Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

For topics that do not fit in another sub-forum.

Moderator: Oberlus

Message
Author
User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 6095
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#16 Post by Vezzra »

Oberlus wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 5:05 pm
Vezzra wrote:...
Poke!
Definitely tempting, but unfortunately instead of the workload getting at least a bit less, I'm getting more swamped (at work). I barely have the time to provide the weekly test builds, manage the upcoming 0.4.10 release, keep up with recent development and at least maintain some minimal presence here on the forum.

I might be able to do 2 or 3 turns per week during early game, and maybe 1/week in mid and late game, but I don't think you guys would want to play that slowly... and can't promise even that... :(

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#17 Post by Oberlus »

Vezzra wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 7:40 pm Definitely tempting, but unfortunately instead of the workload getting at least a bit less, I'm getting more swamped (at work). I barely have the time to provide the weekly test builds, manage the upcoming 0.4.10 release, keep up with recent development and at least maintain some minimal presence here on the forum.

I might be able to do 2 or 3 turns per week during early game, and maybe 1/week in mid and late game, but I don't think you guys would want to play that slowly... and can't promise even that... :(
I'm sorry to hear that. At least it's only workload, not illness.
For you, I would be glad to play a 1 turn per week game. But you have not seen what names we call each other on the XMPP chat room for not playing our turns on time. It gets bloody sometimes :lol:
So we need another VERY-SLOW-MULTIPLAYER-SERVER...

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 6095
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#18 Post by Vezzra »

Oberlus wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 7:46 pmAt least it's only workload, not illness.
Amen to that...
For you, I would be glad to play a 1 turn per week game.
Thanks :D
But you have not seen what names we call each other on the XMPP chat room for not playing our turns on time. It gets bloody sometimes :lol:
:lol: Indeed, I'd most likely try all you guys' patience to the limit... 8)

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#19 Post by Oberlus »

Vezzra wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 7:56 pm I'd most likely try all you guys' patience to the limit... 8)
It would not be me. I must admit I have an excessive double standard when it comes to judge or lose patience with FO devs. I feel in debt.

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 6095
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#20 Post by Vezzra »

Oberlus wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 8:04 pmI must admit I have an excessive double standard when it comes to judge or lose patience with FO devs. I feel in debt.
You should be careful disclosing such information. I might be tempted to take advantage of that... 8) :twisted: :wink:

Magnate
Space Dragon
Posts: 425
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#21 Post by Magnate »

Oh yes that reminds me, I need some help on setting the rules properly. My current server has RULE_DIPLOMACY_FORBIDDEN_FOR_ALL which we definitely don't want, but I don't know the syntax to enable it. I've asked this before, but is there a wiki page somewhere on all the things you can put into persistent_config.xml? What is the syntax for this new seed-hiding rule?

The other one I worry about is SHOW_DETAILED_EMPIRES_DATA because of the bug where you can't see enemy upgrades until you research the tech. Is this fixed? And does this rule turn the graphs off or is that a different switch?

Also I don't know how the ALLOW_CONCEDE and CONCEDE_COLONIES_THRESHOLD work. What settings do we want?

Ditto THRESHOLD_HUMAN_PLAYER_WIN and ONLY_ALLIANCE_WIN ... anyone?

I've only ever run FFA games without diplomacy so now idea how to set these rules. We want diplomacy, and either single human player win or single alliance win.

Incidentally I've gone for random everything, not medium everything. Except for no monsters. Just sayin'.

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 2004
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#22 Post by o01eg »

Magnate wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:06 pm Oh yes that reminds me, I need some help on setting the rules properly. My current server has RULE_DIPLOMACY_FORBIDDEN_FOR_ALL which we definitely don't want, but I don't know the syntax to enable it. I've asked this before, but is there a wiki page somewhere on all the things you can put into persistent_config.xml?
Any options could be set in https://freeorion.org/index.php/Config.xml

Diplomacy is a game rule so it have corresponding option like setup.rules.<rule-name>=<rule-value>.

Currently there are only two choices https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/pull/2543. The other value is RULE_DIPLOMACY_ALLOWED_FOR_ALL
Magnate wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:06 pm What is the syntax for this new seed-hiding rule?
It's an option, not rule: network.server.publish-seed.
Magnate wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:06 pm The other one I worry about is SHOW_DETAILED_EMPIRES_DATA because of the bug where you can't see enemy upgrades until you research the tech. Is this fixed? And does this rule turn the graphs off or is that a different switch?
I suppose it wasn't fixed so don't disable it. Graphs are managed with option network.server.publish-statistics.
Magnate wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:06 pm Also I don't know how the ALLOW_CONCEDE and CONCEDE_COLONIES_THRESHOLD work. What settings do we want?
ALLOW_CONCEDE is just boolean rule to allow or disallow concede at all. If it's allowed so player need to have less then CONCEDE_COLONIES_THRESHOLD colonies to concede.
Magnate wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:06 pm Ditto THRESHOLD_HUMAN_PLAYER_WIN and ONLY_ALLIANCE_WIN ... anyone?
THRESHOLD_HUMAN_PLAYER_WIN maximum of alive human players when victory could be declared. ONLY_ALLIANCE_WIN if set requires all those player be ally each with other.
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-11.2, boost-1.78.0
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#23 Post by Oberlus »

One more think about sensible enemy information being disclosed within the Pedia:
You can go to [Game - Homeworlds] and check out the number of Homeworlds for every species in game (natives and empires).
Thus, as the game progresses and you see the native planets around you or your allies, and the species of your allies and neighbours, it becomes easier and easier to deduce who has a (e.g.) a Mu Ursh planet, or who hasn't.

