Link cap

Old MUME discussions.

Moderator: Builders

Forum rules
The posts in this forum should be related to MUME.
Elestir
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 11:47 pm
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Link cap

Post by Elestir » Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:19 pm

I see your point, but Rogon is right as well. All in all it would hurt MUME not help it.

I see alternative solution in changing the part of mechanics of MUME that is heavily link dependent into a less link dependent mechanics. One such change was change to flee years ago. Basically if there is anything which when abused by client actions gives huge advantage it should be changed somehow.

Example:
Link gives advantage in combat, as it makes you see your foe earlier on a faster link, and you therefore have more time to react before he leaves, than if you were on a slow link.

Change reducing the advantage of a fast link:
Implementation of delayed command "attack", which when used would work like flush just not vs sneakers, but to any1 matching the argument, e.g.:

Code: Select all

*>attack *orc*
# some delay #
*an Orc* has arrived from the east.
You slash *an Orc*'s head and tickle it.
Sure, the fast linked player will still have the advantage on first (unexpected) encounter, but not so during the rest of the combat. If you want to solve even the first encounter problem, you would have to introduce something like states of combat readiness...

Elemmakil
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:03 pm
Location: Massachusetts, United States of America

Re: Link cap

Post by Elemmakil » Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:32 pm

Only the Swedes, Norweigens, and Estonians (excuse me if I missed a nation with 30 ms or so) would "suffer". Except it wouldn't really be "suffering" because they'd get used to it + the playing level would become even. By the way, players with slow links aren't really "suffering" at the moment I'd say, they're just at a noticable disadvantage to 30 ms Europeans.

I'm content with my 150 ms, but just putting out an argument for the players with much slower links.

Ugurz
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:55 am

Re: Link cap

Post by Ugurz » Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:55 pm

Alternate idea ... run a 2nd instance of Mume on a server in the USA. I know that wont help the Aussies, etc. but if the entire player-base is just over 50% American, it would be a nice solution.

Players could have part/all their account ported to the new USA server.

Azazello
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:09 pm

Re: Link cap

Post by Azazello » Wed Mar 19, 2008 6:20 pm

Ugurz wrote:Alternate idea ... run a 2nd instance of Mume on a server in the USA. I know that wont help the Aussies, etc. but if the entire player-base is just over 50% American, it would be a nice solution.

Players could have part/all their account ported to the new USA server.
localhost for everyone i say! Teh link for teh people!

P.S. You really don't see why this is the worst idea ever? :-)

Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Link cap

Post by Wobbler » Wed Mar 19, 2008 6:47 pm

Ask for a copy of the remote server code, fix the bugs, and I'm sure there will be servers set up on different continents that will improve people's links.

I don't care about my ping to any American server, there isn't anythign good enough on offer over there anyway.
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.

Elemmakil
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:03 pm
Location: Massachusetts, United States of America

Re: Link cap

Post by Elemmakil » Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:03 pm

Well you are on Elvenrunes.com 24/7 , that's a USA site :P

I guess Google and Wikipedia don't count since there is a .se version of each :/ Seems you guys like to use everything we do.

Caerroil
Bug Hunter
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Link cap

Post by Caerroil » Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:49 pm

ElvenRunes is hosted in Germany, made (mostly) by a german and an american with (small) help from various people more or less all over the world. So I wouldn't really call it "a USA site".

Regarding the topic of the thread I agree with Rogon, the results of a general slowdown of the game would most likely end up being more negative than positive.

Razoor
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:20 am

Re: Link cap

Post by Razoor » Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:25 pm

Well, i suppose it'd be fair. Very boring though as Rogon said, and far less enjoyable.

Most people who have slow link also have extremely poor clientsetup, which is a much
more important feature in PK than linkspeed will ever be. I'd say linkspeed comes after
client and fighting techniques (prespamming etc), third place at importance in PK.

I doubt this is possible and it'd be really boring to play on 150ms, but i wouldn't mind trying
it out for a month or three just to see if there'd be a difference :)

Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Link cap

Post by Wobbler » Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:34 pm

150 ms would be unfair to everyone playing on 200 ms links.
200 ms would be unfair to everyone playing on 250 ms links.
250 ms would be unfair to everyone playing on 500 ms links.
500 ms would be unfair to everyone playing on 1s links.
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.

