Hello, can we update the anti cheat? The DECK16 all weapons server uses 13b I think that's the latest version? I have a question too how come London 2 uses different tick rate ? I try to practice on it but it feels way different than london(to me it actually feels better). If possible clone london to london 2 server to keep it consistent? and thanks for keeping this game alive.
latest anti cheat?
Same but different. 
I could be wrong but I think London1 uses ZeroPing - (ZP) while London2 includes NewNet - (NN). Some people like the first, and the second - probably no one, so far. 
friendofafriend Hello, can we update the anti cheat? The DECK16 all weapons server uses 13b I think that's the latest version?
As far as I'm aware 13b is a testing version. I'm not in the testing group so I don't have access to it. As soon as there is a public release I will make sure to update to it.
friendofafriend I have a question too how come London 2 uses different tick rate ? I try to practice on it but it feels way different than london(to me it actually feels better). If possible clone london to london 2 server to keep it consistent?
player_0 was right, London 2 runs FragNewNet. Newnets require a minimum tickrate of 60. The main London combo server doesn't have a fast enough CPU for that tickrate without limiting the number of players. Also, not everyone prefers the feel of London 2. Mostly, there are complaints about the grapple not feeling smooth there. These are the main reasons why they are currently different. I expect at some future date the main London combo server will also be running newnet or we will all move to London 2.
It doesn't work. The deck 16 all weapon server is full of cheaters.
There are no reliable anti cheats out there.
- Edited
drunken_fool True, there are no dependable anticheats. ACE's security by obscurity is itself indicative of how bad the design really is. I don't get why anticheat development is not open. Certainly cheat dev is.
snowguy Why don't you run london #1 with FragNewNet if I may ask?
London #1 server's CPU is too slow for newnet tickrates. I would have to reduce players to a maximum of 12 to run at a 60+ tickrate and maybe also have to reduce the spectator slots . Already, there are players trying to join and can't when the server is full at 18 so I really don't want to reduce it any further. Additionally, not everyone is happy with FragNewNet currently.
What's a normal tickrate supposed to be?
- Edited
The game default tickrate is 20. If you use a newnet it needs a minimum of 60. Most players prefer newnet and if you have a fast single core speed on your server's cpu and not tons of players newnet at 100 tickrate will be a very nice experience.
Check this out and especially the screenshots comparing tickrates:
https://wiki.unrealadmin.org/Netspeed_Tutorial_(UT)
For my test server I usually set it to 60(normally it's just vanilia with relics), did mess around with 120 tick rate when I had a better pc as it was just me messing around with bots testing stuff for node utstats.
Also stop whining about ACE being closed source every 5 posts. 
snowguy
Thanks for replying.
drunken_fool
besides the anti cheat the newest ace has better crosshair support
the_cowboy
why would you open source anti cheat? wouldnt the cheaters just have a better understanding of whats going on? maybe im not following but doesnt seem like a good idea
- Edited
friendofafriend Security of the system has nothing to do with closed source nature. If your abstractions are principled enough, you don't need to hide your implementations. I am not sure how versed you really are with coding, you can take example of linux, an open source software being used on servers of google and Microsoft and one of the chief reasons is that Linux is more secure.
You are doing a great disservice to the community if you hide your software implementation under the pretext of security because guess what, even uscripts are able to bypass ace make it a laughing stock personally.
Cowboy does make a good point the cheat anti-cheat communities do seem to have it backward. If I was the ACE of ACE I'd want the number 1 server in all of UTville showcasing my mad coding skills but then again SnowGuy probably doesn't wanna run test versions on his servers anyway.
How much would it cost to run a good 100 tick rate server for a year? Maybe we can all donate for a full year?
London 2 and Atlanta combogib are already at tickrate 80. I could put either one at 100 if a few players started playing there regularly and wanted it moved up. Yesterday, there were 3 or 4 players on London 2 while the main combo was full and stuck on niven-caos 
What i meant was, to put london 1 on 100 TR and most modern Newnet while keeping the 18 players max
I'm pretty sure that lots of people (Myself included) wouldn't mind donating to get something like that
London 1 is the most populated server and it would be nice to play on a modern server settings with all these people
There is no way you are getting 18 players and 100 tick rate with newnet, look at the netstats(F6) on the zp server with 18 players, then look at how much higher it is on a 100 tick rate server with newnet with 5 players.
Pug servers with 100tr have 10 players max, the public server with 12 players couldn't handle newnet 100 tick rate, had to be put down to 65 or 85.
Ooper Pug servers with 100tr have 10 players max, the public server with 12 players couldn't handle newnet 100 tick rate, had to be put down to 65 or 85.
Hmm, just wondering if native C++ code can help in this area. I mean to scale 100 TR to 20+ players.
I am complete noob in this type of calculation and one way I can improve my knowledge is to actually make native newnet type of mod given that'd indeed be useful i.e better scalable.
Ooper It doesn't really have to be 100. 65 or 85 is also fine.
Anything is better than ZP and 20 TR