call FBFIX()

Apparently the

Code: Select all

 tag causes unpredictable, chaotic behavior.[/quote]

I inserted that into the source code, compiled, and it didn't work.  :P 

I guess you didn't read or forgot my previous statement. The fusion bug is integrated. This is the only way to do it efficiently and effectively.

I'll tell ya what. You and Krom bang your heads together and come up with legible C++ code with a basic algorithm you'd like to emulate the fusion bug effects.

After you've spent several months banging this out and testing it, we'll do another poll and see how the masses like it. Then, if we get a consensus, we'll implement your "new feature" and of course make it optional.

No, I'm not being sarcastic. You're welcome to come onto the Von Clan Teamspeak anytime to ask questions and we will be more than glad to point you to the proper resources to get this all put together.

Money! · Post by **Money!** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 2:49 pm

Why are you guys arguing? Nothing is gonna change...

VonVulcan · Post by **VonVulcan** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 3:28 pm

Money! wrote:Why are you guys arguing? Nothing is gonna change...

Really? Seems there have been some major bug fixes. Just 2-3 peeps that are peein in the soup...

Money! · Post by **Money!** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 3:39 pm

Na man, I mean that the changes have been made. SS has definitely helped out alot. But he isn't going to do anything more. That's what I mean by nothing is going to change.

VonVulcan · Post by **VonVulcan** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 3:49 pm

Money! wrote:Na man, I mean that the changes have been made. SS has definitely helped out alot. But he isn't going to do anything more. That's what I mean by nothing is going to change.

X2! except SS did say this was a work in progress.

WarAdvocat · Post by **WarAdvocat** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 4:14 pm

My google skills far exceed my programming skills. Believe me, if it weren't so, I wouldn't be talking to you at all. I'd be busy doing something much more productive.

If (fixfbug = 10)
{
fixfusionbug;
givebunbunskillz;
}

:p

Richard Cranium · Post by **Richard Cranium** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 5:04 pm

WarAdvocat wrote: givebunbunskillz;

I'm not familiar with this sub routine. Would it work for me too?

I need all the help I can get.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:22 pm

All the whining over this makes no sense to me. It seems rather obvious an oversite in the code. I REALLY doubt Outrage ment it to work that way.
and before you ask me if I know what the hell I'm talking about WA, go screw Mobius' cat or something. I'm really tired of reading your 12 y/o bantering. Been reading crap like that on Descent forums for over 10 years. It's one reason D3 had so many issues to begin with.

Personally, I would think that as a fusion moves over or through an object, it deminishes in power. like a hurricane passing over land ..er.. sorta. So a triple blob from a tank moving through a group of 5 ships, let's say, would/should have conciderably less \"umf\" than when it was first fired. Not buffed up to a level that would scare a shaker missle.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:02 pm

Duper wrote:Personally, I would think that as a fusion moves over or through an object, it deminishes in power. like a hurricane passing over land ..er.. sorta. So a triple blob from a tank moving through a group of 5 ships, let's say, would/should have conciderably less "umf" than when it was first fired.

Actually, that's how D1's fusion works. I saw a demo of it in action. Basically it was one person who shot fusion that was fully charged, and five ships lined up front to back. The shooter charged it at full power, and only ended up taking out three ships. the fourth had major damage, and the fifth; minor damage.

SuperSheep · Post by **SuperSheep** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:08 pm

Actually, I was just talking about this with VonVulcan earlier today and it's funny that this particular effect was actually in D3 as well however it was not in effect when the fusion bug was still around.

I can only guess that they either tried to emulate D1/2 fusion or it was a quick and dirty bandaid for the fusion bug as to actually rewrite the code to work properly at that point would have taken much work.

When we tested the fusion bug is when I first noticed the effect. We had people line up and noticed a diminishing power level as it passed through. However when the bug was in effect, this made the fusion lose power much more rapidly spending all it's energy on the two or more ships that were within the fusion's radius.

Money - Although I do not code myself anymore at this point due to real life concerns, AC is alive and well and will continue to be updated and enhanced. I am serving as more of a advisory capacity at this point.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 9:51 pm

ah, very good thanks!

Cangaceiro · Post by **Cangaceiro** » Sat Jun 17, 2006 5:20 pm

[/quote]

Really? Seems there have been some major bug fixes. Just 2-3 peeps that are peein in the soup...[/quote]

Hey I like soup, go pee on some place else.