Snarp
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:09 am

Re: Link cap

Post by Snarp » Wed Mar 19, 2008 10:59 pm

Only for you Edvard or bashtrap you. Either one on either side. Then I'd gac, burn, wait for you to come back.

Amazing the amount of people saying it would hurt the game, after a month noone would notice. The faster people are a disgrace and it's hilarious that Wobbler thinks that link didn't make them good.

"Target steve, he's american"
Last edited by Snarp on Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Link cap

Post by Wobbler » Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:24 pm

Are you saying people like Steele or Ajax were successful because of their mighty links?
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.

Elemmakil
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:03 pm
Location: Massachusetts, United States of America

Re: Link cap

Post by Elemmakil » Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:28 pm

Wobbler: 150 ms would be unfair to everyone playing on 200 ms? Well how bout 30 ms compared to 200 ms? Good argument right there.

Razoor: Agree mostly on all your points, but I'd probably place prespam infront of everything. Though about client-setups...I think most people know how to use hotkeys, and that's pretty much all there is to it? I usually end up manually typing though, besides using a hotkey for hitting a target. I guess that's why I suck.

One thing that no-one's mentioned is that on a slower link, you're at a HUGE disadvantage regarding doors. For instance, you almost HAVE to overspam open door if you want to get out of a closeable for instance (in a trap), whereas those with 30ms seem to hit their open buttons "1 by 1" until they get out and simply move away. This is a huge advantage for a person with a better link. For example, say you're trapping bushes with a fastlink and a slowlinked player enters. Being able to have that *instant* close allows you to simply hit your "close bushes" key one by one, whereas the slower player overspams "open bushes". When he finally flees west, not having overspammed close bushes, you simply move west while he's still spamopening it, hit etc.

I can clarify what I'm saying if you don't understand :/

Elemmakil
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:03 pm
Location: Massachusetts, United States of America

Re: Link cap

Post by Elemmakil » Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:36 pm

Snarp's saying that the general sentiment is to target a slowlinked player (usually an American)...and you only mentioned two American players out of what? at least 200+ that have played

Razoor: "Well, i suppose it'd be fair. Very boring though as Rogon said, and far less enjoyable. " - Well obviously it would be more boring for you and less enjoyable because you can't kill us slowlinks as easily! :) But since the majority of the players have a slower link, *they* would be happier. It's Democracy!

As Pif said, we're never going to agree with another and anyhow, even if the 30ms linked players agreed, I doubt the management would change it.

haunga
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:35 am

Re: Link cap

Post by haunga » Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:13 am

Is it possible to improve the US link speeds by any kinds of investment? Servers...anything? I'm not from the US but I'd donate for something which would increase the links.

Scad
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:37 am

Re: Link cap

Post by Scad » Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:43 am

Well I've played on everything from ultrastable 80ms to 750ms with huge packetloss, and I've done OK on both. I think a sufficiently skilled player can do fine in MUME even with a very very poor link, but you will always be held back from your max potential. My ability to competitively PK (especially as BN, which is why last few years I've played pukes and not PK'd as much) was seriously diminished, and the game really never was as fun anymore after I left college and lost my decent link, which is ultimately why I've more or less quit completely now... But I think an artificial link cap would just make it worse for everyone... Theres another mud I played for a while that had a 250ms link cap built in and god was it annoying, even though technically it benefited my super bad link. The 250ms cap (at least how it was implemented on that mud) seemed to really just make my 350ms into a 600ms. Anyway just thought I'd mention my .02.

Eorberl
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Hobart, Australia

Re: Link cap

Post by Eorberl » Thu Mar 20, 2008 10:03 am

Rogon wrote:If you think it sucks with a bad link, why do you want it to suck for me too? That's not very nice of you.
Nobody is being vindictive, the aim is to put everyone on a more even footing.
Ugurz wrote:Alternate idea ... run a 2nd instance of Mume on a server in the USA. I know that wont help the Aussies, etc. but if the entire player-base is just over 50% American, it would be a nice solution.

