ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Discussions about Servers
User avatar
UTPe
Adept
Posts: 498
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:10 pm
Personal rank: Dude
Location: Trieste, Italy

ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by UTPe » Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:16 pm

Hi,
I've been playing sniper mods by more than 5 years and I think I have seen a lot of sniper rifle models and related mutators.
Anyway I still play sometimes classic sniper arena (SA) with ZP on small/medium sized maps. In the past, I installed ZeroPing Plus v1.03 on both SA and Instagib servers, people liked and still like it even though newer versions of ZP have been published (the last stable version should be v2.10 or something alike).
But now some guys talked to me about NEWNET mutators. According to them, NEWNET should be a "better version of ZP" for arena gameplay. They say me I should change server config, remove ZP and install NEWNET.
I never tried NEWNET mutators for SA and Instagib, I don't know them, I don't know where to find them and how to configure them (MapVote.ini). Maybe some of you already used them or played with them on servers...which are your opinions ?

Thanks in advance, any comments will be much appreciated ! :highfive:

regards,
Pietro
Personal UT99 website: http://utdatabase.gamezoo.org | Personal forum: http://fragfinity.freeforums.org/index.php
Personal file database: http://ut99files.gamezoo.org | Personal map database: http://ut99maps.gamezoo.org

"These are the days that we will return to one day in the future only in memories." (The Midnight)

Spectra
Masterful
Posts: 542
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:23 pm
Personal rank: Nullified!
Location: (X) Unable To Locate....

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by Spectra » Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:39 pm

ZP is well-known for HitScan weapons. Whereas NEWNET is well-known for All Weapons. If your friends are saying to install Newnet then go for it. Or if you have a test server, then install Newnet there and invite your friends and see what they say about it.

I have seen that overall Newnet is quite better than ZP, since because it has Lag compensation and nice balanced weapons and also good for high ping players. Even ZP is good, but only good if the server is based on Instagib or Sniper, etc.
My advice is to install NewNet.

User avatar
Chamberly
Godlike
Posts: 1963
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:32 pm
Personal rank: Dame. Vandora
Location: TN, USA

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by Chamberly » Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:54 pm

He didn't tell you that the NEWNET mod is not a public release yet. Just wait, TimTim is getting ready to release it. I'd say probably less than 6 months maybe but don't know for sure.

There has been lots of bad apples out there that give away newnet packages and that is just uncool to use it without TimTim's OK. So they just like to disrespect, ignore them.

However there are like 4 different things:
Nothing, no mutators.
ZP.
Lag Compensator. (Which is already released. You know, it have the NYA Convert rifle, and my camping sniper rifle.)
Newnet.

Rocky, you sound like you like to use the package without TimTim's OK. Bad boy.

ASLY

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by ASLY » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:39 pm

NEWNET Is good for public servers, Im sometimes playing in ZP | COMBOINSTAGIB (USA Server) and I have an awesome ping from Europe.
So ZP maybe better if playing the players from same country, or Europe, etc.
Maybe that's not true, I don't really know how these works... There is something what I know?... :ironic2:

UT99.org

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by UT99.org » Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:34 pm

medor wrote:Newnet have a certain benefits is to allow play between europe and us and more with erasing the differences ping.

Go play on this uz server 75.102.41.52:7777

maximdymok
Experienced
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by maximdymok » Tue Mar 04, 2014 12:11 am

With hitscan only, it doesn't make much difference, except with ZP sometimes you hit and it doesn't register. However for weapons NN is 200% better.

User avatar
Wises
Godlike
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:59 am
Personal rank: ...

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by Wises » Wed Mar 05, 2014 5:58 am

Both are clientside calculated afaik.. which is not so good.

Newnet has movement compensation , and smaller hit boxes... but over all is better performance for high ping players..
Far superior to ZP103.. and the likes..
You are not able to easily.. adjust firing rates etc for sniper which has been nerfed.. also if you want to have it work with translocator (CTF) you will need to use KeepIt mod.
Aside from that is pretty awesome.

