The Mana World Forums

• ladmin
• GM commands that are actually supported.
• starting from scratch vs starting from existing savefiles.
• parties, storage
• ...

o11c wrote: Some GM, script, and ladmin commands have been disabled.
Particular stuff to test:

• ladmin
• GM commands that are actually supported.
• starting from scratch vs starting from existing savefiles.
• parties, storage
• ...

o11c wrote:As I recall:

the language setting in ladmin,

the date format in ladmin and others

all script functions not usable

a couple of GM commands that mostly don't work or that are related to guilds.

    @guild        Creates a guild.
    @guildlvl     Levels your guild to a specified level.
    @gstorage     Brings up your guild's storage wherever you are. 
    @guildrecall  Warps all online characters of a guild to you (at least one member of that guild must be online). 
    @agitstart    Start guild wars.
    @agitend      Ends guild wars.
    @gvgon or @gpvpon Enables GvG on a map (2 same commands).
    @gvgoff or @gpvpoff    Disables GvG on a map (2 same commands). 
    @guildspy  Allows you to spy on any Guilds Guild chat (at least one member of that guild must be online).
    @partyspy Allows you to spy on any party's party chat (at least one party member must be online). 
 

o11c (git hub commit) wrote: Remove guilds, finally

If anyone in the future wonders why I did this,
just look at how many lines of code this eliminates.

Wombat wrote:What o11c should of said is that he is also going to make a new guild system and it is top priority. If it is low priority, you don't have permission to remove guilds.

o11c wrote:Now, you can either test what code I *have* done, or you can stand here arguing and stopping me from getting things done.

• Fix save file problems
• Improve memory footprint by identifying and removing leaks
• Clean up code so that it's easier to maintain
• As part of cleanup, identify and remove duplication where reasonable

• 1) Maintain compatibility with existing and planned content (coordinate changes with devs where necessary)
  2) Maintain compatibility with manasource and manaplus clients. Coordinate new feature support with 4144.
  3) Replace existing flat data files with a transactional database-like engine
  4) Identify and remove duplicate or unused code

o11c wrote:Every single piece of code that I can't remove is code that I have to rewrite without breaking existing behavior.

This is why e.g. I'm removing as many script commands as I could, even if some of them could be useful..

o11c wrote:It is a vast overstatement to say that guilds were "working" before. The guild code was ... not the worst of TMWA code, but the easiest to safely remove. You may note that I *will* have to remove and reimplement parties (luckily they're slightly less tightly-coupled than guilds), and also have plans to do the same for magic ... doing this for more code than I absolutely have to is simply not going to happen.

Also, remember that *all* existing "guild"s via the bot are NOT affected.

My biggest priority for the near future is fixing save problems. *Any* sort of feature addition is necessarily a lower priority, unless it coincides with maintenance work, like rewriting the magic system, or is absolutely trivial, like adding a script function - but even then, if you can justify its necessity.

Now, you can either test what code I *have* done, or you can stand here arguing and stopping me from getting things done.

1. you reinstall the guild code
2. guilds are re-enabled in game to prevent any further code removal
3. The actual 3 or 4 guilds are created (this will slightly increase the account or char server load which may, with addition of some appropriate debug tags help you to solve the issues that happen while databases backups)
4. When it is done, Guild bot can be changed to a "Babel Bot" according to Frost's suggestion.

Nard wrote:

o11c wrote:It is a vast overstatement to say that guilds were "working" before. The guild code was ... not the worst of TMWA code, but the easiest to safely remove. You may note that I *will* have to remove and reimplement parties (luckily they're slightly less tightly-coupled than guilds), and also have plans to do the same for magic ... doing this for more code than I absolutely have to is simply not going to happen.

