Jump to content

What are you hoping to do with fastman92's limit adjuster?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi guys @fastman92 has recently engaged with us in order to get his limit adjuster implemented into MTA.  Obviously, there are a number of complexities involved in implementing this, and we need

We really appreciate your interest in integrating FLA in MTA, but there are a few requirements that have to be met: Only one MTA version (2 versions would lead to fragmentation which is not our

Link to the project http://gtaforums.com/topic/733982-fastman92-limit-adjuster/

On 10/12/2016 at 6:28 PM, qaisjp said:

Once the team has understood what the community wants, we can decide on how we want things to be implemented. If fastman92 goes through the enormous amount of effort in submitting a pull request with his limit adjuster integrated into MTA (without prior discussion), and if his implementation does not align with how we'd like things to be implemented, we will have to reject the PR. Wasting effort is not fun for all parties involved - for the team to review the code and for fastman92 to implement the limit adjuster.

Is this limit adjuster something that can have individual limit adjustments added on their own? For example the object streaming limit is one of the most requested things to increase, if this limit was increased on it's own, that would be seen as a huge update. A single change like this couldn't have any reason to disagree with either, rather than if it was part of a huge pull request that involve too many modifications.

Link to post
5 minutes ago, Arran said:

Is this limit adjuster something that can have individual limit adjustments added on their own? For example the object streaming limit is one of the most requested things to increase, if this limit was increased on it's own, that would be seen as a huge update. A single change like this couldn't have any reason to disagree with either, rather than if it was part of a huge pull request that involve too many modifications.

Yes.

Link to post
On 2016. 12. 13. at 5:24 PM, Arran said:

the object streaming limit is one of the most requested things

@fastman92 Please if it possible don't forget about ID limit too. There are a lot of server which would be happy if this limit would be increased.
(At least here in Hungary, lot of RolePlay would use that feature.)

Edited by dugasz1
Link to post

I have only one but some players report many others and they start being annoying with only ~30 replaced objects. Maybe you have replaced most objects where players can walk on, that would explain why no one reported a stair or wall without collision because custom objects are not affected.

Object 10244 has no col for me on my server.

Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...

I released a MTA version back in January of this year that was compatible with FLA. The only limit that was not resolved was the ID limit relating to the 16 bit limit(IDs couldnt be over 32767). I am currently working on a new version and with Fastmans help we were able to resolve the 16 bit limit(FLA 4.1+). Based on experience making the standard MTA code compatible with FLA was rather easy, it mostly included changing hard-coded values(addresses usually) to dynamic ones as suggested by Fastman. 

My release:

http://gtaforums.com/topic/839261-saxvcxlc-mta-compatible-build/

 

  • Like 4
Link to post

I'd like to see this thing in MTA, it would open a lot of new things which we couldn't see until this.

Edited by TwisT3R
Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...

We really appreciate your interest in integrating FLA in MTA, but there are a few requirements that have to be met:

  • Only one MTA version (2 versions would lead to fragmentation which is not our intention). The other main problem with a "moddable" version is also that such a version would be very prone to cheating and would lead to frustration due to cheaters on the long term
  • It has to be integrated in a dynamic way. That means: No MTA restarts, but changing the limits on demand via a clientside function (or something similar)
  • Since FLA would require modifications for MTA anyway, I don't see a reason to load FLA via an ASI loader. Instead, it should be merged with the Game SA/Multiplayer SA module.

If you are still not deterred by these requirements and think it is affordable, we'd definitely appreciate a pull request on GitHub (and will accept it if the code quality is fine).

  • Like 9
Link to post
15 hours ago, Jusonex said:

We really appreciate your interest in integrating FLA in MTA, but there are a few requirements that have to be met:

  • Only one MTA version (2 versions would lead to fragmentation which is not our intention). The other main problem with a "moddable" version is also that such a version would be very prone to cheating and would lead to frustration due to cheaters on the long term
  • It has to be integrated in a dynamic way. That means: No MTA restarts, but changing the limits on demand via a clientside function (or something similar)
  • Since FLA would require modifications for MTA anyway, I don't see a reason to load FLA via an ASI loader. Instead, it should be merged with the Game SA/Multiplayer SA module.

If you are still not deterred by these requirements and think it is affordable, we'd definitely appreciate a pull request on GitHub (and will accept it if the code quality is fine).

Changing the limits while the game is running cannot be done, the FLA makes changes, which are irreversible: all or none.

The limit patching is an extremely complicated process.

There's a valid reason, why the limits weren't hacked before.

If you want some changes, (the FLA should do different changes according to different configuration?), obviously you need to run the game once again, with the FLA.

 

There is no nothing to agree with.

There is no better choice available.

One idea is to make a launcher a launcher where you could choose a server.
Like SA:MP
Which starts the proxy_gtasa.exe only after you click Connect
It only takes to understand the rule. How they implement it is completely their choice.
The rule is that the FLA loads and changes the executable code in some places, when GTA SA starts. 

The choice is yours.

You can complain saying that the design is still far from you'd want it to be and get stuck with it.

Or you can actually do something and make the MTA better for many.

 

Edited by fastman92
  • Like 1
Link to post

There's something to think of.

Certain limits need some consideration.

Like Water map size.

This limit sets the max Water map size with all the underlying consequences:

 

the outside water is normally rendered outside of -3000 to 3000 coordinates.

Anything inside depends on the water.dat.

 

When the Water map size is changed to let's say 12000, the outside water will be rendered outside of -6000 to 6000 coordinates.

Anything inside will depend on the water.dat.

Edited by fastman92
Link to post

I don't feel qualified enough to tell the MTA how the FLA should be implemented.
The MTA team is free to implement the FLA in any way that's possible.

 

One part the MTA team must do themselves.
Loading of the FLA.
It's the MTA team to decide how it will be made.
Without this part I can't modify the MTA.
(if I make changes, we should be able to test if game works, with the FLA running, right?)

 

Get the MTA team to decide how the FLA should be implemented, they should make a loading of the FLA at least.
Then I can change a certain MTA code to become compatible with the interesting limits.

Edited by fastman92
Link to post
  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...