Couple of feature requests/suggestions

[twprogrammers]

• I would like a button to start your own server in the play online menu where you can set the settings in a GUI and click start. I love the game but setting up a server is next to impossible.
• I would like a mode where it is a team/solo battling an endless army of bots, like the onslaught mutator but you only fight the bot army.

Other than that this is the best FPS I have played.

[bonifarz]

• I would like a button to start your own server in the play online menu where you can set the settings in a GUI and click start. I love the game but setting up a server is next to impossible.

Have taken a look at the wiki?
http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/r ... rver_Setup
If you want some exotic setup for certain modes and mutators, things may get complicated, but otherwise, the instructions above should be all you need.
Concerning GUI elements for managing the server: Some moderator actions can be done by player made scripts, such as this one.

• I would like a mode where it is a team/solo battling an endless army of bots, like the onslaught mutator but you only fight the bot army.

Maybe the coop and onslaught muts are enough for your needs. If you want drones/grunts only, try lowering the botbalance variable. For more sophisticated singleplayer campaigns, take a look at the tutorial by greaserpirate.

[twprogrammers]

• I would like a button to start your own server in the play online menu where you can set the settings in a GUI and click start. I love the game but setting up a server is next to impossible.

Have taken a look at the wiki?
http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/r ... rver_Setup
If you want some exotic setup for certain modes and mutators, things may get complicated, but otherwise, the instructions above should be all you need.

Windows

Copy the servinit.cfg example template from doc\examples to the root Red Eclipse directory (copy to the same directory as server.bat)
Edit these files with a text editor as appropriate
Start the server by executing server.bat, an icon should appear in the taskbar. Click on it to view the console.

I wanted to set it up with specific mode and mutators. Also, how does a server show up in that list? Does the server contact a centeral server that pings back on that port to see if it is world veiwable, then lists it? I was wanting something like CS Portable's GUI host your own server button. I want this because I am lazy and don't want to rummage through the file, but others may want it because they would look at the instructions and say "Uh.... WTF is this???" or "This is stupidly complicated, the hell with this."

Concerning GUI elements for managing the server: Some moderator actions can be done by player made scripts, such as this one.

• I would like a mode where it is a team/solo battling an endless army of bots, like the onslaught mutator but you only fight the bot army.

Maybe the coop and onslaught muts are enough for your needs. If you want drones/grunts only, try lowering the botbalance variable. For more sophisticated singleplayer campaigns, take a look at the tutorial by greaserpirate.

Step 3: Start an onslaught-timetrial on that map, making sure to turn the "classic" mutator off", and then type /exec game/singleplayer.cfg

I like the classic option. I wanted to be on a team or solo fighting endless enemies without trying to beat another team while having to pick up the weapons I want.

[Unnamed]

I like the classic option. I wanted to be on a team or solo fighting endless enemies without trying to beat another team while having to pick up the weapons I want.

Maybe you mean something like this: start a classic-onslaught DM on polarization and type /enemyspawntime 1
This will make the grunts respawn immediately.

[qreeves]

The fact is, we already have more servers than we do players; therefore very little effort is put into catering for "lazy and/or stupid" when it comes to setting one up. Cube Engine games are very low profile and easy to set up servers for, it doesn't make sense to put already limited resources into things which we don't (as a project) need.

[Xaran]

[list][*]I would like a button to start your own server in the play online menu where you can set the settings in a GUI and click start. I love the game but setting up a server is next to impossible.

Have taken a look at the wiki?

Here we have someone who rates red eclipse as the best FPS he's played, but is unable to set up a server due to the methods needed to set one up. Not everyone knows coding, which is the case with most gamers. They're players, not necessarily developers like many of us on the forum. We should at least make the option of setting up/ running a server available as an in-game function.(makes RE a bit more publicly appealing )

[bonifarz]

Hahah, hasty typing creates new instances of odd grammar

Have taken a look at the wiki?

On topic: I think with such issues the community can help. If someone has problems to get a certain server setup running, some advice via forums, IRC or the in-game chat can be quite useful.
I think it makes sense to have the server settings in a config file, and ultimately, the only thing you really have to edit there is your admin password. For launching the server, you can make a system shortcut (e.g. Ctrl+Shift+Super+R or whatever) and to join your own server you can use keybingings for /lanconnect and /setpriv myAdminPwd. Things are not as tedious as they may seem.

