Topics

I whipped up a team color editor for BZ2 1.3, click this link to read the basic details and for the download.

Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script via GreaseMonkey

Okay, please try to keep the name calling and other such non-technical things out of here, I want to discuss something that is actually related to BZ1 Servers.

You all do know that it would not be too hard to create a protection system for BZ1.  Most likely a stand-alone program that would connect to a specially modified ANet server, download the latest protection information, launch BZ1, and start hooking memory.  From what I gather, most of the 'hacks' are altered files (object definition files, models, whatever), that could fixed by hooking the system loaded file open function and verifying the file information between the clients (basically set it so whatever the host is running, everyone is running).  It would probably take me about a full day to get a rudimentary, but file protecting system (would not touch any clients files, would just transfer the hash information from the server in a few formats to the clients, which the hooked file open function would compare to make sure the loaded files are correct.  Etc... and so forth.  Basically, as long as anything wrong is done to the game, and the maker of this app was kept up-to-date with the information about the cracks, the system could be kept up-to-date, whether watching memory locations for incorrect changes, keeping files in synced, etc... and if any such checks fail it kills the game (Hmm, sounds like PunkBuster...).  If someone is not running the protection program then they cannot join any server that would be running the program

Although, did not BzE fix most of the issues anyway?  Why do people not just use that?
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script via GreaseMonkey

"Myer-Briggs Type Indicator" is an 'updated' version of the original Jung 3-trait test (MBTI uses 4-traits).  Not everyone in the type traits community agrees with the fourth trait being added, but it has been shown to be quite accurate regardless.  MBTI reads more into how someone thinks, rather then how they act, so someone can be a completely different type then what they may appear (for example, I am very INTJ, near 100% on all traits, I also act that way pretty well here, but in RL I tend to become more like the people around me, termed the INTJ camouflage on the popular INTJ forums).  There was another derivative of the original Jung tests that were put out by Keirsey.  Keirsey is very much like the MBTI, but it focuses more how on someone acts externally, rather then how they think.  Most tests now are just generic "Jung" tests that test for both MBTI and Keirsey in the same test.  Also, Myer-Briggs did adamantly state that the types will be most accurate when all the strengths are at or near 100%, but it will still not explain for certain how someone thinks, just how they do in general (although everyone in RL that I have given the test to, about 15 people so far, it has all been very accurate to them).

First of all, I will talk just about MBTI here since you can usually get someones Keirsey type from the MBTI type (they are synonymous, not *always*, but usually), as well as MBTI tends to be far more researched.  A persons MBTI type is made up of four unique letters, E/I, N/S, T/F, and P/J, and this order is usually kept, but not strictly required.  A person will, for example, be either an E or an I, and there will be an associated strength (which the test also gives).  If the strength was, say, 1% then they would be pretty evenly split between E and I, so if their test said ENFP, but the E was 1%, and the other three were above 1%, then their 'main' type would be ENFP, but their secondary type would be INFP, and you could look at both profiles to pretty well explain the basic thinking processes of the person, so when someone posts their type, you also need to know the strength of each trait to be able to know the full types since they may be a combination of many types.

As stated in another thread this is one of the most accurate tests that I have found.  It is the free version given by a company that also does them for businesses (I first encountered MBTI at a job interview many years ago).  The Myer-Briggs people only claimed roughly 75% accuracy on the testing back in the '70s, but in the current day the test has been shown to be roughly 95% accurate now (it got refined over time).  If you take the test you should post up your type and the percentages of each trait in this thread, I can add them to the bottom of this first post as I notice them.

There are no bad types, no good types, no right questions, no wrong questions.  On the test, answer as truthfully as possible (according to how you think, not how you act), if either Yes or No answer is correct in different circumstances, either go with your first instinct, or go with what is more general (you can leave an answer blank, but it makes the test more inaccurate, as it is no considered 'either', it is considered a no-answer, so do try to give an answer for every question).

The traits, when considered individually, do not tell the whole picture (anywhere near actually), but just have quick one-off descriptions.  To really understand a whole type you need to know all four letters and how they interact with each other.  The quick descriptions though are:

I/E = Introverted or Extroverted.
This is not a ranking of how someone acts (someone who is an I can be a *very* outgoing person), but rather a statement on how they 'recharge'.  Introverted types can be very outgoing or not, but regardless they need to be by themselves for some periods in order to recharge.  If around people for too long it is quite literally draining.  Extroverted types need to be in groups in order to recharge, they become drained when by themselves.

N/S = iNtuition or Sensing.
This is how the person 'absorbs' outside information.  Sensing types tend to rely less on what they know, and try to understand a situation more by seeing what is actually going on.  iNtuition types tend to rely on past experiences and trying to understand the deeper meaning behind something, rather then just what is happening on the surface.

T/F = Thinking or Feeling.
The basic measure of what most affects the type decisions.  Someone who is a thinker may still be very emotional, but would not let their emotions cloud what they do, where a feeler tends to be driven more by their emotions, rather then what is logical (most people are feelers)

P/J = Perceiving or Judging.
This is the trait added by MBTI to the Jung version.  It itself does not really mean anything, but it effects the previous two types (N/S and T/F) by refining whether they focus more externally or internally.  For example, as an INTJ, because of the J, by dominate trait is N, and my primary is I, so it is an introverted intuition, meaning I focus more on 'thought' intution, rather then what is happening externally, and that also causes my thinking trait to be extroverted, and the extroverted thinker is the one who tries to make reality what they are thinking, rather then just thinking about it.  That then goes on to mean my third type is introverted feeling, meaning that when feelings do affect my decisions then it is based upon how I think feelings may best be addressed, rather then on what others think (meaning if a feeling affected my decision on something, then it would be based on what *I* think is right, not necessarily what someone else thinks is right, kind of like the question "A man, who was laid off from a job, steals some food for his starving family, but is caught, was he wrong in attempting to steal instead of using some other method, or was he right in that he was trying to have his family survive", as this is a very emotionally charged question, but when I 'think' about it, it becomes obvious there are other ways for him to get food, such as shelters and food drives and such, there was no need for him to steal, so I think he was wrong).  And that means my fourth trait is extroverted sensing, this is the part that causes me to 'sweat the details' at few times, as one of the profiles puts it, as I worry about how a detail about something should best be implemented, instead of just going straight for it, regardless of how good or bad a it may be, problem is, when I worry about the details too much it tends to slow me down, so I have been trying to work on this a bit (although I like noticing how best to implement a detail, even I have to admit I go overboard at times, so I am trying not to deal with this so much so as to help speed me up).

Look at next post, this is getting too long and will probably hit the word limit soon.
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script via GreaseMonkey

So, if anyone (especially non-programmers) feels up for one of my programming brain-dumps-put-to-text, could you visit this post on my forum and give me your ideas on what you think is the best way to handle this syntax issue?
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script via GreaseMonkey

This topic has been moved to Overdrive Terminal.

http://www.bzuniverse.com/forum/index.php?topic=8294.0

Was just going to ask a few questions of GSH over PM, but figured it would be nice to get some thoughts from other (up'n'coming) programmers around here.

I have been making a new language with a C style syntax, but following the Actor model, rather then the OO model.  I am horrible at coming up with names, so I have been asking for thoughts through designing the syntax of the language.  Right now I am on trying to decide whether I should force the programmer to state whether a function is actor based (a continuation in a sense) or not; I can easily have it not be, but forcing them to state so or not helps with documentation.  If I do choose a word, what word would be good to use?

Either way, I intend to make another scriptor for BZ2, not for the sense that I expect people to use it, but rather that it is a perfect scenario to test it in as speed is a concern and it uses an event based model (although I wish there were far more events generated instead of just 'testing' for things...).  So as it is designed, people could play with it...

