Odamex "Team" wad help

Soul Sucka said:

Comparing Zandronum vs Odamex to GZDoom vs Boom/Chocolate Doom is fallacious mainly because Boom and Chocolate Doom have easily understandable and distinct purposes that set them apart from other ports. Boom notably set new heights for the Doom engine back in the day, both in terms of mapping features and limit removals, gave birth to a popular mapping standard (many "oldschool" mapsets you see out there these days require Boom-compatible ports) and served as the groundwork for more advanced ports to come, namely ZDoom, while Chocolate Doom aims to stay as close and compatible to Vanilla as possible, since not many computers can run Doom in its original MS-DOS version very well (or at all) at this day and age.

We don't have Chocolate C/S Doom though, making Odamex the closest thing to a vanilla experience in terms of long-distance deathmatch. It is the only port that supports the original demo format and frankly just feels closer to the original DOS executables. To some of us, anyway. :P

Meanwhile, if you were to ask what Odamex does that other ports don't [...]

Variable wad rotation allowing for a single server to host many maps, rather than having to use 10 servers to host 10 mapsets. Pair that with proper vanilla-approved demo support and you already have two strong reasons for many users and hosts alike, though like any port, it has it's strengths and it's shortcomings. Oda is definitely more niche than Zand, no doubt at all.

[...] it is fair to assume that Odamex's primary goal is to surpass ZDaemon as the oldschool multiplayer port of choice, without ZDaemon's infamous administration issues and whatnot.

ZDaemon is more oldschool than Zandronum certainly, but it doesn't have that native demo support and is lacking compatibility with quite a few 'vanillaisms' as it were. Perhaps that was the goal originally, but that's going back quite a few years now.

The two main problems faced by Odamex right now are that first, its development has (unfortunately) slowed down to a crawl since two years back, and second, ultimately, by being an oldschool port (which in itself is a setback since a great majority of Doom-related activity nowadays stems from advanced ZDoom-based maps/mods) that doesn't look all that much different from ZDaemon, it doesn't have much appeal to newcomers in comparison, seeing that ZDaemon also has a significantly greater legacy.

Both points are definitely true, but hey, that's the way the cookie crumbles, sadly. (Also this is a totally offtopic point but I love how long ZD has been going for - Seems like nothing can or will ever stop it!)

[...] The only way Odamex could somehow get a popularity boost is if it greatly surpassed ZDaemon technologically (which can be tricky since the port's attached to an oldschool philosophy) and made some surreal netcode improvements. I know some of you still have really funky ideas on how to improve Doom's multiplayer functionality beyond its current status at large!

I think it would be more sensible for ZDaemon to attempt such a change rather than Odamex at this point - Based on my observations, ZDaemon's focus on pure vanilla compatibility is not nearly as honed as it used to be, plus it has the (unfortunately) poorest connection quality of all 3 when it comes to international play. If there's one lone thing about Odamex that is 100% fine in it's current state, I'd say it's the netcode. With a higher ping Oda feels marginally smoother than Zan and notably smoother than ZD. I think it would be cool if the ZD team implemented Oda/Zan style unlagged if they so felt inclined.

The only reason it seems harder for one's project to become popular in Zandronum is because there's a plethora of populated servers with a variety of things on the plate, whereas you don't have nearly as much activity in other ports, which explains why it would seem "easier" for your project to thrive in those places, but that idea is only a relative point-of-view thing, really. At the end of the day, you're not going to piss off anyone if you make a more port-exclusive project (regardless of which one it is), especially not in the multiplayer scene where there are no noteworthy ports outside of the three I mentioned in this post. You do you, man!

In all honesty, I don't think it's just that Zan has more populated servers with a wider variety of wads/gamemodes (though that is obviously true and is a big contributing factor), but that people who gravitate towards ZD/Oda are actually actively seeking something a little more old-style. If you don't want to go overboard with the snazzyness, it definitely makes sense to consider ZD/Oda compatibility, however if you want to go all-out and take advantage of lots of new features, definitely focus on Zandronum and don't worry if you go beyond the limits of ZD or Oda.