So you do not remove the guild code because it has any problem, but because it is easy to remove., what an affair! If you do not plan to touch this code why do you remove it

• Lots of assumptions about alliances, emblems, and castles.
• Change behavior of player interactions in ways that are invisible to the client.
• Change behavior of seemingly random mobs and items, without any evidence in the db files.
• Complicates the network layer. Changing the network layer is essential to fix the savefiles, which is the number one priority
• Severely complicates the storage code (which appears to have bugs regarding player locking. If you don't understand player locking, you shouldn't be part of this conversation). Long term, the storage code will be rewritten, so it will be feasible to share storage at that time. If you prevent me from the necessary work of the rewrite, it won't happen.
• Complicates the skill system, which is the single worst area of TMWA's code - worse even than the magic system. (I still maintain that magic should have been implemented using the skill protocol though - it can directly say "cast this spell at this location" or "cast this spell at this being". But since we *don't* use that, I can remove that code to help simplify the skill system ... and the magic system is salvagable)

Nard wrote:

o11c wrote:Also, remember that *all* existing "guild"s via the bot are NOT affected.

I absolutely do NOT Care about Guild bot. Guild bot is a substitute brought to this game by players and developers who think like I do. It fills a lack in game: Guilds are a central point in any game which pretends to be MMORPG.

Nard wrote: [*]When it is done, Guild bot can be changed to a "Babel Bot" according to Frost's suggestion.[/list]

o11c wrote: Received a report from Jenalya that the "make packets read-only" commit sends an invalid packet. Awaiting more details and/or time to investigate it myself.

Jenalya wrote:I did some more testing, and I think the invalid packet is sent when players get in range to each other.

that commit wrote:

Code: Select all

         if (dstsd)
             WFIFOSET(dstsd->fd, packet_len_table[0x1d7]);
         else
             clif_send(buf, packet_len_table[0x1d7], bl, AREA);
     }
     else
     {
         WBUFW(buf, 0) = 0x1d7;
         WBUFL(buf, 2) = bl->id;
         WBUFB(buf, 6) = uint8_t(type);
         WBUFW(buf, 7) = val;
         WBUFW(buf, 9) = 0;
         if (dstsd)
-            WFIFOSET(dstsd->fd, packet_len_table[0x1d7]);
+            clif_send(buf, packet_len_table[0x1d7], &dstsd->bl, SELF);
         else
             clif_send(buf, packet_len_table[0x1d7], bl, AREA);
     }
     return 0;

o11c wrote: Some example detail of why guild code is bad:

• Lots of assumptions about alliances, emblems, and castles.
• Change behavior of player interactions in ways that are invisible to the client.
• Change behavior of seemingly random mobs and items, without any evidence in the db files.
• Complicates the network layer. Changing the network layer is essential to fix the savefiles, which is the number one priority
• Severely complicates the storage code (which appears to have bugs regarding player locking. If you don't understand player locking, you shouldn't be part of this conversation). Long term, the storage code will be rewritten, so it will be feasible to share storage at that time. If you prevent me from the necessary work of the rewrite, it won't happen.
• Complicates the skill system, which is the single worst area of TMWA's code - worse even than the magic system. (I still maintain that magic should have been implemented using the skill protocol though - it can directly say "cast this spell at this location" or "cast this spell at this being". But since we *don't* use that, I can remove that code to help simplify the skill system ... and the magic system is salvagable)

o11c wrote:You should (take careabout guilbot). guild bot is the ONLY currently-supported method of guilds in this game.

o11c wrote: The amount of time until chat channels are fully implemented depends on how quickly I can remove enough code to make it workable, and how much time I waste arguing with people who know nothing about TMWA internals.

o11c in Guild member limit wrote:Personally, I don't see what guilds could add to gameplay that parties don't already do

Nard wrote:Some future potential developer will have no reference if the code is removed now

Nard wrote:you said you removed code "bacause it was easy to remove" which obviously not a good reason to remove it.

Nard wrote:you said you removed code "bacause it was easy to remove" which obviously not a good reason to remove it.

The guild code was ... not the worst of TMWA code, but the easiest to safely remove