Inventive Dingo forums Inventive Dingo forums
News:
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or signup. April 16, 2014, 10:09:37 am


Login with username, password and session length


Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Suggestions / Bugs Thread.  (Read 5509 times)
Kumlekar
Eats planets for breakfast
****
Posts: 140



View Profile
« on: February 01, 2009, 03:31:53 am »

I'm just making a list of a few things I would like to see fixed/added, along with some stuff for the community.

My first suggestion is making a Suggestions/Bug Fixes forum.
My second is that until we have that, people post suggestions on this thread, just to clean up the forums a little bit.

Dedicated server stuff:
1.  AI fixes in multiplayer.  If only AI players are left in the game, the game needs to be a draw, and go back to the formation screen.  This would fix multiple issues we've had with dedicated servers being unavailible.  All this requires is a check each time someone leaves the game, or surrenders to make sure that someone other than AI is left.

2.  A "rockthevote" option.  This is to prevent a two or three players from monoplizing a dedicated server while another 4-7 have to wait for a half hour in observor mode.

3. Specific settings on a dedicated server, or restrictions in settings, that the players can't alter.  the biggest thing that comes to mind is restrictions on game lenght and turn lenght.  Both need a maximum set by the server that the players can't go over. (the chosen values would depend on the server)

4.  A ten second wait period between the time a setting is changed and the start of the game.  This is to prevent a player from changing a setting without other player's approval.  Today someone changed the turn time to 5 seconds and hit start game before we could do anything.  Under that setting you have time for two actions, and since the map was milky way medium, the game took forever.  (everyone eventually quit)

Game options:
1.  I know we've discussed it, but heres my suggestion for an alliance system.  Have three different versions.  Both of these options would have to work with a diplomacy/stats screen.
     a.  First is team games.  These are a seperate game mode, started at the game creation screen, and cannot be changed mid game.  Players can see their teammates ships and movements.  I'll discuss what to do if teammates contro lthe same planet in a minute.

     b.  Second is an ingame alliance.  This is started during a game, and allows you to see the allies ships and actions.  For all intents and purposes, it is the same as a team game, but you can break out of it through a diplomacy screen. 

     c.  Third is a cease fire.  With this you cannot see allies ships or movements.  In normal games this would be the most common alliance system. 

Now for how to handle ships being sent to the same planet by allies.  Under team or allied agreements, you can "attack" and allied planet, and when the ships reach the planet, they remain in orbit, and do not fight.  The ship and number appears next to the planet, and you do not gain any benefit from being there, other than positioning.  If the alliance is broken, the ships fight normall.  If two allies attack hte same planet,  the one with the most ships takes control.  They maintain control until they remove all ships from the planet.  If a planet with two (or more) allies ships in orbit is attacked, the number of ships on the allies side is combined, and casulties are divided between them.

For ceasefires.  Once a ceasefire is declared, any ships enroute to a planet controlled by the other player turn around, and head back to their starting location.  Under a ceasefire, you may send ships to a planet controled by the other player, but the ships heading to their planet will appear.  This is to allow them to vacate a planet and give it to you. (a stragety that a few of us have found very useful) or have time to cancel the ceasefire.  When the ships reach their planet, they have the choice to abandon planet, or cancel the ceasfire.

The other major difference, is that a ceasfire is a contract between only two players.  Alliance and teams can be any number of players.  Once all players outside on an alliance/ceasefire are killed, the alliance automatically breaks apart (in the case of teams, the team jointly wins the game).

2. Chat changes.  An alliance system requires an additional chate channel.  Perhaps a /team or something before the sentence would work.  Whispering is also important.

3.  Someone mentioned cheat codes/ easter eggs.

4.  Another mixed thread - http://www.inventivedingo.com/forums/index.php?topic=78.0 - note that I strongly disagree with his complaint about rally points.  They're great as is, though a % option would be nice.


Community stuff:
1.  Perhaps we could work on some map packs for eventual release as part of the dedicated server functionality. 
2.  We could also organize some sort of tournament competition at some point. 

Thanks for reading my mess of stuff, any comments?  I will be updating this to clarify some of the alliance stuff.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2009, 04:11:39 am by Kumlekar » Logged

What is Six Times Nine
Forty-Two!

Jp may have played mayhem before it was cool, but I play while its cool! *

* "Cool" is defined as the period of time in which Kumlekar plays a game.
[WACKY]Walter
Space cadet
*
Posts: 11



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2009, 04:12:05 am »

I liked nearly all of these suggestions, especially your comprehensive approach to the alliance options. It reminds me of what's available in Civilization, really.

