Page 3 of 3
Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:35 pm
by tartaros
If the client uses smoothwalk, he deserves to be disconnected, so I don't see that as a problem
Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:09 pm
by CWO
People complained about how smoothwalk was screwed up (it was being stopped in some instances) by the way I was doing it and they weren't getting disconnected at all. You're gonna start seeing a lot of smoothwalkers coming out of the woodwork complaining of lag after a while.
Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:49 pm
by tartaros
I don't understand your point of view... The Smoothwalk function of injection is a "experimental" helper for some people who have bad connection and/or some other problems with lag. What it does is give the client automatically a positive answer to walkrequest packets. So it's "out of sync" by definition, because it doesn't wait for the server answer at all. In other words it automatically counts with the server approving all the walkrequests, so it will be far more affected by the system that actually sends walkdeny packets in case of speeding, than with my system that simply slows down the movement of given client on the server (and for other clients).
Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:51 pm
by CWO
But you send the deny and make it resync at that spot. The client should do it after you send the deny for moving too fast. But thats also why I give them 6 moves in my hook instead of 4 which is the max the client will buffer. This kinda lightens it on smoothwalk.