Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Unit limit is too high

106 posts, 5011 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 6 (106 records)
sort
11 years ago

 Saabir AH I HAVE 800 FLEAS ON PATROL

AHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAAA

 [pikts]wolas and you lag game with fleas

 Saabir I WILL RAPEU ALL

 Exit_Wound what does a starlight do?

 Saabir WOOO NO LAG

00:49
 Saabir MOAR FLEAS

 [I]burp !springie

2 hours

lol

 MaverickRTS ... joined the battle ...

 [pikts]wolas !springie

 Springie7 Springie7 (Springie 2.6.0) running for 7.12:09:09

players: 8/30

mod: Zero-K v1.1.3.6

map: GargantuanEpicShore

game running since 02:07:18 ago

 Saabir 900 FLEAZ

MORRRAE

 [pikts]wolas we really need limit on crap

 Thorgasm thats a lame strategy

 [pikts]wolas exactly

 [I]burp trololo

 Thorgasm try spamming detriments its more fun


 Saabir nah

this way i get to break all u computers

 Hamox saabir seriously you lost the game so why you troll with frea spam

 Saabir 930

WE HAVENT LOST

TILL I RESZIGN


currently its valid strategy to lag out all players with weaker computers... Why unitlimit couldnt be like much lower? who needs 900 fleas anyway?
+0 / -0
11 years ago
quote:
currently its valid strategy to lag out all players with weaker computers

Then why was I kicked when i did the same on epicshore? :/
+0 / -0

11 years ago
no such thing as unit limit too high

there is only PCs that are too slow
+1 / -0
11 years ago
Yeah cause we all need 1500 Fleas on Patrol.

Obvious trolling is obvious. To bad Devs/Mods do not care.
+0 / -0

11 years ago
Moderating does not mean deleting every single silly post; there would mean almost no forum left. >_>

@[TROLOLO][GBC]W4RL0K
I think he means it's technically possible, not socially acceptable. I'm not convinced it's anything more than just temporarily annoying, unless someone has an example of a game won with that method?

A unit cap is a fine idea anyway.

Another fine idea would be playing smaller team games, around 4v4, where people take the game more seriously and you will see much less of this nonsense. But that digresses from the original topic.
+0 / -0
11 years ago
why do we even need such a limit?

limit of 200-400 would mean sometimes you have to switch from wind spam to solar spam or fusion spam to save units.
+0 / -0
11 years ago
There is already an almost irrelevant cap set at 3000 by default. If someone is quite clearly deliberately lagging the game then is that not for the admins to sort out?
+0 / -0
Firepluk
11 years ago
It would be good to limit cheap units: fleas, glaives, darts
Set limit only for them.
+0 / -0
Firepluk
But whatever, this will not stop noobs with wooden PCs, like fortaleza or ddab from lagging everyone else.
BTW Fortaleza lags in each game > 5x5
+0 / -0
11 years ago
I have only ever lagged when warlok built 1200 fleas and i am running on an i3 with intel hd 2000. Wooden pc does not seem to be a problem for me.
+0 / -0
Current unitlimit is really too high as long as I played zk as big games were as much takes I had as many winds I spammed I never EVER had hit unitlimit in zk and this is really bad, you can spam units till 90% of people will lag out and thats by just 1 player. (dunno if grammatically it sounds okay :D)

There should be specific unit limits per player and if I remember correctly engine already supports that. So while you can spam wind and it hardly affects performance, you have flea cap at something like 200, dirtbag cap and so on. And of course reasonable all unit limit too.

And best if there would be unitlimit per team(whole team, not person) like 3000 or I dont know just reasonable value so doesnt matter how many players would play global unitlimit per whole team would stay same. Basically wanna control more units? - play smaller game. Problem solved. With this ZK actually could aim at some minimum system requirements which still can play games.
+0 / -0

11 years ago
It's not a valid strategy, and Saabir should at least get kicked for this. There are certain things you can do that will bring the pathfinder to it's knees.

!votekick exists so you can moderate yourselves.

But yeah, the real solution to this is to play serious games rather than 10v10's.

If someone wants to code something to limit fleas and cloggers to around 200 each or so per side, I would support its inclusion.
+0 / -0
11 years ago
It was not just 10v10, it was 10v10 on Gargantuan EpicShore :)
+0 / -0
11 years ago
Current ZK democracy system fails at this really hard. Mostly 1 or 2 votes effectively counter 8 votes you even require more people to vote its like "veto". Also current system doesnt count in afks, who dont vote so its really hard to kick player, unless everyone votes 1. And yes we tried at least 10 times to kick him.
+0 / -0
11 years ago
The BA/TA hosts have a mechanism to peoples which don't vote in their battle rooms.

Just copy this behaviour.
+0 / -0


11 years ago
quote:
mechanism to accidentally peoples which don't vote in their battle rooms.

ftfy
+0 / -0
11 years ago
AUrankAdminSaktoth> If someone wants to code something to limit fleas and cloggers to around 200 each or so per side, I would support its inclusion.

It is already inbuilt:

quote:
http://springrts.com/wiki/Units-UnitDefs

int unitRestricted Default: MAX_UNITS
How many of this unit type may a player control at once? Defaults to being the maximum amount of units controllable. Is overridden by lobby unit restrictions.


The only problem is, that it don't work for "(Fleas and Dirtbags) = 200".

But usually spamers spam only one unit and not 200 Fleas, 200 Dirtbags, 200 Darts, 200 Peewes, 200 ... ups, no more cheap useless units :D
+0 / -0

11 years ago
But but sometimes you need 400 glaives, like when you are charging that porc line and a single doomsday round takes out like 60+ units. It's not like there is a much better way to spend money than to just spam monster waves of small units giving riots a field day.
+0 / -0
this thread is another example of how stupidty and trolling make a clumsy and prohibitive system such as a unit limit "necessary". shame on you, trolls. there hardly ever is a sitution where it actually makes sense to spam 1000 of anything, unless you consider lagging out everybody a sensible thing to do.

now we "need" a unit limit because some people just cant, actually just dont want to control themselves. the result is that in long games people will have to double and triple check wether stuff actually gets built or the highly urgent production of your stilettos, ultimatums, whatever fails at the unit limit. this has major negative impact on the gameplay.
+0 / -0
Nonsense DErankKlon as always. There is no scenario when you would need more than few few hundreds of fleas or dirtbags or whatever so cheap and spammable, dirtbag limit could go even lower because they are just that annoying :)

Nonsense QAranknorm0616 there cant be worse thing than killing doomsday with glaives thats just plain stupid, make some arty.

Starcraft has unit limit and everybody is happy and it is damn low and in zk you can spam till most of people lags out. We are talking here limiting only 1 type of unit, but of course global unit limit per team should be enforced too.

Of course perfect scenario would be to calculate limits per player depending on game size, so if you play 1v1 you can spam all 1000 fleas if you want, but if it is something like 10x10 it is max 100, so you wont lag game for everyone else. There cant be big game with even more units you either sacrifice game size or controllable unit count per player(NOT TEAM also FFA would be whole different story) wanna control bigger army? go play smaller game. And this is solution to lag which plagues spring based games.

Only one problem dunno if dynamic limits is possible at all, because even if they are calculated and set on game start it should be doubled after afk take for player or two coms at start should also mean double unit limit for that player.

Actually I remember on tech anihilation(very porcy game with T4 and so on) we had ~500 unit limit per player or something and actually it worked it prevented massive flea spams and lag.

+0 / -0
Page of 6 (106 records)