View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:54 pm



Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
 Future release feature request & commentary! 
Author Message
Gameop
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 2:00 am
Posts: 190
Location: Oklahoma City OK
Unread post Future release feature request & commentary!
Hi!

I thought I'd post this here to see what others think, feel free to reply to this post!

I would like to see the maximum nodes set to something higher than 100. I was thinking maybe 1000 or 2000 might be in order these days (i have a linux machine that can support 200,000 simultaneous connections per process (yes that includes dns lookups too) with a kernel tweak lol)

Wouldn't it be nice to jump into a 20k unlim game with more than 200 simultaneous players?
Can you imagine the fun we would have!!!! WOOOOOHOOOOO!

Another thing I've been thinking about is the max number of aliens possible, its like 950 or something like that.. What if we had the ability to spawn more in a game? Like 5000?

Also it would be nice to be able to edit the MOTD (that screen users get when they first login). I was thinking something along the lines as similar to how you colorize ship names, and it could be done through TEDIT menu maybe.

JP you have a great product and i hope people keep playing it for many years to come.

To everyone else, Have a nice day!Image

Tyson Demuth, owner
Scolfax Enterprises
Oklahoma City, OK USA
http://scolfax.us/tradewars.htm

_________________
Scolfax's TradeWars
telnet://twgs.mustangpc.net
ICQ: 5342886


Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:22 am
Profile ICQ WWW
Gameop
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2001 3:00 am
Posts: 886
Location: USA
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
i remember when we could get 80+ players in a single game, and that not even a tournament! in some ways, tournaments were designed to limit the number of players that could play. now we announce tournaments in an attempt to just get more than 10 to show up at all. sigh, those were the days!

_________________
twgs : telnet://twgs.thereverend.org:5023
web : http://www.thereverend.org
games : http://www.thestardock.com/twgssearch/i ... verend.org
helper : http://svn.thereverend.org:8080/revhelper/


Wed Jun 03, 2009 8:38 am
Profile
Veteran Op

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:04 pm
Posts: 5025
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
We've never had a game with more than 100 players in it at the same time mainly because there's never been a game that big in the history of TW. The main reason for this is I'm not sure you could get that many players rounded up especially today. Also, when that many nodes get full, twgs becomes very node buggy, and regardless of what you may think, your server would have a hard time handling that many nodes, not to mention the bandwidth you'd need to handle that many nodes without lag. We had a top of the line server on a T3 sitting at a ISP location about 6 years ago, and when we had 50 to 60 nodes full, it was even being taxed when it come to the CPU. I don't think it was the actual server, but the CPU that the software uses per node isn't very effecient.


Wed Jun 03, 2009 12:58 pm
Profile
Veteran Op
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:00 am
Posts: 5558
Location: USA
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
All of the above.

On top of that, the TWGS server doesn't run well on linux. The code is not open source (and never probably will be), and wine is anything but stable for long periods of time (and has a bad habit of not closing files correctly, which could kill a twgs server dead). You would have to run vmware or virtualbox and stick XP on it. At that point you're back to MS's network code on top of the emulation overhead.

For those curious. Each node requires 2 separate threads. A nonpserv.exe and a tw2002.exe. Each takes about 4mb of ram, so that's 8mb per node. 1000 users would take 8 gigs of memory.

On top of that you've got process load. Right now the inactive nodes are near 0%, but back when I started the server I had prome run some CPU usage tests doing SST and a product mover. It was not uncommon to see that node hit 30% CPU (and there are ways to get it to 100%). A multi-core server might be able to handle that better, since multiple instances can run across multiple cores, but it'd still take a monster processor to even handle 100 efficiently. A quad core with 4gb of ram would do the trick, but that's only if the players play nice and don't peg the system all at once.

Then there's bandwidth. 10Kbps (10240 kilobytes) upload is common during a lot of things, with spikes to 35. So again, 100 nodes would take at least a 1Mbps (1 megabyte, ie: around 10mbps)... and would need spike capacity to 4Mbps (40mbps).

With all of that, all of that cost, you'd still only likely get 10 regular players. Then you'd sit and wonder "WTF? That wasn't really worth it..."

_________________
May the unholy fires of corbomite ignite deep within the depths of your soul...

1. TWGS server @ twgs.navhaz.com
2. The NavHaz Junction - Tradewars 2002 Scripts, Resources and Downloads
3. Open IRC chat @ irc.freenode.net:6667 #twchan
4. Parrothead wrote: Jesus wouldn't Subspace Crawl.

