join a running game

[krogoth0815]

hi!

Does anyone know if there's a tool with that you can join a game as spectator while that game is running. Such a tool would be quite useful, cause if you want to join a game when the current battle is over, you can take a look at the current game and don't have to stare into the edge till the game is over.....

hope you can help me!!!!

[BrainDamage]

you can join the battleroom if the battle itself is not locked, you cannot join the running game

[Krux]

it is not possible to join a running game, because the engine wont't support it.

I have read, that only input is sent over the net, this makes it hard to join a running game, because the new player doesn't know anything about the others.

[SinbadEV]

it is not possible to join a running game, because the engine wont't support it.

I have read, that only input is sent over the net, this makes it hard to join a running game, because the new player doesn't know anything about the others.

it's not exactly input but that's close enough to get the point.

it would be conceivable to freeze the game while a new player downloaded one of the automatic game recording from the host and run the simulation forward to the current game point to sync up... and someone was working on a "re-syncing" version of spring a while back and there is work towards of being able to load a saved game for a group of players hiding incomplete in the engine code... but the practical implementation of this feature is quite a lot of work from what I understand so has not been completed.

For the time being there is little difference between spectating a live game and watching a hosted replay so that's probably your best option.

[krogoth0815]

....what is exactly sent over the net during a running game? only the data that updates one frame to the next?? or is there always sent the complete data about all units that currently are participating in the game??
if the complete data was sent, it would be possible to create a feature that allows joining during the game.....
of course, there should be possibilites then to prevent spammers from joining or manipulating running games...... ... but this is another topic......

[malric]

As it was already written only user input is sent over the network. That means stuff like mouse clicks and key press.

Even like this it would be possible to join a running game, it is just a lot of work to make that happen.

[aegis]

if there was a bot doing nothing but connecting to games and storing replays... then playing them back on demand...
could you theoretically start watching a replay before it ended?

then when you try to join a running game, it puts you in the lobby with the people and starts the replay?
it could notify you when their game was done so you could go back to the lobby

it wouldn't be too much work, though we might need engine support for an another unsynced spectator, like dedicated server already does...

thoughts?

[Regret]

if there was a bot doing nothing but connecting to games and storing replays... then playing them back on demand...
could you theoretically start watching a replay before it ended?

then when you try to join a running game, it puts you in the lobby with the people and starts the replay?
it could notify you when their game was done so you could go back to the lobby

it wouldn't be too much work, though we might need engine support for an another unsynced spectator, like dedicated server already does...

thoughts?

The bot owner would have access to all games played. Definite NO.

[Teutooni]

The host could send replay data to the joiner, and start sending normal game traffic too. The joiner would store the traffic in a buffer and try to reconstruct the gamestate from replay (without rendering to speed things up). After replay is done the joiner would start processing the stored traffic to eventually catch up to the game in progress. Without pausing the game. Players wouldn't pause the game for a spectator.

How about that?

The bot owner would have access to all games played. Definite NO.

Paranoid much?

[Regret]

Paranoid much?

I like my games private sometimes.

[imbaczek]

host games yourself then ;p the dedicated server may gain an ability to store replays sometime in the future.

[aegis]

if there was a bot doing nothing but connecting to games and storing replays... then playing them back on demand...
could you theoretically start watching a replay before it ended?

then when you try to join a running game, it puts you in the lobby with the people and starts the replay?
it could notify you when their game was done so you could go back to the lobby

it wouldn't be too much work, though we might need engine support for an another unsynced spectator, like dedicated server already does...

thoughts?

The bot owner would have access to all games played. Definite NO.

games could be designated as public or private.

The host could send replay data to the joiner, and start sending normal game traffic too. The joiner would store the traffic in a buffer and try to reconstruct the gamestate from replay (without rendering to speed things up). After replay is done the joiner would start processing the stored traffic to eventually catch up to the game in progress. Without pausing the game. Players wouldn't pause the game for a spectator.

How about that?

the bot method would work without complicated engine code. it would just need support for an unsynced spectator other than the server. afaik it already exists.

[Regret]

games could be designated as public or private.

That would be acceptable then.

[Teutooni]

Yeah, bot method sounds good, if only for archived data for AI developers, video material and whatnot. It wouldn't be nearly as interesting to spectate without the ability to chat with the players, though.

[aegis]

we could have a couple of computers running to connect to bot games, encode as video and stream to the interwebs for SPRING TV!!!111

Yeah, bot method sounds good, if only for archived data for AI developers, video material and whatnot. It wouldn't be nearly as interesting to spectate without the ability to chat with the players, though.

you can see fresh replays and such

a spectator bot would also be a reliable method of collecting statistics (wins/losses, etc)

[aegis]

Yeah, bot method sounds good, if only for archived data for AI developers, video material and whatnot. It wouldn't be nearly as interesting to spectate without the ability to chat with the players, though.

you can see fresh replays and such

a spectator bot would also be a reliable method of collecting statistics (wins/losses, etc)

[Teutooni]

a spectator bot would also be a reliable method of collecting statistics (wins/losses, etc)

Another strictly private/public option. But yeah, that and fresh replays (possibly with chat relay) would definently be nice.

[aegis]

the problem with a chat relay is you'd be chatting about a different part of the game

it would work nicely to have streaming spring tv with chat though, cause then you'd be at the same time

[daan 79]

this would be a huge step forward.

All the tourney games live brought to you.

What better to win infront of whole community.

Or get comnapped

[aragon]

Don't you think that adding a feature to send whole game state would be much easier then mysterious bot recording replays?
User wants to join, he's starting to recieve data as other players do and host starts to send him game state from the moment he started to recieve the players' input.

The game could even be paused while new player is connecting (assuming host must accept any player willing to join already running game)
Huge benefit: allowing a disconnected player to join back.
Huge benefit 2: resyncing made easy (pause, host sends game state to everyone, unpause)

And.. how big the game state be? 5MB? 10MB? We're waiting much more for maps dl before the start.