[twprogrammers]

[list][*]I would like a button to start your own server in the play online menu where you can set the settings in a GUI and click start. I love the game but setting up a server is next to impossible.

Have taken a look at the wiki?

Here we have someone who rates red eclipse as the best FPS he's played, but is unable to set up a server due to the methods needed to set one up. Not everyone knows coding, which is the case with most gamers. They're players, not necessarily developers like many of us on the forum. We should at least make the option of setting up/ running a server available as an in-game function.(makes RE a bit more publicly appealing )

Thank you for agreeing with me. I do know how to program but I'm a little out of practice, and I have gotten lazy.

The fact is, we already have more servers than we do players; therefore very little effort is put into catering for "lazy and/or stupid" when it comes to setting one up. Cube Engine games are very low profile and easy to set up servers for, it doesn't make sense to put already limited resources into things which we don't (as a project) need.

It shouldn't take much to add that... When I finally pickup the C++ books I bought 2 years ago I will see if I can contribute this part, but I honestly think it would be in the projects best interest to make it easy to set up a server. Games like this (CS Portable and other server-client games) that make it easy to set up a server end up with more users, and sometimes ends up becoming popular, because it gives the non-programmer gamers the ability to host public and/or private servers.

[qreeves]

This is what bothers me. I think you need to read some of the HOWTO topics pinned in this forum (and perhaps this article I wrote). I am the project leader, I am responsible for every part of the project and am the most familiar with what is in the best interests of the public and what is not. When we have more servers than players, giving people an even lazier way to put up servers is not in our best interest. If you want an example of how lazy some server operators are, check the server lists of Cube, Sauerbraten, AssaultCube and Red Eclipse, taking note of how many of those servers are either empty, running an antiquated version of the game, or in many cases, both.

Yes, it could be done, and quite possibly very easily. But should I put resources into it instead of another area which would better benefit the entire Red Eclipse player population? Definitely not. I would go as far to say that more servers would be a detriment to the public view of the game. Unfortunately, not everyone understands how to look at the bigger picture and it results in these kinds of standoffs. You really want to improve the game? There's plenty more useful things up for grabs, as outlined in other topics here on the forum.

Edited with URL references and emphasis.

[twprogrammers]

The fact is, we already have more servers than we do players; therefore very little effort is put into catering for "lazy and/or stupid" when it comes to setting one up. Cube Engine games are very low profile and easy to set up servers for, it doesn't make sense to put already limited resources into things which we don't (as a project) need.

This is what bothers me. I think you need to read some of the HOWTO topics pinned in this forum (and perhaps this article I wrote). I am the project leader, I am responsible for every part of the project and am the most familiar with what is in the best interests of the public and what is not. When we have more servers than players, giving people an even lazier way to put up servers is not in our best interest. If you want an example of how lazy some server operators are, check the server lists of Cube, Sauerbraten, AssaultCube and Red Eclipse, taking note of how many of those servers are either empty, running an antiquated version of the game, or in many cases, both.

Yes, it could be done, and quite possibly very easily. But should I put resources into it instead of another area which would better benefit the entire Red Eclipse player population? Definitely not. I would go as far to say that more servers would be a detriment to the public view of the game. Unfortunately, not everyone understands how to look at the bigger picture and it results in these kinds of standoffs. You really want to improve the game? There's plenty more useful things up for grabs, as outlined in other topics here on the forum.

Edited with URL references and emphasis.

Is it just me or have you been a little snippy at me? I am going to be blunt here. I love the game, but I hate the players that keep targeting me over everyone else. I hate getting slammed with maps, modes, and mutators I don't like because I lost a vote. I hate getting stuck on the opposite team as the person I got on to play with. I want a simple lan server that is me and my friend against bots and I don't want to go through the bull shit of looking through a 300 line file. So don't mind me for getting snippy back when I made a simple suggestion and I get snippy/thats stupid replies. So the hell with these forums and this game, I will find a game with the wanted features and the staff that isn't snippy. Good bye.