Apologies for rehashing a few points, but you're spot on - I'm really glad you've made this post as newcomers probably do have a hard time determining where the ports fit in relative to one another and what each one "does". Maybe I can find some way of outlining it more clearly in the FAQ without stepping on any of the dev's toes or offending people's playing sensibilities or whatever. These things should be clear at a glance!

-

KevvyLava said:

I know that because I like more classic Doom stuff and a lot of people like the newer modes/scripting/features, etc., but I think much of Doom's charm is in the strange ways things work. Stuff like 3D floors is a minor change and just allows for some better levels, really. I wish ACS scripting was easier to figure out. I'd kill to be able to assign a linedef to more than one action easily.

I was thinking it'd be cool to do a game mode sort of like Assault from Unreal Tournament...but without scripting, it'd be tough. That's something that I think people might actually play. Who knows. Even if I'm only ever able to get a few friends to play with me, it's better than nothing. I know the odds of it breaking into the community are somewhat low, which is why this map pack I made were classic levels redone...figure there might be some appeal.

Hmm.. It sounds like you want to make a mapset & gamemode that's OS at a glance, but is actually taking advantage of lots of new features - If you wanted such a thing to see a degree of success, you'd really need your maps to look up to par with the current Zandronum mapping standard. (Take a look at DBAB for a good example.) If you just want to play with a few buddies, you can do it however you like of course, but it seems like a shame to spend so many hours on a thing less than 10 people will see. If you develop this further, I'd urge you to spend time making the maps look 'modern-ish' at the very least so no one judges the book by it's cover, so to speak.

Maybe a shame, yes.

Based on my idea of "Classic Doom Deathmatch Remade", do you think that might have appeal on Zan, ZD, or Oda (seems like the answer to Oda is yes)?

1. For Odamex, if I made:
* 32-map megawad of levels from all of the Dooms
* Edited them to be a bit more balanced for deathmatch
* Kept the overall feel of the levels
* Got rid of boring parts of levels to focus on pacing
* Added more weapons/ammo/items in certain levels

^ Do you think that'd resonate?

2. For Zan, if I made:
* Same as above
* Used 3D floors and some minor scripting
* Fixed some of the architecture to make it look more modern
* Maybe went to the extent of mixing levels or something?

^ Do you think people would play it to get more mileage out of the classic Doom levels?

KevvyLava said:

Maybe a shame, yes.

Based on my idea of "Classic Doom Deathmatch Remade", do you think that might have appeal on Zan, ZD, or Oda (seems like the answer to Oda is yes)?

1. For Odamex, if I made:
* 32-map megawad of levels from all of the Dooms
* Edited them to be a bit more balanced for deathmatch
* Kept the overall feel of the levels
* Got rid of boring parts of levels to focus on pacing
* Added more weapons/ammo/items in certain levels

^ Do you think that'd resonate?

2. For Zan, if I made:
* Same as above
* Used 3D floors and some minor scripting
* Fixed some of the architecture to make it look more modern
* Maybe went to the extent of mixing levels or something?

^ Do you think people would play it to get more mileage out of the classic Doom levels?

To be honest it probably wouldn't have appeal anywhere outside of a few select people. It's best to just make new maps entirely. Now, in saying that, you can draw some inspiration/architecture from the IWAD levels, but ultimately they just aren't really suited for it. And before anyone says BUT DECAY MAP01 MAP07 E1M1 you know damn well they aren't frequently played in DUEL let alone actual DM. Stop deluding yourselves.

OK, thanks for the heads up. I think I'll just make maps for fun. I'm way better at fixing/editing maps than making my own, even if it's just for a few friends, or whatever. Bummer, but that's life.

SoulSucka said:

Underhanded Odamex Bashing (TM) Copyright Ralphis 2016

WHOA more truthful statements about odamex, better watch out because attacks on a port are personal attacks now and you know...

Ralphis said:

keep making personal attacks on this forum and you won't have much more to say here.