Either way, the link to the discussion is currently:  http://www.overminddl1.com/forum/index.php/topic,845.0.html

Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script via GreaseMonkey

Check your modem ports. That was my situation not the router.

You still use a modem?!?
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script via GreaseMonkey

I did not know quite where to put this since the programming board is gone, but as this may relate to BZ2, here should be good.
I created the basics of a little new language earlier today, was wanting a scripting language but of a certain feature set (and I was itchy to use a new optimization engine I ran across), so I implemented enough of it to write the Fibonacci program recursively (you know, the freakishly long time consuming method.  I wrote the parser in boost::spirit (think ebnf grammer, but in C++ form) and stuffed the thing into the optimizer and run it.  I came up with some interesting times, when just executing through the AST it was slower then all heck (even non-jit'ed python in its slow numbers glory eclipsed it in speed, and I could speed up the AST execution speed if I wished, I just had a ton of checks and so forth in them, you know, good for AST building, not execution), however, when ran through the optimizer it ran faster then all the other tested versions, being lua, python, and python-psyco (jit'ed python, should execute numbers based programs at near C speed).

Yes, ran faster then jit'ed python.  Did some very high calculations (up to 45) and it still did them freakishly fast, too fast I thought, so I wrote a real C program, compiled in both 2k5 and 2k3 at high speed optimizations, and my version ran through that optimizer library still exceeded the C programs (just barely, but that 'barely' become a 7 second lead when doing fib(45), 11.8 compared to 18.8 seconds).  Needless to say, I love this optimizer, going to put it through its paces when I get more time later on, probably something mission based for BZ2 (it is trivial to link in my own functions, or rather import functions from BZ2, especially since they all use the C calling convention, and by trivial I mean the optimizer will auto-link by default to all exported functions in the current process that are C extern'ed, I just need to match the parameters and return value) as that is what I know very well.  There is a C compiler being made for this library (C++ to come later) and it has been shown to be faster then even gcc, which nowadays is the fastest.  It is almost too easy to make a language on top of this, thus rather hard to resist.

But yea, all the tests I did are documented over at:  http://forum.orderlymayhem.com/index.php/topic,219.msg2566.html#msg2566
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script via GreaseMonkey

Please go here to see the main thread.

I am needing testers to test various things in the exporter.  How it exports, textures, animations, especially animations (as I just did them).  Read this post to see the main thing I need tested with regards to animations.  I need to know if translating the matrix and using the rotation in it for the animation is necessary or if I should save the animation rotation with an untransformed matrix (I would think so...).  If animation rotation is off by -90 on the Y-Axis, then tell me and I'll remove the transformation.

Every once in a while, playing 1.3 pb (or latest) I get a pause.  Example, as you can see by this picture, I get on average about 400fps while looking at a base, and about 500 looking at a landscape, but every ten seconds or so it drops to about 2fps, it only does this in some select maps, still isolating (do not play much) which ones, but does anyone else experience this?

This is how to get the released 1.3 mission dll source to compile so it will load in the editor build.  Please note, although it should load in the editor I still do not see it being run, so as soon as someone figures out the command to get it to run then this should be good to at least be prepared for when that time comes.

1)  Start up VC++ and open your 1.3 dll project workspace.
2)  Now goto the Build on the menu toobar and choose Configurations...
3)  Click the Add button to add a new configuration type
4)  In the  Copy settings from: box choose *whatever* - Win32 Release
5)  In the Configuration box put in something like "Release Editor" and then click OK
6)  Now goto Project then Setting or hit Alt-F7
7)  In the Setting for: drop down box choose the Win32 Release Editor
 Click on the link tab to bring forward its options
9)  In the Object/library modules: section, scroll all the way right in the text
10)  Change the bzone.lib word to BZ2Edit.lib
11)  From then on, choose the editor configuration to compile it for editor


Please note again, the script will still not be started by bz2 in the editor, there should be some sort of command for that but I am unaware of it at this time.