Oh and one more thing: the intermission is irritatingly long and the game time of 10 minutes is too short.

[Evropi]

Is it just me or have you been a little snippy at me? I am going to be blunt here. I love the game, but I hate the players that keep targeting me over everyone else. I hate getting slammed with maps, modes, and mutators I don't like because I lost a vote. I hate getting stuck on the opposite team as the person I got on to play with. I want a simple lan server that is me and my friend against bots and I don't want to go through the bull shit of looking through a 300 line file. So don't mind me for getting snippy back when I made a simple suggestion and I get snippy/thats stupid replies. So the hell with these forums and this game, I will find a game with the wanted features and the staff that isn't snippy. Good bye.

Oh and one more thing: the intermission is irritatingly long and the game time of 10 minutes is too short.

Oh for god's sake...

I very much doubt players target you more than others. You're either irrationally paranoid or just someone who gets fragged a lot. :P As for the rest, they're to be expected when you don't have administrative rights on a server, so fair enough. No need to be so aggressive; you'll just get aggressiveness back.

For what you're trying to do, just follow the very helpful guide on the wiki and you're pretty much good to go. You need to modify all of 5 lines to do what you want to do optimally. Is it really that hard?

Anyway, if you have trouble, message me with what you need and I will prepare such a file for you.

[Dratz-_C]

Hi twprogrammers,

I hate getting stuck on the opposite team as the person I got on to play with.

To change teams, press . (period). It's not necessarily that I don't agree that you have put some work into making a point which on its face seems fine, just that the supporting connections for it don't exist yet in main idea of the project because these supporting connections are seeded toward other areas that will efficiently grow the project over time and territory. To further your idea please read the HOWTO: Submit your content, idea, proposal, or issue procedure and follow it to completion.
Cheers

[qreeves]

Every so often, you have an individual come along who has their own ideas and opinions, and they are so fixed on the concept that their way is the right way, they end up having a complete disregard for the creator, and the community behind that creation, if one exists. These people will enter a community, demand that everyone conforms to their vision, and when they discover the creator and/or community are resistant to it, blames everyone else for the fact that they failed. This often ends with the person declaring something along the lines of: “I should have known better, you don’t appreciate me, I’ll go elsewhere and get my way there.”

The problem is, these people don’t ever try to integrate with a project naturally, they appear to expect instant results as soon as they come along, and assume they know everything they need to know. This is mostly untrue. Throwing a tantrum and refusing to share your toys is the best way to ensure that everyone will instantly dislike you. To them, they were doing just fine before you came along trying to shake the tree and making demands of them, and they will continue to do just fine without you.

Directly quoted from one of the links I provided.

It's not necessarily that I don't agree that you have put some work into making a point which on its face seems fine, just that the supporting connections for it don't exist yet in main idea of the project because these supporting connections are seeded toward other areas that will efficiently grow the project over time and territory. To further your idea please read the HOWTO: Submit your content, idea, proposal, or issue procedure and follow it to completion.

Exactly. Even though this is just echoing what I said in a different way, thank you for understanding that issue.

For what you're trying to do, just follow the very helpful guide on the wiki and you're pretty much good to go. You need to modify all of 5 lines to do what you want to do optimally. Is it really that hard?

Anyway, if you have trouble, message me with what you need and I will prepare such a file for you.

Thank you too, Evropi, for showing the other part of why I think it is unnecessary; our awesome and helpful community, who I will always put before the everyday n00b.

That being said, if anyone wants to help me come up with a way to do this without it resulting in a flood of useless servers in the list, please raise your hand.

[Dratz-_C]

Quin,
As you probably already know this issue seems to be related to ticket #145 where the master server might become able to unlist newly-flagged servers. I guess the question is whether there is a need for a flag other than private to unlist a server from the master server, and if so what that flag should be: "unmoderated," ["unmastered," ...].