Doomkid said:

We don't have Chocolate C/S Doom though, making Odamex the closest thing to a vanilla experience in terms of long-distance deathmatch. It is the only port that supports the original demo format and frankly just feels closer to the original DOS executables. To some of us, anyway. :P

Honestly I'd buy this argument, IF odamex actually stuck to it like it did in the .5.x and earlier series. Unfortunately it became very apparent that the goal was simply to emulate an old version of zdaemon without being controlled by Kilgore, and not wanting to admit it. I think Kilgore is the winner here! Literally all of odamex's selling features to get people to buy into it for the IDL was "hey look we support the same things zdaemon (and skulltag) have support for 10 years now!" Odamex is great at pretending to want vanilla doom as the standard. It was tried and turned out most players did not like vanilla's limitations and features(bugs)!

Doomkid said:

Variable wad rotation allowing for a single server to host many maps, rather than having to use 10 servers to host 10 mapsets. Pair that with proper vanilla-approved demo support and you already have two strong reasons for many users and hosts alike, though like any port, it has it's strengths and it's shortcomings. Oda is definitely more niche than Zand, no doubt at all.

Vanilla demo support for all the people watching vanilla demos. Good selling point. The on-the-fly wad switching is literally odamex's only good unique feature. Ultimately though this is meaningless for listing port features for a mapper - can't really make use of this in DB can I?

Doomkid said:

ZDaemon is more oldschool than Zandronum certainly, but it doesn't have that native demo support and is lacking compatibility with quite a few 'vanillaisms' as it were. Perhaps that was the goal originally, but that's going back quite a few years now.

This is also a bit of a misnomer because ZD isn't open source and we really don't know what is in there (tons of speculation has been made) but one thing is for sure that it is only more "oldschool" because it is built and maintained off an ancient version of zdoom. Zdaemon has been adding plenty of (useless) features that make it it's own brand of newschool doom, to be very fair and honest.
Both points are definitely true, but hey, that's the way the cookie crumbles, sadly. (Also this is a totally offtopic point but I love how long ZD has been going for - Seems like nothing can or will ever stop it!)

Doomkid said:

I think it would be more sensible for ZDaemon to attempt such a change rather than Odamex at this point - Based on my observations, ZDaemon's focus on pure vanilla compatibility is not nearly as honed as it used to be, plus it has the (unfortunately) poorest connection quality of all 3 when it comes to international play. If there's one lone thing about Odamex that is 100% fine in it's current state, I'd say it's the netcode. With a higher ping Oda feels marginally smoother than Zan and notably smoother than ZD. I think it would be cool if the ZD team implemented Oda/Zan style unlagged if they so felt inclined.

One thing I will give odamex is that it doesn't lie about unlagged. ZDaemon has claimed for years to support unlagged and damn you sure could fool me.

Doomkid said:

In all honesty, I don't think it's just that Zan has more populated servers with a wider variety of wads/gamemodes (though that is obviously true and is a big contributing factor), but that people who gravitate towards ZD/Oda are actually actively seeking something a little more old-style. If you don't want to go overboard with the snazzyness, it definitely makes sense to consider ZD/Oda compatibility, however if you want to go all-out and take advantage of lots of new features, definitely focus on Zandronum and don't worry if you go beyond the limits of ZD or Oda.

Aside from your group, mostly (not everybody) the people who gravitate towards odamex are the jaded and irrelevant outcasts from other ports.

Doomkid said:

Apologies for rehashing a few points, but you're spot on - I'm really glad you've made this post as newcomers probably do have a hard time determining where the ports fit in relative to one another and what each one "does". Maybe I can find some way of outlining it more clearly in the FAQ without stepping on any of the dev's toes or offending people's playing sensibilities or whatever. These things should be clear at a glance!

Ultimately it's time someone made up a guide for people to help them start MP mapping, pointing them in the right direction for their needs and outlined goals. I started such a guide a while ago, I guess I should finish it. It would also help to keep these sort of off-topic discussions out of the author's topic (less clutter).

KevvyLava said:

OK, thanks for the heads up. I think I'll just make maps for fun. I'm way better at fixing/editing maps than making my own, even if it's just for a few friends, or whatever. Bummer, but that's life.

In the end, you should always just make the maps for fun and for yourself. No matter what port you map for, never assume you will have an audience. Make something you like, you want, and you will have fun with.

Roger that, Decay.

BTW, do you know anyone that can help me/my friend troubleshoot Zan on Mac? He's having some issues and after some Googling, we can't figure it out. Should I post a new thread?

