diff --git a/ConcerningEdgeCases.md b/ConcerningEdgeCases.md index d9a84b8..f828f41 100644 --- a/ConcerningEdgeCases.md +++ b/ConcerningEdgeCases.md @@ -6,6 +6,6 @@ Under the current "input delay" algorithm, the lag of a single player would caus players #2, #3 #4 would receive "outdated(in their subjective feelings) but all-confirmed commands" from then on, thus forced to rollback and chase many frames - the lag due to "large range of frame-chasing" would then further deteriorate the situation - like an avalanche. -In a "no-server & p2p" setup, I couldn't think of a proper way to cope with such edge case. Solely on the frontend we could only mitigate the impact to players #2, #3, #4, e.g. a potential lag due to "large range of frame-chasing" is proactively avoided in `/frontend/assets/scripts/Map.js, function update(dt)` for more information. +In a "no-server & p2p" setup, I couldn't think of a proper way to cope with such edge case. Solely on the frontend we could only mitigate the impact to players #2, #3, #4, e.g. a potential lag due to "large range of frame-chasing" is proactively avoided in `/frontend/assets/scripts/Map.js, function update(dt)`. However in a "server as authority" setup, the server could force confirming an inputFrame without player#1's upsync, and notify player#1 to apply a "roomDownsyncFrame" as well as drop all its outdated local inputFrames.