UT2Vote44B2
- Thread starter ProAsm
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
It only really kicks in and can be appreciated when you have 16 or more players, although it is noticable with less.
Well thats good news.
Question....
Why are more and more Admin using AMD's as a Game Server.
It is a known fact that AMD's make the best Gaming PC but it also a know fact that they make the worst Server.
Be honest - is it because of the price or what ?
As this "Player Disconnects" - "Levels Timing out" etc..... are happening more and more with UT2004 as time passes and Admins are blaming the Game, the Mods, the everything except the AMD machine which is 90% the problem.
An old Pentium 3-1000 which you can pick up for around $100 makes a better server than the very latest AMD, all you need is lotsa memory and a fast hard drive.
My Flagship Server which is a Dell P4 2 gig, has 2 x UT2004, 1 x UT2003, 1 x BF1942, 1 x CS, 1 x Quake3 Servers on it and sits on a 10 mbit line.
I have checked with big ONS maps and never does the level changeover exceed 20 to 30 seconds.
My other Server is an old P2 Dual 400 and runs 2 x UT2004 servers plus 1 x UT2004 Demo with no problem what so ever. This server runs UT2004 DeathMatch as default and its levels switch over in 6 to 10 seconds on average.
Besides writing mods for gaming I also do a lot of Network software for Wireless ISP's and Clients and my worst nightmare is an AMD server running Win2k. I have found where WinXp does not work too well as a Server on a Intel machine it works pretty well on an AMD whereas its the other way around with Win2k as on an Intel that makes an excellent Server but on an AMD it sucks real bad and I mean very very very bad.
Here is an email I got last night from one of my clients and these guys know the problem yet they still buy AMD's for servers - beats me dead
afaik... the modern amds (opteron, fx64) are much better, than the old athlons. i heard, that no intel-machine will be able to run a ut2k4-server with more than 24 slots lagless, but a modern amd can handle 32 without any problems (maybe a myth, and maybe rising the cache would do the trick, what isps of course don't want to)
our isp runs dual-opterons 2 gig with 2 gig ram and a maximum of 8 servers / 80 slots (whatever comes first) and the connection-lost-problems are long long time ago...
my own server is a athlon 3000+ with 1 gig ram and runs 2 ut2004-servers. the isp-servers run win2003-server, mine runs linux.
i have no problems with both of them
our isp runs dual-opterons 2 gig with 2 gig ram and a maximum of 8 servers / 80 slots (whatever comes first) and the connection-lost-problems are long long time ago...
my own server is a athlon 3000+ with 1 gig ram and runs 2 ut2004-servers. the isp-servers run win2003-server, mine runs linux.
i have no problems with both of them
hmmm. very interesting indeed. I will bump up my cache megs a bit. I'll try 256 see if it helps a bit.
The funny thing is, everyone else who pretty much plays my server lives near it and they get the chop or stutter once in a while. I live really far away and it is very rare I get a chop while playing.
The funny thing is, everyone else who pretty much plays my server lives near it and they get the chop or stutter once in a while. I live really far away and it is very rare I get a chop while playing.
my server is amd because it is hand-me-down old gamer...as this gamer gets outdated..it will then be passed down to server state..I do'nt try to run high end stuff..just a hobby this one at the house....we rent our big servers which are all high end pentiums i believe..
Can someone help this guy, he emailed me and I told him to come here and I really dont have a clue if the MapLimits are working or not as I've never really had a solid Yes or No yet
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=141438
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=141438
Ok regarding the Percentage Voting as in the List I did for Beta 2 - has anyone tested to see if this is the case - check your logs if you like.
Beta 3 is nearly ready as it has many updates now but I need to know about the Voting percentages first ?
Beta 3 is nearly ready as it has many updates now but I need to know about the Voting percentages first ?
i have nothing documented but have checked that often when a vote passes...it seems to follow (51%)
Ok I had a look at your log and everything is 100% correct but I think I need to re-explain how the voting works.
Something to remember.
The VotePercent ONLY comes into effect if the Vote did NOT timeout and not everyone has voted but someone changed their vote.
So in other words the only time the VotePercent is considered is when a Player changed his vote and the voting did not Timeout and not every player voted.
PoW in your case no-one ever changes their vote ever so you can have VotePercent=0 and it will make no difference.
In every case either everyone votes or the vote times out which in these cases it chooses the map with the most votes - VotePercent is not used at all ever in these cases.
So to test the VotePercent senario players MUST change their votes and the Voting must NOT timeout - and at least 1 person must NOT vote ever making it so that the vote is not calculated because everyone has voted.
Set VoteMaxTime=300 or something.
Something to remember.
The VotePercent ONLY comes into effect if the Vote did NOT timeout and not everyone has voted but someone changed their vote.
So in other words the only time the VotePercent is considered is when a Player changed his vote and the voting did not Timeout and not every player voted.
PoW in your case no-one ever changes their vote ever so you can have VotePercent=0 and it will make no difference.
In every case either everyone votes or the vote times out which in these cases it chooses the map with the most votes - VotePercent is not used at all ever in these cases.
So to test the VotePercent senario players MUST change their votes and the Voting must NOT timeout - and at least 1 person must NOT vote ever making it so that the vote is not calculated because everyone has voted.
Set VoteMaxTime=300 or something.
Here's an example:
From my logs and asking players, all seems to be working well for the voting being decided correctly.
one thing i see every once in a while..not sure if it was mentioned before..but sometimes the vote don't appear in the tally area...it seems to happen if i change my vote..every vote after that doesn't get registered..can't replicate all the time.. but have noticed 2-3 times.. (tally area being RH pane of vote menu)
Try setting bUseUniqueID=False
The MasterServer goes on and off so many times these days that people with Generated CD-Keys are having a ball and players with the same CD-Key can cause this.
I have switched to bUseUniqueID=False on all my servers here.
The MasterServer goes on and off so many times these days that people with Generated CD-Keys are having a ball and players with the same CD-Key can cause this.
I have switched to bUseUniqueID=False on all my servers here.
i don't have people with common ids here... I check my UTAN logs at least once a day and scan for just that..as well as other stuff..