I have never used a Mac and so I'm really unable to help him.

KevvyLava said:

I've found that generally there are ways within the normal Doom engine to get what you want, so that's what I tend to stick to. One thing that I've experimented with on my maps is how to do a deathtag game with a scoreboard (I usually use a "W1/WR Raise Floor 24" tag to raise a skull pillar but that only results in 5 scores needed and I'm not sure if that's long enough).

The skull pillar raise was pretty cool when I looked at your e1m5 edit. There are some deathtag maps in udm1 and I think one of the tlsdm wads that actually implement numbered scoreboards throughout the map that you could check out.

Decay said:

Ultimately it's time someone made up a guide for people to help them start MP mapping, pointing them in the right direction for their needs and outlined goals. I started such a guide a while ago, I guess I should finish it. It would also help to keep these sort of off-topic discussions out of the author's topic (less clutter).

This would be a smart move, I think, though part of me wonders how many times you'll trash Oda and ZD in said guide. Would it then become a guide to gravitate towards Zand mapping? Hehe. In all seriousness though, a guide would be a great move for newcomers, but seems like it should only be half of the equation as you'll wind up touching on many of the same points as an SP guide, in which case you might as well make it a full guide and not leave 2 paragraphs of SP-only info aside. That said, I think the guide would be the most balanced if DK worked on it as well.

I can be very port neutral (safe spaces!) if I want to be. I just often choose not to. https://www.doomworld.com/vb/doom-multiplayer/90563-starting-a-multiplayer-project/ judge for yourself. I only made true statements so far as I am aware and will gladly change anything if it is factually incorrect.

Thanks, Ralphis.

I have tried a few different ideas. I made a MAP01 edit that I think is maybe my best deathtag level. Each score lowers a series of colored bars and after 10, the exit is opened. One thing I like is that after the opposing team scores 7 times, it opens up a "special weapons cache" in your base, which can help you catch up.

Oh, also, maybe you guys can answer this: Is there a way in DoomBuilder 2 that I can use all the textures in both Doom and Doom2 on all of my maps? Without making the file really big? Or does anyone have a combined texture wad or something? Not sure the best way to go about this.

Oh right, sorry I can't help you with your friend's MAC issue. Best I can do is point you to zandronum IRC or zandronum.com

As for the textures, you will need to add textures to your wad. Best would be to use the Doom2.wad as your main IWAD and use this Doom1 texture wad as an additional resource in DB.

So if I do this:
http://sli.mg/FeSulr

Any wad I make using that game configuration will automatically include the textures from that and doom2.wad, then? I wasn't sure how that would work, ha.

Decay said:

I can be very port neutral (safe spaces!) if I want to be. I just often choose not to. https://www.doomworld.com/vb/doom-multiplayer/90563-starting-a-multiplayer-project/ judge for yourself. I only made true statements so far as I am aware and will gladly change anything if it is factually incorrect.

This is actually one of the most informative and helpful threads I've read in a while. Should be circulated around quite a bit.

KevvyLava said:

My biggest gripe is how difficult it is to just set up a server and get friends to play (seems like every port has a unique issue or two).

If you're setting up your own server, make sure it's got a reliable connection to do so, a port-forwarded router, and try to copy the DMFlags from any other popular server in the master server list you feel are closest to what you'd be hosting.

KevvyLava said:

I was thinking it'd be cool to do a game mode sort of like Assault from Unreal Tournament...but without scripting, it'd be tough. That's something that I think people might actually play. Who knows. Even if I'm only ever able to get a few friends to play with me, it's better than nothing. I know the odds of it breaking into the community are somewhat low, which is why this map pack I made were classic levels redone...figure there might be some appeal.

A well-executed Assault mod would definitely get a bunch of people playing for a while. I know there are some ACS tutorials out there, but your best bet is probably to read ACS code and see how it's applied to major projects you like. That can be a somewhat efficient way to learn ACS, and coding in general.