I might also suggest in regard to reducing the number of 0-player servers in the client browser that we think about having a server that has had no player activity for 24 hours, or x amount of time, be unlisted until the server operator joins their own game or someone privately connects to it in the background. Does this sound like a practical approach?
Cheers

[TheLastProject]

I might also suggest in regard to reducing the number of 0-player servers in the client browser that we think about having a server that has had no player activity for 24 hours, or x amount of time, be unlisted until the server operator joins their own game or someone privately connects to it in the background. Does this sound like a practical approach?
Cheers

Personally, this seems like a bad idea to me, because of a few reasons:
1. Sometimes, I don't feel like playing anything any server is offering, or I want to quickly have a match with a friend, so I join an empty server so that I can quickly choose a mode to play with said friend on.
2. The solution does not seem to solve the OPs wish for having a server set up easily

What I think would be more sane:

Very quick mock-up. Please note that the wording should be changed.

This button would set /servertype to 1, which turns the server private. However, I must admit there are a few issues with this:
1. This assumes /servertype 0, which is default in "offline practice", does not allow others to connect. If I'm wrong here, well, then this idea is doomed from the start
2. There is no mention of "lan connect" in my descriptions
3. It's way too much text
4. Can we even reliably detect the IP? Won't the only way for this force the client to contact the master server?
5. Does it even make sense to name it "offline practice" with this button?

All of this brings us back to the main point: Is it worth it? Honestly, I believe this is a lot of work for very little gain and it does not solve the main issue which is hard for a lot of users: port forwarding. The only possible use in this is making it easier to set /servertype to 1. However, if users are incapable of reading the wiki and figure out how to change the server type, we can generally safely assume they will also be unable to port forward, which means that we will only end up with "Why doesn't this feature work?" topics. Besides that, adding a feature which is not guaranteed to work in a lot of cases on such a prominent position makes the game feel of lower quality. Features, especially those visible without resorting to commands, should just work.

[Dratz-_C]

Thanks for the guidance TheLastProject,
I realize because of my novice understanding of the subject that most of what I communicate about it will not be useful. That said, here are my thoughts. Ignore the stuff in parentheses if you want. About the server browser, sometimes I say some crazy stuff; it was late when I typed that. This second part was regarding Quin's remark that there are perhaps too many 0-player servers in the browser, not at solving twprogrammers' wish for ease in setting up an intraLAN game. Perhaps having the freshest dozen, or x number, 0-player servers guaranteed as open past the populated ones could work. I agree that there are some complications and it could be a bad idea.

(Predictably, Sauerbraten seems to have implemented LAN the same way Red Eclipse does.

sauerbratenLAN01.jpg

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1651635 )

1. From what I can tell 0 allows others to connect from within the same LAN where I think that "local" includes the local area network.

red_eclipse00.png

http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/rar ... ver.6.html http://h30434.www3.hp.com/t5/Wireless-I ... td-p/77164

(2. --This is irrelevant now that I know you are talking about your diagram. Here is something that maybe of some use in Sauerbraten.

sauerbratenLAN00.png

http://sauerbraten.org/docs/game.html#lanconnect )

3. According to my casual research, showing folks how to connect manually, such as /connect 255.255.255.255.255, then requiring that if there are other computers in the local area network that folks know how to port forward is a misapplication. This is because LAN activity requires no internet connection and port forwarding is specifically designed for internet connections. http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/in ... 301AA40iYu I think that the [votes] tab should start to be used. In this tab could be options for manually connecting to a LAN IP via [lan connect] or an apter name, and listening for client connections to your server via [search lan] or an apter name. For the near future, I think that a [chat] tab would also be necessary.

red_eclipse_02.jpg

As far as how other games do it, Minecraft seems to ask folks to click on singleplayer, correlating to our offline practice mode, and then click on lan connect; Warcraft 3 shows options for Singleplayer, Multiplayer and LAN Connect separately on the main menu(; Assault Cube has folks click on multiplayer, then join LAN server)

4. For any way other than manual entry, which I think people should willingly be able to invoke, I think you are right in saying that you would have to contact the master server to detect the other IP.

5. "Play Online" and "Offline Practice" are free of multi-/single- nomenclature. One does not need a server browser when there is probably only one person's server one wants to connect with. Provided it is worth doing, without dramatically changing the main menu language, I think your approach is the best available.

Cheers

[qreeves]

I actually think that could work. Making it easier for LAN games while keeping it all separate from the online list.