Mirage Source
http://web.miragesource.net/forums/

Development Log
http://web.miragesource.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=195&t=922		 Page 2 of 6
Author:  lordgivemick [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:01 am ]
Post subject: 
i ment by making two separate types of clients one for the players and one set for the mods admins and stuff. the player client wont have the admin functions in them. but the admin clients would creating a better secure game. stops them from hacking and becoming a admin themselves. the admin client would have all the editors and stuff.
Author:  William [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:03 am ]
Post subject: 
Yes but the features you add to the admin client will also have to be added to the player client. Therefore it gives you twice the job to keep both client up to date.
Author:  lordgivemick [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:10 am ]
Post subject: 
you could also make a second login for in the game. and you only tell the other people what it is making it so the players cant use the editors and stuff without the password.


oh and yes willaim i agree it would be twice the work to add the fetures in but at least you would have top protection. which is always 1# in my book.

and also taken out sertiant things in the player side would allow there clients to run faster.
Author:  William [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:29 am ]
Post subject: 
I understand what you mean, but I'd say its the programmers decision, and he can simply just remove the forms and whats used for them.
Author:  Lea [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:39 am ]
Post subject: 
I think the easiest way to do this would be using external DLLs... such as a "Admin Functions" dll, if they don't have the DLL, they can't use admin stuff :D

could also have the client forcibly unload the dll if the player manages to hack it open. Maybe a password to open the DLL, and if the server says they can open the dll, let them. Otherwise forcibly unload it.

On the other hand...

Quote:
002. ADDED: Server Side Who's Online Listview.
003. ADDED: Server Side Kick/Disconnect/Ban.
004. ADDED: Server States.
005. ADDED: Sex.

007. FIXED: NPCs are targeted when standing on top of items.
008. FIXED: Frozen NPC bug.
009. FIXED: Equip x2 bug.
010. FIXED: Ban list destroy bug.
011. CHANGED: Removed 'on error resume next'.
012. FIXED: Server loading errors.
013. ADDED: Packet Spoof Check.
014. FIXED: Several Packet Handling Errors (False Packet Spoof)
028. FIXED: Minemise to System Tray works now. (Tutorial on MS by Sonire)
029. CHANGED: Chat text now typed into a text box. (Tutorial on MS by Sonire)
030. FIXED: Position Modification (Tutorial on MS by Dave)
033. CHANGED: Case-sensitive password
034. CHANGED: Clearing UDTs optimized.
035. CHANGED: DoEvents used less-frequently
037. CHANGED: Need entire name for commands (no longer only first 3 characters)
041. CHANGED: No longer booted back to main menu after doing anything.
044. CHANGED: Name of game shows on title bar
048. FIXED: Server usability bugs, list view sorting, minemize to system tray fixed..
060. REMOVED: frmMainMenu. Start directly to frmLogin.


These things should be done ASAP. They were also what I did first in Valkoria. William, if you want to do these yourself by all means do :)

They're almost all fixes/changes. The additions in the begining I felt were extremely necessary.

If you want me to do them for you, I'd be happy to :) We can talk tonight, my girl is babysitting so I will be free to program all night :D
Author:  halla [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:54 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
005. ADDED: Sex.


Cant have a game without it :wink:
Author:  Lea [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:09 am ]
Post subject: 
male and female characters, pervert.
Author:  lordgivemick [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 4:20 am ]
Post subject: 
isn't your idea kind of coping what gore does with there stuff MM well i like the way they did it so i give Dave's idea a thumb up.... :)


aah aah lasagna hot!!!
Author:  halla [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:16 am ]
Post subject: 
Dave wrote:
male and female characters, pervert.


Hey I was just bored and had to do it.
Author:  lordgivemick [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 7:30 am ]
Post subject: 
know you didnt do it becuase of that you did it becuase you where looking at porn you pervert lol. :lol: know we should go back on subject.
Author:  William [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 10:36 am ]
Post subject: 
They aint that hard. Althought I dont understand what you mean with all of them. Its christmas today, so I dont think I will do much work today. So if you feel like doing it today, feel free to do so.

But, we need to decide íf we should use Grims base for MSE2 before.
Author:  Robin [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 11:36 am ]
Post subject: 
Must have:

1. Real server loop.

2. Basic, but much needed, packet optimisations.

3. Much more user-friendly GUI (still with picture boxes maybe, but not with everything like it was *blurgh* Took me days to work frmMirage out itself)

I think we should all stay focused here though, this is a basic engine we are creating.

