TASClient (latest version available here) - Page 4

TASClient (latest version available here)

Discuss the source code and development of Spring Engine in general from a technical point of view. Patches go here too.

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

I think forcing people to utilize clans in order to play with their friends is both foolish and insulting to those of us who have friends across multiple clans, or choose not to clan up.
User avatar
SwiftSpear
Classic Community Lead
Posts: 7287
Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29

Post by SwiftSpear »

neddiedrow wrote:I think forcing people to utilize clans in order to play with their friends is both foolish and insulting to those of us who have friends across multiple clans, or choose not to clan up.
I think expecting an auto balance algorithm to intelligently handle people's friendship values is over ambitious and impossible.

If you absolutely must play with one friend just repeat the auto balance until you are distributed to their team. If you must play with several friends, don't bother auto balancing anyways, you've pretty much already got a team.
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

I wasn't saying he should handle it, per say, I was simply rebuffing the argument in abstraction.
ZellSF
Posts: 1187
Joined: 08 Jul 2006, 19:07

Post by ZellSF »

Make it remember lock speed option without having to click "load defaults" or "lock speed" all the time?
User avatar
Pendrokar
Posts: 658
Joined: 30 May 2007, 10:45

Post by Pendrokar »

Add a ring host option in Battle Room with a conformation message "Are you sure?" so it wouldn't be pressed many times to irritate host!

Edit: Oh and can you plz add a popup window (Are you sure? Unequal teams.) when host presses start and the game is unbalanced in players ratio!!!
Satirik
Lobby Developer
Posts: 1688
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 18:27

Post by Satirik »

Pendrokar wrote:Add a ring host option in Battle Room with a conformation message "Are you sure?" so it wouldn't be pressed many times to irritate host!

Edit: Oh and can you plz add a popup window (Are you sure? Unequal teams.) when host presses start and the game is unbalanced in players ratio!!!
too much "are you sure ?" irritates people ... like in vista ...
User avatar
AF
AI Developer
Posts: 20686
Joined: 14 Sep 2004, 11:32

Post by AF »

Funny you should say that, tasclient still has masses of rendering issues, and they are really obvious in Vista. They're still visible in XP only to a far lesser extent.

Things like controls overlapping window borders, windows not maximising correctly after minimizing and restoring or widnow switching, divider controls not behavign correctly and showing components larger than they really are causing rendering flaws, windows with no minimum sizes resizing untill there's just a window icon with 3 buttons.

Then there's the universal deliberate flaws such as when you download a map and start tasclient and it pops up a messagebox asking to cache minimaps (who in their right mind would click no), but the messagebox has no taskbar entry so its very easy not to notice, and you have to minimize every single window to get to it, very annoying.

Then theres numerous moments where the lobby locksup for upto 10 seconds at a time when doing things, or how when opening a battle window dialog you cant use the main window or opening options disables the battle window dialog.

Or when someone disconnects and your talking to them via pm but dont notice untill you look up and see your messages have vanished?
User avatar
Pendrokar
Posts: 658
Joined: 30 May 2007, 10:45

Post by Pendrokar »

Satirik wrote: too much "are you sure ?" irritates people ... like in vista ...
Are you sure? :lol:
Satirik
Lobby Developer
Posts: 1688
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 18:27

Post by Satirik »

AF wrote:Funny you should say that, tasclient still has masses of rendering issues, and they are really obvious in Vista. They're still visible in XP only to a far lesser extent.

Things like controls overlapping window borders, windows not maximising correctly after minimizing and restoring or widnow switching, divider controls not behavign correctly and showing components larger than they really are causing rendering flaws, windows with no minimum sizes resizing untill there's just a window icon with 3 buttons.

Then there's the universal deliberate flaws such as when you download a map and start tasclient and it pops up a messagebox asking to cache minimaps (who in their right mind would click no), but the messagebox has no taskbar entry so its very easy not to notice, and you have to minimize every single window to get to it, very annoying.

Then theres numerous moments where the lobby locksup for upto 10 seconds at a time when doing things, or how when opening a battle window dialog you cant use the main window or opening options disables the battle window dialog.

Or when someone disconnects and your talking to them via pm but dont notice untill you look up and see your messages have vanished?
i'll fix the caching msg, i don't care about the rest =)
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

Sorry, Satirik, but if you don't care about what you're delivering, you probably shouldn't be developing. You obviously have the wrong priorities with the program if you're willing to waste time integrating SpringMark but won't deal with real interface issues.
Satirik
Lobby Developer
Posts: 1688
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 18:27

Post by Satirik »

neddiedrow wrote:Sorry, Satirik, but if you don't care about what you're delivering, you probably shouldn't be developing. You obviously have the wrong priorities with the program if you're willing to waste time integrating SpringMark but won't deal with real interface issues.
i use tasclient everyday ... i fix what i see, and btw i don't code for others i do it for myself ... you don't have to use my updated lobby and if you don't i really don't care
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

You're supposed to produce for the consumer, not yourself. It is egocentric development for yourself which will render your product useless.

It's just good manners and development ethic. You don't have to take it to heart, but trust me, it will come in handy.
Masure
Posts: 581
Joined: 30 Jan 2007, 15:23

Post by Masure »

The lobby was lacking of hosting features and it's now up and running fine :

- auto balance
- player count by ally id
- fix colors
- ring players who are not ready
- save boxes and load start boxes

This makes games hundred times easier to host when a standard lobby client is evil concerning hosting properly.

