Login to BatWeb
Forgot your password?
BatMUD Forums > Bs > Re: mob hitpoints
Re: blasterr's batclient post and old farts...
I count myself among the "old farts" who don't use the batclient. I have a few
reasons, I'll even list them for you. But, even if I were an avid batclient
user, I would still protest the addition of features to the client without
supporting raw telnet, though I'll save that topic for some future post.
Some reasons I don't use batclient:
*) Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
settings/etc
*) No standard database backend support (my mudclient uses sqlite, zmud has
some sort of database, etc)
*) Triggers must be replicated to multiple machines manually. (tf/my client is
commonly played from a shell account, always the same computer running the
mudclient.
*) Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
like a game...
*) Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to
a comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on
any program i try to use)
*) My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
java. I don't know java.
*) My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in
triggers/etc. Batclient doesn't.
The batclient meets many needs, especially those of someone wanting to bridge
the gap between typical online games, and the old-fashioned muds. But there
are also users who play batmud because they want a mud, and don't want to have
fancy whizzbang graphics...
--ooga
I count myself among the "old farts" who don't use the batclient. I have a few
reasons, I'll even list them for you. But, even if I were an avid batclient
user, I would still protest the addition of features to the client without
supporting raw telnet, though I'll save that topic for some future post.
Some reasons I don't use batclient:
*) Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
settings/etc
*) No standard database backend support (my mudclient uses sqlite, zmud has
some sort of database, etc)
*) Triggers must be replicated to multiple machines manually. (tf/my client is
commonly played from a shell account, always the same computer running the
mudclient.
*) Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
like a game...
*) Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to
a comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on
any program i try to use)
*) My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
java. I don't know java.
*) My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in
triggers/etc. Batclient doesn't.
The batclient meets many needs, especially those of someone wanting to bridge
the gap between typical online games, and the old-fashioned muds. But there
are also users who play batmud because they want a mud, and don't want to have
fancy whizzbang graphics...
--ooga
Rating:
10
Votes:
16
I would really urge one to try the batclient before, especially, whining.
Looking at my code, the batclient already reports the enemy HP in 20% chunks.
So, it's actually LESS accurate than scan.
Looking at my code, the batclient already reports the enemy HP in 20% chunks.
So, it's actually LESS accurate than scan.
Rating:
-4
Votes:
8
Ulath wrote:
I would really urge one to try the batclient before, especially, whining.
Looking at my code, the batclient already reports the enemy HP in 20% chunks.
So, it's actually LESS accurate than scan.
Looking at my code, the batclient already reports the enemy HP in 20% chunks.
So, it's actually LESS accurate than scan.
word 'if' atleast a couple times. I did actually try the client though, I just
didn't see the point in going into battle with it to test that when I already
didn't like it outside of battle. Was after I had tried that I heard about
this supposed feature. Although just yesterday someone told me that it gives
an that accurate to 20% hp level hp on mobs that traditionally hide their
shape in scan. That true? Obviously that's a rare occurance and no reason to
kick up a stink on it's own though.
Really, I'm sure this could have all been helped if some wiz had replied to my
initial request saying what this post in BS did, then maybe half the mud
wouldn't be having a huge flamewar over batclient
Rating:
1
Votes:
1
Ooga wrote:
Re: blasterr's batclient post and old farts...
I count myself among the "old farts" who don't use the batclient. I have a few
reasons, I'll even list them for you. But, even if I were an avid batclient
user, I would still protest the addition of features to the client without
supporting raw telnet, though I'll save that topic for some future post.
Some reasons I don't use batclient:
*) Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
settings/etc
*) No standard database backend support (my mudclient uses sqlite, zmud has
some sort of database, etc)
*) Triggers must be replicated to multiple machines manually. (tf/my client is
commonly played from a shell account, always the same computer running the
mudclient.
*) Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
like a game...
*) Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to
a comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on
any program i try to use)
*) My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
java. I don't know java.
*) My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in
triggers/etc. Batclient doesn't.
The batclient meets many needs, especially those of someone wanting to bridge
the gap between typical online games, and the old-fashioned muds. But there
are also users who play batmud because they want a mud, and don't want to have
fancy whizzbang graphics...
--ooga
I count myself among the "old farts" who don't use the batclient. I have a few
reasons, I'll even list them for you. But, even if I were an avid batclient
user, I would still protest the addition of features to the client without
supporting raw telnet, though I'll save that topic for some future post.
Some reasons I don't use batclient:
*) Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
settings/etc
*) No standard database backend support (my mudclient uses sqlite, zmud has
some sort of database, etc)
*) Triggers must be replicated to multiple machines manually. (tf/my client is
commonly played from a shell account, always the same computer running the
mudclient.
*) Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
like a game...
*) Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to
a comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on
any program i try to use)
*) My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
java. I don't know java.