Doomkid said:

We don't have Chocolate C/S Doom though, making Odamex the closest thing to a vanilla experience in terms of long-distance deathmatch. It is the only port that supports the original demo format and frankly just feels closer to the original DOS executables. To some of us, anyway. :P

I can appreciate Odamex actually staying truer to the oldschool experience as it says it does, because ZDaemon does (or did, but probably still does, I imagine) have instances of weird behaviour that are difficult to be pinpointed and discussed about since it's close-sourced.

Doomkid said:

Variable wad rotation allowing for a single server to host many maps, rather than having to use 10 servers to host 10 mapsets. Pair that with proper vanilla-approved demo support and you already have two strong reasons for many users and hosts alike, though like any port, it has it's strengths and it's shortcomings. Oda is definitely more niche than Zand, no doubt at all.

The wad rotation feature is best (and often only) executed with old maps back in the 90's that were single-map wads for the most part. It's a cool gimmick that works well for that particular scenario, but today's player's wad choices are, 99% of the time, large mappacks and compilation wads like Duel40 or ZDDL, rendering that feature less useful, so it's definitely not something someone would stop playing other ports for.

To be frank, vanilla demo support is relatively such a minor feature that it would hardly make a difference if Odamex didn't have it. You could use Odamex to watch vanilla demos and maybe record single player demos (like speedruns, for example), but for both of these cases, you already have significantly more standard ports for those necessities in Chocolate Doom, Boom and Competitive Doom.

You say these are "strong reasons", but if you asked people who play Odamex, I doubt anyone would honestly tell you that they actually use these features extensively, or even at all.

Doomkid said:

ZDaemon is more oldschool than Zandronum certainly, but it doesn't have that native demo support and is lacking compatibility with quite a few 'vanillaisms' as it were. Perhaps that was the goal originally, but that's going back quite a few years now.

It can be fair to say that ZDaemon is less oldschool than Odamex, but it's evident that it is still heavily more oldschool than it is newschool. That hasn't changed, so it could also be a fair assessment to say that these two ports are competing with each other in that sense. :P

Doomkid said:

Both points are definitely true, but hey, that's the way the cookie crumbles, sadly. (Also this is a totally offtopic point but I love how long ZD has been going for - Seems like nothing can or will ever stop it!)

This is just trivia, but the first version of Skulltag came out on 2000, before ZDaemon's first release in 2001. If you were to attach Zandronum's history to Skulltag's (which isn't an unreasonable stretch), Zandronum has actually been running for longer than ZD has!

Doomkid said:

I think it would be more sensible for ZDaemon to attempt such a change rather than Odamex at this point - Based on my observations, ZDaemon's focus on pure vanilla compatibility is not nearly as honed as it used to be, plus it has the (unfortunately) poorest connection quality of all 3 when it comes to international play. If there's one lone thing about Odamex that is 100% fine in it's current state, I'd say it's the netcode. With a higher ping Oda feels marginally smoother than Zan and notably smoother than ZD. I think it would be cool if the ZD team implemented Oda/Zan style unlagged if they so felt inclined.

I disagree. Oda's netcode is okay, but there's a good room for improvement still. Zandronum is overall significantly smoother for me, and this comes from a high ping player just like you. This netcode discussion could go on to a topic of its own so I won't say any more about it, but Odamex does desperately need an update, and not just for updating's sake. My experiences playing ZDaemon were really bad due to its questionable unlagged, so it'd definitely be nice of them to implement major improvements, but who knows what their devs are up to these days.

KevvyLava said:

1. For Odamex, if I made:
* 32-map megawad of levels from all of the Dooms
* Edited them to be a bit more balanced for deathmatch
* Kept the overall feel of the levels
* Got rid of boring parts of levels to focus on pacing
* Added more weapons/ammo/items in certain levels

^ Do you think that'd resonate?

I'm pretty sure that idea's been done to death already. You know DWANGO? It's filled to the brim with altered versions of the original maps, especially D2M1, and that's only one example. You could probably find hundreds of others in idgames. Now, I'm sure there aren't nearly as many newschool alterations complete with 3D floors and other fancy features, but I still agree with Decay in that you should just pursue making new maps altogether.

Decay said:

WHOA more truthful statements about odamex, better watch out because attacks on a port are personal attacks now and you know...

There's a fine line between what I wrote and a post that pretty much screams "HAHA ODAMEX IS BAD LOL" without having much in the way of being civil. Regardless though, I won't be arguing here whether I think punishments handed out here are fair or not.

