Well I know this issue has been brought up many times about how the new players need to learn how to build normally without so many blocks and that most of the time uberfort games end in deadlocks or are just a deathmatch game and I know it might be too late to implement anything into 194, but uberforts pose a serious problem.

The reason something needs to be done is not because of the bad gameplay it brings, but because of the bad performance in uberforts games. Similar to TF2, where Valve budgeted for 24 player servers instead of the 32 player servers that popped up when the game came out. To solve this Valve put the 32 player servers in a custom tab, so that people who really wanted to play them could go to the custom servers tab and play them if they really desired to. Valve didn't want people having to experience the worse performance that came with 32 player servers since most client CPU time is spent doing per-player work (animation bone setup, etc), so the more players in the game, the worse the player's performance is going to be.

The same thing applies to uberforts as the more blocks that are spawned, the worse the performance of a single player is going to be. Some players who don't have the greatest computers would join a game of uberforts and wouldn't be able to move. They decide that the game is terrible since they would imagine that most games would be like this and their system can't handle the game. Now if you were to play on a 50 block server instead of a 250 block server the lag might still be a bit of a problem, but the game would at least be playable.

That's why I'm proposing you either hardcode a max block limit of 100 (only if you truly want to get rid of them completely), but that would deny the players with good computers who want to uberfort. Another idea could be that whenever a server goes over the 100 block limit mark the name of the game changed from Sourceforts to uberforts or implementing some kind of custom tab for uberforts servers. Either that or make it so that certain servers say SF dev approved and the uberforts servers don't say SF dev approved.

The reason I'm making this thread is because I suffer from the lagginess of uberforts

__________________
[IMG]http://www.nocashvalue.co.uk/shizzle/goldstar.png[/IMG]

Nevar, EVAR hardcode a max block limit.

Hardcode banlist and cexec removed via hardcode is bad enough...

It's the responsibilty of the server owners to configure how the game will be played on there gameserver.

I have a q6600, and I get minor blocklag, but merely for only a few seconds.. Those with worse computers, idle a medium server for a while. People will join, and play.

Source/OB games like TF2 and hl2dm are mostly CPU limited, while the game gives you system recommendations based on your graphics card, so most people don't bother to switch down to DX 7 or 8 if they have a graphics card that runs DX 9. You're probably playing on DX 7 and have a good computer. Most people have shitty computers and instead of upgrading the computer, they just simply buy a better graphics card, so basically Valve fucked up and made the game give your system recommendations based on your graphics card and not your system.

I personally don't have anything wrong with uberforts, but I simply can't play on them. I put all my graphics to the bottom settings, but I can't play a normal game of sourceforts. Most people will think when they download this game that every game will give them such bad performance (good computer or not, their performance will be worse on uberfort servers even if the performance is still considered good its worse than it could be).

No matter if people really like uberforts or not, it's killing the game by killing people's performance. Without uberforts, more people would get good performance meaning there's a better chance that people will like the game.

BTW: a building tutorial would be helpful (did anyone get around to making one?)

__________________
[IMG]http://www.nocashvalue.co.uk/shizzle/goldstar.png[/IMG]

I think a hardcoded blocklimit should be included just to piss OCBpLayer off.

__________________

I think it shouldn't or I'll cry tears of pig shit. *browntear

I'm tellin ya, make the max 45 so you can use the excuse that you're eliminating phys-locks.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

I like this thread.

i just wrote an email to publicaffairs@cia.gov and asked how to cover up things like this.. if i get an answer ill post it here

__________________

the thing that confuses me is when you have 30 - 35 block limit people make a sniper tower so you can;t finish the wall. So you either leave it and loss or take it down and they get pissed off and rip your hole wall down. so then you put it up to solve all problems then people just waist blocks and its just one big pile of crap :P One thing i hate about pub servers.