View Full Version : Joining during a battle #2 *** *** New idea (Please BIS reply!)
Well like most other players I think the main problem with OFP is that we can't join when a game is in progres. I've been reading the forum about this topic and came up with a idea, well Bronco suggested it.
Like Suma said joining a game in progres isn't possible because of the large amount of data that has to be send. Well Bronco suggested a smaller island designed for Multiplayer. In my opinion this is a brilliant idea.
Make a new island with about 4 or 5 villages with a maximum of 80 buildings. Give every building a number or name. A building has to have two options, not destroyed and destroyed. Then when a player joins the server will only have to send the number of which building has been destroyed. The information being send then won't be big. As for objects like trees and stuff. Make them client side only. I won't mind if I don't see which tree is broke and which isn't. And i'm sure others won't either.
As for players and positions, this is done anyway. It has to be tracked constantly for MP to work. And with like 32 players (maximum i've seen working so far) that won't be that much data as well. From that point it's like a normal game we have already.
And who cares if it takes like 2 minutes to join because of all the data being send. 2 minutes is way better than waiting 30 minutes or more!
This is just my opinion.
I hope BIS will reply if this could work, and if not why not?
Oct 25 2001, 22:44
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from SimteC on 8:39 am on Oct. 26, 2001
As for objects like trees and stuff. Make them client side only. I won't mind if I don't see which tree is broke and which isn't. And i'm sure others won't either.
<Snip> [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I would certainly mind. A tree that has been run over by a tank or APC makes a great hiding spot for someone in the prone position, much better than the trunk of a tree that is still standing.
Well I don't know how much information this would be , let's say the map has 2000 trees and bushes, it would mean every tree and bush has to have a name, and the server has to send i.e. 1 for not destroyed or 0 for destroyed. Dunno how much data that would be. btw as for the server being flood by storing this information, isn't this done anyway (storing whats destroyed and whats not)
Oct 25 2001, 23:49
If you are going to send the full state of the static environment, you wouldn't have to name each object.
Given your example of 2000 trees, let's assume that each tree can have from 0 to 100 percent damage, and that the trees crumple/break/snap the same way every time they reach a given damage level.
All clients know about the same trees, and they exist in the same order as well. Now all you need to send are 2000 bytes with a value from 0 to 100, which even a 28.8 modem can do in less than one second.
You would only need to identify objects when sending incremental/differential updates.
So basicly what your saying is that BIS CAN make this work. altho they state that it would be to much data.
But with a smaller island the data could be taken down seriously. Make a island as big as the desert island only with villages, trees, maybe a few forests.
Just don't destroy the scenery - you want that, go play Red Faction..
The issue is the scripts and such - I think a plain vanilla map with CTF would be sufficient to start. Don't worry about vehicles, etc..., slowly incorporate those later if possible...
WWII Online is doing this - they are slowly evolving the game.
I don't think a few vehicles would really mather.
Well I can't really believe it's impossible. If BIS wants this game to be a total succes they need to add to option to join a game in progres, no question about that.
But please give your opinion on the idea, do you guys agree a smaller island would be good enough? The desert island isn't good enough tho in my opinion cause it lacks scenery.
Oct 26 2001, 08:19
BIS can do it, they just choose to dedicate what time they have to revenue generating projects like Red Hammer. Which is to bad, because OFP will die out that much faster if people have to wait for each game to end.
I would love to be able to have a large island, half east, half west owned. Throughout the week the frontline moves back and forth until one side eventually owns all positions. Very much like WWII online, only on a smaller scale (and with the superior OFP engine).
Speaking of WWII online. If Cornered Rat Software can have a map of Europe with hundreds of players working(arguably), why can't BIS do it with a small island and less than 32 players?
I really hope they reconsider implementing join-in-progress games. It would open up a whole new world.
(Edited by DutchBoY at 4:25 am on Oct. 26, 2001)
Col Rambo SBS
Oct 26 2001, 19:26
Destoyable Building , trees and objects are not an issue realy when it comes to multiplayer.
I'll probably get moaned at for mentioning this but look at the DeltaForce series, the online map area is Huge, they just place the bases at rediculusly close points to each other, but even on those while online, the Building, trees, Tanks, trucks are all destroyable, and it works even when the map has bot tanks, trucks, soldiers all moving round the map.
Sorry BIS, your excuse of too much data just doesnt hold water, its been done else where, so it can be done here too.
As for the moving front line map, I know how to do this type of map, its quite easy, but theres no point as the battle could last days, which would need people constanlt joining to replace people who leave.
If you lot want, I'll create a mini version of it but it would need at least 16 a side to play properly.
Oct 26 2001, 20:51
I don't know...
You may have noticed that a savegame is around 300kb
And joining in progress means that the server will have to 'save' the game and send it to the joiner, which will take some time, and when he is finally finished dlling the file, it will be out of sync because it took some time to dl...
I don't know that much about these kind of things... but it is true isn't it?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.