Decay said:

Literally all of odamex's selling features to get people to buy into it for the IDL was "hey look we support the same things zdaemon (and skulltag) have support for 10 years now!" Odamex is great at pretending to want vanilla doom as the standard. It was tried and turned out most players did not like vanilla's limitations and features(bugs)!

Most players wouldn't have liked Odamex regardless of how much better or worse it was at the time. The major influx of players came from the IDL migration from ZDaemon (which was a huge subject of discussion for a long time), so even if Oda was somehow better than ZD in every conceivable way, a good chunk of the playerbase would've still left anyway, no matter when the port change happened, because the IDL was a community that built itself upon ZDaemon, in all of its good and bad points, for YEARS (Doom multiplayer ports are just that different from each other that such divisions are very much real). I've got my own theories on how the relationship between IDL, WDL and multiplayer ports have shaped the competitive scene as a whole into the shell of its former self that it is today, but that's a topic for another time...

"I'm pretty sure that idea's been done to death already. You know DWANGO? It's filled to the brim with altered versions of the original maps, especially D2M1, and that's only one example. You could probably find hundreds of others in idgames. Now, I'm sure there aren't nearly as many newschool alterations complete with 3D floors and other fancy features, but I still agree with Decay in that you should just pursue making new maps altogether."

Yeah, that's why I'm starting to see that the Doom community isn't really for me at this point. It seems like people are trying to turn it into a drastically different game these days and that's not really my thing. I like to mostly worth within the framework of the game, with the occasional exception, like 3D floors and a few other things.

KevvyLava said:

Yeah, that's why I'm starting to see that the Doom community isn't really for me at this point. It seems like people are trying to turn it into a drastically different game these days and that's not really my thing. I like to mostly worth within the framework of the game, with the occasional exception, like 3D floors and a few other things.

Truth be told this is pretty heartbreaking to read - We're playing older/less popular shit all the time in dmstuff on any of the 3 ports. The community at large may not be for you, but myself and quite a few others, both oldies and newcomers, would definitely be willing to host/play anything ranging from the oldest of oldschool to the newest of newschool. We're more OS focused overall but I've never ruled anything out until I've tried it thoroughly for myself. You should pop in some time and see how you go, people pop in randomly once or twice for a match and often end up as regulars.

I log on and play on servers every now and again. But every time I go on Doomseeker, it is some crazy version of Doom that I'm not familiar with...sometimes that is really awesome, though.

Man, if I could just run a server, have people occasionally drop in try it out, and maybe get some friends to play sometimes, that'd be awesome. But like, I read this thread and it's all technical mumbo-jumbo. Cool that you guys are into it.

Basically, what I'm saying is that if people could just download Zandronum and easily start a server or join a server without having to know which customer parameters result in "first to 20 frags ends the level" (why isn't there a checkbox for that in Doomseeker?), then it'd be easier for more people to pick up and play, thus more new people joining. I came here to ask basic questions and was immediately met with people arguing over which port was best, or what the "true mission" of a port is, or why I should make maps for which ports (or all of them?) and so on.

I know people are working on it for free, but I'm a diehard fan with a lot of Doom editing experience and a moderate technical background...and even I'm having trouble setting up servers for friends.

Basics, you know?

This thread became convoluted, but to put it simply - Come hang out in #dmstuff (or any Doom IRC really) and after about 10 minutes you'll be ready to host and/or play just about anything. It's certainly not as complex as the lengthy posts in this thread might have you think. I hope to see you giving it a try some time, stuff like Dwango and whatever else that's seen as outdated by many gets plenty of mileage amongst our crew, then again so does stuff that's a little more new and shmick. We're willing to play just about anything :)

Cool, man. I'm out for the weekend...going to Montréal for the weekend. But Monday and Tuesday night, I'll probably be down to host some stuff.

OK, back from vacation and almost done with my 20-level deathmatch mod of classic Doom maps. I chose maps that I thought would make good deathmatch levels if I modified them a bit. For some, I (re)moved large chunks of maps to make it flow better, but still keep the feel of the original level and make it conducive to 8-player DM. All levels will have custom music.

I've been told this sort of idea has been a bit played out, but I think people will appreciate the re-balanced levels regardless.

By the weekend, I will be hosting a server from my PC (if I can get it going...may need help)...what I'm hoping to hear from you all is which port you think it will be most attractive to based on the level styles (assuming I can't run a server for all 3 simultaneously). Since it's vanilla Doom engine-wise, it will work on all 3.

Even if it doesn't get super popular, I hope that this weekend some of you will get some enjoyment out of it.

Cool man! Id recommend heading over to #dmstuff before you start it up. For one, we could potentially (I can't promise anything) get your wad up on a server. If you host from your comp, the lag will likely be so real that playing and seriously gathering info will be out of the question. Just my 2 cents. Best of luck, tho!

Thanks for the tip...I was under the impression that if I had a good connection, it would work for a few people, but maybe not? I have 75Mbit down, and I think 25Mbit up...usually pings well. But you guys are the expert. Maybe it'll be worth a limited run. Will head over to there when it's finished. I'll also post it here since everyone has been helpful (even the people fighting each other, ha).

We love to butt heads. Like a couple mountain rams it's the only way we know to interact with each other. Like the scorpion that stung the frog on the trip across the river, it's in our nature. But take it with a grain of salt, hehe.

As for specific speeds for decent hosting; you got me there. I'm not a huge comp person, but I can say that as a general rule of thumb hosting on your own comp that you are also playing on will always have worse latency than a dedicated server. Now, by how much, I couldn't tell.

It really depends where you're located relative to the server. Our cluster is hosted in California, I connect all the way from Australia and the connection is quite smooth, so if you're closer than I am you should be fine. When you connect to a server, check your ping - Anything under about 150 is generally seen as a solid playable connection.

I'll give it a go...just need to finish the last map I'm working on.

I was thinking the following flags...maybe you all can advise me on what people like:

- DM
- Item respawn 30 seconds (includes powerups)
- Spawn furthest
- No BFG aiming
- Free-look (do people like this or?)
- Autoaim low/never (depends on freelook)
- First to 25, 35, ?
- Exit kills player
- Max players 8
- MAP01 - MAP20 only
- Random level order?

Some of these maps have turned out pretty great...I think you guys will want to give them a spin online.

I'm not the best source of on this, but from what I do know:

- DM = good
- item respawn 30 seconds (includes powerups) = a bit ns, but still fairly standard.
- Spawn furthest = this isn't normal.
- No BFG aiming = definitely yes.
- Free-look (do people like this or?) - depends on how close to ns you want to get.
- Autoaim low/never (depends on freelook) - I believe this is always on, regardless of freelook/freeaim.
- First to 25, 35, ? - 30 is the typical number I see for DMs
- Exit kills player - yes
- Max players 8 - this always winds up being a thing in the beginning, then 3 or 4 people are spectating and the admin always bumps it up to get everybody in.
- MAP01 - MAP20 only - easily done
- Random level order? - no point

Hope that helps Kev, and others correct me where I'm wrong.

Thanks, Fonze.

What's "ns"? Non-standard?

New School, as opposed to Old School.

I'd highly recommend giving this article a read: https://www.doomworld.com/vb/doom-multiplayer/90563-starting-a-multiplayer-project/

Interesting...thanks.

I guess that since my megawad will be edited classic levels, it makes sense for me to have items respawn since it's how original Deathmatch 2.0 was for Doom.

Maybe this is appropos:

- DM
- Items respawn 30 seconds
- No duck/jump
- Maybe freelook
- No BFG aiming
- Ultra-Violence
- Exit kills player
- 30 fraglimit
- Max players = 8 (what is max for Zandronum?)
- MAP01 - MAP20

I can't wait to post this baby. If I log onto #dmstuff, will people advise me on where is best to host a WAD, etc.? Or is there a good site that will allow Doom Seeker to auto-download it for people?

KevvyLava said:

- Max players = 8 (what is max for Zandronum?)

Zandronum has a potential of sixty-four players maximum, while - and just for the record - Odamex can support up to 255 players maximum. However, even though these are the maximum players possible, it may not always be possible to achieve depending on the community peak and activities.