I think if they used NW3's Zp client/server model however it would be far more superior in terms of antihack.. (aimbots and the likes)

Over all great mod.

maximdymok
Experienced
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by maximdymok » Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:17 am

Wises wrote:Both are clientside calculated afaik.. which is not so good.
Pretty sure only ZP is, NN is server side (that's why when you hit someone with shock primary for example, the knockback is delayed by your latency)

User avatar
Wises
Godlike
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:59 am
Personal rank: ...

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by Wises » Wed Mar 05, 2014 9:54 pm

All i know is that it's 'Pure Based' and therefore vulnerable.
Only because the basic age-old principal is not adheared to...
'Trust nothing to the client' ..
added to this a newer principal.. 'If it needs to be OBFUSCATED , Then it needs to be SERVER-SIDE !'

regarding leaks etc.. lets be honest.. the games dying at a cancerious rate.. admins are doing whatever they can to acquire / retain whatever clientbase thry have.

Might add that even with NN the servers are not any fuller.. at least not for long.. small spats / here and there.

I think to get this game any large increase in playerbase ,
we need to look at a few systems / mods which could perhaps target todays market ;)

Quite frankly.. through Web-Browser ... also for mobiles.. with BT(Bluetooth) support.. controllers etc.
Like Quakelive pretty much.

Then have several portals (websites) scattered thtoughout the globe.. interconnect-able yet self managable..
Clientside-wise we would give clients the option of purchasing patched download.. royalties etc split between host and epic and whoever..

Or if they already have existing version.. then option to download webbrowser support modules. << this is what we need right here..

Being able to embed actual games (ut/quake/halflife/etc) into any webbrowser via java/php/etc.. would help bring this game back to life..

The host could embed a module which talks to connected peers.. encrypted where needed via gpg or whatever.
The host's website has a few modules which allow for interaction.. and said servers may need to be listed on dome kind of rating board independant of all servers .. yet managed by all admins from reputable servers .

How i percieve this system to work is like so...

Client opens chrome/firefox/ie/etc.. goes to GAMEHUB.COM

A Website comes up all fancy .. with buttons alon the top / bottom.. and a black void / screen in the middle.

A popup comes up and poses the security questions.. Allow GAMEHUB.Com to perform system check.. for needed files etx

Client says Yes.. and it scans the system for install folder.. found? Yep.. report back to browser.. found UT99/UT2K4/SWAT4/ETC

Updates will be required for any/all games.. therefore it will ask.. check/download updates?
Client ticks games then update..

Once games are updated / patched.. the green button shows (play now) next to said games.
The game loads in the background.. and the master-serverlist is displayed.. (or.. a new serverlist with selected servers only loads) this is all done via web browser.. point and click.

When client clicks server.. the browser switches to the game screen and loads the server.

Various pieces of information can be collected for stats like more in depth then gametracker.. perhaps utstats stats be good but for servers more-so.. like , players ... servers... ratings.. times and zones... who's on when.. (in your time not theres lol)
Ie; I play between (6-7pm) - mytime.. which maybe (6-7am) yourtime..

All that sort of stuff...

Add to that system management for various mods.. and the ability to embed the systems into the browser. So an admin could flick over to ace manager in browser or nexgen manager...

Anyways.. soz for off toppic.. exagerations etc.

Theres more to it.. but it addresses 'Bigger Issues' such as ... low player-base.

maximdymok
Experienced
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by maximdymok » Thu Mar 06, 2014 12:31 am

Honestly I think the web browser approach won't work. Even Quake Live, after being a browser plugin for so long, has its own client now. And you mentioned the site checking for a UT99 install.. That completely defeats the point of an in-browser game, why would you play from the browser if you have a client?

IMO to make UT more popular we need to first fix all the annoying bugs with it. NN accomplishes most of that. Then we need updated graphics - and not just S3TC textures. The game also needs an integrated Twitch streamer/YouTube uploader, so that people can easily share footage. This can serve as advertisement. Finally, it has to be free - and easy to install. Double click on the install file, wait, play - it should not need any tweaks, configurations, and any other mess to be compatible with the latest hardware and OSes. Maybe someone can make an installer that downloads the demo + that no delta patch from official sources and installs them adding all the modifications and modernizations described above.