One thing I didn't quite understand was how if you 'attack' an allied planet, the ships just orbit until the alliance has been dissolved. It sounds cool, but what function does that serve? As a kind of collateral for an alliance ("break the alliance and I'll rape your homeland!")?

Geez, Chris has his work cut out for him  Shocked

Logged
ato
Space cadet
*
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2009, 04:52:55 am »

One thing I didn't quite understand was how if you 'attack' an allied planet, the ships just orbit until the alliance has been dissolved. It sounds cool, but what function does that serve?

It means you can help defend an ally's planet.
Logged
ato
Space cadet
*
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2009, 06:32:21 am »

BUG: Played a few games with Commander Minus hosting. With a few turns remaining in the game it crashes and kicks everyone out. Minus says he gets a "Network Error" "9: Bad File Descriptor".
Logged
Chris
Administrator
*****
Posts: 405


Developer


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2009, 06:39:41 am »

Yes, Minus has reported that error to me before. I have no idea what causes it. (The technical explanation seems to be that the socket descriptor gets messed up, but how? And how to work around that?) Any light you can shed would be most welcome. Smiley

My first suggestion is making a Suggestions/Bug Fixes forum.

Oh, alright then. I yield!

Amusingly, today is the one-week anniversary of the day I deleted the Features & Bugs forum (moving all the threads into here) since it wasn't getting enough posts to warrant a separate forum... Cheesy  Now I have to sort all the threads out again.

The suggestions I'm not commenting on, I agree with and have nothing to add to. Smiley

Quote
2.  A "rockthevote" option.  This is to prevent a two or three players from monoplizing a dedicated server while another 4-7 have to wait for a half hour in observor mode.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Do you mean a voting system to allow a majority to force a game to end so that it can be restarted? How do you propose to prevent this from being abused?

Quote
4.  A ten second wait period between the time a setting is changed and the start of the game.  This is to prevent a player from changing a setting without other player's approval.  Today someone changed the turn time to 5 seconds and hit start game before we could do anything.  Under that setting you have time for two actions, and since the map was milky way medium, the game took forever.  (everyone eventually quit)

Yeah, that's a good idea. I may add some kind of countdown after "start game" is clicked (cancellable only by the player who initiated it), as that would solve a few other problems too.

Your diplomacy suggestions are good ones. Functionality that complex will probably have to wait a bit though.

Quote
Community stuff:
1.  Perhaps we could work on some map packs for eventual release as part of the dedicated server functionality. 
2.  We could also organize some sort of tournament competition at some point.

I encourage and would fully support any community initiatives that were set up along these lines. Smiley  I'm happy to contribute prizes if a serious tournament gets off the ground.
Logged
Kumlekar
Eats planets for breakfast
****
Posts: 140



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2009, 08:47:47 am »

Quote
2.  A "rockthevote" option.  This is to prevent a two or three players from monoplizing a dedicated server while another 4-7 have to wait for a half hour in observor mode.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Do you mean a voting system to allow a majority to force a game to end so that it can be restarted? How do you propose to prevent this from being abused?
I don't have a comprehensive answer for this, but it seems ridiculous for one person to be allowed to monopolize the dedicated server for an hour, and not let anyone else play.  We had at least 7 people join and quit while only one person was playing.

Quote
4.  A ten second wait period between the time a setting is changed and the start of the game.  This is to prevent a player from changing a setting without other player's approval.  Today someone changed the turn time to 5 seconds and hit start game before we could do anything.  Under that setting you have time for two actions, and since the map was milky way medium, the game took forever.  (everyone eventually quit)

Yeah, that's a good idea. I may add some kind of countdown after "start game" is clicked (cancellable only by the player who initiated it), as that would solve a few other problems too.
  The countdown has to be cancelable by all players, otherwise the problem just continues.  One player changes the settings and hits start, and everyone else has to live with it.

Your diplomacy suggestions are good ones. Functionality that complex will probably have to wait a bit though.
I realize that, but some primative ceasefire functionality should be possible in the short term, primarily as a chat option.  Also allied wins wouldn't be too hard, from what I can think of.

Quote
Community stuff:
1.  Perhaps we could work on some map packs for eventual release as part of the dedicated server functionality. 
2.  We could also organize some sort of tournament competition at some point.