*) My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in
triggers/etc. Batclient doesn't.
The batclient meets many needs, especially those of someone wanting to bridge
the gap between typical online games, and the old-fashioned muds. But there
are also users who play batmud because they want a mud, and don't want to have
fancy whizzbang graphics...
--ooga
You have Javasupport, what else?
Perl triggers? Install perl for windows, make a 3-line wrapper in java that
will pass all triggers to perl - there you go, triggers in the language of
your choice.
^o^
Rating:
-1
Votes:
8
Favorit
A r c h w i z a r d
5y, 221d, 3h, 27m, 18s old
Level:
600 [Wizard]
I count myself as an old fart too but still I am yet to experience the wide
scale of negative feelings the batclient seems to inflict on other oldbies.
While your post has a couple of really good arguments you totally ignore a
couple of facts (according to my best knowledge) I'm now going through.
settings/etc
Isn't the batclient configurable, so that you can have the client AND the
logs, triggers, whatnot on a memory stick?
like a game...
While at work, you're supposed to work, not play batmud.
comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on any
program i try to use)
You can make the batclient look pretty much like tf with a fancy background.
Dislike the map window? Fine, close it and redirect the output to genmeric
tab. Hate the battle window? No problem, just do the aforementioned trick.
java. I don't know java.
A semi-valid point. There's a variety of ready trigger-sets for batclient.
Batclient doesn't.
How is this different from when you first moved from pure telnet to some
client? Did you perhaps get a ready trigger set, which would invalidate your
argument? Or did you build it from scratch, which would prove my case?
Being a purist isn't bad by itself but turning down something just because it
has 'fancy whizzbang graphics'? Gimme a break..
With a little tuning and honing you can adapt batclient to your needs or at
least get rid of the unnecessary eye-candy, if you will. As for the DB, I
don't know what you use the DB for but that's something I think batclient
isn't ready handle just yet (unless you can do it with plugins).
Disclaimer: This post wasn't meant to be disrespectful, I'm merely trying to
point out the defects and gaps in your reasoning and on some parts agreeing
with the points you made.
scale of negative feelings the batclient seems to inflict on other oldbies.
While your post has a couple of really good arguments you totally ignore a
couple of facts (according to my best knowledge) I'm now going through.
Quote:
Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
Isn't the batclient configurable, so that you can have the client AND the
logs, triggers, whatnot on a memory stick?
Quote:
Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
While at work, you're supposed to work, not play batmud.
Quote:
Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to a
program i try to use)
You can make the batclient look pretty much like tf with a fancy background.
Dislike the map window? Fine, close it and redirect the output to genmeric
tab. Hate the battle window? No problem, just do the aforementioned trick.
Quote:
My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
A semi-valid point. There's a variety of ready trigger-sets for batclient.
Quote:
My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in triggers/etc.
How is this different from when you first moved from pure telnet to some
client? Did you perhaps get a ready trigger set, which would invalidate your
argument? Or did you build it from scratch, which would prove my case?
Being a purist isn't bad by itself but turning down something just because it
has 'fancy whizzbang graphics'? Gimme a break..
With a little tuning and honing you can adapt batclient to your needs or at
least get rid of the unnecessary eye-candy, if you will. As for the DB, I
don't know what you use the DB for but that's something I think batclient
isn't ready handle just yet (unless you can do it with plugins).
Disclaimer: This post wasn't meant to be disrespectful, I'm merely trying to
point out the defects and gaps in your reasoning and on some parts agreeing
with the points you made.
Rating:
-11
Votes:
15
Ooga wrote:
Re: blasterr's batclient post and old farts...
I count myself among the "old farts" who don't use the batclient. I have a few
reasons, I'll even list them for you. But, even if I were an avid batclient
user, I would still protest the addition of features to the client without
supporting raw telnet, though I'll save that topic for some future post.
Some reasons I don't use batclient:
*) Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
settings/etc
*) No standard database backend support (my mudclient uses sqlite, zmud has
some sort of database, etc)
*) Triggers must be replicated to multiple machines manually. (tf/my client is
commonly played from a shell account, always the same computer running the
mudclient.
*) Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
like a game...
*) Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to
a comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on
any program i try to use)
*) My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
java. I don't know java.
*) My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in
triggers/etc. Batclient doesn't.
The batclient meets many needs, especially those of someone wanting to bridge
the gap between typical online games, and the old-fashioned muds. But there
are also users who play batmud because they want a mud, and don't want to have
fancy whizzbang graphics...
--ooga
I count myself among the "old farts" who don't use the batclient. I have a few
reasons, I'll even list them for you. But, even if I were an avid batclient
user, I would still protest the addition of features to the client without
supporting raw telnet, though I'll save that topic for some future post.
