Page 1 of 2
2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:51 am
by jlv
Changes:
- Doesn't reapply erode after rewinding in demo.
- Fixed collision bug.
- Skybox is now 2x2x2 to allow for closer far plane settings.
Windows users:
http://www.mxsimulator.com/snapshots/mx ... 6-1381.exe
Linux users:
http://www.mxsimulator.com/snapshots/mx ... 01-16-1381
Replace mx.exe or mxbin with one of the above files. The default location for mx.exe should be "C:\Program Files (x86)\MX Simulator". I'd keep a backup of the originals since these aren't well tested.
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:04 am
by AHeckman2
jlv wrote:
- Doesn't reapply erode after rewinding in demo.
THANK YOU
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:06 am
by Bradclay306
you working on sim 2?
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:09 am
by Dunivant25
Does this go towards lag, and the davalos bales collision?
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:17 am
by Wahlamt
Could we have so that erode is showing itself faster than now? Like split the waiting time in half? Could potentially make it easier if you're following someone
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:20 am
by Bradclay306
Dunivant25 wrote:
Does this go towards lag, and the davalos bales collision?
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:37 am
by NoFear345
Dunivant25 wrote:
Does this go towards lag, and the davalos bales collision?
You can only hope
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:39 am
by Lnxa
NoFear345 wrote:Dunivant25 wrote:
Does this go towards lag, and the davalos bales collision?
You can only hope
Pretty sure it's just the fix to stop your game from crashing when you touch someone.
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:37 am
by jlv
Lnxa wrote:NoFear345 wrote:Dunivant25 wrote:
Does this go towards lag, and the davalos bales collision?
You can only hope :wink:
Pretty sure it's just the fix to stop your game from crashing when you touch someone.
That's what I'm hoping for. There was a divide by zero when two objects centers intersect exactly.
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:58 am
by Cody Dawe
Wahlamt wrote:Could we have so that erode is showing itself faster than now? Like split the waiting time in half? Could potentially make it easier if you're following someone
do you want lag because THATS HOW YOU GET LAG. that would required double the bandwidth thats being transfered for erode
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:22 am
by NoFear345
sneakyKittyGaming wrote:Wahlamt wrote:Could we have so that erode is showing itself faster than now? Like split the waiting time in half? Could potentially make it easier if you're following someone
do you want lag because THATS HOW YOU GET LAG. that would required double the bandwidth thats being transfered for erode
I'm sorry... did you say bandwidth?
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:54 am
by Wahlamt
sneakyKittyGaming wrote:Wahlamt wrote:Could we have so that erode is showing itself faster than now? Like split the waiting time in half? Could potentially make it easier if you're following someone
do you want lag because THATS HOW YOU GET LAG. that would required double the bandwidth thats being transfered for erode
Please explain to me how that would require the double bandwidth, I'm very interested.
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:25 pm
by Cody Dawe
Wahlamt wrote:sneakyKittyGaming wrote:Wahlamt wrote:Could we have so that erode is showing itself faster than now? Like split the waiting time in half? Could potentially make it easier if you're following someone
do you want lag because THATS HOW YOU GET LAG. that would required double the bandwidth thats being transfered for erode
Please explain to me how that would require the double bandwidth, I'm very interested.
i more than likely used the wrong word on an account of being a dumba** but the amount of data being transfered to and from the server and clients would be doubled if the wait time for the applied effect was cut in half. correct me if im wrong here but thats how my mind picked it up.
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:46 pm
by Wahlamt
sneakyKittyGaming wrote:Wahlamt wrote:sneakyKittyGaming wrote:
do you want lag because THATS HOW YOU GET LAG. that would required double the bandwidth thats being transfered for erode
Please explain to me how that would require the double bandwidth, I'm very interested.
i more than likely used the wrong word on an account of being a dumba** but the amount of data being transfered to and from the server and clients would be doubled if the wait time for the applied effect was cut in half. correct me if im wrong here but thats how my mind picked it up.
The data sent/received wouldn't double. The rate of which it would send would be the same, it would just only start to send/apply it sooner than it currently is. It's like getting your mail with overnight shipping or standard 3-4 days
Re: 2018-01-16 snapshot
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:57 am
by jlv
Actually, if I didn't buffer up the erode points the overhead from the headers would more than double the bandwidth used for erode. Each packet can have up to 64 erode points so if you sent them one by one you'd have up to 64x the header overhead. On top of that, each point is merged with its neighbors if they're close enough and delta compressed, so to send them one at a time it would more than double due to lack of compression. Probably be about 4x more without the delta compression and merging.