This has to be a bug right? When a railgun shoots a player, the laser is instantaneous so if the attacker hits a defender it should be the attacker round. I ask this this because often the game awards the round to the defender!
Logically? I don't understand. Lets examine railgun/instagib only...
: Here on instagib servers you can trade kills with rail players which is a strange phenomenon in rail gaming (I don't see this possible in UT, Quake, CS AWP'ers (correct me if I am wrong I mainly played UT and you can't trade there). Usually the whole idea is that if you are dead you can't shoot! So you have made players ignore death some how.
Certainly the railgun IS instant, it's clearly shown on slow motion to not have any particle or travel time from gun to enemy. The only delay is the death animation once the game decides to register the shot as a kill. Which is fine - the server will check which shot is fired at what time, register where the players are at the time and calculate if it's a kill or not in that calculation. Why it takes as long as it takes is usually down to the code (client register/server register, tickrate). Or, in Nadeos unique world - snapshot delta.
BUT this does not solve why you can trade! The calculation should still understand who has shot first and where everyone was and award the kill to the player who hit first, instead it reads the shot that is fired afterwards and allows both players to kill each other with some grace period. There is a buffer time between kill/death where you are invulnerable to maths physics and logic - I can call this the Nadeo Time. (tm)
I just joke, because I lack understanding - I do not code.Back to elite:
So sure, a rocket is not instant and can land on you after you fire - near enough. You shoot the defender and can withstand the hit from the rocket as you normally do (everyone has hit an attacker after dying in the last moment and it will deny the hit as the round is instantly(?) over). The server should be deciding who fires at that point based on its exact readings - you can't hit at the 'exact' time... or if it is, those odds are astronomical and the coding probably ignores it anyway..
What if it cost you thousands of euros? Case in point: eswc finals Lemondogs verus aAa - exactly this happens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6teaZNq ... e&t=36m28s
Certainly they would be more likely to win that first map with a 2 attack lead and few rounds remaining (they lost 3-2 overall). Yes it's if buts and maybes - I am being controversial to evoke a response. The similarity you will understand is when a football goes over the goal line but the referee ignores/misses it and the team is unfairly robbed of something potentially big (although this is not 100% evidence that the result is going to change).
Counter arguments:
1) You'll ignore what I say and suggest that the round maybe wasn't exactly a trade, maybe the rocket landed first? (I don't know how that would work but okay lets investigate that statement):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ixnzsv3 ... e=youtu.be
The reference replay from the eswc round I mention.
The railgun is delivered at 0:56.10
The defenders death is registered at 0:56.12
The rocket lands at the end of 0:56.12 - it's within 1 millisecond but clearly it's later than the death register, maybe around 0.8ms later.
The attackers death is registered at 0:56.14
So... over 4ms after the railgun is hitting the defender, the attacker is killed by the rocket. Even after the hit is registered by the game before the rocket - it just ignored it and proceeded to award the round to the defender. So that is clearly not 'at the same time'.
What I want to know is how that happens. Did you intentionally code a <5ms grace period where if a defender trades a rail you award the defender to clutch the round? Is that your intention of fairness? I see that as much like a redrawing the goal line to be wider or deeper into the goal mouth!.. At least the referee is human so you can't fault him if his eyes / brain miss it or gets paid some money, but I can fault you for allowing defenders to have an advantage in that situation where they clearly do not deserve to win the round. Gahnzby clearly won that for his team.
2) The casters state some false logic about if the attacker is dead than he can't cap the pole any more.. 2 things: people hit rockets after that grace period is over all the time and it will be ignored because the round is already awarded to the attacker. Also would it ever account for time remaining? Trading with 2 seconds left and being 5 seconds from pole etc with X stamina/speed etc? Way too many variables so the answer has to be no, it does not.
My last point is a bit of a stretch based on feeling alone. I feel that this probably ties in with the captures of poles on clients going to 100% but often gets awarded to the defence to instead... another 4-5ms discrepancy between what you see and what occurs because we witness successful captures before the last rocket hits a defender only to be awarded the round. But instead of it being a grace time, they subtract the time from the pole and it goes down to 97-99%! Then there are times where you are CERTAIN you have witnessed a successful boost from the pole well within the full capture time but the game awards the round to the attacker whilst being some meters away from the pole already. That whole period feels incredibly random at times and I can't bring you any evidence or data to back up my claims like I have done with the 2 videos, so, I can understand if you do not answer this directly.