User avatar
Feralidragon
Godlike
Posts: 5313
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:24 pm
Personal rank: Work In Progress
Location: Liandri

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by Feralidragon » Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:22 am

Just allow myself to add that Quake is open source since a long time ago, whereas UT/UEngine1 is not, thus it's impossible to make a "UT Live" of sort to speak if that's what it's being implied...
but thanks to the native headers and the engine relative openness concerning the direct replacement of key elements such as graphical drivers, sound drivers, net drivers, canvas, input driver, render, game engine itself, viewport manager, console, among a few others, along with some other indirect replacements such as collisions, mesh types, texture types, data types, and tons of others, it can be expanded to something way out of the realm of what even newer games ever achieved (Shadow's SDK is a great example of that). The only catch is that generally this means no Linux support (only relatively important in Linux servers, but then Wine works pretty well anyway for UT).
so with that in mind, please carry on.

User avatar
Wises
Godlike
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:59 am
Personal rank: ...

Embedded WindowsApp into Browser (FF/IE/CH/OP) concept

Post by Wises » Thu Mar 06, 2014 4:55 am

I was looking to try and embed a windows app (game) into the client-side browser in WindowMode and have it sized via script of some sort. if / when client clicks alt+enter (FS Mode) the WindowsApp would take over and go FullScreen.

ALT+Enter once more , reduces it to Embedded-Window-Mode .. inside of the Browser itself.
be good to be able to pass commands to and from the WindowsApp from the browser this can be done already via unreal://styled links and so-forth.

by what you have said.. these things can be done I believe.. by hooking? into the Graphics/Sound/Net/Engine System(s) via java/script/php with DB support.
allowing for browser interaction with UT and other games.. (later on)

now imagine having UT windowed-Mode .. center browser resized to 80% width + height.. the browser Background color could be #000 (black)
keyboard hooks would need to be redirected to the WindowsApp .. ESC/~/etc.

in the Browser Window which is served from an Apache Server of some sort.. ie; WebServer. And will have buttons / stats / search for server etc capabilities.
this is already possible as you can see from 333NetWorks / and other Game QueryServer system's about the web.

on the right you could have a Search function , which is coupled to a DB to find what you are looking for .. [XXXServer]
Results instantly displayed.. , ability to favourite etc.. so therefore accounts system.. forums , news etc etc .. all in the browser.

it is easy enough I guess to setup a browser system already which sit's hard left/right of screen with options.. and formatted accordingly .. (Aesthetics)
which directly interacts with UT.

perhaps things like browser based .ini editors and the like could be built into it also.
^ the browser would request permission to edit C:\UT\System\server.ini for example. And load it into the browser in edit mode.

appears to be quite popular this QL.. http://www.qlranks.com

Code: Select all


550,501 Players 3,819,856 Duels, 183,974 TDM's, 2,904,255 CA's, 202,922 CTF's and 21,281 Demos ... 

...
Last edited by Wises on Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:02 am, edited 2 times in total.

Tim-_-
Average
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:18 am

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by Tim-_- » Thu Mar 06, 2014 4:59 am

You're describing exactly what I've been working on and why I began developing newnet to begin with. :lol2:

User avatar
Wises
Godlike
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:59 am
Personal rank: ...

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by Wises » Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:09 am

Tim-_- wrote:You're describing exactly what I've been working on and why I began developing newnet to begin with. :lol2:
I thought so bro , had a sneaky feeling that either You or Ferali's future projects were in this arena.

Nice Work! .. Glad someone's doing it lol.. have had this concept for years.. but putting it into words is a bit tricky , almost resorted to drawing pretty pictures in MsPaint to save a 1000 words..

UT99.org

Re: ZP or NEWNET: which is better ?

Post by UT99.org » Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:20 am

billybill wrote:
maximdymok wrote: The game also needs an integrated Twitch streamer/YouTube uploader, so that people can easily share footage. This can serve as advertisement.
You can stream as it is, but chatting with viewers from the in-game chat is difficult and I couldn't make any progress. I know there is a way to send raw commands from the in-game chat, you need to get an IRC code the first time and use it every time after to log in. I wish more people WOULD stream for the advertisement purpose. You can make money if you have enough people willing to tune in regularly, which is another incentive. Maybe if a few of us start doing this we can refine the chat part and get a guide out