I encourage and would fully support any community initiatives that were set up along these lines. Smiley  I'm happy to contribute prizes if a serious tournament gets off the ground.
[/quote]
I'll try contacting some people about map packs.  I figure we'll want around 6-10 maps for one pack, so we'll need more than that submitted for people to vote on.  Map packs I'm hoping you could release as an official update if we get a good one together.

Tournaments are a long way off right now.  We need multiple bug fixes, and specific maps or a modified algorithm for generating the maps.  Without the maps being semetrical, its kinda pointless, unless we made each match best 6 of 11 or something crazy like that. 

Logged

What is Six Times Nine
Forty-Two!

Jp may have played mayhem before it was cool, but I play while its cool! *

* "Cool" is defined as the period of time in which Kumlekar plays a game.
Chris
Administrator
*****
Posts: 405


Developer


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2009, 08:55:45 am »

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Do you mean a voting system to allow a majority to force a game to end so that it can be restarted? How do you propose to prevent this from being abused?
I don't have a comprehensive answer for this, but it seems ridiculous for one person to be allowed to monopolize the dedicated server for an hour, and not let anyone else play.  We had at least 7 people join and quit while only one person was playing.

Hmm. Maybe if I restricted votes to one per IP address.

Quote
The countdown has to be cancelable by all players, otherwise the problem just continues.  One player changes the settings and hits start, and everyone else has to live with it.

But then someone can just sit there hitting cancel, cancel, cancel and not letting anyone play. It could even be automated.

Quote
I realize that, but some primative ceasefire functionality should be possible in the short term, primarily as a chat option.  Also allied wins wouldn't be too hard, from what I can think of.

A chat option is high on my list (though it keeps getting bug reports shoved above it!). Allied wins is actually a bit more complicated, architecturally.

Quote
I'll try contacting some people about map packs.  I figure we'll want around 6-10 maps for one pack, so we'll need more than that submitted for people to vote on.  Map packs I'm hoping you could release as an official update if we get a good one together.

I'm open to the possibility of adding the best community-created maps to the official build. Smiley

Quote
Tournaments are a long way off right now.  We need multiple bug fixes, and specific maps or a modified algorithm for generating the maps.  Without the maps being semetrical, its kinda pointless, unless we made each match best 6 of 11 or something crazy like that.

Working on the bugs. For tournament conditions you really would want a pre-made map rather than a randomly generated one, I reckon. But that's OK, you guys are proving pretty good at making maps even with the lack of tools. Smiley
Logged
Prez
Destroyer of Worlds
***
Posts: 60



View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2009, 09:11:55 am »

How many players for a tournament map? I can try to develope  a 4 players map to use for future tournament, only I need to know how many players and how long will be a game.
Fabio
Logged
ato
Space cadet
*
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2009, 09:28:53 am »

I don't have a comprehensive answer for this, but it seems ridiculous for one person to be allowed to monopolize the dedicated server for an hour, and not let anyone else play.  We had at least 7 people join and quit while only one person was playing.

Hmm. Maybe if I restricted votes to one per IP address.

Well for this particular problem what about just auto-scaling the dedicated servers.  When all the servers are full bring up an extra one (within reasonable limits)?  Future idea that'd take smoe more work: since it's a turn-based game and shouldn't be resource intensive to serve a lot of games, why not make it so that all games are served by the dedicated server (the user who creates the game has their map auto-uploaded to the server and is the only one that can change settings by default).  That'd stop all the firewall and most of the griefing problems.
Logged
Chris
Administrator
*****
Posts: 405


Developer


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2009, 10:52:09 am »

I'm not sure that would scale. The server is actually under a surprising amount of load. Check out the CPU usage history graphs on the server web console (did I give you access to that?).
Logged
ato
Space cadet
*
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2009, 12:28:50 pm »

That's really odd.  What's the server doing to be using CPU? I would have thought that you should be able to run at least 100, maybe even 1000 simultaneous games of MI before approaching anywhere near the cpu usage of say a FPS server which handle hundreds to thousands of object movements and updates per second. (This is assuming you run all the games within the same process.)
« Last Edit: February 01, 2009, 12:32:19 pm by ato » Logged
Chris
Administrator
*****
Posts: 405


Developer


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 02, 2009, 01:04:58 am »

Scratch that, I was looking at a scaled graph. We haven't exceeded 12% CPU usage in the past month.

Each server is its own process.
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM