On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 23:46:54 +0200, 
Matevz Jekovec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> 
> > I've thought in terms of a server that could manage a high volume of
> > aircraft.  It would send back the locations of only the
> > closest/visible aircraft and not the entire set.
>   
> We had a so called bubble surrounding the aircraft in Falcon. And we

..does this Falcon multigamer server look or work any like the Russian 
free gameserver (http://wbfree.net/) for Warbird?  I tried to mail the 
Russians regarding it and and FG, but I wound up with the feeling they 
thought I work for somebody like IEN or BSA, I got _no_ response.

> had 2 types of units: aggregated and deaggregated. Ones were fully
> simulated (e.g. SAM model turning towards the enemy and calculating
> its launch) and the others were just a data, approximately affecting
> on its surrounding (e.g. all 4 aircrafts in one flight were presented
> as 1 unit (actually a flight) and not seperated all 4 units if they
> were 200 miles far from you). Around your aircraft, you always saw the
> units in their perfect condition (best LOD, maximum physics, most
> intelligent AI and therefore eating most CPU). For multiplayer, we
> also had bubbles, but set by the server. These bubbles were
> surrounding all of the human clients and had the most fresh and
> precise data on the models. I think these kind of ideas should be
> useful here as well.
> 
> > It would also be nice to do something DIS-ish where you send
> > position/orientation as well as velocities and accelerations.  This
> > way both the server and client can estimate the path of an aircraft
> > (using the same algorithm and same input data) without sending
> > further data ... until the server determines that the actual
> > aircraft path has diverged far enough from the mutually estimated
> > path.  Then the server would send new data and repeat.
>   
> Yes, that is true. We should at least send the speed of the aircraft 
> beside the coordinates themselves. This is very useful for close 
> formation flying.
> 
> > For normal civilian flying this could result in a very large
> > bandwidth savings.  For dog fighting it probably wouldn't help much.
> 
> Not necesseraly. I think we should include ONLY speed, without 
> acceleration. IMO, one packet of human client should consist of: (the 
> number of exclamations is the priority)
> - !!! 3 integers for location (X,Y,Z absolute world/scenery
> coordinates)
> - !!! 3 integers making up a vector of turn and speed (the direction
> is the turn of the aircraft (heading and pitch), the length is the
> speed)
> - !!! Players weapon data (when implemented missles and bombs someday,
> with again at least 6 integers for each object)
> - !!! Immediate action for airbrake, gears, flaps etc. (when you'd
> lower the gears, this data will be immediately send to the server)

..we don't need this for every package, only on 
firing/launching/releasing etc. 

> - ! Every few seconds check for the airbrake, gears, flaps state, in 
> case the immediate packet was lost.

..doh!  Agreed!  ;-)

> > If we had multiple servers covering multiple areas, it might be
> > interesting to have a way to hand aicraft off from one server to
> > another ... although that might be overkill for a first pass at
> > this.
> >
> > A massive multiplayer server would be a cool thing to have ... I
> > would say let's start simple and get the airplanes flying together
> > ... then we can worry about weather and other things later.
> >
> > Also soemthing like "speak freely" would be really slick to
> > investigate for doing simulated radio communications with live
> > audio. 
> >
> The in-game voice comms are useful. But do we really need a seperated 
> speech engine? What if we use TeamSpeak and just make some rules the 
> speech server should be set (TS server is very useful IMO and you can 
> taught him a lot!).

..you know him?  Reel him in!  ;-)  (And you _can_ mail me if 
you want a preventive chew out in case you don't know him. ;-) )


-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.


_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to