We should not:

1. Work on any of the items, npcs (except maybe AI), maps etc.

2. Add tons of features which people might not like (we need to keep it open to everyone)

3. Make the engine specific to one game genre (even though most people create western medieval, we need to keep the engine open)

4. Add pointless things like multi-server, IOCP, combat enhancements, pixel by pixel movement, etc. etc.
Author:  William [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 11:39 am ]
Post subject: 
Please post new topics for the ideas. Good ideas thought :P
Author:  Lea [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:05 pm ]
Post subject: 
I am unfamiliar with Grim's base. Could you describe it or link me to it please?

Thanks!
Author:  Misunderstood [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:06 pm ]
Post subject: 
IOCP definitely isn't pointless. I think we should do a sox - iocp combo like dave and I suggested
Author:  William [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 4:06 pm ]
Post subject: 
Dave wrote:
I am unfamiliar with Grim's base. Could you describe it or link me to it please?
Thanks!

grimsk8ter11 wrote:
i have IOCP and byte array in my MSE2, im just not sure if it works lol.
Author:  halla [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Optimizing it should be the primary concern, but adding to the core of it isnt bad as well. I dont mean features that some would want and others not but the source as is has a lot of flaws with how games are. Like the NPCs need a lot of work. Maybe adding so they can talk and all cause pretty much all games have that. Also maybe adding status affects or buffs. What games do you know without those as well. Thats not making it so people can not customize and do stuff on their own just adding to the core of stuff that should be there. Maybe spell animations as well but that might not be watned by some for some reason.

Anyways in short... add optimizations and things any mmorpg has... such as npc speech, arrows, buffs, improved npc AI, status effects, private messaging.... to name a few. I think those are in about every mmorpg but not MS.
Author:  Robin [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
IOCP will destroy compatability.
Author:  Misunderstood [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 9:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
We talked about having a method either using one dll that checked the OS and used either SOX or IOCP, or an ADT with all the basic functions, one class extending it to implement SOX, and one to implement IOCP. Switching would simply mean changing one line.
Author:  Robin [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 10:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
Misunderstood wrote:
We talked about having a method either using one dll that checked the OS and used either SOX or IOCP, or an ADT with all the basic functions, one class extending it to implement SOX, and one to implement IOCP. Switching would simply mean changing one line.


I actually like the sound of that... it would add an air of proffesionalism around the engine.

"Mirage source! With adabtable real-time OS checks to ensure perfect running of your game!"
Author:  William [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 10:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
Misunderstood wrote:
We talked about having a method either using one dll that checked the OS and used either SOX or IOCP, or an ADT with all the basic functions, one class extending it to implement SOX, and one to implement IOCP. Switching would simply mean changing one line.

So, we have a lot of ideas to implement into MSE2. So maybe we should use Verrigans version of MS as the MSE2 base. Cause I think it only had the byte arrays server side, correct?
Author:  Lea [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 11:03 pm ]
Post subject: 
If grim has byte packets going both ways, we should use that.

Removing the basic network setup and communication functions is easy, we can plug them into a DLL and have it initialize whichever communication method we want.

However, if Grim could spend some time getting Valkoria to work correctly, we could use Valkoria as the base for MSE2. Valkoria is a MSE edit, with byte packets, and many more optimizations and fixes. The goal of the project was to create the most flexable and fast RPG engine from Mirage Source. Currently connecting to a local network works fine, but connecting to an external IP doesn't let you connect. Puzzeling? Edit: It's probably more an IOCP problem than it is a byte-packet problem. I use the JetByte comSocketServer dll

The entire changes log can be viewed on http://www.eternalflameonline.com/changes.txt


I would also be willing to put a lot more time into MSE2 if we started with Valk as the base :) I would still put some time into it if we didn't but eh, I need some motivation don't I?
Author:  Misunderstood [ Sun Dec 24, 2006 11:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
The JetByte dll, or Verrs modified version?
Verr's modified version increases the size the packets can be(Before the mapeditor packets had some problems)
Author:  William [ Mon Dec 25, 2006 1:26 am ]
Post subject: 
Thats a big list, were I can find a few uneccessary things. It seems like a good start. Just need to remove the fmod and such. Who owns Valkoria?
Author:  Liz [ Mon Dec 25, 2006 2:19 am ]
Post subject: 
Dave
Page 2 of 6 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/