Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: July 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: rfc on allowconnect
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: rfc on allowconnect

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Per I Mathisen <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: rfc on allowconnect
From: Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 13:05:08 +0200

On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 05:14:46PM +0200, Per I Mathisen wrote:
> I've been thinking a bit on how to make allowconnect work better. Right
> now my impression is that it is hardly used much, and sometimes used to
> abuse the server. The ability to abuse it looks to me like a fundamental
> design flaw.
> 
> First off, allowconnect should be a per user attribute, and only that user
> should be able to change it. Hence, it would only be settable from the
> client concerned.
> 
> Secondly, the current attribute mask in allowconnect is needlessly
> complicated. There is no need to allow connecting to dead players and
> barbarians.
> 
> Being able to restrict the number of observers to either one or any number
> seems redundant. Either you want people peeking over your shoulder or not.
> The ability to set human players to observers only also seems redundant.
> 
> So I suggest removing "allowconnect" entirely, and replace it with
> 
>       /allowobserver on|off
> 
> and
> 
>       /control [connection]
> 
> where the first allows any number of observers to join you and the latter
> gives the indicated connection control (or gives you control over an AI).

> When you have enough observers, just turn allowobserver off.

allowobserver off should kick all observers.

> Only controlling connections or connections to a player with no
> controller can issue these commands.

> Players set to AI should always be set to allowobserver on.

Seems like an invention to cheat.

> Finally, in the code there are comments indicating that it was originally
> thought observers should be omniscient. I do not see the justification for
> this, it will only lead to rampant cheating. So I suggest this
> goal/comment is removed.

What about a "global" observer? Who sees everything?

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "I do feel kind of sorry for Microsoft. Their attornies and marketing
  force must have tons of ulcers trying to figure out how to beat (not
  just co-exist with) a product that has no clearly defined (read
  suable) human owner, and that changes on an hourly basis like the
  sea changes the layout of the sand on a beach. Severely tough to
  fight something like that."
    -- David D.W. Downey at linux-kernel


[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]