[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6941) Mission Orders

["Gregory Berkolaiko" <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6941 >

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, Arnstein Lindgard wrote:

> Well I've been playing all multiplayer games with this in the client
> for a long time. One problem is that when more than one settler tries
> to build on the same turn, only one will do so, probably because of
> the name popup request, even when the popup is suppresed. This could
> be kludged.

Such problems can be resolved.

> Generally, the lag makes the mission as a whole seem slow --
> with server execution it is seamless.

I am sure it is.

> It is much better to give the order first, because you will often
> know what you want the unit(s) to DO at the destination at the time
> you issue the goto(s). Once Mass Orders is implemented and players

I agree that this is a terribly convenient feature.  I just like some 
separation of duties.  The current model seems to be server-judge and 
clever client.  I would be equally happy with clever-server and stupid 
client (agents move to server).

A single order done in the end of a goto is fine but it sets a precedent.  
And soon we might have clients sending python programs to the server and 
such.

Unfortunately, we live in a real world with network lag, so while I don't 
like the "execute things in server" situation, I might have to live with 
it...

G.

> get used to this convenience, we may have a situation where lots of
> clients complete their gotomissions at _the beginning of the turn_.
> It's not that the packets themselves are very big, the problem is
> that this phase of the game is already crowded with traffic.
> 
> This is already a problem with the CMA, and I think it would be
> preferable to have that in the server as well. When I have many
> cities, I have no choice but to turn off CMA in order not to loose 1
> or 2 seconds in the phase where that actually matters. It's like, a
> Frigate has attack 4, defense 2.
> 
> In multiplayer, players at war must resolve the most critical
> situations as fast as possible at the beginning of the turn, and I
> would rather not add annoyances.
> 
> However, with server implemented Mission Orders, the unit need only
> send one packet to the client, containing the new activity after the
> goto. As opposed to first sending "idle", waiting for client to
> respond, then sending update back, for each unit.
> 
> 
> Arnstein
> 
> 
> 
>