Page 1 of 1

Bugs in 2.06

Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:01 pm
by Genosse Dark Lord
System: Windows XP, PII 400, 512 MB, Geforce II

When someone activates SW, my system stucks for ca. 0.5 secs

Possibly a problem with a new effect on SW and my old graphic card adapter

Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:21 pm
by Spazzy McGee
what is your quality level on? i think if you take it down to high or medium it loses the SW effect - it's only for experimental. i could be wrong. correct me please.

Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 10:53 pm
by Genosse Dark Lord
Spazzy Mcgee wrote:what is your quality level on? i think if you take it down to high or medium it loses the SW effect - it's only for experimental. i could be wrong. correct me please.

Quality level: high

[ Seems, my computer is getting old :-) ]


Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:37 pm
by BZFlag_user

The new Version 2.0.6 some time. STOP me.
an Blocked the Game.

My PC ->
Pentium II MMX - 266 MHz
128 MB Ram
Gecube Radeon 9200SE - Gamebuster - 128 MB AGP 2X

O.S.: Windows XP Service Pack 2

BUT the PC AND My Conection To Internet and the System continue.


Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 9:45 pm
by AGeek
wtf? i can make no sense of your post!?


Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:03 am
by pyr0
Pentium II MMX - 266 MHz
128 MB Ram
Gecube Radeon 9200SE - Gamebuster - 128 MB AGP 2X

O.S.: Windows XP Service Pack 2
BAH, is that even legal? first off, i believe winxp recommends 256. i recommend 512 for sp2... the processor shouldnt even work on xp.... system seems a bit old, that MIGHT JUST BE THE PROBLEM...

just a thought

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:06 pm
by kahcepb[RU]
offtopic, i know


@pyr0: your statement/assumption 'bout windows requirements is...err...slightly incorrect:

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 9:14 pm
by pyr0
Here's What You Need to Use Windows XP Home Edition

PC with 300 megahertz (MHz) or higher processor clock speed recommended; 233-MHz minimum required;* Intel Pentium/Celeron family, AMD K6/Athlon/Duron family, or compatible processor recommended

128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)

1.5 gigabyte (GB) of available hard disk space.*

Super VGA (800 × 600) or higher resolution video adapter and monitor

CD-ROM or DVD drive

Keyboard and Microsoft Mouse or compatible pointing device

although 64 is the min and 128 is recommended... i believe i said 256 for SP2, considering all the CRAP it adds to a system. 128 on SP1 maybe, but ive worked as a comp tech and 128 on sp2 always had problems with speed and ability. ... sreqs.mspx

Although I HATE microsoft products, if your to use XP, SP1 or SP2, I would recommend 1GHz or better processor, 256mb ram, basic on board/3d graphics card, nothing spectacular, as a miniumum. if you want all the pretty stuff they put on there that wastes ram, i say 1.8GHz and 512mb or better with a fair 3d card...

Honestly, I feel bad for windows users. - one of many that say about the same thing with windows vista... 512mb or more, newer intel or amd processor, 3d card with DirectX 9.0 built in.... Now, although i have all of the above in a server box, this system outruns my server when i use longhorn or even xp pro. the server im speaking of is meant for file serving and is in my garage, but is used for local access only. i tried it under longhorn, 2000 pro and xp pro, its 1gb ram, amd athlon xp 3200 and a nice little geforce 6800 (soon to be on this system, i may switch the systems completely). this sytem, tested on a wired connection to a laptop, transfered at 6.2mb/s, the other, on 2000 pro got 4mb/s, xp pro was about 5.2 and longhorn was at 3.8..... i did it on 3 *nix system to the laptop as well, and all were 9-15mb/s each... running n 160gb sata...

image rendering, using blender, it was about 20 seconds to 6 minutes longer then on here, using the same image file, fairly small. took about 30 seconds here... it did it in 5-10 seconds on the 3 nix systems.

but with vistas requirements/recommendations being so high, it sucks to be windows. given, i believe the minimum for vista is actually 128mb or 256mb, but its legacy mode as they call it. meaning no graphics, none of the other happy crap at all, just a basic basic os... i can get you one on *nix that will need 1/10th that amount and run just as well as vista will.

as it sits, i have this system running gentoo 2006.0, my fileserver running gentoo 2006.0 and occassionally debian sid. i top at 80 fps here (due to my moniter limitations at this setting), i top at 80 on the other as well. but according to my tests, i can get 300fps on this, 600fps on my file server, but only 160 at max of all the windows systems

off to school though, hopefully not to fall asleep though


Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:58 am
by kahcepb[RU]
i knew you'll react this way :lol-old:
i'm running gentoo and ubuntu on my pcs. win-based machine is my son's game console (no real work is done on it)


Re: Bugs in 2.06

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 1:28 pm
by BZFlag_user
Undecover bugs! Fake Bugs, real Cheats Conspiracy, and permit by High Peoples , inside to BZflag!

what are the reals intentions!??? thief information, get popularity, make "LAMAS" players!!

They use the CENSURE, for mute, the freedom, and the unfair, for win, kick , and ban.

Too are using this for TEST cheats or mod clients for make "Unfair Game" and too Cheats or MOd (plug-ins) Servers for make easy advantage, for a limited Group!

The Reality! There any real bug? or is Only a shield, for hidden this abuses?

There any reason to these High People not use a private and limit server to make these TEST!! and Not make on Public Servers!????

Re: Bugs in 2.06

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 2:26 pm
by blast
Was that English? I mean, they kinda look like English words, but they're all mixed around. And please leave the llamas out of this. They didn't do anything wrong.

Re: Bugs in 2.06

Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:10 pm
by FiringSquad
OK I ran it through 10 translations and it's beginning to make sense. ;)
After 10 translations wrote:Hidden Error! The actual state of error, fraud, conspiracy, allowed to enter the Supreme People's Court BZFlag! What is the real purpose? Thief in the mass media, "Lama" players! They refuse to use, no noise, and the abuser, Win and legs, and stop them. To use this test code, or "foul" defense mode customers, deception (optional) server is easy to get in a limited time! Seriously! In the actual accident? Or is it just a screen to hide abuse? We have no reason to believe that this is not how people use a private company with limited liability in order to test this server! Not in public services !????
BTW What made you resurrect this old thread anyway? It's 4 ½ years old. :shock: