From b9fd3c01be29fe4a7327fc9488291f5faa96cb9b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Spoike Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2019 13:20:06 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Fix +back not respecting scaling unlike +forward (reported by GoaLitiuM). git-svn-id: https://svn.code.sf.net/p/fteqw/code/trunk@5428 fc73d0e0-1445-4013-8a0c-d673dee63da5 --- engine/client/cl_input.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/engine/client/cl_input.c b/engine/client/cl_input.c index 48c4a8f8a..bbd47bc3c 100644 --- a/engine/client/cl_input.c +++ b/engine/client/cl_input.c @@ -906,8 +906,8 @@ void CL_BaseMove (usercmd_t *cmd, int pnum, float priortime, float extratime) if (! (in_klook.state[pnum] & 1) ) { - cmd->forwardmove = cmd->forwardmove*oscale + nscale*(cl_forwardspeed.value * CL_KeyState (&in_forward, pnum, true)) - - ((*cl_backspeed.string?cl_backspeed.value:cl_forwardspeed.value) * CL_KeyState (&in_back, pnum, true)); + cmd->forwardmove = cmd->forwardmove*oscale + nscale*(cl_forwardspeed.value * CL_KeyState (&in_forward, pnum, true) - + (*cl_backspeed.string?cl_backspeed.value:cl_forwardspeed.value) * CL_KeyState (&in_back, pnum, true)); } if (!priortime) //only gather buttons if we've not had any this frame. this avoids jump feeling weird with prediction. FIXME: should probably still allow +attack to reduce latency