Re: [VANILLA-LIST:2847] The r.g.n ejection debate

[sheldon <sheldon@visi.com>]

On Fri, Jan 28, 2000 at 11:47:28AM -0500, Jeffrey Nowakowski wrote:
> We simply don't have enough players to have different level servers.
> People will play where there is a game and they have good lag (as
> James said).  Until we have a lot more players than we do now, eject
> should be disabled and the clue check removed, *escpecially* if we are
> trying to push for an influx of new players.

 Right now we actually do have enough players for maybe two servers... not
all the time, but.  But still people will go to where there is a game with
good lag.  Or that they can play at all(pickled does not support the
portswap code)

> > PS, Sheldon: If I remember correctly, you promised to change Netrek 2000
> > (or whatever its called) to automatically answer the eject questions.
> > IMO, this is misguided.  A more difficult but arguably better thing to
> > spend your time on is good documentation for newbies.
> 
> I think eject is misguided, but I also agree that Sheldon going out on
> his own to battle eject is misguided as well.  Newbie documentation is
> worthwhile, but don't expect it to remove twinkiness from pickup.

 Ahh, it's just fighting fire with fire, using the same attitudes as those
who support eject.

 Or maybe I'm just threatening.  I don't know, I'm greatly uncomfortable
with causing additional havoc, but eject has caused such considerable damage
to the game.

 I haven't coded it up yet, and I'm more inclined to rewrite the tactical
display to smoothen the redraw, and a nice front end.  But it might be an
interesting learning experiment, because I would put in a key... the client
would check an internet resource on startup to see whether it should enable 
the code.  Then it'd be in place, just waiting for someone to flip the
switch and cause mass havoc. :)