FS Satirik is pissing off when he's told about modal windows or overlapping borders but I really don't care of those minor things.

Secondly, main lobby dev refused to update the svn with satirik's features we don't know why. Ask now the main dev for these minor things and keep on hosting with pain.
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

The main lobby developer is obsessed with security and control. Integration of Springmark into the client if nothing else makes this version of the client insecure and invasive. I'll poke around about this on my own time.

I'm not saying that other features added aren't useful, but Satirik made a bad decision with one and that probably sunk combining the two versions. In addition, modal windows are pretty easy to play with if I recall correctly - it's a basic courtesy.

Why do we still call it TASClient? Might as well call it SClient, it isn't TA: Spring, but Spring alone - sounds better as well!
Masure
Posts: 581
Joined: 30 Jan 2007, 15:23

Post by Masure »

But if the main dev would have been more cooperative, maybe Satirik could have directly displayed cpu brand & model through the lobby exe.

I personally use the so insecure and invasive lobby cause I can't host properly without all the features I said. And, you know what ? My comp is still alive !

True hosts use Satirik's modified client and they are more and more. Avoiding those updates in the official client update was not smart for all the community. Moreover the main dev can't control which lobby you use and I won't use it the official one anymore til satirik's features are not merged.
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

If you can't host properly without those features, it is a symptom of laziness.

Understand me, I do like the advances made in this fork of the lobby, but I have concerns about certain decisions, and from the view of another sort of content developer, I feel no qualms about voicing them.
Masure
Posts: 581
Joined: 30 Jan 2007, 15:23

Post by Masure »

neddiedrow wrote:If you can't host properly without those features, it is a symptom of laziness.
So you think automation = lazyness. I think automation = intelligence.

- counting the allies by hand > waste of time, hard task. Do it when people are always changing their ally.
- changing ally by hand > waste of time, hard task.
- changing color by hand > waste of time, hard task.
- ringing people by hand > waste of time, hard task.
- ...

All those operations done by hand are boring, making games 10 times longer to start and often needs restarting.

I don't understand why you keep on going against this. It's just sounds like argueing for argueing so I won't say anything else cause all is already said.
User avatar
AF
AI Developer
Posts: 20686
Joined: 14 Sep 2004, 11:32

Post by AF »

Masure, is satirik a brother/best friend of yours?

Betalord likes some of the features added. He expressed concern over spring mark integration.

Although betalord can be un-cooperative at times, he did like some of the features, and wanted to review the code and merge some of the features in. However he lacked the time to do so.

Because of your egocentric development process and controversial changes a direct merge is out of the question.

However, looking at the ever increasing speed of development in the alternative lobbies, this wont be necessary. The other lobbies feature sets are growing rapidly and they will overtake tasclient and your fork within the next month or two. Then users will really be able to choose which client they want. Those who really want to use an alternative to standard tasclient will find the other lobbies are much better alternatives to your fork, and that may partly be down to your development process and controversial choices.
Masure
Posts: 581
Joined: 30 Jan 2007, 15:23

Post by Masure »

Betalord could have merged features except springmark or let Satirik do that for him. He's just been un cooperative like you said.

Springmark wasn't there to take another way of evil features but looked like useful at the moment.

I'll always be happy to see the hosting features merged in the official TASClient as everybody would have the auto update and games start faster.

Satirik never said he didn't want the features to be merged without springmark.



When you talk about other clients, it really sounds as competition. I don't like this kind of behaviour. Adding features to the main lobby is always useful and your lobby competition analyze is just so kiddy. I never thought in this way considering all the lobbies, it makes me sad.

I may be Satirik's friend, it doesn't change my absolute thinking. It sounds like you, as an alternative, new and so much better client developper, are not really smart as a community actor.
User avatar
AF
AI Developer
Posts: 20686
Joined: 14 Sep 2004, 11:32

Post by AF »

Please dont try to take the moral highground, especially when arguing for the lowlands.

Lobby competition would be healthy. It drives ahead co-operation, increases the developer userbase, and gives developers a reason to actively look for and implement new features.

Look at the AI scene, for a longtime, competition was the sole factor driving AI devs to make better and better AIs for spring.

Having said that, in a system with many rival projects co-existing, merges forks and competition come naturally.


As for betalord, he would never let satirik merge his changes into tasclient on his own. He would do ti himself to ensure his own standards were me and nothing suspect was snook in. Having said that betalord si interested in the changes and he lacks the time to merge them in.

However protocol and server changes are a no no. You have to specifically state what you want done, why it is needed, why you want it done, and how it will be done, and most specific of all, how it will improve tasclient.

If it isnt needed and betalord didnt think of it himself as a necessary feature then *bump* its dropped. The fact you are displaying cpu model strings without modifying the server is all the justification anyone would need to shoot down any attempt at making betalord co-operate with this.

And remember, betalord has very little time to spare lately. You must be patient.

If you really want server and protocol modifications, you need to propose the changes, implement them, and show them working reliably in an active test environment. Then there's modification of autohosts, other lobbies, and other tasclient forks including the original. Making the change specifically for your client fork will immediatly give you a big fat no, as will relying on springmark for providing the cpu model.

Ontop of that you have the issue of disclosure and privacy. How will you allow users to hide their cpu model At minimum this would be off by default using an opt in method. How long will the data be kept? How would this be done under linux?
Locked

Return to “Engine”