For now, I will only setup the lists and such and and think of exactly what I will include in this tutorial. I have a couple of ideas on parts that can improve the speed. And we'll see if it turns out any good at all.

Idea 1

• Hard Coded Items - Currently the items are loaded from a file server side. And each time a player logs into the game. The server sends all the item information to the client. But instead of sending them, I thought it would be better to skip the simple item editor and just hard code them into the game. The idea would be something like this, on both the server and client:
  
  Code:
  Item(1).Name = "Sword of everything"
          Item(1).Pic = 3
          Item(1).Type = ITEM_TYPE_WEAPON
  
  This way the client will always have the information and no packets will be sent. Only the item number when needed.
  Idea 2
• Hard Coded Items - The 2:nd idea if that instead of the server being the only part that has the items, the client could also posses them, and instead of letting the server send the information. The client just loads them from the item files in the Client. This is the easy and non time consuming way. Since it only includes the loading part and not much coding. But still it would make the server send less packets.

I don't agree. If you make it the right way, all the things would be checked SERVER side and there will be no problems with the items client side, I mean, it doesn't matter if you can see items with 999 attack, if the server still knows the right attack, you will be the only idiot to see that...

I like this idea. You could always do this to spells, quests, etc. But wouldn't this make the EXE a lot bigger?

How you think Kal has it? It's that exact way, but it's still really easy to hack the items.

But w/e. Do what you think will work. I know what I know, you know what you know. Let's see who's wrong and who's right in the long run.

if the server has to check the items, you'd still need to send ALL the information the client has to the server, then have the server end an "ok" so it'd still be the same, only backwards?