By consulting this in the Ninth Game I've been able to deduce that WE ARE DOOMED!
The Federation (the enemy team) must have 2 or 3 Mu Ursh HWs (can't connect to server right now to check the number), and 2 Ugmors HWs, and several other interesting native species, while my team has one Ugmors on sight in the borders with one of the enemy empires.
It is rather discouraging.

Also, unrelated to game options, from my statistics on star types, planet environments and planet sizes depending on galaxy settings, I know that the enemies have a high chance to have around 2 BH stars with planets, because my team has not seen any BH. Seriously, WE ARE DOOMED!

Magnate
Space Dragon
Posts: 425
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#24 Post by Magnate »

Hi all,

We stalled at about six players- me, Oberlus, Hyperant, swaq and a couple of my friends. That's ok, I could go with that.

Then Oberlus and I got into a debate about chaff and he gave me the idea of changing SHIP_HULL_COST_FACTOR to make chaff much less economic. I'm thinking it should be 5 or 6 to make a real difference, but that would mean we'd need to double or triple research costs or everyone will be running round with death rays in basic hulls. So my proposal is

SHIP_HULL_COST_FACTOR 4
TECH_COST_FACTOR 3

to slow things down a bit but not too much. Note that TECH_COST_FACTOR is 2 by default, so 3 is a 50% slowdown, not 200%!

Anyone have such a problem with that that they'd like to withdraw?

Magnate
Space Dragon
Posts: 425
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#25 Post by Magnate »

Btw I hear the angst about information leakage, but after turning graphs off I'm not sure what I can do about it until a proper fog of war branch is testable. In the ninth game, Thinksome somehow knows exactly which turn each enemy researched each tech - I have no idea how! But clearly, as Oberlus says above for natives, there is a lot of leakage going on.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#26 Post by Oberlus »

Magnate wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:37 pmwe'd need to double or triple research costs or everyone will be running round with death rays in basic hulls.
Nopes. Hulls keep balanced among them, ratio slots/cost. In fact, maybe the more slots the better when you up hull cost.
So don't up research cost for this. Maybe up it because we'll be playing huge galaxy.

I'm OK with your setting nevertheless.

User avatar
swaq
Space Dragon
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#27 Post by swaq »

Magnate wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:37 pm Then Oberlus and I got into a debate about chaff and he gave me the idea of changing SHIP_HULL_COST_FACTOR to make chaff much less economic. I'm thinking it should be 5 or 6 to make a real difference, but that would mean we'd need to double or triple research costs or everyone will be running round with death rays in basic hulls. So my proposal is

SHIP_HULL_COST_FACTOR 4
TECH_COST_FACTOR 3
What if we reduced the cost of parts to keep total ship cost similar? For example, if we made parts 0.33 and hull cost 2 that would achieve the 6x ratio difference while keeping the cost of building the ships similar to current so tech cost wouldn't need to be increased.
Magnate wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:39 pm Btw I hear the angst about information leakage, but after turning graphs off I'm not sure what I can do about it until a proper fog of war branch is testable. In the ninth game, Thinksome somehow knows exactly which turn each enemy researched each tech - I have no idea how! But clearly, as Oberlus says above for natives, there is a lot of leakage going on.
Right click on empire -> Pedia Lookup -> scroll down to Researched Techs

With the current state of the game this information leakage is necessary for enemy weapon damage to appear correctly.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#28 Post by Oberlus »

swaq wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:59 pm With the current state of the game this information leakage is necessary for enemy weapon damage to appear correctly.
Maybe there is a easy way to completely disable those Galaxy pedia pages?

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 2004
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#29 Post by o01eg »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 1:01 am
swaq wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:59 pm With the current state of the game this information leakage is necessary for enemy weapon damage to appear correctly.
Maybe there is a easy way to completely disable those Galaxy pedia pages?
It has nothing with Galaxy pages. It's about Empires' pages.
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-11.2, boost-1.78.0
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm

Magnate
Space Dragon
Posts: 425
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: Tenth game on multiplayer game server - in parallel!

#30 Post by Magnate »

swaq wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:59 pmWhat if we reduced the cost of parts to keep total ship cost similar? For example, if we made parts 0.33 and hull cost 2 that would achieve the 6x ratio difference while keeping the cost of building the ships similar to current so tech cost wouldn't need to be increased.
Ah now that's a fine idea, thank you. All I need now is Oberlus's cheaper shields pullreq merged and we're good to go!

Post Reply