*** SG memorial donations via paypal to: dpocky68@booinc.com
Image


Wed Jun 03, 2009 2:47 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Gameop
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 2:00 am
Posts: 190
Location: Oklahoma City OK
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
Yeah and we could have 100k sector games too!!!!

just wishful thinking

And in these days of 8x quad core zeons and 32+ gigs of ram....

I think we could probably handle some serious traffic with twgs (provided there are people to play)

_________________
Scolfax's TradeWars
telnet://twgs.mustangpc.net
ICQ: 5342886


Wed Jun 03, 2009 3:59 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Gameop
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 2:00 am
Posts: 190
Location: Oklahoma City OK
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
Thought i would post this photo here. TWGS is running on a compaq ipaq with 733mhz p3 and 64mb ram.
Its the machine just sitting on top of the switch in the rack.

Enjoy!

Image
Image

_________________
Scolfax's TradeWars
telnet://twgs.mustangpc.net
ICQ: 5342886


Wed Jun 03, 2009 4:41 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Commander
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:00 am
Posts: 1344
Location: Canada
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
SpeedTest is pretty cool. but that doesn't really indicate how well your box can handle a stress-load like the one Sing indicated. Your grand idea sounds alot like EVE :D A Mega Player ANSI Text Adventure! ..this would put almost every independant TWGS into obsolescence

_________________
----------------------------
-= QUANTUM Computing 101: 15 = 3 x 5 ... 48% of the time.
-= There are 10 types of people in the world: Those that understand Binary and those who do not
-= If Oil is made from Dinosaurs, and Plastic is made from Oil... are plastic Dinosaurs made from real Dinosaurs?
-= I like to keep my friends and my enemies rich, and wait to see which is which - Tony Stark (R.I.P.)


Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:54 pm
Profile ICQ YIM
Gameop
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 2:00 am
Posts: 190
Location: Oklahoma City OK
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
Yeah, there's no way i could handle more than 100 nodes at present time at least on the machine twgs is currently running on.

As for the speedtest, it's a good way to see bandwidth overhead.
And when i run out of overhead, i'll just put another line in here! no biggie. Its not residential either!

_________________
Scolfax's TradeWars
telnet://twgs.mustangpc.net
ICQ: 5342886


Wed Jun 03, 2009 6:23 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Veteran Op
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:00 am
Posts: 5558
Location: USA
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
Quote:
Thought i would post this photo here. TWGS is running on a compaq ipaq with 733mhz p3 and 64mb ram.


Yes, it'll run, but not well. You'll get 10 to 15 nodes and start swapping out. Then there's external aliens to consider, which will be pure pain.

Mine runs on a P4 2.8ghz, 2gb ram on the fastest residential connect I can get here (comcast's fastest offering). See my above post for bandwidth figures. It's rare that I cap out on BW, simply because I don't run a lot of unlims, but it's quite easy to hit 100% CPU on a single node. There are certain processes within TW that are very inefficient. They are well documented here, no need to go into them, but they make hosting large games tricky.

TW is also extremely sensitive to other processes. When AVG updates, the entire server lagggggggs.

Quote:
As for the speedtest, it's a good way to see bandwidth overhead.


It's a good way to see what kind of peak bandwidth your network can handle. Non-peak scheduling makes it a little trickier. Read my above post for figures, BW will not be the biggest issue since it scales better than everything else. If you can afford to do it (or atleast want to afford to do it), then you can do it. Not much else to it.

Quote:
I think we could probably handle some serious traffic with twgs (provided there are people to play)


The biggest thing will be CPU load. As said above, 1000 nodes would take 8gigs of ram. That's do-able by itself. But even on an 8 core system, it'd be possible for a single user to max out an entire core. If you could get a 1000 core system then things would be different.

Granted, an 8 core system would handle load bursts well enough in most situations... atleast for a 100 node system, but if you up the number of nodes to 1000 (assuming you can attract that many players) then core count would end up being the bottleneck.

I suspect other bugs surface when you start getting past 100 nodes too. There's probably a very good reason why JP capped it that. Doesn't really matter much tho, there aren't 100 active players left anyway.

I don't think any of that could be done under wine tho. Wine is extremely buggy, and while it's bugs may not kill 90% of the apps out there... they would be very lethal to TWGS with the way it handles files.

