Go ![]() | New ![]() | Find ![]() | Notify ![]() | Tools ![]() | Reply ![]() | |
| Treasurer |
Place in the c:\rune\system folder.
rak030328b.u (573 Kb, 78 downloads) | ||
|
| Peregrine |
quote: Nah, then where are we gonna have a clean arena for existing movements? | |||
|
| Treasurer |
Right; check it out though, dude: it's smooth and might be a competitor for the 1.07. I'm hoping with a lean, mean Arena and the help of a teleporter system we can get back to seven players. With teleporters we can introduce flow control to keep crowding at a minimum. We'll worry about that when the time comes, though (I'd like to port "Screen" from UT, first). Wrap up the expansion so we can eventually realise the LCN project. | |||
|
| Peregrine |
Seven players would definitely be a good thing for the new arena, but I'm not so much concerned if the local system can handle it but rather if your server is capable of supporting 7 players just about as well as the current 5. | |||
|
Magistrate![]() |
interesting thing with the nosafe.... Remind me to tell you about it next time I run into you Unt. | |||
|
| Treasurer |
Will do, Mano. Thing is, NuTT, the server seemed to handle it fine before we introduced the RAK-modifications, which require 25% more memory and roughly 30% more processing-power on the client side. If we install a teleport system we can offset that increase by limiting the number of players in any given vicinity, which means making the rest effectively irrelevant to the client (and which is why a DM is much easier to run than an arena). If you take a look at the code, the most process-intensive RAK-additions are located in non-replicated rakRunePlayer code like the radar; which run completely independent of the server. The server is as capable of running seven as it was last summer; and I don't subscribe to the infallibility of your local machine, lol. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
| Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© Low Caliber Club 2002-4

