Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Idea for 2.0

[Peter Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxx>]

Daniel Sjolie wrote:
> 
> On 1999-07-15 14:11:10, Peter Schaefer wrote:
> > A useful discussion...
> >
> > Generating it in the client and sending for safekeeping is
> > bad for traffic reasons.
> 
> Well, that depends...
> If the client should be anything but stupid we need something like
> that... If You think it is unfeisable I'd like to hear it before I spend
> to much time doing it... :)
> But I realize that sending an entire map each turn might be a little on
> the heavy side... :) Maybe You could make it optional... Sending it on
> request when the server makes a save should be doable... If You're on a
> slower connection maybe You can live with the risk of losing some
> stuff... Sure, it's not perfect... But neither is keeping everything in
> the server... I think this is a very good example of what *should* go in
> the client...
> 


Ok, maybe that was not a good enough point - here is a better one:
If the client sends the map to the server for safekeeping anyway,
why not keep it in the server from the start ?


Last time I played on a small connection, downloading
the map took very long - so I think yes, it matters.
This sort of spells doom for (ai) clients that plan to sent
huge amounts of data to the server for safekeeping -
maybe (ai) clients should avoid storing anything on the server
that they could recalculate - imagine shortest path data here,
or threat densities, or distance from empire.
To help clients like this in remembering where other
civilizations cities, units and improvements have been sighted,
keeping a map on the server should make most sense.

Storing the clients memory of current relations with other
civilizations would make sense, and does not use much bandwidth.


> 
> --
> Now take a deep breath, smile and don't take life so seriously... :)

-- 
Peter Schaefer - schaefer@xxxxxx, schaefer@xxxxxx
Spiegel Online, 12.6.99 - 
Aktionaere rennen auf die Boerse, auf der einfach nichts los ist.