[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Development Strategies [Was Documentation,Usability and Development]

[Andrew Sutton <ansutton@xxxxxxx>]

On Sunday 09 December 2001 06:41 pm, Kevin Brown wrote:
> Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 02:40:40PM -0800, Kevin Brown wrote:
> > > My question is: with respect to limiting what the scripting language
> > > that would be used on the server can do, why do we care?
> >
> > You don't want anyone to be able to change the rules of the game without
> > anyone else knowing.  A scripting language that enables the user to
> > set his money to 10000 is too powerful.
> >
> > > I mean, this is the *server* we're talking about here.  If someone
> > > decides to run a server that includes units that favor one player over
> > > another (as an example), that server will become unpopular very
> > > quickly.  Problem solved.
> >
> > No, it won't.  What about a script that makes all units of player Foo
> > 50% harder to beat 50% of the time?  You don't want to allow rules like
> > that (not in a ruleset, either).
>
> Perhaps, but the language is just a tool that can be used for good or
> "evil" and the power of the language will affect the abilities of both
> equally.  So you can reduce the power of the language and make it
> impossible for, e.g., the unit to set the user's money at 10000 (or,
> more appropriately, add 10000 to the player's bank), but now you've
> made it impossible to build a "gold miner" unit, as an example.

i think i'd agree with kevin on this point. the whole point of allowing 
server-side scripting is to allow a wider range of games - not really 
dynamically script the modification of rules at run time - that would be 
disasterous. besides, who would really need to do that anyway? IMO if a 
scripting language is used, it should ONLY be used to inline extensions in 
the ruleset configuration.

the "simple" solution to the entire problem would be something along the 
lines of a ruleset/configuration negotiation phase of the client/server 
protocol. the client connects to the server. the server transmits the rules. 
the user sees either the complete ruleset (a la online civilopedia) or maybe 
just the pieces that have been scripted as a summary of extensions to the 
game (assuming that official stuff has been compiled).

anyway, if the player sees some configurations he/she doesn't like, they 
don't have to play on that server.

does that seem like a reasonable solution?

andy