Some reasons I don't use batclient:
*) Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
settings/etc
*) No standard database backend support (my mudclient uses sqlite, zmud has
some sort of database, etc)
*) Triggers must be replicated to multiple machines manually. (tf/my client is
commonly played from a shell account, always the same computer running the
mudclient.
*) Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
like a game...
*) Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to
a comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on
any program i try to use)
*) My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
java. I don't know java.
*) My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in
triggers/etc. Batclient doesn't.
The batclient meets many needs, especially those of someone wanting to bridge
the gap between typical online games, and the old-fashioned muds. But there
are also users who play batmud because they want a mud, and don't want to have
fancy whizzbang graphics...
--ooga
We dont want graphics like WoW , this is not World of Warcraft.
If you want 3D or whatnot , go play WoW , and let us play Batmud in the text
based fashion we have played it for the last whatnot years.
Yes , batclient looks nice. It has nice features.
No , it does NOT support my triggers , and i do NOT code java.
I do admit , i did like some features of batclient.
Why not give same info to batclient than to others. Could always make monster
shapes be shown like it used to , or if it has to be in percentages , make
percentages be shown in approximates , for example exc -> 90-100% health etc
like that.
Or give the same exact % amounts to all people. Better yet , if the batclient
users get it in % , give us others the monsters exact amount of hps , in hps
!!!
(All i lack from batclient is the window to make triggers via basic stuff ,
and no im not gonna learn java)
Rating:
-3
Votes:
9
Marrow wrote:
Ooga wrote:
Re: blasterr's batclient post and old farts...
I count myself among the "old farts" who don't use the batclient. I have a few
reasons, I'll even list them for you. But, even if I were an avid batclient
user, I would still protest the addition of features to the client without
supporting raw telnet, though I'll save that topic for some future post.
Some reasons I don't use batclient:
*) Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
settings/etc
*) No standard database backend support (my mudclient uses sqlite, zmud has
some sort of database, etc)
*) Triggers must be replicated to multiple machines manually. (tf/my client is
commonly played from a shell account, always the same computer running the
mudclient.
*) Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
like a game...
*) Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to
a comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on
any program i try to use)
*) My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
java. I don't know java.
*) My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in
triggers/etc. Batclient doesn't.
The batclient meets many needs, especially those of someone wanting to bridge
the gap between typical online games, and the old-fashioned muds. But there
are also users who play batmud because they want a mud, and don't want to have
fancy whizzbang graphics...
--ooga
I count myself among the "old farts" who don't use the batclient. I have a few
reasons, I'll even list them for you. But, even if I were an avid batclient
user, I would still protest the addition of features to the client without
supporting raw telnet, though I'll save that topic for some future post.
Some reasons I don't use batclient:
*) Unable to play from multiple computers, and keep same logfiles/variable
settings/etc
*) No standard database backend support (my mudclient uses sqlite, zmud has
some sort of database, etc)
*) Triggers must be replicated to multiple machines manually. (tf/my client is
commonly played from a shell account, always the same computer running the
mudclient.
*) Logging in from work, batclient, even in the simplest settings, still looks
like a game...
*) Eye candy -- fancy frames, all that...it seems that the client cant get to
a comfortable simplistic view. (i always turn off all the fancy eye candy on
any program i try to use)
*) My mudclient triggers are in perl. I know perl. Batclient triggers are in
java. I don't know java.
*) My mudclient has many many hours of my development invested in
triggers/etc. Batclient doesn't.
The batclient meets many needs, especially those of someone wanting to bridge
the gap between typical online games, and the old-fashioned muds. But there
are also users who play batmud because they want a mud, and don't want to have
fancy whizzbang graphics...
--ooga
We dont want graphics like WoW , this is not World of Warcraft.
If you want 3D or whatnot , go play WoW , and let us play Batmud in the text
based fashion we have played it for the last whatnot years.
Yes , batclient looks nice. It has nice features.
No , it does NOT support my triggers , and i do NOT code java.
I do admit , i did like some features of batclient.
Why not give same info to batclient than to others. Could always make monster
shapes be shown like it used to , or if it has to be in percentages , make
percentages be shown in approximates , for example exc -> 90-100% health etc
like that.
Or give the same exact % amounts to all people. Better yet , if the batclient
users get it in % , give us others the monsters exact amount of hps , in hps
!!!
(All i lack from batclient is the window to make triggers via basic stuff ,
and no im not gonna learn java)
opinion fully and I won't budge: Commas have whitespace only after, not
before.
No comments on the batclient thing you mentioned.
Rating:
4
Votes:
8
© 1990-2024 Balanced Alternative Techniques ry. All rights reserved. BatMUD™ is a registered trademark of Balanced Alternative Techniques ry.
The individual comments are the property of their posters, and may not reflect the views or opinions of the administration.