From akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to Tue Apr 1 01:13:55 2008 From: akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to (Andrew K. Bressen) Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 02:13:55 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <20080331225714.CC1EF32675A@ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com> (msucka0xff@programmer.net's message of "Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:57:11 -0800") References: <20080331225714.CC1EF32675A@ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <0qbq4uxfto.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> I have to second Jeffrey's statements. I'm a newbie, having only been on -dev for about 18 months. I don't know who Nick Slager is, and I don't know what happened with Trent. It's clear that in the past netrek development has been heavily freighted with politics. For a new contributer coming in, I don't think that's currently true. While I've been here, I've not seen wars about patch acceptance. In this thread, we've seen James explicitly solicit server patches. There has been heated argument over certain client features, but they always been worked through; p2k and XP 2006 both get released when their authors provide them. > door policy, where over time I can come back out of the wood work and > give my latest updates. The "put up or shutup" approach does not > historically represent how netrek developed, and I don't think it useful > today. I think in this case, "put up or shut up" means "do something useful and we'll listen to you". Submitting updates is probably useful, assuming they are any good. Useful is writing new programs, documentation, helping with web stuff, doing marketing. Useful is not someone who does not understand any of the issues involved in any of these activities telling us how to do them. If you want to contribute, there are a lot of things we'd love to have someone do... And if you tell me I'm wrong about any of the above, I'll listen and consider what you have to say. --akb From akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to Tue Apr 1 01:13:55 2008 From: akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to (Andrew K. Bressen) Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 02:13:55 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <20080331225714.CC1EF32675A@ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com> (msucka0xff@programmer.net's message of "Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:57:11 -0800") References: <20080331225714.CC1EF32675A@ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <0qbq4uxfto.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> I have to second Jeffrey's statements. I'm a newbie, having only been on -dev for about 18 months. I don't know who Nick Slager is, and I don't know what happened with Trent. It's clear that in the past netrek development has been heavily freighted with politics. For a new contributer coming in, I don't think that's currently true. While I've been here, I've not seen wars about patch acceptance. In this thread, we've seen James explicitly solicit server patches. There has been heated argument over certain client features, but they always been worked through; p2k and XP 2006 both get released when their authors provide them. > door policy, where over time I can come back out of the wood work and > give my latest updates. The "put up or shutup" approach does not > historically represent how netrek developed, and I don't think it useful > today. I think in this case, "put up or shut up" means "do something useful and we'll listen to you". Submitting updates is probably useful, assuming they are any good. Useful is writing new programs, documentation, helping with web stuff, doing marketing. Useful is not someone who does not understand any of the issues involved in any of these activities telling us how to do them. If you want to contribute, there are a lot of things we'd love to have someone do... And if you tell me I'm wrong about any of the above, I'll listen and consider what you have to say. --akb From akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to Tue Apr 1 01:28:20 2008 From: akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to (Andrew K. Bressen) Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 02:28:20 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] code-management <-> key-management In-Reply-To: <20080321194452.GA18051@mail.beanhq.com> (John R. Dennison's message of "Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:44:52 -0500") References: <21058637.1573431206122620108.JavaMail.root@cdptpa-web28-z02> <20080321194452.GA18051@mail.beanhq.com> Message-ID: <0q7ifixf5n.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> "John R. Dennison" writes: > I would be happy to volunteer to build binaries except that as > far as I am concerned that's a position of trust, both within > the circle of developers and within the community and I do not > feel I have earned that level of trust within either group. Um, as far as I'm concerned, please go for it. We have no decent linux binary at the moment; the old ones are starting to get flaky used against newer X libraries and p2k is expired. I'd love it if we could get a COW or TT build into major linux distros. From quozl at us.netrek.org Tue Apr 1 03:29:25 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 19:29:25 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] code-management <-> key-management In-Reply-To: <0q7ifixf5n.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> References: <21058637.1573431206122620108.JavaMail.root@cdptpa-web28-z02> <20080321194452.GA18051@mail.beanhq.com> <0q7ifixf5n.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> Message-ID: <20080401082925.GA24589@us.netrek.org> Does anyone know how to build COW static? That's something I'd like to do. If I could do that, I would host binaries. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From quozl at us.netrek.org Tue Apr 1 03:32:14 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 19:32:14 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <0qbq4uxfto.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> References: <20080331225714.CC1EF32675A@ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com> <0qbq4uxfto.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> Message-ID: <20080401083214.GB24589@us.netrek.org> On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 02:13:55AM -0400, Andrew K. Bressen wrote: > While I've been here, I've not seen wars about patch acceptance. > In this thread, we've seen James explicitly solicit server patches. Server patches don't set game community policy, so I can accept anything provided it is configurable and the default is reasonable. That's why I can even accept Paradise features. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From quozl at us.netrek.org Tue Apr 1 03:36:32 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 19:36:32 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080331233305.GC5634@us.netrek.org> <47F199AA.40708@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401025605.GI5634@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <20080401083632.GC24589@us.netrek.org> On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 12:31:20AM -0400, Zach wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:56 PM, James Cameron wrote: > > > > I had an idea for wrap perception simplification which offsets all > > coordinates given to a player so that they remain locked in the centre > > of the galactic. As they move the offset changes, and so everything > > moves around them. It would have a bad effect on the data stream > > though, since planets would need to be moved. > > So in the conventional method the planets are fixed and the player > moves through space. There would be no change to that, as far as the coordinates of the planets and the players held in server structures. > In your proposed method the player is static and space (the planets) > moves relative to the player yes? Yes and no. No as far as the coordinates held internally by the server. Yes, as far as the coordinates sent to the client. The player would perceive a relative galactic. Recall that already the tactical expresses object coordinates in a relative fashion, relative to the player position. > Interesting, I am guessing the latter method would result in a larger > sized update being required than the former? As I said, it would have a bad effect on the data stream, requiring either a larger amount of data, an additional delay in updating certain objects, or client support for relative coordinates in packets. > Do any popular games use your method? I don't care. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From billbalcerski at gmail.com Tue Apr 1 07:54:18 2008 From: billbalcerski at gmail.com (Bill Balcerski) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 08:54:18 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <47F199AA.40708@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080331233305.GC5634@us.netrek.org> <47F199AA.40708@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <45ab86180804010554h1237895coac5c7aef2390b445@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:10 PM, Mark Mielke wrote: > Forward and reverse orbits - depending on entry trajectory (affects game > play) Sounds like a good candidate for sysdef option. This feature already exists in the paradise server, might want to take a look and see how they did it. > Proper calculation of wall wrap - again, errors in the wall logic under > chaos rules Never noticed any misalignment when crossing over during the days of chaos (monster). What exactly are you referring to here? > Phaser lock across the wall, plasma seeking across the wall > Enemies across the wall show up as "near", meaning better cloaker > approximation (more frequent updates), and proper updates to "see" > torpedoes, phasers, etc. across the wall in suitably modified clients. Yes plasma tracking would be nice :0 There's certainly a large issue with chaos mode wall wrap in that clients don't have the ability to draw information on tactical across the "wall" even if it was given by the server (which it isn't). With a fair amount of work on both client and server end it could be done. It would require a feature packet to let the client know wall wrap is enabled. The feature packet would have to be resent if sysdef is modified. A lot of server routines would have to be modified (enemy visibility, alert status, phaser hit, torp tracking, plasma tracking, possibly more I'm forgetting). A lot of client draw routines on local (ships, weapons, planets, stars, etc) would have to be changed to support that feature packet. A few things on galactic map as well (phasers, view box). All in all, a lot of work for a feature that isn't used on any servers currently. I personally think there are better things to spend time working on. Bill From list2rado at gmx.de Tue Apr 1 13:16:28 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 20:16:28 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- Mark Mielke wrote on Mon 31.Mar'08 at 18:28:04 -0400 -= > If you went to the Linux kernel list and presented yourself the > same as Rado, demanding for somebody in authority to offer > volunteers to work on your favourite whizbang feature, the > reaction would be far more hostile than we see here. I see you bring this comparison up again. What kind of situation is it there and here? For you the same? Why do you think I would even need to raise the same issues there? I see the difference that the Linux kernel does not suffer from lack of highly qualified participants/ contributors. They don't need to change because all runs well on its own, because it's self-sustaining and -reproducing _already_, while Netrek is not. Netrek isn't in the same league, so it can't do the same and expect the same success: just focus on the code. Oh, and it's a game, and games are about fairplay more than feature collections. You don't need fairplay with kernels, or have I missed something? > There are people that put up, and there are people that talk. I've put up code, but that's irrelevant to the issue at hand. Sometimes "putting up" _is_ talk. As long as you don't accept this, there is no point in continuing. > I find myself continuously confused over what Rado is asking for > (over months or years?), and see him being critical of James and > existing process. I'm asking for: a) Do something different about fairplay. b) Let the decision power go for others to pick up and do it differently. Neither was accepted, despite interest _and_ offerings beyond my person. > The last time I attempted to contribute code here, I believe the > reaction was generally welcome, with concerns about my choices, > and a request that I come back once I had worked some details out, > or consider keeping the patches separate as they were not > universally appreciated. a) talking about it brought attention to it. Would this recall and the reactions to it have happened without me? They definitly happened _now_ because of me. b) will your contributions change anything about the people involved in netrek total (aside from yourself)? This was the underlying plan even before I spoke up. Anyone has done something about it with lasting success? If the current situation is satisfying for you all, then I stand corrected. > I was not part of an "inner clique" - and beyond being a person > who still reads this list and responds, I don't think I am > currently part of any "inner clique". Right, but how many can afford this amount of commitment these days offered by you some time ago and still demanded these days by the power in charge? It actually meant quite an effort for me to squeeze the time for the P-Server hacking that lead to the meta-server issues discoveries. Seeing how this was welcomed I have to think carefully wether it's worth to try anything again. You might think "yay, Paradise down, better for us", but there might be people in the same situation as I am in the Bronco context. Is it better to pitch some bread crumbs to the starving project raking back at outsiders or make it feed by itself to make it more tolerant for variants again to attract even more players? > It's possible I am stupid and that Rado is so far advanced in > comparison that anything he says will blow right past me > - but I don't truly believe this, and I believe the reaction of > others coincides with mine. *sigh* None of us (2 or even anyone else on netrek-dev) has to be stupid to disagree or misunderstand. Just it takes character to accept that there are other interests and preferences than just the personal, and that not only 1 way can lead to success. (given that "success" could be somehow defined in agreement first) I don't believe that I'm advanced in intellect, but in the vision range. I think in larger scales than what a single individual can do. Because no single individual can change something larger than itself just by itself easily. -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. From list2rado at gmx.de Tue Apr 1 13:19:42 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 20:19:42 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <65631e800803311943q47111f51s6df83b8a89124500@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080331225714.CC1EF32675A@ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com> <65631e800803311943q47111f51s6df83b8a89124500@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080401181941.GD19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- Jeffrey Watts wrote on Mon 31.Mar'08 at 21:43:40 -0500 -= > Well, we're kind of talking about two things here. The two voices > that have spoken up are both those of people who were offering > code. Rado is not, he's proposing organization and that "others" > do "things". I originally didn't want to answer to this publicly at all, but I can't hear this "no code" non-sense anymore, brought up by different people. a) all this started because I _did_ offer code for the meta-servers; which started because I've done even more code to P-server before that to notice meta-server problems in the first place. b) it all went wrong because the receiving side didn't like the form while practicing the same form before. ->double standards. c) the receiving side consisting of a single person, so little chance for working it out with somebody else _caring enough_. d) people demand code submissions before taking me serious, but even if I proved that I had already contributed code before I spoke up even the first time, it wouldn't change _ANYTHING_ about what I said about non-code issues thereafter. Why would any of my code influence anyhow the code-unrelated message itself or the attitude of the recipients? I don't originally ask from others to do things, but rather to relax and _let things go_ for others to _pick up_. For example, John (like I) would do something, but is denied by James' preference for perfectionism, which naturally limits the number of participants. If James relaxed, we could have 2 more people "in". Coding? No. Action? Yes. Which then indirectly can lead to coding from those same actors, too, once they're involved enough. > However, we're really not talking about the kind of situation you > went through. We're talking about someone with a pathological need > to get the last word and argue. Right, because some other guys pathologically can't stop talking wrong. You know it takes 2 for an endless back and forth. Whatever I try to bring up not dealing with literal code, it will all be turned down with some freaky _unrelated_ code conditions. Not because I would be wrong, but because they don't like the personal consequences. It's about time to look beyond prejudices and begin to think further than just the own nose. -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. From list2rado at gmx.de Tue Apr 1 13:23:05 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 20:23:05 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <20080401182304.GE19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- . . wrote on Mon 31.Mar'08 at 14:12:24 -0800 -= > I am not certain Rado is addressing these same issues, but as far > as I can tell it seems to be along these lines. I can't tell either, since I don't remember your case(s). Anyway, we both won't change anything, since the system isn't designed to change itself and is too small to fork off. =- . . wrote on Mon 31.Mar'08 at 14:57:11 -0800 -= > Clearly there should be the opportunity to at least present the > development work, but my experience was confronted by > obstructionist behavior, which totally flipped me out. This was my experience, too, though I didn't flip out. This is how it is, this is how they want to have it, they have the power, we must deal with it. I rest my case with the code-freaks. You can't force anyone to peek beyond his own horizon when there is no desire to change personal habits for a greater good. > It seems to imply that because I am stronger than you (or vise > versa), my voice should be heard the loudest, but as you know > intelligence is lost in this model. > I think Rado may not be seeing such an open door policy and thus > cause for his concern. The answer is "I don't care" (*). What do you expect to happen? Basically it's all about double-standards to preserve some personal convenience to protect their power, favouring the logic of "easy for me" over "involving more people". Either be patient for things to change on their own, or startup a new project altogether from scratch. The latter would have the additional benefit of better addressing the licensing/ rights issues. (*) which probably should be completed with "enough". I understand their position for priorizing stuff by their preference contrained by their limited time... but at the same time this limits the whole, not just themselves. They like the current situation for some reason which I don't understand. The only one I can think of is personal convenience or obsession with power, but that would be contradictory to the calls for the global benefit of more participation. -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. From mark at mark.mielke.cc Tue Apr 1 16:00:11 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:00:11 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <45ab86180804010554h1237895coac5c7aef2390b445@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080331233305.GC5634@us.netrek.org> <47F199AA.40708@mark.mielke.cc> <45ab86180804010554h1237895coac5c7aef2390b445@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47F2A25B.9060803@mark.mielke.cc> Bill Balcerski wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:10 PM, Mark Mielke wrote: > >> Forward and reverse orbits - depending on entry trajectory (affects game >> play) >> > Sounds like a good candidate for sysdef option. This feature already > exists in the paradise server, might want to take a look and see how > they did it. > Yep - lots of people with similar ideas. I think mine was first - but not really sure - both happened years ago (over a decade?). >> Proper calculation of wall wrap - again, errors in the wall logic under >> chaos rules >> > > Never noticed any misalignment when crossing over during the days of > chaos (monster). > What exactly are you referring to here? > This leads into my next answer: >> Phaser lock across the wall, plasma seeking across the wall >> Enemies across the wall show up as "near", meaning better cloaker >> approximation (more frequent updates), and proper updates to "see" >> torpedoes, phasers, etc. across the wall in suitably modified clients. >> > > Yes plasma tracking would be nice :0 There's certainly a large issue > with chaos mode wall wrap in that clients don't have the ability to > draw information on tactical across the "wall" even if it was given by > the server (which it isn't). With a fair amount of work on both > client and server end it could be done. If the client doesn't let you "see" across the wall, the mistakes are difficult to see. The teleport effect where you are on one side, and then on the other, and you cannot see how this affects your position relative to others. Of course, it's also possible that they fixed it independent of me - my patches have been sitting around for a _long_ time. > It would require a feature > packet to let the client know wall wrap is enabled. The feature > packet would have to be resent if sysdef is modified. A lot of server > routines would have to be modified (enemy visibility, alert status, > phaser hit, torp tracking, plasma tracking, possibly more I'm > forgetting). A lot of client draw routines on local (ships, weapons, > planets, stars, etc) would have to be changed to support that feature > packet. A few things on galactic map as well (phasers, view box). > All in all, a lot of work for a feature that isn't used on any servers > currently. That's certainly the official way of doing it. I chose to make it an option. Of course, within the company I worked, my client was also the only one to have cracked the reserved.c key in use and provide borg features. Those were fun times... :-) > I personally think there are better things to spend time > working on Once upon a time - it was very interesting. Back then (1993?) Netrek encouraged me to learn C, trigonometry and calculus. I was a geeky 13 year old... :-) Now, at 29, with three children, Netrek is a good memory from the past. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080401/7ccb52c7/attachment.htm From mark at mark.mielke.cc Tue Apr 1 16:07:19 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:07:19 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> Message-ID: <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> Rado S wrote: ... Sorry, Rado - but I still don't see your point. I read your email twice. All I can pick on is "yes, I wanted to stir things up, and I did". Might it be possible for you to express your request in two lines for those of us who are too slow to follow? Something with substance, that can be answered in two lines? Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From cflrich at cfl.rr.com Tue Apr 1 16:11:07 2008 From: cflrich at cfl.rr.com (Rich Hansen) Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:11:07 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> Message-ID: <47F2A4EB.8020407@cfl.rr.com> Rado S wrote: >> There are people that put up, and there are people that talk. >> > > I've put up code, but that's irrelevant to the issue at hand. > Sometimes "putting up" _is_ talk. > As long as you don't accept this, there is no point in continuing. > > Far from being irrelevant, that -is- the issue at hand. You want a bunch of work to be done but you don't want to actually do any portion of it. This time, putting up is not talk. Putting up is -doing-. Let me spell out "Put up or shut up" a little more clearly for you, since you don't seem to get it. We're saying, "Go and implement something and -show- us what you want to do, not -tell- us, -show- us, or quit yer incessant yapping." You're all talk dude. That's all you know how to do. Show. Don't tell. Show. > Why would any of my code influence anyhow the code-unrelated message > itself or the attitude of the recipients? Because it's real easy to come up with a whole lot of ideas. It takes a lot more fortitude, motivation and courage to implement those ideas and show them to the community. You've got no motivation to actually do anything. You just want to blab all day. And who's got time for that? The rest of us are too busy -doing- things. If you spent all of the time you waste responding with these ridiculous emails into implementing your vision, I have no doubt that great things would come of it. But you just don't have the guts, do you? We've been pretty civil but these last three responses were pretty ridiculous and insulting. Can we remove this guy from the list? -rich From quozl at us.netrek.org Tue Apr 1 17:29:59 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:29:59 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <47F2A4EB.8020407@cfl.rr.com> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A4EB.8020407@cfl.rr.com> Message-ID: <20080401222959.GA6266@us.netrek.org> On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 05:11:07PM -0400, Rich Hansen wrote: > We've been pretty civil but these last three responses were pretty > ridiculous and insulting. Can we remove this guy from the list? That would serve less benefit that merely ignoring them. We don't need a Paradise martyrdom. We need more players. ;-) -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From netrek at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 12:31:14 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:31:14 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] OBStrek (?) source? Message-ID: I am looking for the Java source to mp3's Java client. I can't find it anywhere online. Someone on FMC is interested in working on the code to extend it. He is a professional Java programmer. Zach From kellycromwell at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 12:46:43 2008 From: kellycromwell at gmail.com (Kelly Cromwell) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 11:46:43 -0600 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? Message-ID: <34fccaab0804021046u787da07brbb79ed90e4649f03@mail.gmail.com> Hey folks, Just curious if anyone has ever suggested/attempted to move netrek to xbox live arcade? I think it would be an amazingly popular title. If anyone is working on it i'd love to become a part of it, if not perhaps i'll spear head it! who's interested? Kells -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080402/8460856c/attachment.htm From list2rado at gmx.de Wed Apr 2 13:22:23 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 20:22:23 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? In-Reply-To: <34fccaab0804021046u787da07brbb79ed90e4649f03@mail.gmail.com> References: <34fccaab0804021046u787da07brbb79ed90e4649f03@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080402182223.GA29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- Kelly Cromwell wrote on Wed 2.Apr'08 at 11:46:43 -0600 -= > Just curious if anyone has ever suggested/attempted to move netrek > to xbox live arcade? I think it would be an amazingly popular > title. If anyone is working on it i'd love to become a part of it, > if not perhaps i'll spear head it! > who's interested? I know little about xbox: how will you control the ship? (speed, direction, aiming with 2 weapons, other functions all listed in the on-line help) (Oh, and it's netrek with 1 "t") -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. From list2rado at gmx.de Wed Apr 2 13:35:41 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 20:35:41 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- Mark Mielke wrote on Tue 1.Apr'08 at 17:07:19 -0400 -= > Sorry, Rado - but I still don't see your point. I read your email twice. > All I can pick on is "yes, I wanted to stir things up, and I did". ... > Might it be possible for you to express your request in two lines > for those of us who are too slow to follow? Something with > substance, that can be answered in two lines? 1) Netrek is a game, games need fairplay, netrek doesn't have it. 2) Dealing with fairplay in netrek would turn more people active. tech: Thanks for using @lists, but your reply-to: still points to @us. -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. From msucka0xff at programmer.net Wed Apr 2 13:46:41 2008 From: msucka0xff at programmer.net (. .) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:46:41 -0800 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? Message-ID: <20080402184641.88DD01BF28D@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> Xbox console has usb connectors for keyboard or mouse. No reason the client controls can't be modified and adapted to the standard XBox controller, which I would favor personally since it would gain traction, and Xbox users wouldn't reject. Xbox I would guess could probably run the latest windows client. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rado S" To: netrek-dev at lists.netrek.org Subject: Re: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 20:22:23 +0200 =- Kelly Cromwell wrote on Wed 2.Apr'08 at 11:46:43 -0600 -= > Just curious if anyone has ever suggested/attempted to move netrek > to xbox live arcade? I think it would be an amazingly popular > title. If anyone is working on it i'd love to become a part of it, > if not perhaps i'll spear head it! > who's interested? I know little about xbox: how will you control the ship? (speed, direction, aiming with 2 weapons, other functions all listed in the on-line help) (Oh, and it's netrek with 1 "t") -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. _______________________________________________ netrek-dev mailing list netrek-dev at us.netrek.org http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev -- Want an e-mail address like mine? Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080402/8f6f0642/attachment.htm From msucka0xff at programmer.net Wed Apr 2 13:46:41 2008 From: msucka0xff at programmer.net (. .) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:46:41 -0800 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? Message-ID: <20080402184641.88DD01BF28D@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> Xbox console has usb connectors for keyboard or mouse. No reason the client controls can't be modified and adapted to the standard XBox controller, which I would favor personally since it would gain traction, and Xbox users wouldn't reject. Xbox I would guess could probably run the latest windows client. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rado S" To: netrek-dev at lists.netrek.org Subject: Re: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 20:22:23 +0200 =- Kelly Cromwell wrote on Wed 2.Apr'08 at 11:46:43 -0600 -= > Just curious if anyone has ever suggested/attempted to move netrek > to xbox live arcade? I think it would be an amazingly popular > title. If anyone is working on it i'd love to become a part of it, > if not perhaps i'll spear head it! > who's interested? I know little about xbox: how will you control the ship? (speed, direction, aiming with 2 weapons, other functions all listed in the on-line help) (Oh, and it's netrek with 1 "t") -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. _______________________________________________ netrek-dev mailing list netrek-dev at us.netrek.org http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev -- Want an e-mail address like mine? Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080402/8f6f0642/attachment-0001.htm From mark at mark.mielke.cc Wed Apr 2 15:23:59 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 16:23:59 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? In-Reply-To: <34fccaab0804021046u787da07brbb79ed90e4649f03@mail.gmail.com> References: <34fccaab0804021046u787da07brbb79ed90e4649f03@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47F3EB5F.8090607@mark.mielke.cc> Kelly Cromwell wrote: > Hey folks, > > Just curious if anyone has ever suggested/attempted to move netrek to > xbox live arcade? I think it would be an amazingly popular title. If > anyone is working on it i'd love to become a part of it, if not > perhaps i'll spear head it! > > who's interested? > I have trouble thinking of Netrek without a mouse... :-) The Wii controller might work better? And I own a Wii - not an X-Box... :-) Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From mark at mark.mielke.cc Wed Apr 2 15:27:32 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 16:27:32 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> Message-ID: <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> Rado S wrote: > =- Mark Mielke wrote on Tue 1.Apr'08 at 17:07:19 -0400 -= > >> Might it be possible for you to express your request in two lines >> for those of us who are too slow to follow? Something with >> substance, that can be answered in two lines? >> > > 1) Netrek is a game, games need fairplay, netrek doesn't have it. > 2) Dealing with fairplay in netrek would turn more people active. > 1) Netrek rules have been 'fair' since the beginning. If anything, the rules have been against anything that would upset game play in the standard mode, precisely because people like the game to be fair, without surprises. Even though I haven't played in over a year - I could jump right back in and start ogging away. 2) I think you are speculating without evidence. The decline of Netrek is due to many factors, none of which have to do with 'fair play'. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080402/90bb8143/attachment-0001.htm From quozl at us.netrek.org Wed Apr 2 16:54:55 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 08:54:55 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <20080402215455.GA5691@us.netrek.org> On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 04:27:32PM -0400, Mark Mielke wrote: > Rado S wrote: > 1) Netrek is a game, games need fairplay, netrek doesn't have it. > 2) Dealing with fairplay in netrek would turn more people active. There is no unfairness that isn't caused by a player's own choices and actions. The fairness is enforced by the network protocol and the server. I agree with Mark, decline of Netrek is due to many factors, and I don't think fair play relates to any of the factors. That fair play will increase activity ... is a specious argument that wastes time that could be better spent on the factors that are significant. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 17:16:06 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 17:16:06 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? In-Reply-To: <20080402184641.88DD01BF28D@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20080402184641.88DD01BF28D@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <65631e800804021516i2866429m61f18bdc41735cbe@mail.gmail.com> My understanding is that the Xbox360 does not support USB keyboards. As far as the suggestion goes: what a truly excellent idea. The client would have to be modified and somewhat dumbed down to work with the Xbox360 controller, and communication would be difficult without the chatpad attachment, but I think it could definitely be done. Left trigger phasers, right trigger torps, right button lock-on, left button plasmas. A button toggle shields, B button Det, X button cloak, Y button transwarp. Just some simple suggestions. The left analog stick could be speed (would be hard though, perhaps use the pad below it to increment speed or have fixed speed settings), right analog stick direction. I'd recommend using separate servers though to host it, as you wouldn't want a horde of new players pouring onto an established server. There's no reason regular clients couldn't connect to the new servers though. Would be an easy way to advertise the game and regular clients, and to be honest it sounds like fun to me to sit on my couch and get owned by clue. :) Jeffrey. On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 1:46 PM, . . wrote: > > Xbox console has usb connectors for keyboard or mouse. No reason the client > controls can't be modified and adapted to the standard XBox controller, > which I would favor personally since it would gain traction, and Xbox users > wouldn't reject. Xbox I would guess could probably run the latest windows > client. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From netrek at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 18:15:07 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 19:15:07 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <20080402215455.GA5691@us.netrek.org> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402215455.GA5691@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: Rado would have to elaborate on precisely what he mean by "fair play" and what is currently limiting it from being realized, however I think social behaviour can affect netrek health. It is common now in pickup to see stacking. Team A has 2 or 3 elite players, team B has none. A quick geno ensues. Newbies are getting tooled. You can argue either way this is good or bad. Good because they are facing tougher opponents which should help their long-term progression of learning. Bad because some newbies will be turned off and not find it very fun and stop playing. Since there is no data we can only speculate and make an argument either way. I think the idea of automatic balancing has been put forward in the past. To balance numerically would be fairly trivial but balancing based on clue would not be as straight forward. This is where persistent status would help. Clued players could or even just those that demonstrated they are no longer newbies would have a status field set, then have the netrek server check every X minutes (could be sysdef'd) and automaticallu balance, or balance when one team is down by Y planets. Status could be determined automatically based on stats or for a more reliable method it could be voted on by a pool of clued players or manually selected by the server god. If we had ID registration it would be much easier and could have same ID for multiple servers. Could be cool for stats also. Say you login to a web form with your ID and password and it lists your registered characters and stats for each server. Zach From jrd at gerdesas.com Wed Apr 2 18:25:36 2008 From: jrd at gerdesas.com (John R. Dennison) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:25:36 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402215455.GA5691@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <20080402232536.GD27013@mail.beanhq.com> On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 07:15:07PM -0400, Zach wrote: > Rado would have to elaborate on precisely what he mean by "fair play" Good luck with that. > quick geno ensues. Newbies are getting tooled. You can argue either Newbies always get tooled. There is a steep learning curve. > make an argument either way. I think the idea of automatic balancing > has been put forward in the past. To balance numerically would be > fairly trivial but balancing based on clue would not be as straight > forward. This is where persistent status would help. Clued players The code exists. It's just not compiled in / enabled by default; I also do not know how well tested it is currently. And if you start denying people the option of playing with friends you alienate and make people quit. > could or even just those that demonstrated they are no longer newbies > would have a status field set, then have the netrek server check every > X minutes (could be sysdef'd) and automaticallu balance, or balance > when one team is down by Y planets. Status could be determined > automatically based on stats or for a more reliable method it could be > voted on by a pool of clued players or manually selected by the server > god. If we had ID registration it would be much easier and could have No server admin is going to spend time doing this. Player votes can not be trusted due to personality issues. > same ID for multiple servers. Could be cool for stats also. Say you > login to a web form with your ID and password and it lists your > registered characters and stats for each server. Let me know when you have it designed. John -- "I'm sorry but our engineers do not have phones." As stated by a Network Solutions Customer Service representative when asked to be put through to an engineer. "My other computer is your windows box." Ralf Hildebrandt trying to play sturgeon while it's under attack is apparently not fun. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080402/c2970c00/attachment.pgp From carlos at jpl.nasa.gov Wed Apr 2 18:01:02 2008 From: carlos at jpl.nasa.gov (Carlos Y. Villalpando) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 16:01:02 -0700 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? In-Reply-To: <65631e800804021516i2866429m61f18bdc41735cbe@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080402184641.88DD01BF28D@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <65631e800804021516i2866429m61f18bdc41735cbe@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080402230102.GA880@carlos-desktop> Quoting Jeffrey Watts : > My understanding is that the Xbox360 does not support USB keyboards. Lord no, then. Netrek really needs a real mouse and keyboard. I've tried playing on laptop eraser mouses, and trackpads, and it just isn't feasable. On top of that, player messaging is vital, and you currently need a keyboard for that. "use voice!" you say? Only works if everybody has voice capabilities. On top of that, Netrek is rather dense screen. I figured one needs at least a 900-1000 pixel high screen with small fonts to be useful, and for that you'll need progressive scan for those small fonts. Although HD TVs are becoming more and prevalent, you couldn't play this on a regular TV, or even a 720p flatpanel. --Carlos V. From nimret at nimret.com Wed Apr 2 18:52:10 2008 From: nimret at nimret.com (Nimret Sandhu) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:52:10 -0800 Subject: [netrek-dev] OBStrek (?) source? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200804021552.11537.nimret@nimret.com> I'd be interested in that too. I did find the following: http://www.shadowhunter.org/javaviewer/source.html I also see references to: http://ftp.netrek.org/pub/netrek/clients/jtrek/ are there better suggestions for looking at source? cheers - -- Nimret Sandhu http://www.nimret.com On Wednesday 02 April 2008 09:31 am, Zach wrote: > I am looking for the Java source to mp3's Java client. I can't find it > anywhere online. Someone on FMC is interested in working on the code > to extend it. He is a professional Java programmer. > > Zach > > _______________________________________________ > netrek-dev mailing list > netrek-dev at us.netrek.org > http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev From msucka0xff at programmer.net Wed Apr 2 19:07:08 2008 From: msucka0xff at programmer.net (. .) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 16:07:08 -0800 Subject: [netrek-dev] OBStrek (?) source? Message-ID: <20080403000708.F3D1747808F@ws1-5.us4.outblaze.com> greets chewie have a look at http://ftp.netrek.org/pub/netrek/clients/gltrek/glTrek-src.jar will answer all questions about it cheers ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nimret Sandhu" To: "Netrek Development Mailing List" Subject: Re: [netrek-dev] OBStrek (?) source? Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:52:10 -0800 I'd be interested in that too. I did find the following: http://www.shadowhunter.org/javaviewer/source.html I also see references to: http://ftp.netrek.org/pub/netrek/clients/jtrek/ are there better suggestions for looking at source? cheers - -- Nimret Sandhu http://www.nimret.com On Wednesday 02 April 2008 09:31 am, Zach wrote: > I am looking for the Java source to mp3's Java client. I can't find it > anywhere online. Someone on FMC is interested in working on the code > to extend it. He is a professional Java programmer. > > Zach > > _______________________________________________ > netrek-dev mailing list > netrek-dev at us.netrek.org > http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev _______________________________________________ netrek-dev mailing list netrek-dev at us.netrek.org http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev -- Want an e-mail address like mine? Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com! From netrek at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 23:20:18 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 00:20:18 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] OBStrek (?) source? In-Reply-To: <200804021552.11537.nimret@nimret.com> References: <200804021552.11537.nimret@nimret.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 7:52 PM, Nimret Sandhu wrote: > I'd be interested in that too. > > I did find the following: > http://www.shadowhunter.org/javaviewer/source.html > > I also see references to: > http://ftp.netrek.org/pub/netrek/clients/jtrek/ Hey Nimret, Thanks. By the way if you also have interest perhaps Jay, Fokker, yourself and whoever else is interested could all pool your talent and work on a client together to spread the workload and save time. Zach From netrek at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 23:26:45 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 00:26:45 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] yay or nay? Message-ID: Doosh stats. Such as armies dooshed by you, your armies that were dooshed and a percentage of success: say you carried 4 armies 10 times and only delivered 20 then your doosh success would be 50%. Zach From jrd at gerdesas.com Thu Apr 3 00:45:06 2008 From: jrd at gerdesas.com (John R. Dennison) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 00:45:06 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] yay or nay? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080403054506.GE27013@mail.beanhq.com> On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 12:26:45AM -0400, Zach wrote: > Doosh stats. Such as armies dooshed by you, your armies that were > dooshed and a percentage of success: say you carried 4 armies 10 times > and only delivered 20 then your doosh success would be 50%. Exists, LTD_STATS. Enabled on the 2 primary servers. No way to currently display, as has pointed out to you on IRC. Work has already been undertaken to display various LTD stats via an "&" / "XSTATS" command, still pending completion and being pushed out. As has also been pointed out to you on IRC. John -- "I'm sorry but our engineers do not have phones." As stated by a Network Solutions Customer Service representative when asked to be put through to an engineer. "My other computer is your windows box." Ralf Hildebrandt trying to play sturgeon while it's under attack is apparently not fun. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080403/5f8c259d/attachment-0001.pgp From mark at mark.mielke.cc Thu Apr 3 01:03:38 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 02:03:38 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402215455.GA5691@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <47F4733A.7090002@mark.mielke.cc> Zach wrote: > It is common now in pickup > to see stacking. Team A has 2 or 3 elite players, team B has none. A > quick geno ensues. Newbies are getting tooled. You can argue either > way this is good or bad. ... I think the idea of automatic balancing > has been put forward in the past. To balance numerically would be > fairly trivial but balancing based on clue would not be as straight > forward. This is where persistent status would help. > This may be the feeling of it - but the sample size is quite small these days, and drawing conclusions based upon this sample size is probably invalid. Experienced people don't like playing with people who don't read their messages, who obviously have no "clue" what they are doing. Enforcing experienced people to put up with an inexperienced team might appear to be appealing in the short term, but long term, it's reducing the game to a level that can be enjoyed by newbies, and experienced people will leave. There is no evidence that such measures would increase the number of players who would play netrek, or increase the skill level of those few who do. People have peaves against the current and past players of Netrek, and would love to see things changed. As far as I am concerned, however, the problem that Netrek faces, is that it always targeted a very specific demographic, and this demographic has grown responsibilities. The new generation doesn't want a game like Netrek when hundreds of more visually appealing and entertaining games exist on the market. Even 10 years ago, I had to twist the arms of friends to play, and they never really picked it up. It's no surprise at all that fewer and fewer people play. For certain, enforced team balancing throughout the game (as would be required - because the people in a game change over long games, and the "stack" moves back and forth, which would requiring re-balancing, forcing experienced people who worked hard to win one side, to suddenly switch to become a defender on the losing side???) certainly won't make me put in Netrek hours. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Thu Apr 3 03:05:54 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 03:05:54 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402215455.GA5691@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <65631e800804030105j13e2f615o741a502ee453702@mail.gmail.com> To be honest Zach, if you're really interested in this just read the archives from last year. Rado posted dozens (hundreds?) of times on this subject, so you could probably answer your own question. To be honest, though, the conversation between Rado and others wasn't so much on what was "fair" or not, but more of whether or not there should be an "official" review of "fairness". As you can probably tell, it was dry reading and to be honest I didn't read much of it as it became a circular argument really fast. See my prior email to get the link to "Tireless Rebutter". However, I would please ask the list to please not bring this up again. It was terribly dull and unproductive the first time around. I'm certainly not a real contributer here, and I was never really clue, so please don't take my opinion as carrying a lot of weight. However, I've gone through a lot of tubes during my time on "teh internets" and one thing I do know well is this: how to spot list trolls and dull threads. "Fair play" as a thread will not deliver and will only serve to feed the lonely men living under the bridges of cyberspace. I would suggest instead we talk about: 1) Patches, game mods, you know, CODE STUFF. 2) Xbox360 port (to be honest the coolest idea I've heard in a while) 3) Paradise vs Bronco flamefests -- oops, forgot, those have been done to death too ;-) Jeffrey. On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:15 PM, Zach wrote: > Rado would have to elaborate on precisely what he mean by "fair play" > and what is currently limiting it from being realized, however I think > social behaviour can affect netrek health. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Thu Apr 3 03:36:44 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 03:36:44 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? In-Reply-To: <20080402230102.GA880@carlos-desktop> References: <20080402184641.88DD01BF28D@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <65631e800804021516i2866429m61f18bdc41735cbe@mail.gmail.com> <20080402230102.GA880@carlos-desktop> Message-ID: <65631e800804030136s1ed6314bl7a6286bc214bdf4@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Carlos Y. Villalpando wrote: > > Lord no, then. Netrek really needs a real mouse and keyboard. I've > tried playing on laptop eraser mouses, and trackpads, and it just > isn't feasable. If one were to port to the Xbox360 environment the idea would be that you would adapt the client to the environment. Yes, it'd be different, but that doesn't make it bad per se. I hated the Xbox360 controller at first until I learned how to use it. Now it's actually quite nice. I still prefer mouse+keyboard setups, but I can't sit on my ass with my feet up on the edge of my sofa and use M+K comfortably - yet that 360 controller feels real nice, and I can easily take a swig of my beer while playing. > On top of that, player messaging is vital, and you currently need a > keyboard for that. "use voice!" you say? Only works if everybody has > voice capabilities. As I said in my prior post, there is a Chatpad that attaches to the Xbox360 controller. It's not perfect, but it'd work for communicating. And yes, I'd also say "use voice". I was the raidleader of an EverQuest guild for five years. I type REAL fast. I managed raids using three custom channels in addition to the regular channels. I had no problem controlling 72 people, the leadership, and my team (pullers) at the same time. When I moved to WoW I kept the same routine. Then Ventrilo came. I didn't like it at all at first, but here's the reality - chat communications are far superior for team games. They're faster, they allow you to keep your hands on the controls while communicating, and they allow you to coordinate with the less-than-clue, the people who have a harder time reading fast (dyslexic, etc), and those who are really busy (bases being ogged, warriors tanking, etc). As I also said before, I don't think that any implementation (if it's even possible, I don't know how the server part would work out) should be on the regular servers. Thinking now I doubt that they could co-exist. But it's a neat idea and has some promise of addressing a some of the issues affecting the community (namely lack of players~). I think it's worth looking at, assuming someone gets a big enough itch that they want to scratch it. And for Cthulhu's sake, at least it's a lot more interesting than everyone yelling at Rado. :) > On top of that, Netrek is rather dense screen. I figured one needs at > least a 900-1000 pixel high screen with small fonts to be useful, and > for that you'll need progressive scan for those small fonts. Although > HD TVs are becoming more and prevalent, you couldn't play this on a > regular TV, or even a 720p flatpanel. Make it only work on HD. Hell, screw the 720 crowd. Make it only work well on 1080. Boohoo if you're low-rez. I mean seriously, what happened to the Netrek community? I remember not being able to play trek effectively on 800x600 and getting NO SYMPATHY. Are we getting soft? Real trekkers would plug their 360 into their LCD monitor to play. :-p Anyhow, it's an interesting topic and I probably shouldn't imply that the code trees would be that similar. I'd think it a pretty significant fork and I'm not sure how the XboxLive server architecture works anyway - it's probably not possible to have a 3rd party server piece interacting with Microsoft's environment. Aside from security concerns, there's the more obvious issue of the fact that M$ probably doesn't want this kind of thing occurring. Probably won't happen, but it's interesting to think of the possibilities. Console game platforms are really the future of team games, especially sport-type games like Netrek (whether we like it or not). The only sport-type game type that's still dominant on PCs are MMOGs, and to be honest that crowd is different from Netrek (more emphasis on tactics, whereas MMOGs emphasize organization more). Netrek is much more like a FPS in type of play. Jeffrey. P.S. The next generation of players who would like a game like Netrek aren't playing their games on a PC. They're using the Xbox360 (which is currently the platform of choice for team games). This is the reality. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From msucka0xff at programmer.net Thu Apr 3 12:08:40 2008 From: msucka0xff at programmer.net (. .) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:08:40 -0800 Subject: [netrek-dev] yay or nay? Message-ID: <20080403170840.E47B516427A@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> yay, wish i had doosh stats, they would be massive ----- Original Message ----- From: Zach To: "Netrek Development Mailing List" Subject: [netrek-dev] yay or nay? Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 00:26:45 -0400 Doosh stats. Such as armies dooshed by you, your armies that were dooshed and a percentage of success: say you carried 4 armies 10 times and only delivered 20 then your doosh success would be 50%. Zach _______________________________________________ netrek-dev mailing list netrek-dev at us.netrek.org http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev -- Want an e-mail address like mine? Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080403/a8735185/attachment.htm From akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to Thu Apr 3 12:23:54 2008 From: akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to (Andrew K. Bressen) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:23:54 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? In-Reply-To: <34fccaab0804021046u787da07brbb79ed90e4649f03@mail.gmail.com> (Kelly Cromwell's message of "Wed, 2 Apr 2008 11:46:43 -0600") References: <34fccaab0804021046u787da07brbb79ed90e4649f03@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0qzlsaj1hx.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> "Kelly Cromwell" writes: > Just curious if anyone has ever suggested/attempted to move netrek to xbox > live arcade? I think it would be an amazingly popular title. If anyone is > working on it i'd love to become a part of it, if not perhaps i'll spear > head it! I think this idea utterly rocks; please go for it. Even if the game was segregated onto different servers, and was not entirely the same as standard netrek, it could not help but draw in more players. The HD-only idea has some merit, since that technology is rolling in right now, and that market segment will only be increasing. From akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to Thu Apr 3 12:40:07 2008 From: akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to (Andrew K. Bressen) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:40:07 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? In-Reply-To: <20080402230102.GA880@carlos-desktop> (Carlos Y. Villalpando's message of "Wed, 2 Apr 2008 16:01:02 -0700") References: <20080402184641.88DD01BF28D@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <65631e800804021516i2866429m61f18bdc41735cbe@mail.gmail.com> <20080402230102.GA880@carlos-desktop> Message-ID: <0qve2yj0qw.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> "Carlos Y. Villalpando" writes: > On top of that, Netrek is rather dense screen. I figured one needs at > least a 900-1000 pixel high screen with small fonts to be useful, and > for that you'll need progressive scan for those small fonts. Although > HD TVs are becoming more and prevalent, you couldn't play this on a > regular TV, or even a 720p flatpanel. What if objects got smaller towards the edges of the screen? (taken to an extreme, has anyone ever tried combining the whole galaxy into one window with teeny planets at the edges? It'd be like playing in a fish-eye lens... planets in mirror are closer than they appear...) Someone playing on a small tac would be at a disadvantage, unless they were playing against mainly other players who had a small tac. Voice is best, but maybe there could be a few canned messages, only to team; carry report (or game could automatically send beam-up messages for teammates?), distress, generic ogg call (which could be displayed differently depending on target; "ogg the base!"/"defend planet"/"kill ship"). From quozl at us.netrek.org Thu Apr 3 18:01:30 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 10:01:30 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio Message-ID: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Now is the time. We can probably afford the bandwidth. The last player I know on dialup has finally upgraded. Let's look into what it will take to augment the most popular clients with audio, routed via the server. I'm happy to program the server side. In a game, each team would have audio of themselves, perhaps with 3dB of impedence added per rank below Admiral. In a clue pre-game, before and during a draft, the audio would be shared across all teams. Out of t-mode, shared across all teams. During conquer parade, shared again. I've learned what I need to know about audio on the Linux side, I think, but I'd appreciate anyone else piping up. What can we build upon, and what open source code is available? -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From quozl at us.netrek.org Thu Apr 3 18:02:50 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 10:02:50 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] Nettrek on Xbox Live Arcade? In-Reply-To: <65631e800804030136s1ed6314bl7a6286bc214bdf4@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080402184641.88DD01BF28D@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <65631e800804021516i2866429m61f18bdc41735cbe@mail.gmail.com> <20080402230102.GA880@carlos-desktop> <65631e800804030136s1ed6314bl7a6286bc214bdf4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080403230250.GC7214@us.netrek.org> On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 03:36:44AM -0500, Jeffrey Watts wrote: > Then Ventrilo came. I didn't like it at all at first, but here's the > reality - chat communications are far superior for team games. I agree, taken to a new thread. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From quozl at us.netrek.org Thu Apr 3 18:09:16 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 10:09:16 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <20080403230916.GD7214@us.netrek.org> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumble_%28computer_software%29 "Mumble is a free, open-source, cross-platform voice over IP application. Its primary users are gamers, and it is similar to programs such as TeamSpeak and Ventrilo. It uses a Client-server architecture where users who want to talk connect to the same server." -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From netrek at gmail.com Thu Apr 3 18:29:30 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 19:29:30 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: So if you :ita someone you won't hear their audio? :) Do you envision adding VOIP functionality to Vanilla or use some FOSS application alongside the server? A member of FMC has a Ventrillo server for us to use with 20 channels. I found this Speak Freely (Windows and UNIX code exist): http://sourceforge.net/projects/speak-freely-u/ On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:01 PM, James Cameron wrote: > Now is the time. We can probably afford the bandwidth. The last player > I know on dialup has finally upgraded. Let's look into what it will > take to augment the most popular clients with audio, routed via the > server. I'm happy to program the server side. > > In a game, each team would have audio of themselves, perhaps with 3dB of > impedence added per rank below Admiral. > > In a clue pre-game, before and during a draft, the audio would be shared > across all teams. > > Out of t-mode, shared across all teams. > > During conquer parade, shared again. > > I've learned what I need to know about audio on the Linux side, I think, > but I'd appreciate anyone else piping up. What can we build upon, and > what open source code is available? > > -- > James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > netrek-dev mailing list > netrek-dev at us.netrek.org > http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev > From netrek at gmail.com Thu Apr 3 18:37:18 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 19:37:18 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080403230916.GD7214@us.netrek.org> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080403230916.GD7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: Cool. Have you seen this: http://www.digium.com/en/products/open-source.php Zach On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:09 PM, James Cameron wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumble_%28computer_software%29 > > "Mumble is a free, open-source, cross-platform voice over IP > application. Its primary users are gamers, and it is similar to programs > such as TeamSpeak and Ventrilo. It uses a Client-server architecture > where users who want to talk connect to the same server." > > > > -- > James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > netrek-dev mailing list > netrek-dev at us.netrek.org > http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev > From mark at mark.mielke.cc Thu Apr 3 18:43:28 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:43:28 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <47F56BA0.1030004@mark.mielke.cc> James Cameron wrote: > Now is the time. We can probably afford the bandwidth. The last player > I know on dialup has finally upgraded. Let's look into what it will > take to augment the most popular clients with audio, routed via the > server. I'm happy to program the server side. > > In a game, each team would have audio of themselves, perhaps with 3dB of > impedence added per rank below Admiral. > > In a clue pre-game, before and during a draft, the audio would be shared > across all teams. > > Out of t-mode, shared across all teams. > > During conquer parade, shared again. > > I've learned what I need to know about audio on the Linux side, I think, > but I'd appreciate anyone else piping up. What can we build upon, and > what open source code is available? > Ooooo.... 8 year olds can swear at us in 8khz... :-) I do like the idea, though. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From karthik at karthik.com Fri Apr 4 01:33:34 2008 From: karthik at karthik.com (Karthik Arumugham) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 02:33:34 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <539937FD-72AE-4E59-BCFB-EC20813D4331@karthik.com> On Apr 3, 2008, at 7:01 PM, James Cameron wrote: > Now is the time. We can probably afford the bandwidth. The last > player > I know on dialup has finally upgraded. Let's look into what it will > take to augment the most popular clients with audio, routed via the > server. I'm happy to program the server side. > > In a game, each team would have audio of themselves, perhaps with > 3dB of > impedence added per rank below Admiral. > > In a clue pre-game, before and during a draft, the audio would be > shared > across all teams. > > Out of t-mode, shared across all teams. > > During conquer parade, shared again. > > I've learned what I need to know about audio on the Linux side, I > think, > but I'd appreciate anyone else piping up. What can we build upon, and > what open source code is available? Hey, finally a bit of signal amongst all the noise I've basically paged past on this list in the past few weeks. This may be a good idea. More consideration has to be taken into account with regards to contention between users. 8 players cannot speak at once, and using rank is not a very good differentiator in my opinion. Many people who probably should not have priority to speak have scummed rank, and many people who should have priority to speak do not have rank or are playing as guests. I would say that a combination of carried armies, offense, and perhaps other stats could be used to give priority. I want the 2.0 offense player on my team to be able to speak. I also want the guy with 6 armies to be able to speak, even if he is a low offense twink. Though, I would probably want the 2.0 offense player to be able to speak over the guy who only has 4 armies and has been running around for 10 minutes without getting near an enemy planet. The standard "Be Quiet" logic can be applied as well in some form. I also would want a "mute" vote that quiets a given IP for some length of time, and the ability to set your threshold for receiving chatter. All of the above gets pretty complicated, so it probably needs to be reduced to a simpler equation for who can speak when, and what their priorities become for a simple threshold setting without a huge amount of granuarlity. (E.g., let players select "none", "important", or "all" as their receiving preferences. Not something like setting a threshold from 0 - 9.) If we can come up with an intelligent equation as to who can speak and when, I'm happy to work on the server side as well, and have pickled serve as a testbed. From quozl at us.netrek.org Fri Apr 4 05:29:57 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 21:29:57 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] pret, round win parade, tested Message-ID: <20080404102957.GA5200@us.netrek.org> Tested version of the Pre-T round win parade, which uses the old style conquer parade of a ring of plasma from the planet to the parade ring. Changed the conventional conquer parade to use a ring of plasma moving the opposite direction. See darcs repository. The way this works is that the daemon now detects the Pre-T winning condition in conjunction with Kathy. The daemon runs the conquer parade animation, and Kathy waits for it to finish before proceeding as usual. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From niclas at acc.umu.se Fri Apr 4 06:28:35 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 13:28:35 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: On Fri, 4 Apr 2008, James Cameron wrote: > In a game, each team would have audio of themselves, perhaps with 3dB of > impedence added per rank below Admiral. Having played a lot of clue games with audio I know a thing or two about its upsides and downsides. In pregame, it's a great thing. You can chat and catch up on things. It takes a lot less time for the captain to set up roles, etc. During the game, you need very strict radio discipline for it to work. Basically, you only want the captain to speak, maybe also the main carrier when he's going for a big take. Having more than one or two people during the game trying to control the team by speaking I have found to be counter productive. During the game, there is one situation when voice communication really helps the team, and that is when ogging ("everyone uncloak in 3,2,1... NOW"). It's such a joy to see I almost get goose bumps just thinking about it. Also, if there is not much communication on the voice channel, two scout oggers can really get that extra edge by communcating to eachother vocally. So game wise, voice communication can make a difference if and only if your team knows how to handle it (ie be very disciplined over the voice channel). But I guess it would be a fun thing, and that's always a plus. On pickup, people could talk smack over the voice interface, chat, etc. Voice communication in pickup would probably never help anyone's game (unless the team has eight smart, experienced and disciplined players that know how to use voice communication in netrek). So in conclusion, what I wanted to say is I believe that players that play to win will only find voice communications annoying, while new players that are looking to have fun and meet new people will love it. Also, putting decibel restrictions on rank is a bad idea for several reasons, some of them already pointed out by Karthik. If you are to add this to the server code, I suggest creating a "captain" role on pickup and let that guy be the only one allowed to talk. The players could then vote for a captain (any player on their own team, including obs, or no player at all (so that no one can talk)) and they could vote as often as they want to (but of course their vote is only counted once). Or, if everyone is allowed to talk (which probably could also be a vote), no one should have any decibel restrictions. At least not globally, on a local level each player should be allowed to set private restrictions on any player (you'd want to mute supervisor, for instance). -- Niclas From list2rado at gmx.de Fri Apr 4 12:51:23 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 19:51:23 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <20080404175122.GB11657@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- Mark Mielke wrote on Wed 2.Apr'08 at 16:27:32 -0400 -= > Rado S wrote: >> 1) Netrek is a game, games need fairplay, netrek doesn't have it. > > 1) Netrek rules have been 'fair' since the beginning. If anything, > the rules have been against anything that would upset game play in > the standard mode, precisely because people like the game to be > fair, without surprises. Even though I haven't played in over a > year - I could jump right back in and start ogging away. I mean John's view on fairness. Ask him for details. So you mean his desire for feature-even clients is not justified? >> 2) Dealing with fairplay in netrek would turn more people active. > > 2) I think you are speculating without evidence. The decline of > Netrek is due to many factors, none of which have to do with 'fair > play'. I think you've put more into my statement then was there. I never claimed the decline was due to unfairness. I suggested that if John's view about fairness were to be implemented, it would take more than 1 person doing stuff, and besides John I'd do it for the platforms I have access to, as well as others might for the platforms they have access to. -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. From list2rado at gmx.de Fri Apr 4 12:56:48 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 19:56:48 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] merit of code In-Reply-To: References: <20080331221225.21AB5164288@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <47F16574.2010109@mark.mielke.cc> <20080401181628.GC19181@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F2A407.2090909@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402183541.GB29493@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> <47F3EC34.5000803@mark.mielke.cc> <20080402215455.GA5691@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <20080404175648.GC11657@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- Zach wrote on Wed 2.Apr'08 at 19:15:07 -0400 -= > however I think social behaviour can affect netrek health. You mean sportsmanship, that's not what I meant. I mean technical fairplay for having the same functionality independent of platform used, and on the same platform independent of the client used. Ask John for details. -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. From billbalcerski at gmail.com Fri Apr 4 15:28:33 2008 From: billbalcerski at gmail.com (Bill Balcerski) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 16:28:33 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <45ab86180804041328l5b3b4878u4e74c27ab5a3bfb2@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 7:28 AM, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > So game wise, voice communication can make a difference if and only if > your team knows how to handle it (ie be very disciplined over the voice > channel). > Agreed. I'd like the ability to have other channels besides team though. Like "chat room1, chat room 2, etc" so that you can converse with 1 or 2 people rather than having to talk to your whole team. The whole business of trying to fairly decide who gets to speak and who doesn't seems too complicated - as a player, I'd like the ability to chat with 1 to X (X being some number larger than 1) other players, not just my entire team. Conversely, if that's too hard to do, I'd like to be able to send voice messages to an individual player only, like a private message. And there should be some way to signal that it's a private message. Bill From netrek at gmail.com Fri Apr 4 17:30:56 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:30:56 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: Niclas what voice client(s) did you guys use? I agree with Karth it is a good idea to have granularity and to let players have the option to receive no sound if that ios their choice. I guess this functionality could be feature packeted and all clients can be updated to have option of "voice_chat: on/off" they could togge via netrekrc. If global chat is enabled it will be nearly unintelligble if 8, 16, 16+ (observers) players are all yelling and chatting at once. Maybe have different modes such as in clue games the captain can toggle his team chat (player -> all on team receive) and he will automatically be able to broadcast on ALL but no one else unless he turns on their voice privelege such as "R2->R2 voice 3 team" would give R3 voice broadcast rights to the team board. "R2->R2 voice 3 team+all" gives R3 rights to team and all. And "R2->R2 voice roms" gives all rom players voice. Also player-to-player private audio channel would be cool. This could also be something a player can set in their netrekrc. Such asd "voice_p2p: on" and players could also define similarly if they want to receive team and all voice. At the ip level players could elect to mute ip addresses so they won't receive any of their broadcasts; this could be tied into :ita or made as a different command. Zach From netrek at gmail.com Fri Apr 4 17:35:21 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:35:21 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <45ab86180804041328l5b3b4878u4e74c27ab5a3bfb2@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <45ab86180804041328l5b3b4878u4e74c27ab5a3bfb2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Bill Balcerski wrote: > > Conversely, if that's too hard to do, I'd > like to be able to send voice messages to an individual player only, > like a private message. And there should be some way to signal that > it's a private message. Good idea. Perhaps the server would send you a message such as "Incoming voice message from R2. Do you wish to receive it?" and each message would have a request associated with it. Or if it is a player you want to chat with you could establish a chat session (this could be strictly ip based on persistent across sessions if it is tied into the player Name). These are sort of analogous to in IRC "/msg nick" versus "/DCC CHAT nick". Zach From quozl at us.netrek.org Fri Apr 4 17:51:35 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 09:51:35 +1100 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> I disagree with Zach, the audio link should default to on, with an option to turn it off. The preferences of the existing players are not relevant. I also think that 8 players on a single audio link is not at all impractical, given the expected conversation latency. I'm regularly on conference calls with that number of people, and we all learn rapidly to do random back-off, just like in real life. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Fri Apr 4 18:54:46 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:54:46 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <65631e800804041654p2f827e2byb7051ed9320158a1@mail.gmail.com> Seconded. I understand the desire of people to "control" the channel. I used to completely agree, and when I first implemented Ventrilo into our large raids we did just that. However, we quickly found that it wasn't very useful and that it was simply a mechanical solution to a social problem. I've run 40 and 25 person raids with everyone unmuted without problems. People manage themselves very well overall, especially in smaller communities like this one where reputation is important. Default chat to "on". Give people the option to turn off chat altogether, and give them the ability to mute individuals. In pickup games people can either not be on chat or can mute the 10 year old kid that decides to sing Back Street Boys songs during the game (this has actually happened to me). If it's a clue game, it's the captain's responsibility to keep control of the channel. If someone fails to comply, folks can simply mute him and not invite him again. Jeffrey. On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 5:51 PM, James Cameron wrote: > I disagree with Zach, the audio link should default to on, with an > option to turn it off. The preferences of the existing players are not > relevant. > > I also think that 8 players on a single audio link is not at all > impractical, given the expected conversation latency. I'm regularly on > conference calls with that number of people, and we all learn rapidly to > do random back-off, just like in real life. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From niclas at acc.umu.se Sat Apr 5 09:50:32 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 16:50:32 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, James Cameron wrote: > I also think that 8 players on a single audio link is not at all > impractical, given the expected conversation latency. I'm regularly on > conference calls with that number of people, and we all learn rapidly to > do random back-off, just like in real life. I'm also regularly on conference calls with a lot of people but there is no similarity to that type of communication and netrek communication. When you are on a conference call, there is only one (or possibly a few) things happening at the same time. You decide that you will first talk about item 1 on the agenda, then move on to item 2, etc. In netrek there are a lot of plays happening all over, and every player has their own view on what the team needs to know or do *right* *now*. This is especially true on pickup where a lot of newbie players are playing that haven't yet quite grasped how to prioritize correctly in netrek. Having a communication channel consisting of eight random pickup players would be total chaos. It might be fun, but it would hinder the team's performance, rather than boosting it. -- Niclas From msucka0xff at programmer.net Sat Apr 5 11:19:17 2008 From: msucka0xff at programmer.net (. .) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 08:19:17 -0800 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio Message-ID: <20080405161917.F1DD032675A@ws1-8.us4.outblaze.com> Bill, I think the chat feature can be separated out, and should move to instant message tech XMPP, aka jabber.org, and can be overlayed with VoIP capability. This would free client to focus on more fundamental issues. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Balcerski" > To: "Netrek Development Mailing List" > Subject: Re: [netrek-dev] Team Audio > Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 16:28:33 -0400 > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 7:28 AM, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > > So game wise, voice communication can make a difference if and only if > > your team knows how to handle it (ie be very disciplined over the voice > > channel). > > > Agreed. I'd like the ability to have other channels besides team > though. Like "chat room1, chat room 2, etc" so that you can converse > with 1 or 2 people rather than having to talk to your whole team. The > whole business of trying to fairly decide who gets to speak and who > doesn't seems too complicated - as a player, I'd like the ability to > chat with 1 to X (X being some number larger than 1) other players, > not just my entire team. Conversely, if that's too hard to do, I'd > like to be able to send voice messages to an individual player only, > like a private message. And there should be some way to signal that > it's a private message. > > Bill -- Want an e-mail address like mine? Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com! From mark at mark.mielke.cc Sat Apr 5 12:54:07 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 13:54:07 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, James Cameron wrote: > > >> I also think that 8 players on a single audio link is not at all >> impractical, given the expected conversation latency. I'm regularly on >> conference calls with that number of people, and we all learn rapidly to >> do random back-off, just like in real life. >> > > I'm also regularly on conference calls with a lot of people but there is > no similarity to that type of communication and netrek communication. When > you are on a conference call, there is only one (or possibly a few) things > happening at the same time. You decide that you will first talk about item > 1 on the agenda, then move on to item 2, etc. In netrek there are a lot of > plays happening all over, and every player has their own view on what the > team needs to know or do *right* *now*. This is especially true on pickup > where a lot of newbie players are playing that haven't yet quite grasped > how to prioritize correctly in netrek. > > Having a communication channel consisting of eight random pickup players > would be total chaos. It might be fun, but it would hinder the team's > performance, rather than boosting it. > It is a team sport, though, and having separate plays isolated from each other is a bit anti-team. I think default to on - with the ability to squelch out people who are too noisy for the value they provide, is just fine. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080405/e2d49281/attachment.htm From niclas at acc.umu.se Sun Apr 6 05:48:29 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 12:48:29 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > It is a team sport, though, and having separate plays isolated from each > other is a bit anti-team. This comment of yours is a comment on netrek, not the audio part. It's a fact that there are several separate plays going on continuously in netrek. -- Niclas From netrek at gmail.com Sun Apr 6 16:04:47 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 17:04:47 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] code-management <-> key-management In-Reply-To: <20080401082925.GA24589@us.netrek.org> References: <21058637.1573431206122620108.JavaMail.root@cdptpa-web28-z02> <20080321194452.GA18051@mail.beanhq.com> <0q7ifixf5n.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> <20080401082925.GA24589@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: I've built COW binaries. Not sure if it is static or not. How do you tell? Zach On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:29 AM, James Cameron wrote: > Does anyone know how to build COW static? That's something I'd like to > do. If I could do that, I would host binaries. > > > -- > James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > > > netrek-dev mailing list > netrek-dev at us.netrek.org > http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev > From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Sun Apr 6 19:56:49 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 19:56:49 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <65631e800804061756m5cbf7369p893a479c442b26cf@mail.gmail.com> I've played games that would utilize communication in EXACTLY the same way as Netrek. I've used it with up to 40 players. There are no problems as long as there is recognized leadership. In clue games this is no issue. In pickup games people can turn off chat or mute idiots should there be problems. In practice (from pickup raids and Call of Duty 4 on the Xbox) there aren't many problems. Remember, humans are social animals and we self-organize. In-game communications is not so novel a concept that somehow we all need new rules in order to communicate. The _technology_ is new, _communicating in large groups_ is not. Jeffrey. On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > > I'm also regularly on conference calls with a lot of people but there is > no similarity to that type of communication and netrek communication. When > you are on a conference call, there is only one (or possibly a few) things > happening at the same time. You decide that you will first talk about item > 1 on the agenda, then move on to item 2, etc. In netrek there are a lot of > plays happening all over, and every player has their own view on what the > team needs to know or do *right* *now*. This is especially true on pickup > where a lot of newbie players are playing that haven't yet quite grasped > how to prioritize correctly in netrek. > > Having a communication channel consisting of eight random pickup players > would be total chaos. It might be fun, but it would hinder the team's > performance, rather than boosting it. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From quozl at us.netrek.org Sun Apr 6 20:30:21 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:30:21 +1000 Subject: [netrek-dev] code-management <-> key-management In-Reply-To: References: <21058637.1573431206122620108.JavaMail.root@cdptpa-web28-z02> <20080321194452.GA18051@mail.beanhq.com> <0q7ifixf5n.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> <20080401082925.GA24589@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <20080407013021.GA8436@us.netrek.org> ldd says so. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From mark at mark.mielke.cc Mon Apr 7 07:36:36 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 08:36:36 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > >> It is a team sport, though, and having separate plays isolated from each >> other is a bit anti-team. >> > > This comment of yours is a comment on netrek, not the audio part. It's a > fact that there are several separate plays going on continuously in > netrek. > No - I don't think so. Team messages have been fine for tracking team efforts for over a decade. Voice is more efficient. There is really no reason it NEEDS to have separate channels. Some people might not be able to figure out the new protocols, just like some people never used team messages appropriately. If you isolate voice - you end up with people NOT getting important team messages. If the team captain says something important, and isn't heard, because you are off doing your own thing on a separate channel - whose fault is that? Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080407/008cbaa6/attachment.htm From niclas at acc.umu.se Mon Apr 7 09:46:29 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 16:46:29 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <65631e800804061756m5cbf7369p893a479c442b26cf@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <65631e800804061756m5cbf7369p893a479c442b26cf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Jeffrey Watts wrote: > I've played games that would utilize communication in EXACTLY the same > way as Netrek. What games are that? -- Niclas From niclas at acc.umu.se Mon Apr 7 10:13:25 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 17:13:25 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > Niclas Fredriksson wrote: >> On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: >> >>> It is a team sport, though, and having separate plays isolated from each >>> other is a bit anti-team. >>> >> >> This comment of yours is a comment on netrek, not the audio part. It's a >> fact that there are several separate plays going on continuously in netrek. > > No - I don't think so. Team messages have been fine for tracking team > efforts for over a decade. You're ignoring the difference between written and spoken communication in netrek: - For most people (everyone but the super clue) written communication in netrek is not received (read) by everyone at the same time. Most people read messages when they have the time. - Written communication is very many times faster to receive (read), especially in netrek. - Written communication can be filtered much more effectively (by RCD's for instance). - Written communication in netrek is independent of things like dialects, speech impediments, non-native English speakers, etc. Voice messages only will never be enough to (as you say) "tracking team efforts". If you had ever played a netrek game using voice communciation this would be more apparent to you. Voice messages can only be seen as a compliment to written messages and a very poor one as such. > Voice is more efficient. This is not true in netrek. In netrek, written communication is extremely more efficient than voice dito. How can you even begin to claim that voice communication in netrek is more efficient? Ctrl-T on the keyboard instead of holding the "send message button" and saying "Ok guys, I'm now carrying five armies to orgus, no sorry I mean Organia. Is anyone up for giving me an escort? Hello? Do you guys have sound activated?". > If you isolate voice - you end up with people NOT getting important team > messages. Why? What kind of important messages? Have people missed important team messages for the past 15 years due to not having voice communication? > If the team captain says something important, and isn't heard, because > you are off doing your own thing on a separate channel - whose fault is > that? What if the team captain says something important and you miss it because there are seven other guys on the channel and you don't recognize his voice and even if you could recognize it you can't hear it over supervisor swearing at everyone for not escorting his cloaking DD+5 to KLI? Like I said earlier, voice communication is a good idea. It would give people a chance to chat and give the game a more social feel. But it will never be able to replace written communication in netrek, and the game play situations where voice communication is helpful (and slightly superior to written dito) can be counted on the fingers of your right hand. -- Niclas From cflrich at cfl.rr.com Mon Apr 7 10:35:55 2008 From: cflrich at cfl.rr.com (Rich Hansen) Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 11:35:55 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FA3F5B.20102@cfl.rr.com> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > Like I said earlier, voice communication is a good idea. It would give > people a chance to chat and give the game a more social feel. But it will > never be able to replace written communication in netrek, and the game > play situations where voice communication is helpful (and slightly > superior to written dito) can be counted on the fingers of your right > hand. > Firstly, I don't think voice should replace written communication in Netrek. There's no reason to do so. But I very much disagree that it -couldn't-. I've played many games, both FPS and MMO, in PvP settings, and in all cases voice chat was superior. In fact, the majority of the people I played with insisted you have voice chat for communication-- it is just so much faster. I think the only reason some netrek players believe macros are better is because they're so used to them and trained to read them. I think the kind of plays we've been able to set up and implement have been limited by our macros. Think about this. Say you wanted an escort to Org, but you wanted F3 to fake to bet on your mark, F2 and F5 to come with you, and the scout bomber at El to get in the way of that clue ressing at ORI. You're beaming up armies now. There is just no way to communicate on that level, so you don't even worry about it. But this is 5 seconds of voice chat: "Ok, I'm going to org in 5. 2 and 5 come with, and 3, could you fake bet? John, watch for 9 ressing at ORI." Done. Far superior. 2 isn't listening? You have no way of making him read. But you can make him listen. "2, where are you, come with me now 2, now 2, now now now." It's just far more effective at getting people moving in my experience. A leader will emerge for each team. I think it will also have the side effect of reducing the learning curve for newbies. I really can't think of any situation where voice chat would not be superior. A lot of the scenarios you quoted ("people talking over, guy not recognizing leader's voice") just don't happen in practice. It's worth remembering that nowadays, pretty much everyone who plays games on-line uses voice chat to do so. I can't think of a single competitive FPS or MMO PvP game that doesn't. -rich From netrek at gmail.com Mon Apr 7 10:51:26 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:51:26 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Mark Mielke wrote: > > No - I don't think so. Team messages have been fine for tracking team > efforts for over a decade. Voice is more efficient. There is really no > reason it NEEDS to have separate channels. Some people might not be able to > figure out the new protocols, just like some people never used team messages > appropriately. There is an important difference with the two mediums. With text messages one can scan several lines of messages in a second or two. If 5 people are talking all at once it will be much harder to parse out the individual meaning and then rank it accordingly this is trivial if one is a fast reader. Also one need not compensate for variables such as word slurring, speed, pitch, volume, all which can affect how readily the message will be received. Zach From mark at mark.mielke.cc Mon Apr 7 11:03:18 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:03:18 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > >> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote >>>> It is a team sport, though, and having separate plays isolated from each >>>> other is a bit anti-team >>> This comment of yours is a comment on netrek, not the audio part. It's a >>> fact that there are several separate plays going on continuously in netrek. >>> >> No - I don't think so. Team messages have been fine for tracking team >> efforts for over a decade. >> > > You're ignoring the difference between written and spoken communication in > netrek: > - For most people (everyone but the super clue) written communication in > netrek is not received (read) by everyone at the same time. Most people > read messages when they have the time. > This is because people are lazy - not because they wouldn't benefit from hearing the messages sooner. Voice communication, being MORE EFFICIENT, can be received in near real time, without creating a hinderance. It relies on people staying on topic, and not interrupting with stories about blisters on their toes or whatever that nobody wants to hear anyways. :-) > - Written communication is very many times faster to receive (read), > especially in netrek. > No it isn't. > - Written communication can be filtered much more effectively (by RCD's > for instance). > Voice should not replace text. For data that might need to be referenced, it should certainly stay on text, and keep the voice channel clear. > - Written communication in netrek is independent of things like dialects, > speech impediments, non-native English speakers, etc. > This is an argument against audio altogether - it is not an argument that multiple channels are required. > Voice messages only will never be enough to (as you say) "tracking team > efforts". If you had ever played a netrek game using voice communciation > this would be more apparent to you. Voice messages can only be seen as a > compliment to written messages and a very poor one as such. > The effectiveness of a person at communication has little to do with the medium. Great communicators can use both effectively. Most people, cannot type as fast as they can speak. Most people, communicate more effectively with voice. I challenge your claim - I've played fun team games where the members of the team sat in the same room, and we talked over top of the monitors. If you can't perform team communication with your voice - I suggest practice. :-) >> Voice is more efficient. >> > > This is not true in netrek. In netrek, written communication is extremely > more efficient than voice dito. > No it isn't. The proof is simple - newbies don't read messages. They need to learn to use text, and even then, people don't read what they write until seconds or more later. The most effective netrek players are right on top of the message window - but the most effective netrek players would also be on top of a voice channel. You are not performing a legitimate comparison. Voice is active and in real time - text is passive and read in batch. It is true that some content is more effective in each, but it is not true that "written is extremely more efficient than voice". You are incorrect. > How can you even begin to claim that voice communication in netrek is more > efficient? Ctrl-T on the keyboard instead of holding the "send message > button" and saying "Ok guys, I'm now carrying five armies to orgus, no > sorry I mean Organia. Is anyone up for giving me an escort? Hello? Do you > guys have sound activated?". > If that's the only message you send ... sure. >> If you isolate voice - you end up with people NOT getting important team >> messages. >> > > Why? What kind of important messages? Have people missed important team > messages for the past 15 years due to not having voice communication? > Yes? >> If the team captain says something important, and isn't heard, because >> you are off doing your own thing on a separate channel - whose fault is >> that? >> > > What if the team captain says something important and you miss it because > there are seven other guys on the channel and you don't recognize his > voice and even if you could recognize it you can't hear it over supervisor > swearing at everyone for not escorting his cloaking DD+5 to KLI? > > Like I said earlier, voice communication is a good idea. It would give > people a chance to chat and give the game a more social feel. But it will > never be able to replace written communication in netrek, and the game > play situations where voice communication is helpful (and slightly > superior to written dito) can be counted on the fingers of your right > hand. > You squelch the people that don't follow protocol. I think this is a problem of imagination and tradition. Because you've relied on written for so long, people have made written more efficient. This does not mean voice is not a healthy complement, and it does not mean we *need* multiple channels. I've lost what point you are arguing. The point I disagreed with you on is that we need multiple channels. You have changed the debate into efficiency of voice vs text. I don't care to debate the value of voice - everybody else in the world knows that voice is valuable. It's done. Text is also valuable and has evolved to a point of efficiency in netrek out of necessity. This is also done. There is nothing for us to debate here. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080407/6178e06f/attachment-0001.htm From mark at mark.mielke.cc Mon Apr 7 11:07:22 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:07:22 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FA46BA.50802@mark.mielke.cc> Zach wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Mark Mielke wrote: > >> No - I don't think so. Team messages have been fine for tracking team >> efforts for over a decade. Voice is more efficient. There is really no >> reason it NEEDS to have separate channels. Some people might not be able to >> figure out the new protocols, just like some people never used team messages >> appropriately. >> > > There is an important difference with the two mediums. With text > messages one can scan several lines of messages in a second or two. If > 5 people are talking all at once it will be much harder to parse out > the individual meaning and then rank it accordingly this is trivial if > one is a fast reader. Also one need not compensate for variables such > as word slurring, speed, pitch, volume, all which can affect how > readily the message will be received. > The only reason you NEED to takes several seconds to scan text, is because it's a passive poll-based approach to communication. If it was in real time, and it is received immediately, it takes as long as the person talking requires. If 5 people are talking all at once the majority of the time, then at least 4 of them are newbies, and they should be squelched. The option - of having people on the same time, segregate into channels, is the wrong approach. The team should work together, and with some exceptions, the team should communicate on the same channel. If they cannot work this out - they are not a team, or they are incompetent. Either way, separate channels is not going to fix their problem. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080407/cb739903/attachment.htm From narcis at luky.nl Mon Apr 7 12:48:03 2008 From: narcis at luky.nl (Narcis) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 19:48:03 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] team audio In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hi, MacTrek "speaks" most of the system messages, i found it very effective, but it never replaces the glance of an eye, but helps you doing 2 things at once, especially the newbies regards, Chris From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Mon Apr 7 14:27:38 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 14:27:38 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <65631e800804061756m5cbf7369p893a479c442b26cf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <65631e800804071227y2ca1385at8b1db09372df0486@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Jeffrey Watts wrote: > > > I've played games that would utilize communication in EXACTLY the same > > way as Netrek. > > What games are that? To name a few: Call of Duty 4 Halo 3 World of Warcraft: Arena PVP (five on five, single objective) WoW: Battleground PVP (fifteen on fifteen, mulitple objectives - very similar to Netrek) WoW: Raiding (25-40 people, multiple objectives) All of these have similarities to what happens in Netrek. WoW mass PVP and raiding are certainly very similar to Netrek, in that you have multiple teams doing different things using voice to coordinate. Note that in WoW text is also used along with voice, when it is appropriate (calling out timers, announcements, etc). I've spent hundreds of hours using Ventrilo and Teamspeak to do these things. I was very resistant to moving to voice communications. All of my reasons for being resistant were proven wrong. The reality was that my resistance was simply born out of an unwillingness to change established practice. Additional channels are a bad idea, IMHO. They don't work anywhere that I've seen. The only place where something like that is needed is in MMOGs, and you only need them for text channels. Jeffrey. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to Tue Apr 8 03:54:49 2008 From: akb+lists.netrek-dev at mirror.to (Andrew K. Bressen) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 04:54:49 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> (Mark Mielke's message of "Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:03:18 -0400") References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <0qbq4kenfq.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> I pretty much agree with Mark M's comments. There are two questions in my mind: (1) while one channel per team makes sense, should there be a second voice channel for obs, so that they can peanut gallery on their own? (2) should certain macros (mainly distress, maybe ogg call) make a sound in the audio channel? do distresses make any sound now? (linux player talkin here...) From billbalcerski at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 06:18:25 2008 From: billbalcerski at gmail.com (Bill Balcerski) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 07:18:25 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <0qbq4kenfq.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <0qbq4kenfq.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> Message-ID: <45ab86180804080418i230ea2f5j787cc18851215187@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 4:54 AM, Andrew K. Bressen wrote: > > I pretty much agree with Mark M's comments. > > There are two questions in my mind: > > (1) while one channel per team makes sense, > should there be a second voice channel for obs, > so that they can peanut gallery on their own? > Yea I think that's a good idea..I think we shouldn't ignore the social aspect of voice and allow for people to chat on a channel that doesn't interfere with people trying to communicate about in game stuff. > (2) should certain macros (mainly distress, maybe ogg call) > make a sound in the audio channel? > do distresses make any sound now? (linux player talkin here...) > That's part of beeplite (it allows sound files to be mapped to RCDs). I have about 7 or 8 different beep sounds I put into XP 2006. Planet take, escort, and base ogg are the ones with sound effects by default, but sound can be added to any RCD. Though if we are going to add voice, which serves the same effect as beeplite in that provides a 2nd way to alert players to what to do besides reading the team message board, I think beeplite should be fully enabled on all servers :). > > > _______________________________________________ > netrek-dev mailing list > netrek-dev at us.netrek.org > http://mailman.us.netrek.org/mailman/listinfo/netrek-dev > From mark at mark.mielke.cc Tue Apr 8 07:25:56 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 08:25:56 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <0qbq4kenfq.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <0qbq4kenfq.fsf@lanconius.mirror.to> Message-ID: <47FB6454.1050906@mark.mielke.cc> Andrew K. Bressen wrote: > I pretty much agree with Mark M's comments. > > There are two questions in my mind: > > (1) while one channel per team makes sense, > should there be a second voice channel for obs, > so that they can peanut gallery on their own? > > (2) should certain macros (mainly distress, maybe ogg call) > make a sound in the audio channel? > do distresses make any sound now? (linux player talkin here... I like both ideas. For 2), I am assuming you mean an identifying chime of some sort to draw attention, but not to upset any current conversation. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From niclas at acc.umu.se Tue Apr 8 08:04:41 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 15:04:41 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <65631e800804071227y2ca1385at8b1db09372df0486@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <65631e800804061756m5cbf7369p893a479c442b26cf@mail.gmail.com> <65631e800804071227y2ca1385at8b1db09372df0486@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Jeffrey Watts wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: >> On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Jeffrey Watts wrote: >> >> > I've played games that would utilize communication in EXACTLY the same >> > way as Netrek. >> >> What games are that? > > To name a few: > > [...] > > All of these have similarities to what happens in Netrek. Similarities, sure, but none of them "utilize communication in EXACTLY the same way as netrek". In fact, no game does. Netrek built-in communication is the best and most efficient in-game communication ever made. There is no substitute for the extremely fast, efficient and reciever configurable communication that exists in netrek. The reason we can have such fast and effective communication in netrek is that the things that need to be communicated are few since the playing field always looks the same and people do pretty much the same few number of things things. This is the reason why other team games cannot have the same way of communicating as netrek has. An easily understandable example is positioning: Wherever a netrek player is in the "playing field" he can easily communicate his position ("@ ORG") and everyone will instantly know exactly where that is, +/- 1-2 second travel time. If a WoW player who's out running in some forest wants to communicate his position ("Green forest near big lake") there may only be a few players that know where that is and even if they know it, the indicated area may be very big. This is what I feel that you are not getting. Netrek is a small game with few things to do and few places to be. As such, the built-in communication system for the game is perfect and will always be much quicker and more accurate than voice communication. I will elaborate on this more in my next mail to Mielke since he too does not seem to get this. -- Niclas From niclas at acc.umu.se Tue Apr 8 08:22:22 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 15:22:22 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: >> - For most people (everyone but the super clue) written communication >> in netrek is not received (read) by everyone at the same time. Most >> people read messages when they have the time. > > This is because people are lazy - not because they wouldn't benefit from > hearing the messages sooner. No. It's because reading messages while playing is a skill that is learned. Most of us that have played this game for over ten years can see and identify a dist.carrying message in the corner of our eye while dogfighting because we recognize its pattern. >> - Written communication is very many times faster to receive (read), >> especially in netrek. > > No it isn't. So what you're saying is that you read slower than you talk. Fine. However, that is not true for most people. Most people type slower than they talk, but this is not an issue in this discussion since netrek communication is mostly done with macros and macros are several times faster than speaking. > The effectiveness of a person at communication has little to do with the > medium. Great communicators can use both effectively. Most people, > cannot type as fast as they can speak. Most people, communicate more > effectively with voice. I challenge your claim - I've played fun team > games where the members of the team sat in the same room, and we talked > over top of the monitors. If you can't perform team communication with > your voice - I suggest practice. :-) I've played probably 100 times more hours than you so don't suggest I practice to reach your skill in anything that has to do with netrek. >>> Voice is more efficient. >> >> This is not true in netrek. In netrek, written communication is extremely >> more efficient than voice dito. > > No it isn't. The proof is simple - newbies don't read messages. They > need to learn to use text, and even then, people don't read what they > write until seconds or more later. The most effective netrek players are > right on top of the message window - but the most effective netrek > players would also be on top of a voice channel. You are not performing > a legitimate comparison. Voice is active and in real time - text is > passive and read in batch. It is true that some content is more > effective in each, but it is not true that "written is extremely more > efficient than voice". You are incorrect. Arguing that something doesn't work because newbies don't use it properly is a faulty argument. Newbies wouldn't use voice communication correctly either, nor would they understand when someone told them to "escort their five babies to organia now goddammit you twink or I'll eject your sorry ass". As for your second argument that clue would be on top of the voice channel, this is also an altruism. That doesn't mean anything though, because fact remains that in netrek written communication is both sent (macros) and received (read) quicker than voice (and the signal to noise ratio is much lower). >> How can you even begin to claim that voice communication in netrek is >> more efficient? Ctrl-T on the keyboard instead of holding the "send >> message button" and saying "Ok guys, I'm now carrying five armies to >> orgus, no sorry I mean Organia. Is anyone up for giving me an escort? >> Hello? Do you guys have sound activated?". > > If that's the only message you send ... sure. During the game the only messages you need to send are RCD's. >>> If you isolate voice - you end up with people NOT getting important >>> team messages. >> >> Why? What kind of important messages? Have people missed important team >> messages for the past 15 years due to not having voice communication? > > Yes? Such as? > I think this is a problem of imagination and tradition. Because you've > relied on written for so long, people have made written more efficient. I don't know when macros were introduced to netrek, but they were there when I started playing and by that time netrek was not very old. Since then, nothing much has happened to netrek communication. It's still perfect as is. So this thought of yours that netrek communication has evolved during the years to the perfect state that it's in today is not true. > I've lost what point you are arguing. I'm letting you know why written communication is far superior to voice communication in netrek. You keep arguing it's not, without any experience or counter arguments. > The point I disagreed with you on is that we need multiple channels. We don't *need* any channels other than for chatting. Like I've said several times, it's a good idea to add voice channels to netrek, but if people think it's going to help game play then they are wrong, at least as far as experienced players are concerned. It may be easier for a complete newbie to play the game with voice communication though. A voice channel would pretty much only be good for chatting. If one or more voice channels are added to the game and newbie players like you think this is a new way to communicate in-game specific things to your team mates (instead of using RCD's) then that would be bad for the game. -- Niclas From cflrich at cfl.rr.com Tue Apr 8 10:03:09 2008 From: cflrich at cfl.rr.com (Rich Hansen) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:03:09 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FB892D.7040809@cfl.rr.com> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > A voice channel would pretty much only be good for chatting. If one or more voice channels > are added to the game and newbie players like you think this is a new way > to communicate in-game specific things to your team mates (instead of > using RCD's) then that would be bad for the game. > > I think the argument that voice communication is inferior for Netrek, when it is superior for every other game in existence, is specious. The fact that Netrek has macros does not make it sufficiently different. Besides, you're ignoring the fact that macros are limited in what information they can transfer to the team. The argument that macros contain all the info you'd ever need to send shows how reliant current play is on the macros that exist. I can think of a dozen situations where play would be improved through voice communication. Netrek communication is far from perfect. From mark at mark.mielke.cc Tue Apr 8 10:16:17 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:16:17 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > > >>> - For most people (everyone but the super clue) written communication >>> in netrek is not received (read) by everyone at the same time. Most >>> people read messages when they have the time. >>> >> This is because people are lazy - not because they wouldn't benefit from >> hearing the messages sooner. >> > > No. It's because reading messages while playing is a skill that is > learned. Most of us that have played this game for over ten years can see > and identify a dist.carrying message in the corner of our eye while > dogfighting because we recognize its pattern. > It must be learned, because it is unnatural and impractical. People train to make it natural and practical. >>> - Written communication is very many times faster to receive (read), >>> especially in netrek. >>> >> No it isn't. >> > > So what you're saying is that you read slower than you talk. Fine. > However, that is not true for most people. > Not exactly, but essentially, yes. I'm also going to say that taking your eyes off the tactical/galactic to read messages could easily mean you miss somebody uncloaking on your 6 which might be enough time for them to put one more torpedo in you than you can withstand with their exploding ship destroying you. You have multiple senses. If you are going to claim that ignoring one of the senses is more efficient - you have nowhere to go with this, because it makes no sense. > but if > people think it's going to help game play then they are wrong, at least as > far as experienced players are concerned. It may be easier for a complete > newbie to play the game with voice communication though. A voice channel > would pretty much only be good for chatting. If one or more voice channels > are added to the game and newbie players like you think this is a new way > to communicate in-game specific things to your team mates (instead of > using RCD's) then that would be bad for the game. > My experience is that experienced players already do voice chat - whether via VoIP or whether sitting in the same room swearing at each other for screwing up over a monitor in the same room. I think your platform is extremely thin, and question why you would resist that possibility that voice would benefit an experienced person. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080408/92270c2e/attachment.htm From niclas at acc.umu.se Tue Apr 8 11:19:05 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 18:19:05 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FB892D.7040809@cfl.rr.com> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB892D.7040809@cfl.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Rich Hansen wrote: > Besides, you're ignoring the fact that macros are limited in what > information they can transfer to the team. Give examples that matter in game situations. > I can think of a dozen situations where play would be improved through > voice communication. Give examples that matter in game situations. > Netrek communication is far from perfect. How so? -- Niclas From karthik at karthik.com Tue Apr 8 11:24:49 2008 From: karthik at karthik.com (Karthik Arumugham) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 12:24:49 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Fwd: World Clue Games - Important Announcement References: Message-ID: <7DA72252-802F-40DE-8AAC-B6FF8E940046@karthik.com> Although this is not development related, I'm crossposting to netrek- dev this one time to reach folks who aren't on the netrek-clue-games list, due to lack of players lately. If you wish to join the clue game list, which is miniscule in volume compared to netrek-dev (generally one email a week announcing World games and another email every 2 - 3 weeks announcing teams playing World), please visit http://groups.google.com/group/netrek-clue-games . The next game will be Wednesday, April 16 at 10PM Eastern (7PM PDT, 3AM UTC). *** Please take a few moments to read the rest of this message, as it is important to the continuity of clue games. *** Of the last four weekly clue games, two were not played due to lack of players (both had around 12 people present.) I believe these mark the first instances in over a year that we have not had enough players to have a game. Due to this, we're going to try moving to a bi-weekly schedule for now in hopes of getting more people to show up to the games. I strongly hope that many of you who are on this list but haven't played games lately will show up and have fun! We may try an experimental game, such as playing 3-4 overtime-only games back-to-back, or playing with no bases, based on what the players who show up want. (I think 3-4 no-regulation sudden-death OTs could be a lot of fun, and would still take less time than a regular game. Plus we can easily sub in observers between OTs if we have more players than slots.) The game will be a draft as usual, unless there are special balance circumstances. The game WILL be listed on the metaservers to make connecting more convenient and help make people more aware of the game. You may still connect to the server from the command line as usual: "netrek.exe -h clue.netrek.org -p 4566" for home team "netrek.exe -h clue.netrek.org -p 4577" for away team "netrek.exe -h clue.netrek.org -p 4000" for home observer "netrek.exe -h clue.netrek.org -p 5000" for away observer Once the game has started, we ask that you please refrain from joining the queues. This lets busted players rejoin quickly, and lets players be subbed in and out more easily. If the game is full, please join as an observer instead and wait for the captains to ask you to join. We will make every effort to sub you in halfway through the game if a slot hasn't opened before then. (If we have a ton of people show up it may not be possible to sub in everyone, but given recent and historical player counts, I seriously doubt this will be an issue.) Team captains, please forward this message to your team lists as to notify team members who may not be on this list. Since there is no game this week, a reminder will be sent out on April 14. From niclas at acc.umu.se Tue Apr 8 11:25:10 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 18:25:10 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: >> No. It's because reading messages while playing is a skill that is learned. > > It must be learned, because it is unnatural and impractical. People > train to make it natural and practical. As with all skills of the game. No one started playing netrek thinking "wow, keeping a constant phaser lock while dodging torps is so natural to me, it's like I was born to do this". >> So what you're saying is that you read slower than you talk. Fine. >> However, that is not true for most people. > > Not exactly, but essentially, yes. I'm also going to say that taking > your eyes off the tactical/galactic to read messages could easily mean > you miss somebody uncloaking on your 6 which might be enough time for > them to put one more torpedo in you than you can withstand with their > exploding ship destroying you. You have multiple senses. If you are > going to claim that ignoring one of the senses is more efficient - you > have nowhere to go with this, because it makes no sense. The thing I've been telling you is that skilled players can read messages, look at the galactic and dogfight at the same time without missing information in any of those three windows. It's a *skill* acquired from years of playing the game. > My experience is that experienced players already do voice chat - > whether via VoIP or whether sitting in the same room swearing at each > other for screwing up over a monitor in the same room. Please give examples of clued players that use voice chat on a regular basis today. > I think your platform is extremely thin, and question why you would > resist that possibility that voice would benefit an experienced person. I question it because 1) I am an experienced player and 2) I have tried voice communication in netrek and know its benefits and drawbacks. I question why you, who are not an experienced player and who have probably never even played a clue game with voice communication stubbornly assume that voice communication is better than written dito in netrek. -- Niclas From mark at mark.mielke.cc Tue Apr 8 12:57:13 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:57:13 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > > >>> No. It's because reading messages while playing is a skill that is learned. >>> >> It must be learned, because it is unnatural and impractical. People >> train to make it natural and practical. >> > > As with all skills of the game. No one started playing netrek thinking > "wow, keeping a constant phaser lock while dodging torps is so natural to > me, it's like I was born to do this". > We're getting somewhere. You admit that reading messages is hard. :-) Reading between the lines, I am picking up that learning to read messages is part of the challenge when it comes to comparing the performance of a newbie to an expert. I can agree with this. It is hard, and that newbies don't read messages, and experts do, is an obvious differentiating factor. The important question, though, is whether reading messages is truly a fun part of the game, and whether the learning curve is justified as an investment. It's easily observable that Netrek is dying. Would you not agree that reason for this include: 1. The learning curve is too steep. 2. The presentation is "old school", with new games looking far more impressive. 3. Newbie's often don't realize there IS a message window, and how can they become better, if they don't pass this initial hump? 60 seconds into the game they say "this is crap!" and leave never to return. I believe voice has the capability of dealing with all three of these. Of course, if people just use it to mock each other, it might back fire. >>> So what you're saying is that you read slower than you talk. Fine. >>> However, that is not true for most people. >>> >> Not exactly, but essentially, yes. I'm also going to say that taking >> your eyes off the tactical/galactic to read messages could easily mean >> you miss somebody uncloaking on your 6 which might be enough time for >> them to put one more torpedo in you than you can withstand with their >> exploding ship destroying you. You have multiple senses. If you are >> going to claim that ignoring one of the senses is more efficient - you >> have nowhere to go with this, because it makes no sense. >> > > The thing I've been telling you is that skilled players can read messages, > look at the galactic and dogfight at the same time without missing > information in any of those three windows. It's a *skill* acquired from > years of playing the game. > As with my above paragraph, I can agree with you it is a learned skill, but I question the value of the skill, given that it otherwise prevents newbie's from participating, and I suspect that even experts would be more efficient using voice, even if only to direct the newbies to result in a TEAM success, rather than a solo expert fighting the battle on his own, insulting his team mates for their incompetence and inability to read the message window. I don't value the skill as you do. I can type fast and read fast too, but if I could get away with not having to, I would in an instant. This very email chain would have been more efficient in person over beer. Text messaging is a skill - but this does not mean it should be an entry requirement skill for a game that should be entertaining. >> My experience is that experienced players already do voice chat - >> whether via VoIP or whether sitting in the same room swearing at each >> other for screwing up over a monitor in the same room. >> > > Please give examples of clued players that use voice chat on a regular > basis today. > I would be hard pressed to give you a list of clued players that exist today that play on a regular basis. I think you are missing the point. >> I think your platform is extremely thin, and question why you would >> resist that possibility that voice would benefit an experienced person. >> > > I question it because 1) I am an experienced player and 2) I have tried > voice communication in netrek and know its benefits and drawbacks. I > question why you, who are not an experienced player and who have probably > never even played a clue game with voice communication stubbornly assume > that voice communication is better than written dito in netrek. > I find it amusing that you think the above is a compelling argument for your case. I've gone through this process before. People hate change. In an organization I am a part of that provided Internet access in text format in 1991/1992, before the word was known to most households (although it was known to netrek players :-) ). Around 1995 we began switching people to PPP. Around 1998 we started to offer services on the WWW only. We received hate mail from people who refused to use WWW, claiming that we were misguiding the corporation. Not to say you are as ignorant as these people, but the result is the same. You didn't try voice - not really. You don't know the benefits - as your messages clearly indicate. You think I'm stubborn for believing that voice is an effective communication mechanism - which is just hilarious. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080408/4290c1b5/attachment.htm From netrek at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 13:01:06 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:01:06 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: Personally I can read significantly faster than I or most people can talk. When I was on Leftovers Chuck had use voice communication for a few games and it was very confusing. Some people would keep shouting so others got angry and muted them so tat nullified their voice benefit right there. Too many people would talk at the same time. Information was lost (unintelligible words, person talked too fast) or had to be retransmitted thus wasting time ("Can you repeat that please?"). Also it takes time to learn anake the association of which voice maps to which player. Whereas with text it is much easier to ascertain who is talking. I think voice could be cool for observers and for coaching newbies (a coach player talks the newbie through how to do things) and for private chats but I'm still wary of how effective voice communication will be with lots of people talking simultaneously. And will this teach newbies to no longer rely on text? I think Niclas is right that text is more efficient at least in the context of netrek's gameplay. In 1 or 2 seconds of reading I can gather a wealth of information that you could not possibly comvey in the same amount of time or even in 3 times the amount of time. Experienced players don't just gather 1 piece of data per read. Also distress messages (fuel, damage, shields, armies carried status) would take longer to convey unless you sacrificed some information. Perhaps we could do an experiment and have a few clue games where everyone used voice then poll the players afterwards to gauage their impressions? Zach From mark at mark.mielke.cc Tue Apr 8 13:29:48 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:29:48 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> Zach wrote: > ... > distress messages (fuel, damage, shields, armies carried status) would > take longer to convey unless you sacrificed some information. > Perhaps we could do an experiment and have a few clue games where > everyone used voice then poll the players afterwards to gauage their > impressions? > I think you've fallen into the other poster's trap that suggests voice replaces text. I haven't read a single person here who claimed that text was unnecessary. This thread has a lot of straw men erected. :-) I believe any referenceable information should be in text, whereas any event-based information should be in voice. It's also a trap to compare newbie voice communicators with clued text communicators. It's illogical to compare the two. You are proving that clued > newbie, and believing that this therefore means that text > voice. I have a problem with the social behavior of many "clued" Netrek players. Of the last 5 to 10 games I have played in the last 5 years, I have each time decided not to play for months after seeing other people harassed, and being harassed myself, by people who thrill from calling themselves clued and acting like they own the place. If people don't do exactly as expected, they find themselves at the end of a barbed attack, even from team mates. I don't play, because I find it a hostile environment. Usually I am attacked for defending newbies - usually called a newbie myself. Not that I care too much, but it means I don't come back for 12 months. In the other poster's comments, I saw him doing the exact same thing in this thread. I defend the newbie for having too large of a learning curve. He tells me that text messaging is a skill that must be learned. I challenge him. He tells me he thinks I have no experience, with the presumed conclusion that I should not have a say in this debate (all his own assumptions based on ignorance). How is a real newbie ever going to feel welcome in this environment? The reason I bring this up, is that voice isn't going to resurrect Netrek if the attitude towards newbies doesn't change. Nobody is desperate enough to want to play a game like Netrek, that they will put up with this attitude. There are many other games out there, that are far more rewarding, with nicer human interfaces (and less arcane learning curve / entry requirements), and friendly people. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From list2rado at gmx.de Tue Apr 8 13:47:40 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 20:47:40 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <20080408184740.GB19864@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- Zach wrote on Tue 8.Apr'08 at 14:01:06 -0400 -= > I think voice could be cool for observers and for coaching newbies > (a coach player talks the newbie through how to do things) and for > private chats but I'm still wary of how effective voice > communication will be with lots of people talking simultaneously. So you've never played in a big lab where people rather talk to each other than hit extra keys? Ask Linus how they did all the years at RIT. Sure, they are not the best players, but if you'd put Niclas and other good players together, I'm sure they could get used to talking, too, to convey _some_ (not all) information. -- ? Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal! EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude. You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give. From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 14:33:21 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:33:21 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <65631e800804061756m5cbf7369p893a479c442b26cf@mail.gmail.com> <65631e800804071227y2ca1385at8b1db09372df0486@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <65631e800804081233i1c7df08jf49daddccb378b0e@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > > Similarities, sure, but none of them "utilize communication in EXACTLY the > same way as netrek". In fact, no game does. You're splitting hairs, sir. > Netrek built-in communication is the best and most efficient in-game > communication ever made. There is no substitute for the extremely fast, > efficient and reciever configurable communication that exists in netrek. The > reason we can have such fast and effective communication in netrek is that > the things that need to be communicated are few since the playing field > always looks the same and people do pretty much the same few number of > things things. You keep somehow trying to make the point that text communication is somehow "faster" and more "efficient" than verbal, despite the fact that this not only flies in the face of common sense but also seems in opposition to numerous studies that show that people comprehend verbal communication better. I've provided several good examples and I've offered my extensive experience, yet your defense is simply that Netrek is "different" and that its text communication is "the best and most efficient". I'm sorry sir, but I do not believe your opinions are objective. I encourage you to be more open to new technology (well, one can argue that voice communication is "old" technology, but I digress). > Wherever a netrek player is in the "playing field" he can easily > communicate his position ("@ ORG") and everyone will instantly know exactly > where that is, +/- 1-2 second travel time. If a WoW player who's out running > in some forest wants to communicate his position ("Green forest near big > lake") there may only be a few players that know where that is and even if > they know it, the indicated area may be very big. You sir, by these statements, demonstrate your total ignorance of what you speak. WoW Arenas, Battlegrounds, and Raids all take place on consistent terrain, and it is all named, much like Netrek. For example, on the "Alterac Valley" Battleground map there are numerous named landmarks, choke points, towers, and graveyards: Stormpike (AKA SP) Aid Station Stonehearth (AKA SH) Stonehearth Bunker Balinda Iceblood Iceblood Tower etc. I appreciate that you feel that Netrek's system is superior. However, the times have changed and you ought to recognize that or risk becoming obsolete. > This is what I feel that you are not getting. Netrek is a small game with > few things to do and few places to be. As such, the built-in communication > system for the game is perfect and will always be much quicker and more > accurate than voice communication. I will elaborate on this more in my next > mail to Mielke since he too does not seem to get this. What you do not get, sir, is that Netrek was novel and new almost TWENTY years ago. There has been a lot of change since then in gaming, most of it positive. Modern gaming learned a lot from Netrek and its predecessors, and now it's time for Netrek to learn from others. Netrek certainly doesn't "need" to change, but why do you oppose even considering it? It's clear from your responses that you do not have any real objective experience in this matter and I suggest that you go out and educate yourself before putting down an idea. I am certainly not a "clue" Netrek player (at least compared to the others on this list), but I'm certainly "clue" when it comes to team games and online gaming. I find your arguments that my ideas are quaint and ill-informed to be arrogant and condescending. Jeffrey. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From niclas at acc.umu.se Tue Apr 8 15:11:08 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 22:11:08 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080408184740.GB19864@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> References: <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <20080408184740.GB19864@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Rado S wrote: > So you've never played in a big lab where people rather talk to each > other than hit extra keys? Ask Linus how they did all the years at RIT. > > Sure, they are not the best players, but if you'd put Niclas and other > good players together, I'm sure they could get used to talking, too, to > convey _some_ (not all) information. You seem to assume I haven't played in labs with lots of other players too. This is an incorrect assumption. We had lots of players (and even a server) at umu.se 10-12 years ago and I've also played a few games in labs with people on NASG's. -- Niclas From list2rado at gmx.de Tue Apr 8 15:30:10 2008 From: list2rado at gmx.de (Rado S) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 22:30:10 +0200 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <20080408184740.GB19864@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> Message-ID: <20080408203010.GD19864@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> =- Niclas Fredriksson wrote on Tue 8.Apr'08 at 22:11:08 +0200 -= > > So you've never played in a big lab where people rather talk to > > each other than hit extra keys? Ask Linus how they did all the > > years at RIT. This primarily applied to Zach. > > Sure, they are not the best players, but if you'd put Niclas and > > other good players together, I'm sure they could get used to > > talking, too, to convey _some_ (not all) information. > > You seem to assume I haven't played in labs with lots of other > players too. This is an incorrect assumption. We had lots of > players (and even a server) at umu.se 10-12 years ago and I've > also played a few games in labs with people on NASG's. Granted that _you_ played in labs. Though I don't know much about the share of such games of your total. I _guess_ you played little where you talked a lot. The question would be why? Maybe lab policy not to be loud? From niclas at acc.umu.se Tue Apr 8 15:35:32 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 22:35:32 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > We're getting somewhere. You admit that reading messages is hard. Everything in netrek is hard. > The important question, though, is whether reading messages is truly a fun > part of the game, and whether the learning curve is justified as an > investment. The team aspect of netrek is what makes it great. It's the best team game ever made. The communication is a big part of the team aspect of netrek and as such the netrek communication system with macros will always be unsurpassed in efficiency simply because sending macros will always be faster than talking and reading macros will always be faster than listening to someone talk. > It's easily observable that Netrek is dying. Sure. It has been for the past ten years. I don't think that has anything to do with this discussion though. I keep saying it's a good idea to add a voice channel so that people can chat, teach newbies, etc. However, a voice channel will not do much for game play. That doesn't matter much though. I entered this thread just to point out that it's not a good idea to think that voice will revolutionize netrek game play, or something like that. > I suspect that even experts would be more efficient using voice I keep telling you this is false. I keep giving you reasons why this is false (macros are faster, clues can read messages from the corner of their eye, RCD's let clues decide what information they receive, etc). Yet you keep banging your head into that wall. I guess I'll have to accept that you will never learn. >>> My experience is that experienced players already do voice chat - >>> whether via VoIP or whether sitting in the same room swearing at each >>> other for screwing up over a monitor in the same room. >> >> Please give examples of clued players that use voice chat on a regular >> basis today. > > I would be hard pressed to give you a list of clued players that exist > today that play on a regular basis. I think you are missing the point. Okay. Give a list of experienced players who have played with voice communication in the past and think that form of communication is superior to RCD's. -- Niclas From niclas at acc.umu.se Tue Apr 8 15:35:29 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 22:35:29 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > In the other poster's comments, I saw him doing the exact same thing in > this thread. I defend the newbie for having too large of a learning > curve. He tells me that text messaging is a skill that must be learned. > I challenge him. He tells me he thinks I have no experience, with the > presumed conclusion that I should not have a say in this debate (all his > own assumptions based on ignorance). How is a real newbie ever going to > feel welcome in this environment? Are you drunk? Pretty much every thing in netrek is a skill that needs to be learned. It's not a very intuitive game and the learning curve is very steep. Discussing the discussion isn't very productive so I'll keep this short. Your "presumed conclusion" is incorrect. What I'm saying is that I speak from experience, and you don't have any experience at all in this matter. So when I say "this is how it works" and you say "no, it doesn't" you need the burden of proof is with you. Also, you're making some outrageous claims like the one that written information is slower to process than spoken dito. -- Niclas From niclas at acc.umu.se Tue Apr 8 15:48:53 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 22:48:53 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <65631e800804081233i1c7df08jf49daddccb378b0e@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <65631e800804061756m5cbf7369p893a479c442b26cf@mail.gmail.com> <65631e800804071227y2ca1385at8b1db09372df0486@mail.gmail.com> <65631e800804081233i1c7df08jf49daddccb378b0e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Jeffrey Watts wrote: > You keep somehow trying to make the point that text communication is > somehow "faster" and more "efficient" than verbal, despite the fact that > this not only flies in the face of common sense but also seems in > opposition to numerous studies that show that people comprehend verbal > communication better. You keep discussing like you have your nose in a college text book instead of lifting your head and taking a look at what we're actually talking about: netrek. Let me run it by you step by step why text communication is more efficient than voice communication in netrek. By "efficient" in this context we're talking about the (1) speed of which the information is sent and (2) received and (3) the quality of information (signal:noise ratio). 1. In netrek all important messages can be conveyed by RCD macros. This means that all important messages can be sent with the touch of one key. Therefore, RCD's are very many times faster than voice communication. 2. An experienced player can recognize an RCD in less than one second after it has been sent. This is a lot less time than it would take for the same player to listen to the same message being spoken. 3. RCD's can be configured to convey the information the receiver wants to have. For instance, whenever someone uses the dist.carrying macro, I see their fuel because I think this is crucial information to me when I decide to escort. Furthermore, RCD's are never garbled -- you never have to say "can you repeat that?" with written messages. The signal to noise ratio is virtually unlimited. -- Niclas From mark at mark.mielke.cc Tue Apr 8 15:55:29 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 16:55:29 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > > Pretty much every thing in netrek is a skill that needs to be learned. > It's not a very intuitive game and the learning curve is very steep. > We agree on this. We disagree on whether or not this is a good thing. Having to learn to use text is a skill from 1990. We all did it. Some of us have grown out of it. > What I'm saying is that I speak from experience,and you don't have any experience at all in this matter. > You know nothing about me. My experience is just as valid as yours. I would say my experience as more valuable, given that I came out of it understanding that two senses are better than one sense. > So when I say "this is how it works" and you say "no, it doesn't" you need > the burden of proof is with you. Actually, I don't need to prove anything. You've reminded me what I *don't* like about Netrek, and it's no skin off my nose if somebody such as yourself is unable to progress. > Also, you're making some outrageous > claims like the one that written information is slower to process than > spoken dito. I have to wonder what exposure you have to the world around you if you find it outrageous that somebody might suggest voice is a good medium for communication. How isolated are you? Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From mark at mark.mielke.cc Tue Apr 8 16:07:58 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:07:58 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > The team aspect of netrek is what makes it great. It's the best team game > ever made. The communication is a big part of the team aspect of netrek > and as such the netrek communication system with macros will always be > unsurpassed in efficiency simply because sending macros will always be > faster than talking and reading macros will always be faster than > listening to someone talk. > It's a good game when played well. Best team game ever is a stretch. That it is inaccessible to many in terms of entry requirements is a major problem that is forcing your "best team game ever" to disappear as each player from 1990 or so grows up to have a family or play other games (I do both - my sons and I love playing games together). New blood is minimal or non existent, and by retaining the aspects of Netrek which discourage new membership, or that prevent new membership from obtaining a level of competency which you consider "clue", it's only a matter of time before the last server is shut down for good. You keep challenging my experience - I played Netrek 10+ hours a day for probably 3 out of 5 days most weeks of the year for 4 years. Back then I had no responsibilities. I was changing the server and client source code. My father and I "broke" the reserved.c in use at my father's company as a training excercise (took all of about 15 minutes - most of which was me learning for the first time :-) ). I don't care if you are the best dog fighter in the world - your "clue" superiority is a problem. It limits your field of view, and it makes people like me want to walk away. That I haven't played more than 10 games in 5 years is evidence. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From cflrich at cfl.rr.com Tue Apr 8 16:56:49 2008 From: cflrich at cfl.rr.com (Rich Hansen) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:56:49 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB892D.7040809@cfl.rr.com> Message-ID: <47FBEA21.2080100@cfl.rr.com> We have macros for distress, carrying ,etc, and these work great, and most players become reasonably proficient at reading them in a timely matter. The kinds of things I'm thinking of below are things we don't have macros for, or things that no one uses the macros for-- specific things that voice would be best for. My 'for instances' would be: -- You're dfing at the front and F4 refuses to really get in there and fight close. You could tell him after you die, sure, but he'll probably forget in 10 minutes. If you keep calling him out over voice, however, he's much more likely to remember, and get in there and fight. It may save you. You can elaborate on specifically what he's doing wrong, and get him to do it more correctly. -- You're carrying to a planet and your escort is moving to the wrong side. You tell him over voice to move to the correct side of the planet. I can think of a few variations of this, especially when you're dfing to get there, and you can't break away to type something to them. -- Ogging, calling the decloak exactly. -- When some random swedish player grabs a dd and tries to sneak to URS, and gets dooshed, you can make fun of them in more detail :-) Ok, the last one was just for fun. I could come up with more, but I think it illustrates my point. Pretty much everything we don't have a macro for, anything that would involve a whole bunch of typing, is better done through voice. Obviously clued players already do a lot of things correctly... but a lot of players, especially players playing today, aren't clued. I suppose the discussion is irrelevant at this point, however, since you do support voice for chatting and such. We ought to just implement it and see how people end up using it. It's not like we're going to be able to tell them, "No game related info on voice," anyhow. -rich Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Rich Hansen wrote: > > >> Besides, you're ignoring the fact that macros are limited in what >> information they can transfer to the team. >> > > Give examples that matter in game situations. > > >> I can think of a dozen situations where play would be improved through >> voice communication. >> > > Give examples that matter in game situations. > > >> Netrek communication is far from perfect. >> > > How so? > > From netrek at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 17:34:38 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 18:34:38 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Mark Mielke wrote: > > I think you've fallen into the other poster's trap that suggests voice > replaces text. I haven't read a single person here who claimed that text > was unnecessary. This thread has a lot of straw men erected. :-) I > believe any referenceable information should be in text, whereas any > event-based information should be in voice. > > It's also a trap to compare newbie voice communicators with clued text > communicators. It's illogical to compare the two. You are proving that > clued > newbie, and believing that this therefore means that text > voice. Hi Mark, I meant that even if it is not intended that voice will supplant text that may well happen since newbies will a) probably prefer voice over text b) it is something they are familiar with from other games. And as more newbies become regular player this will trend in that direction. In my view voice is a cool tool for some situations and I see strengths with voice but also some weaknesses as I pointed out. So let the player decide. It should be designed so that one can turn of all voice with a single variable in the netrekrc for those who find it an annoyance/distraction. I think giving the player different levels of control over the voice granularity will cause the least ripples. Most of us who have been playing regularly for years will still probably prefer text, but I can see how voice would be an asset in training newbies and getting their attention which itself can be sometimes very problematic. We could make a voice library or ideally a video library of common problems newbies face and let them choose a topic and get help on it either in-game or offline. Newbies are the future of netrek (unless we find a way to lure back the hundreds/thousands of former netrekers who don't play anymore) so we should be nice to newbies and help them to learn if they show the desire to do so. Zach From quozl at us.netrek.org Tue Apr 8 17:42:51 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 08:42:51 +1000 Subject: [netrek-dev] Fwd: World Clue Games - Important Announcement In-Reply-To: <7DA72252-802F-40DE-8AAC-B6FF8E940046@karthik.com> References: <7DA72252-802F-40DE-8AAC-B6FF8E940046@karthik.com> Message-ID: <20080408224251.GA7094@us.netrek.org> I'll add that I think playing the game is actually very important way to contribute to development. Your patch rating in my mind is higher if you play and I see you. Of course, I might not know it's you, be sure to remind me. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From netrek at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 17:51:02 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 18:51:02 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080408184740.GB19864@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> References: <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <20080408184740.GB19864@sun36.math.uni-hamburg.de> Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Rado S wrote: > > So you've never played in a big lab where people rather talk to each > other than hit extra keys? > Ask Linus how they did all the years at RIT. Actually I did. At CMU I played many times with other people in the same room. And I observed some of the best netrek teams of all time playing in clue games, INL playoff games and INL championship games in the same room and they did not talk very much. At such a high level and with players who know each other so well far less communication is needed. However playing together in the same room not equivalent to playing remotely and using voice chat. I think voice has some good applications, but I don't think it can effectively replace text. You still need text sincet can convey so much information so quickly. It would be neat to try voice in an upcoming clue game. On pickup if voice is implemented we need to really think how it can be done to th ebenefit of newbies and experienced players. If newbies ignore text and expect voice as the sole means of communication they will be missing out on the input and guidance from the clued and semi-clued players since most of them will likey not opt to use voice, at least not in pickup games. Zach From netrek at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 18:25:47 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 19:25:47 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FBEA21.2080100@cfl.rr.com> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB892D.7040809@cfl.rr.com> <47FBEA21.2080100@cfl.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Rich Hansen wrote: > > -- Ogging, calling the decloak exactly. Hi Rich, Good examples but I think some assume a certain level of clue and competence. We see in pickup (and even in clue games) how a player may call a base ogg when it isn't a good time for one or a ship may uncloak too early during an ogg. So even with voice an ogger may not listen. And what about players who elect to not use sound will they be left in the cold? Zach From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 19:38:59 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 19:38:59 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <65631e800804061756m5cbf7369p893a479c442b26cf@mail.gmail.com> <65631e800804071227y2ca1385at8b1db09372df0486@mail.gmail.com> <65631e800804081233i1c7df08jf49daddccb378b0e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <65631e800804081738m45819850j757d25d15896386d@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > > By "efficient" in this context we're talking about the (1) speed of which > the information is sent and (2) received and (3) the quality of > information (signal:noise ratio). I'm not going to argue this with you endlessly Niclas. The time you spend reading is time you are not looking at the tactical or the galactic. Voice uses _another sense_, one that doesn't compete with your eyes. If you are listening you are able to process more information than someone only using his or her eyes. This is obvious. Regardless, let me make something very clear to you. Something that you seem to be missing. No one here is saying that text communication should be removed. No one here is saying that voice communication will replace text communication entirely. What everyone here is saying is that voice communication can add to the experience - that it might reduce the steep learning curve and maybe add a new social dimension. You seem to be thinking that we're advocating something else. Jeffrey. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From niclas at acc.umu.se Wed Apr 9 03:13:47 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:13:47 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > I don't care if you are the best dog fighter in the world - your "clue" > superiority is a problem. It limits your field of view, and it makes > people like me want to walk away. That I haven't played more than 10 > games in 5 years is evidence. The problem with people like you (yes, I said "people like you") is that whenever someone mentions that your lack of experience gives you a limited view of the problem you start to snivel about the big bad clue harassing you. If you want not play the game, don't play the game. No one cares. -- Niclas From niclas at acc.umu.se Wed Apr 9 03:15:33 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:15:33 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: >> What I'm saying is that I speak from experience,and you don't have any >> experience at all in this matter. > > You know nothing about me. I know that you're a netrek twink and in this discussion that matters. >> Also, you're making some outrageous claims like the one that written >> information is slower to process than spoken dito. > > I have to wonder what exposure you have to the world around you if you > find it outrageous that somebody might suggest voice is a good medium > for communication. How isolated are you? You're making the same error as Jeffery thinking that since the textbook on communication says that voice communication is more efficient than text communication, that is true in every single area in the world. I have explained to you and Jeffrey why this is not true for netrek, yet the only counter argument you have is "voice > text". Since you only seem to read the messages starting with "Mark Mielke wrote:", here's what I wrote to Jeffrey on this matter. --snip-- By "efficient" in this context we're talking about the (1) speed of which the information is sent and (2) received and (3) the quality of information (signal:noise ratio). 1. In netrek all important messages can be conveyed by RCD macros. This means that all important messages can be sent with the touch of one key. Therefore, RCD's are very many times faster than voice communication. 2. An experienced player can recognize an RCD in less than one second after it has been sent. This is a lot less time than it would take for the same player to listen to the same message being spoken. 3. RCD's can be configured to convey the information the receiver wants to have. For instance, whenever someone uses the dist.carrying macro, I see their fuel because I think this is crucial information to me when I decide to escort. Furthermore, RCD's are never garbled -- you never have to say "can you repeat that?" with written messages. The signal to noise ratio is virtually unlimited. --snip-- Obviously you couldn't disagree more with this. So please give counter arguments other than "that's just crazy talk!". -- Niclas From mark at mark.mielke.cc Wed Apr 9 08:32:17 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 09:32:17 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > > The problem with people like you (yes, I said "people like you") is that > whenever someone mentions that your lack of experience gives you a limited > view of the problem you start to snivel about the big bad clue harassing > you. If you want not play the game, don't play the game. No one cares. > You have yet to properly refute any claim I made. You reduced yourself to challenging my authority when it is clear to most that your own experience is lacking. Have you put more hours into Netrek than me? I have no idea. I probably have thousands of hours of play. Perhaps you have more. Are you a better dog fighter than me? Quite likely given how rusty I was when I tried out yesterday on pickled (my once in 12 month attempt). If you think that your "clue" stick counts in a logical debate, you are mistaken. You are wrong on many of your points, and the points you are right on, nobody contested. You seemed upset that I didn't challenge your claim that some text messages are important. Why would I challenge something that I agree with? Your straw men are as thick as a forest. Your attitude is poor. Perhaps mine is as well. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke From niclas at acc.umu.se Wed Apr 9 09:00:16 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 16:00:16 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > You have yet to properly refute any claim I made. What claim is that you feel I need to refute? > I probably have thousands of hours of play. Seeing how you play I seriously doubt that (or rather, for your sake, I hope that's wrong). > You are wrong on many of your points Such as? -- Niclas From mark at mark.mielke.cc Wed Apr 9 09:13:01 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 10:13:01 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FCCEED.4000409@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote >> You have yet to properly refute any claim I made. >> > > What claim is that you feel I need to refute? > This list doesn't need the thread repeated. :-) You should have read them the first time. >> I probably have thousands of hours of play. >> > > Seeing how you play I seriously doubt that (or rather, for your sake, I > hope that's wrong). > Why? 10+ years without serious play is a long time. My intuition about torpedoes is pretty much gone now. Sorry for going off and doing something else with my life... :-) In any case, even if I always sucked - which I won't agree with, but for the sake of argument - why should my opinion about what could improve the game for the average player be less valuable than yours? If you want to wave your "clue" stick as if it really matters, can you not accept that as a "clued" individual, your input is *less* valuable, as you cannot properly represent the majority of current players, and you cannot properly represent new players. >> You are wrong on many of your points >> > > Such as Starting with your inability to comprehend that voice provides value. Ending with your belief that text messaging is an enjoyable part of the game that new members should invest significant effort into perfecting when a more accessible alternative is in use by most modern games, and the ones that do not have built in support, people set up their own voice servers or use pre-existing technology like a telephone and a headset, or speaking over monitors from the same room. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080409/de5b2053/attachment.htm From niclas at acc.umu.se Wed Apr 9 09:52:18 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 16:52:18 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FCCEED.4000409@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCCEED.4000409@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: >> What claim is that you feel I need to refute? > > This list doesn't need the thread repeated. :-) You should have read > them the first time. You're close to the "I'm rubber you're glue" way of arguing. If I'm asking what claims I need to refute it's obviously because I haven't noticed you previously pointing out any claims I need to refute. > In any case, even if I always sucked - which I won't agree with, but for > the sake of argument - why should my opinion about what could improve > the game for the average player be less valuable than yours? Personal experience matters in all decisions. In this case (playing many netrek games using voice) I have it and you don't. Let's say we're talking about how to fly to the moon. Being Neil Armstrong, I speak from experience when I say that we need two terminals for control of the exterior solar panels. You, having never even seen a space shuttle in real life and whose experience in this matter comes from reading Isaac Asimov. Then could you see how experience matters? > Starting with your inability to comprehend that voice provides value. I started this thread by writing about the cases where voice provides value. -- Niclas From mark at mark.mielke.cc Wed Apr 9 10:12:16 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:12:16 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCCEED.4000409@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FCDCD0.206@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: >> In any case, even if I always sucked - which I won't agree with, but for >> the sake of argument - why should my opinion about what could improve >> the game for the average player be less valuable than yours? >> > > Personal experience matters in all decisions. In this case (playing many > netrek games using voice) I have it and you don't. > > Let's say we're talking about how to fly to the moon. Being Neil > Armstrong, I speak from experience when I say that we need two terminals > for control of the exterior solar panels. You, having never even seen a > space shuttle in real life and whose experience in this matter comes from > reading Isaac Asimov. Then could you see how experience matters? > I'll step out by saying that you have a large head. Somehow my thousands of hours of experience means absolutely nothing. I'm neither surprised nor too hurt. It's exactly how people such as you have acted for over a decade, and its exactly why I stopped enjoying Netrek. Have fun Neil Armstrong. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080409/0e5e92ea/attachment.htm From cflrich at cfl.rr.com Wed Apr 9 10:31:32 2008 From: cflrich at cfl.rr.com (Rich Hansen) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:31:32 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB892D.7040809@cfl.rr.com> <47FBEA21.2080100@cfl.rr.com> Message-ID: <47FCE154.60609@cfl.rr.com> Zach wrote: > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Rich Hansen wrote: > >> -- Ogging, calling the decloak exactly. >> > > Hi Rich, > > Good examples but I think some assume a certain level of clue and > competence. Of course. Voice isn't insta-clue. > We see in pickup (and even in clue games) how a player may > call a base ogg when it isn't a good time for one or a ship may > uncloak too early during an ogg. So even with voice an ogger may not > listen. They are much more likely to listen when someone is talking to them, as opposed to a 'sync on 3' message that was pasted 40 seconds ago, and they're ahead a bit, and I don't remember who I'm supposed to sync on, and I'm about to die anyway, and maybe I can distract some defenders, and any other such nonsense that goes through a non-clue's head. It's much harder to decloak when someone is saying into your ear, "Not yet, not yet, not yet, not yet." Similarly, you're unlikely not to decloak when someone yells, "Now!" As for calling, only the leader should be calling an ogg. I actually think having voice will cut down on the number of bad ogg calls, since the (presumably most clued) leader can stop any bad calls, and reiterate that only they make ogg calls, more quickly, and whether or not they are currently in a dogfight. > And what about players who elect to not use sound will they be > left in the cold? > Yes, use sound. This is like saying, "What about people who choose not to use the message window?" -rich From niclas at acc.umu.se Wed Apr 9 11:09:55 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 18:09:55 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FCDCD0.206@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCCEED.4000409@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCDCD0.206@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > Somehow my thousands of hours of experience means absolutely nothing. > I'm neither surprised nor too hurt. It's exactly how people such as you > have acted for over a decade, and its exactly why I stopped enjoying > Netrek. Have fun Neil Armstrong. You've previously stated that you have 0 hours of experience with playing netrek clue games with voice. -- Niclas From mark at mark.mielke.cc Wed Apr 9 11:37:30 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 12:37:30 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCCEED.4000409@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCDCD0.206@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <47FCF0CA.3080007@mark.mielke.cc> Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: > > >> Somehow my thousands of hours of experience means absolutely nothing. >> I'm neither surprised nor too hurt. It's exactly how people such as you >> have acted for over a decade, and its exactly why I stopped enjoying >> Netrek. Have fun Neil Armstrong. >> > > You've previously stated that you have 0 hours of experience with playing > netrek clue games with voice. > The opposite is true. I stated that I have played Netrek in the same room with people, and enjoyed it. We still used emergency distress, but we would ALSO shout out "guys! where the f are you?" As to whether clue games at the company I played at the time compare to the clue of games on the Internet at the time? I didn't have access to port 2592 on the Internet at that time, but from the NNTP newsgroup and screen shots, I would say that we had very good players (I was never the best - of the hundreds of people who played at our company, I was probably 3rd or 4th at the top of my game), but clue games on the Internet sounded impressive, and I was always disappointed that I was unable to participate. (This is around 1992-1993, when the Internet was mostly used by Universities and the government) By the time the Internet became widely available, I had already reduced my playing hours significantly as the company I worked for blocked out playing during working hours (apparently employees were playing all day instead of working? :-) ), and I grew other responsibilities including school, a job, and a girl friend. Around 1994-1995 I played occasionally on the Internet, but if my memory is correct, there was no Windows client at the time, and playing over X with a 33.6kb/s modem was extremely painful. I was only able to do well because I was fairly good at the time, but once the lag hit 1.0+ second latency, and my ship would go from warp 9 into an area to the next update with my ship exploding, I gave up. 1996 or so is when I started my yearly interest where I would play a few days and then take a year break. In the last 5 years, it has been about 1 day a year. I completely suck right now. My "clue", though, is that I recognize and know exactly how much I suck. I know I'm not moving fast enough, or torping fast enough. I know I'm not holding onto the phaser lock. I know I'm not detting others to protect my team mates, and I know I'm on the wrong side of the planet than I should be for conflicts. My knowledge is still good - my intuition and reflex is gone. So there you have it - that's my Netrek playing history. You can feel free to mock me for being a twink again... :-) Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080409/a18a537d/attachment-0001.htm From carlos at jpl.nasa.gov Wed Apr 9 12:05:47 2008 From: carlos at jpl.nasa.gov (Carlos Y. Villalpando) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:05:47 -0700 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <20080409170547.GA2148@carlos-desktop> Mark, Niclas. Take it off list. It's become a pissing contest. Keep the list to actual technical discussions, please. --Carlos V. From netrek at gmail.com Wed Apr 9 12:33:12 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 13:33:12 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FCE154.60609@cfl.rr.com> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB892D.7040809@cfl.rr.com> <47FBEA21.2080100@cfl.rr.com> <47FCE154.60609@cfl.rr.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Rich Hansen wrote: > > They are much more likely to listen when someone is talking to them, as > opposed to a 'sync on 3' message that was pasted 40 seconds ago, and > they're ahead a bit, and I don't remember who I'm supposed to sync on, > and I'm about to die anyway, and maybe I can distract some defenders, > and any other such nonsense that goes through a non-clue's head. > > It's much harder to decloak when someone is saying into your ear, "Not > yet, not yet, not yet, not yet." Similarly, you're unlikely not to > decloak when someone yells, "Now!" > > As for calling, only the leader should be calling an ogg. I actually > think having voice will cut down on the number of bad ogg calls, since > the (presumably most clued) leader can stop any bad calls, and reiterate > that only they make ogg calls, more quickly, and whether or not they are > currently in a dogfight. Ok I look forward to seeing a base ogg synced using voice. Should be fun. > Yes, use sound. This is like saying, "What about people who choose not > to use the message window?" I often play netrek while listening to music on my headphones. And other times I just like to play in silence so I can concentrate more fully such as in clue games. The message window is fundamental to gameplay. I see the voice as more of an extra feature that some may elect to use. It would be really cool if we could get a voice to text system so when the leaders says "Ogg base" it would appear in text on the team board. Zach From niclas at acc.umu.se Wed Apr 9 12:58:22 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 19:58:22 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <47FCF0CA.3080007@mark.mielke.cc> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <20080404225135.GA2990@us.netrek.org> <47F7BCBF.8020002@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA1554.7010506@mark.mielke.cc> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB1F9.7070608@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDEAE.6060007@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCC561.4020803@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCCEED.4000409@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCDCD0.206@mark.mielke.cc> <47FCF0CA.3080007@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Mark Mielke wrote: >> You've previously stated that you have 0 hours of experience with >> playing netrek clue games with voice. > > The opposite is true. I stated that I have played Netrek in the same room > with people, and enjoyed it. You incorrectly equate sitting in the same room with people to speaking over a digital voice channel. The two are extremely different. -- Niclas From jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com Wed Apr 9 13:45:23 2008 From: jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com (Jeffrey Watts) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 13:45:23 -0500 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> Message-ID: <65631e800804091145g13c48651udd68e78424092cd7@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 3:15 AM, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > > I know that you're a netrek twink and in this discussion that matters. > > You're making the same error as Jeffery thinking that since the textbook > on communication says that voice communication is more efficient than text > communication, that is true in every single area in the world. I have > explained to you and Jeffrey why this is not true for netrek, yet the only > counter argument you have is "voice > text". And you, sir, seem to want to disregard everything I've written. No one here is talking about REMOVING text communications. The discussion was about ADDING voice. No one here is talking about NOT using text. We're talking about enhancing the game with voice. I never once have said that text communication should be removed. I've said that ADDING voice could help. I seem to recall that the lead developer also supports trying this out. Are you calling him a twink and an idiot as well? You're an elitist jerk, and people like you are part of the reason Netrek is dying. You are not adding anything constructive to this list. Your efforts here seem to be simply one of showing off how large your penis is. Go buy a Hummer instead. I'd like to apologize to everyone else here, I was hoping that Niclas was actually interested in reasonable discussion. I will discontinue discussing this with him. Niclas, feel free to get the last word in, we all know you want to. Good day. Jeffrey. -- "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine From niclas at acc.umu.se Thu Apr 10 02:40:43 2008 From: niclas at acc.umu.se (Niclas Fredriksson) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:40:43 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <65631e800804091145g13c48651udd68e78424092cd7@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080403230130.GB7214@us.netrek.org> <47FA45C6.3030402@mark.mielke.cc> <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> <65631e800804091145g13c48651udd68e78424092cd7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Jeffrey Watts wrote: > And you, sir, seem to want to disregard everything I've written. No one > here is talking about REMOVING text communications. The discussion was > about ADDING voice. No one here is talking about NOT using text. > We're talking about enhancing the game with voice. I never once have > said that text communication should be removed. I've said that ADDING > voice could help. You have obviously not read what I have written. I started out this thread writing that adding voice is a good idea, but that its game play benefits are somewhat limited. You and Milke seem to be arguing that voice is the ultiate way to communicate in netrek which I have shown is simply just not true, nor is it of any relevance in this discussion. > I seem to recall that the lead developer also supports trying this out. > Are you calling him a twink and an idiot as well? Cameron? As a player he's a big twink, he'd even admit to this himself. He's far from being an idiot though and he's great for our community. And yes, I do have a huge penis, thanks for asking. -- Niclas From quozl at us.netrek.org Thu Apr 10 04:10:12 2008 From: quozl at us.netrek.org (James Cameron) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:10:12 +1000 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: References: <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> <65631e800804091145g13c48651udd68e78424092cd7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080410091012.GA3214@us.netrek.org> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 09:40:43AM +0200, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > Cameron? As a player he's a big twink, he'd even admit to this himself. > He's far from being an idiot though and he's great for our community. Chuckle. I blame the lag from here. I used to be so much better. I ran daily games at lunch hour inside Digital Equipment Corporation in Sydney. Full server, every day for two years. But I do read, watch, and die quickly. I still enjoy it. As for the team audio idea ... silly me, I should have just done it, and not invited comment. ;-} In principle approval received from the two pickup server bandwidth owners, and from the server operators, and probably from the client developer ... so next task is to set up a Mumble, integrated with the client and the server, sharing the communications path. -- James Cameron mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/ From mark at mark.mielke.cc Thu Apr 10 10:16:13 2008 From: mark at mark.mielke.cc (Mark Mielke) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 11:16:13 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080410091012.GA3214@us.netrek.org> References: <47FB8C41.9060705@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> <65631e800804091145g13c48651udd68e78424092cd7@mail.gmail.com> <20080410091012.GA3214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: <47FE2F3D.9070801@mark.mielke.cc> James Cameron wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 09:40:43AM +0200, Niclas Fredriksson wrote: > >> Cameron? As a player he's a big twink, he'd even admit to this himself. >> He's far from being an idiot though and he's great for our community. >> > > Chuckle. I blame the lag from here. I used to be so much better. I > ran daily games at lunch hour inside Digital Equipment Corporation in > Sydney. Full server, every day for two years. > > But I do read, watch, and die quickly. I still enjoy it. > > As for the team audio idea ... silly me, I should have just done it, and > not invited comment. ;-} > > In principle approval received from the two pickup server bandwidth > owners, and from the server operators, and probably from the client > developer ... so next task is to set up a Mumble, integrated with the > client and the server, sharing the communications path. > > What kind of help could you use? Not that this is really the type of software I normally work on, but we can see, or you might have others who have been quiet? Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.us.netrek.org/pipermail/netrek-dev/attachments/20080410/35a41952/attachment.htm From netrek at gmail.com Thu Apr 10 16:16:06 2008 From: netrek at gmail.com (Zach) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:16:06 -0400 Subject: [netrek-dev] Team Audio In-Reply-To: <20080410091012.GA3214@us.netrek.org> References: <47FBB99C.2030708@mark.mielke.cc> <47FBDBC1.2090806@mark.mielke.cc> <65631e800804091145g13c48651udd68e78424092cd7@mail.gmail.com> <20080410091012.GA3214@us.netrek.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:10 AM, James Cameron wrote: > > Chuckle. I blame the lag from here. I used to be so much better. I > ran daily games at lunch hour inside Digital Equipment Corporation in > Sydney. Full server, every day for two years. Marl mentioned hundreds playing netrek on their intranet at Nokia and you had a lot of people at DEC playing. I wonder how many private netrek servers there are operating right now! Zach