[rush.Killerkarla]

Hi,

I am facing a problem with 4.2.018, which is maybe related to the new introduced g_gear feature:

Initial situation:
- Player connects to a server (best for reproducibility is a CTF, TS or BOMB server) with g_gear "0" and sv_floodprotect "1"
- Player uses Auto-join button -> The weapon / items dialog appears
- Player changes the primary weapon, and changes 2 items


Bug:
The server message "Command delayed due to sv_floodprotect" appears


How to avoid bug:
When a player does NOT change weapons/items after he joined the server and changes his weapons/items during the match, then there is no "Command delay" message shown. Even after a death and respawn, changing the inventory does not produce a command flood.




I retested this with some limitations (e.g. g_gear KcQS) -> same behavior: For the inital weapon change, a command flood is detected.


In UrT 4.1.1 this problem does not occur, and I am not sure, if this issue occurs the first time in 4.2.018, since I am using in 99% the same weapon/item...


Thanks & regards,
Killerkarla

This post has been edited by Killerkarla: 26 January 2014 - 06:01 PM

[-WAR-Runamok]

interesting, in previous versions of UrT, gear changing had been floodprotected. Where you said it's bugged at the start, was actually the expected behaviour from UrT.

It was one of the complaints that was raised on the forums, that people couldn't fix the gear they had for the current spawned state, and that their new gear choices would only come into affect on respawning again

[rush.Killerkarla]

Runamok, on 26 January 2014 - 07:38 PM, said:

interesting, in previous versions of UrT, gear changing had been floodprotected. Where you said it's bugged at the start, was actually the expected behaviour from UrT.

It was one of the complaints that was raised on the forums, that people couldn't fix the gear they had for the current spawned state, and that their new gear choices would only come into affect on respawning again

That was really all the time like that?
I tested today with 4.1.1 and was not able to reproduce that.
As mentioned in my post, I am not sure if this behaviour occurred in previous 4.2 releases.

However, that would not make sense, since within the game you can change your weapons/items without the flood protection message.

It would be interesting to know, what is the wanted feature... :-)

This post has been edited by Killerkarla: 26 January 2014 - 08:47 PM

[rush.Killerkarla]

Since there is no interest in bug reports, please close (=reject) this thread.

[Mod ObScUrE]

This needs to be fixed I will not lock it.
-
bump

[Fenix]

Killerkarla, on 21 February 2014 - 04:19 PM, said:

Since there is no interest in bug reports, please close (=reject) this thread.

Since no one replies I will: the problem, I believe, is not that devs are not interested.
As you can see the flood protect CVAR is prefixed with sv_ (sv_floodprotect). The gear instead is prefixed with g_ (g_gear). What does it mean?

• sv_ -> server engine
• g_ -> server game module

Now, it may seem simple to fix this bug, but since gear and floodprotect are in 2 different places it's quite complicated: The engine loads the game module in memory and knows nothing of game module code (except the interface). The game module also knows nothing of the engine except the interface needed for basic communication.

This post has been edited by Fenix: 03 March 2014 - 09:26 AM

[rush.Killerkarla]

Fenix, on 03 March 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

Since no one replies I will: the problem, I believe, is not that devs are not interested.

Hi Fenix,

Thanks for the reply.
I am not directly expecting a fix.
It would be helpful to get feedback from the devs, if an reported issue is counted as possible bug or a expected behavior or a "wontfix" situation.
As already mentioned by other members is other threads, there is no transparency of the reported bugs, so nobody knows, what happens with the issue reported in a forum. And then I am asking myself, why shall a spend my time for reporting, if nobody is willing to read it.
My post reached already forum page 5, so I would say nobody would see it again. And since more than a month was over, I had to assume, that no one is interested in the report. Sorry for the inconveniences.

Best regards,
Killerkarla