A 100,000 sector game would not be possible. Specific inefficiencies in the way the server handles linked lists. You would have to rewrite the entire code base (get away from pascal, lol) to do it.

_________________
May the unholy fires of corbomite ignite deep within the depths of your soul...

1. TWGS server @ twgs.navhaz.com
2. The NavHaz Junction - Tradewars 2002 Scripts, Resources and Downloads
3. Open IRC chat @ irc.freenode.net:6667 #twchan
4. Parrothead wrote: Jesus wouldn't Subspace Crawl.

*** SG memorial donations via paypal to: dpocky68@booinc.com
Image


Thu Jun 04, 2009 8:03 am
Profile ICQ WWW
Private 1st Class

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 2
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
What about,
1. The option of being able to run a website with TW / TWGS from on a remote server (ie: godaddy.com) and be able to control the settings, bang, rebang, etc... from your home PC or laptop.
2. Be able to set players ability to play multiple games or just a single game depending weather or not they are a contributor to the website, or a paid member... Such as ... Paid members or contributers can be active in up to XX number of games while a free member can play in just one at a time...
3. Don't know if those one is there already or not, but I'm stating it anyway... Limit multiple logons from the same source or household.

Just food for thought. I strongly want to run & host TW Gold, and have a domain registered, but do not have a dedicated IP address to do it at home...

Kenny B


Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:05 am
Profile
Veteran Op

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:04 pm
Posts: 5025
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
Kenny B wrote:
What about,
1. The option of being able to run a website with TW / TWGS from on a remote server (ie: godaddy.com) and be able to control the settings, bang, rebang, etc... from your home PC or laptop.
2. Be able to set players ability to play multiple games or just a single game depending weather or not they are a contributor to the website, or a paid member... Such as ... Paid members or contributers can be active in up to XX number of games while a free member can play in just one at a time...
3. Don't know if those one is there already or not, but I'm stating it anyway... Limit multiple logons from the same source or household.

Just food for thought. I strongly want to run & host TW Gold, and have a domain registered, but do not have a dedicated IP address to do it at home...

Kenny B


Not sure I understand exactly what you are saying in the 1st part of the post, but you can run a twgs server on a dynamic IP you'll just need an IP update client.

Most domain providers have an IP updated client available for download at their site.


Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:55 pm
Profile
Veteran Op
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:00 am
Posts: 5558
Location: USA
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
Quote:
1. The option of being able to run a website with TW / TWGS from on a remote server (ie: godaddy.com) and be able to control the settings, bang, rebang, etc... from your home PC or laptop.


Remote hosts like godaddy cannot run TWGS, they lack the resources and set very tight limits on what you can do. If you just want to run thru a domain registered via godaddy, well that's easy, but you still need a server.

You can, however, buy a remote server like some here have done ($50 to $200 a mo, depending) and administer it via remote thru RDC.

Quote:
2. Be able to set players ability to play multiple games or just a single game depending weather or not they are a contributor to the website, or a paid member... Such as ... Paid members or contributers can be active in up to XX number of games while a free member can play in just one at a time...


Using a combination of closed games you could accomplish the same thing. Just have specific games that are pay-only.

Quote:
3. Don't know if those one is there already or not, but I'm stating it anyway... Limit multiple logons from the same source or household.


Already exists to an extent, ie: only 1 login per IP at a time.

Quote:
Just food for thought. I strongly want to run & host TW Gold, and have a domain registered, but do not have a dedicated IP address to do it at home...


You can either buy a dedicated host or just use a dynamic DNS setup. The latter is quite easy.

_________________
May the unholy fires of corbomite ignite deep within the depths of your soul...

1. TWGS server @ twgs.navhaz.com
2. The NavHaz Junction - Tradewars 2002 Scripts, Resources and Downloads
3. Open IRC chat @ irc.freenode.net:6667 #twchan
4. Parrothead wrote: Jesus wouldn't Subspace Crawl.

*** SG memorial donations via paypal to: dpocky68@booinc.com
Image


Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:27 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Private 1st Class

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 2
Unread post Re: Future release feature request & commentary!
Thank you for all of your feedbacks... It was informative and educational.
I did 2 free registrations with DynDNS.com. 1 for the website itself, and 1 to point directly to the twgs once clicked on from the website.
Next is the daunting task of setting up my own server... I will scour the other forum topics.
Thanks,
Kenny B


Mon Jul 13, 2009 4:34 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 13 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.