Players could have part/all their account ported to the new USA server.
Yes! lets reduce the playerbase even further, just what the game needs!! Not to mention it still leaves All those in the south east Asia area with the exact same situation as the American players are complaining about now.
Haunga wrote:is it possible to improve the US link speeds by any kinds of investment? Servers...anything? I'm not from the US but I'd donate for something which would increase the links.
Anyone want to pay Ilie to fix the server module? And if that happens, to provide money for a server in areas that currently suffer the most from poor linkspeed? (South America, South East Asia) Note that I'm not saying everyone should pay for somethign to benefit only a few players, it should be for those effected to donate and make it possible.
Razoor wrote:Most people who have slow link also have extremely poor clientsetup, which is a much
more important feature in PK than linkspeed will ever be. I'd say linkspeed comes after
client and fighting techniques (prespamming etc), third place at importance in PK.
Agreed. You have to be able to fight (client setup, and personal experience) before you can really take advantage of a fast link anyway. I don't think anyone with a brain says players like you or Rogon (just picking a few from the many there are) are only good because of your link. But you have to admit, your link helps a lot when you need to spam someone down or get out of a nasty situation quickly.

If slowlinked players like myself learn to prespam properly, it is entirely possible to be competetive with faster linked players, though of course we are always at a considerable disadvantage and because of that we need to have a good strategy and stick to it in order to win any fights. Take p(Mafaz) for example, he played from 300ms link in Chile some time ago, and he was commonly seen on the warlords list, I would honestly be more scared to face him than many fast linked players now if he ever got his hands on a European link.

The biggest disadvantage of a slow link is the time it takes to respond to any changes. It's easily possible to "spam someone down" if they are fleeing, and you prespam the right dir+hit, but it takes considerably more effort because you cannot wait to see what direction the person flees; by then it will be already nearly a second since you were fighting before you are into the next room. I have been accused of actions by Europeans simply because of lucky/good prespam (and it's VERY satisfying when it happens, too).

And Razoor, if you think my client setup is bad, you're welcome to check it out and suggest some changes that can be made :) (me being the newbie I am, I could use some help!)

Moving on to a constructive comment, I would say the only way to start bridging the massive gap in link speeds is to put some friendly pressure and support on Ilie, to get the bugs ironed out of the current server module. That way it would be possible to spready those servers around, giving those at a large disadvantage a small benefit in link speed. I'm not sure what the link speed is between mume.ca and mume.org, but using that for the time it works feels incredible (I'm guessing it's still some 350ms or so from my computer to the final destination). I can understand why people on fast links don't want to lose that, but you do have to acknowledge that it is a huge advantage to be so fortunate. Some day I hope to experience a 30ms link as well!

PS: Wobbler, stop with the anti-american comments, there's no need to turn a thread about link difference into a political statement.

Razoor
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:20 am

Re: Link cap

Post by Razoor » Thu Mar 20, 2008 10:25 am

Just contact me in-game and i'll be happy to look through your client and suggest improvements :)

Ugurz
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:55 am

Re: Link cap

Post by Ugurz » Thu Mar 20, 2008 10:43 am

Yes, I do understand that a 2nd copy of mume running on a separate server located in the US would split the player-base in half. I also believe that the US-based server would then grow in player-base size quickly, If playing on a really fast link is as enjoyable as Rogan says it is.

Next, based on the euros' constant bashing and open distain for us Americans, the European Mume player-base should grow rapidly as well ... with us nasty Americans playing on a different server. :)

As for a third instance of mume running on an Asian server, great idea whoever mentioned that.

Newer idea ... rotate where mume is based every month and keep the player-base together on a single instance of Mume. Europe, US and then Asia ... rotate the nice link around the globe. :)

Razoor
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:20 am

Re: Link cap

Post by Razoor » Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:36 am

I played from asia during summed, it sucked :D

Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Link cap

Post by Wobbler » Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:39 am

I'm not sure, but I think Ilie would happily supply the remote server source to any coder willing to debug it.
That way we could end up with remote servers on every continent all connected to enhance the gaming experience for everyone.

Elemmakil wrote:Wobbler: 150 ms would be unfair to everyone playing on 200 ms? Well how bout 30 ms compared to 200 ms? Good argument right there.
What I'm saying is that for any link cap to be fair, it would have to be so high it affects every player there is.
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.

Locked