Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Reloaded V11 Windows Test

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
    Well we bought the server for 20 slots, so I'm guessing the host made it so that if any1 would try and manually change it (to something higher), that it would crash and autorestart with the 20 slots.
    it's unlikely that they will crash the server,
    it probably is some allocation / deallocation bug...

  2. #22

    Default

    Sorry guys - a little off-topic - I run a MOH:BT-Demo server; is there a way I could incorporate some of your brainiac fixes into this game format?

    Thanks much

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pondera View Post
    Sorry guys - a little off-topic - I run a MOH:BT-Demo server; is there a way I could incorporate some of your brainiac fixes into this game format?

    Thanks much
    yes but the offsets will be different in BT which would require time to find all of them.. so the easy answer NO and i doubt anybody would convert it for a demo version of a game.

  4. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Razo[R]apiD View Post
    About filling:

    this is normal thing even with mohfill fix (actualy we just added this to our patch, so no changes were made to the original code), you have to set lower zombie time, because those fake players doesn't connect now (with the atch) but stay in zombie (inactive) state, so setting lower zombie time will make them timeout, when normal players won't get affected by this.

    About stufftext:

    stufftext is a scripting command that allows modders to write mods that send some info to client and change client-side things. Cheaters however can make a bypass so stufftext will no more affect them (making things like CL, Foresight etc. useless).
    We have introduced bypass detection. Does it happen only to few ppl or everyone gets kicked?

    You can still see info about ppl typing bad commands, etc. in logs.
    oh and curious does the patch reject multiple connections from the same IP? thats the best solution.. for example dont accept more then 2 connections from one IP.. and otherwise just reject it its > then the value set.. tweety being a skiddie

  5. #25

    Default

    Luigi Auriemma created this already, problem is that it still bugs a bit with reconnecting, and sometimes you can't enter the server and it says ''Server is for high pings only'' or something like that (yeah high pings lol) and you have to reconnect, and it doesn't always accept it, so I removed it again. Though it is the ultimate filling fix.

  6. #26
    Über Prodigy & Developer Razo[R]apiD's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Poland, Lublin
    Posts
    3,257

    Default

    Well, we can reject multiple connections like clint is suggesting. CVar like: sv_maxConnectionsPerIP would do. Def would be set to eg. 3. Devs could change it when they are testing something (like me running 5 - 10 clients at once ;p)

  7. #27

    Default

    Well if you could implement that, then it would be great, so I can change it myself to a higher number if there are any problems, which I couldn't with Luigi's patch.

  8. #28
    Über Prodigy & Developer Razo[R]apiD's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Poland, Lublin
    Posts
    3,257

    Default

    Already done ;p

  9. #29

    Default

    Oh :P Very nice

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •