1  |   Order by index

Aug 15, 2002, 5:23pm

You can build below 350 but not go below. Can someone tell this to AW

--
-CarLBanks, 335711

Active Worlds 3.3 Build 419

Aug 15, 2002, 5:42pm

Huh?

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A message from Zeo Toxion
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[View Quote]

Aug 15, 2002, 6:01pm

Going below I think is handled by browser and building is (i think) handled
by world server.


[View Quote]

Aug 15, 2002, 6:04pm

He wants someone who has access to the beta NG to post it there.

[View Quote]

Aug 15, 2002, 6:51pm

I know...i didn't understand what he said at first :)

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A message from Zeo Toxion
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[View Quote]

Aug 16, 2002, 12:03am

Another Bug is anything built around -324.0 meters is deleted. Someone
please forward this bug to beta also.

--
-CarLBanks, 335711

Active Worlds 3.3 Build 419

[View Quote]

Aug 16, 2002, 12:10am

> Another Bug is anything built around -324.0 meters is deleted.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't it always done that? Since you're not
supposed to build any lower...

Aug 16, 2002, 12:14am

no 340 is the limit

--
-CarLBanks, 335711

Active Worlds 3.3 Build 419

[View Quote]

Aug 16, 2002, 12:42am

That's his point. It's always been the limit, it's how it was designed...
you never could go below that.

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A message from Zeo Toxion
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[View Quote]

Aug 16, 2002, 12:44am

Whoops wasn't reading that fully :) Actually wasn't the limit 350 in both
directions? I'm not sure....

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A message from Zeo Toxion
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[View Quote]

Aug 16, 2002, 1:10am

The limit used to be according to http://tnlc.com/rw/measurement.html#cell :

"full vertical: -327.67m to +327.67m (655.34m); current building depth/height (hopefully this will be increased in the future, considering you can move beyond these limits from -350m to +2000m)"

Don't know when it changed...

[View Quote] > Whoops wasn't reading that fully :) Actually wasn't the limit 350 in both
> directions? I'm not sure....
>
[View Quote]

Aug 16, 2002, 5:18am

the tile data limit really needs to be increased as well
maybe 10 times as much as the current limit

Aug 16, 2002, 2:12pm

Well the point is it should tell you when you can't build more.
--
-CarLBanks, 335711

Active Worlds 3.3 Build 419

[View Quote]

Aug 16, 2002, 3:59pm

I think it's laggy as it is with huge cell data limit and have the place
filled. But if you turn that option on in your world have fun watching
everyone crash on entrance :)

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A message from Zeo Toxion
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[View Quote]

Aug 17, 2002, 7:01am

ummm, its the amount of objects and special effects which lagg the place,
not the amount of bytes in a tile..
i dont think it makes any difference in frame rate whether u have an object
use its original texture or applying another one with create texture..

[View Quote]

Aug 17, 2002, 2:09pm

> ummm, its the amount of objects and special effects which lagg the place,
> not the amount of bytes in a tile..
> i dont think it makes any difference in frame rate whether u have an
object
> use its original texture or applying another one with create texture..

Well, that can be somewhat true. Adding a Create texture something to an
object will cause your video card to completely redraw the object (I assume
over the already present textures). This would cause a slight increase in
the time to draw the frames, I would assume that's how it's done.

--Bowen--

Aug 17, 2002, 3:06pm

Erm, not quite. The object and the texture are independent of each
other. Once the object is loaded, then it goes about loading the
texture. If no texture is specified via a texture or animate command,
then it downloads the object's default texture. If you change an
already-loaded object's texture, then it just replaces the old texture
with the new texture. That's why, if you change it to a texture that's
not already in your cache, the object turns white/grey while the new
texture is downloading.

[View Quote] > object
>
>
> Well, that can be somewhat true. Adding a Create texture something to an
> object will cause your video card to completely redraw the object (I assume
> over the already present textures). This would cause a slight increase in
> the time to draw the frames, I would assume that's how it's done.
>
> --Bowen--

--
Goober King
Did Bowen put sugar on his foot or something? :P
gooberking at utn.cjb.net

Aug 17, 2002, 8:57pm

> Erm, not quite. The object and the texture are independent of each
> other. Once the object is loaded, then it goes about loading the
> texture. If no texture is specified via a texture or animate command,
> then it downloads the object's default texture. If you change an
> already-loaded object's texture, then it just replaces the old texture
> with the new texture. That's why, if you change it to a texture that's
> not already in your cache, the object turns white/grey while the new
> texture is downloading.

Not with mine it doesn't. But then again this is one buggy as hell video
card.

--Bowen--

Aug 27, 2002, 9:54am

From my expirience it makes quite a difference. I built a huge thing in
TheBeans and all objects had a create name on it. It got quite laggy. When I
replaced the objects with pretextured ones I got a noticeable increase in
framerate. That's why TheBeans gz is relatively lag free :)

"ncc 72897" <NCC-71854 at USS-Venture.Starfleet.UFP> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3d5e10e0 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> ummm, its the amount of objects and special effects which lagg the place,
> not the amount of bytes in a tile..
> i dont think it makes any difference in frame rate whether u have an
object
> use its original texture or applying another one with create texture..
>
[View Quote]

Aug 27, 2002, 10:42am

I guess then we need to have objects of every texture lol.

[View Quote]

Aug 29, 2002, 4:31am

want a really bad bug? Working off the server from my computer at
home...took forever to get the router to work properly... and then
update...boom!
My world no longer lists itself in my world server admin... and it says
connecting to server but never does... can't add world to the server because
its unhighlited... go to the event log and it repeats forever that it is
unable to send server start. Retrying... on and on...and AW has no response.
Made the router a switch to bypass all firewalls...deleted the server and
reuploaded and still the same thing happens. There's a bug...no world..
nothing. Anyone have a clue how to fix this one?
BTW: don't go to Unwise and try to repair things.. it deletes everything so
you can forget about any saved stuff period... can't reupload what has been
obliterated.

Aug 29, 2002, 6:10am

ok... here's the trick... may not be able to use build43 yet... have to use
build42 if the world disappears in server administration with build43. Not
much I can say... there don't appear to be any errors having it on aw as a
build42 although the build43 is supposed to be mandatory... for some of us
it is the kiss of death to our world.

[View Quote]

Aug 29, 2002, 3:16pm

More fun stuff. the world doesn't show up at all if you are under
build42... but shows up in your server administration... when you upgrade to
build 43 it shows up neither in your server administration nor in the AW
world system. Does anyone have a patch to upgrade from build42 to build 43
that won't blackball this girl's world?

[View Quote]

Aug 29, 2002, 10:20pm

Hmm you need to open Ports on your router, read the AW help files.

Aug 30, 2002, 4:55am

On Linux it worked to copy just the executable binaries
(would be the EXE files in Windows) into the old world
server directory - be sure to make a backup of course.

This can only work if the database format hasn't changed
and that is the case for this upgrade.


Or install a fresh build 43 and copy all .dat, .idx and .ini
files from your 42 server into the new directory.


The 42 server cannot work anymore because it's blocked by
the universe server settings. This has been announced in
the upgrade information mail.



[View Quote]

Aug 30, 2002, 7:56am

all the ports are open on the router...it's acting as a switch.. there is no
firewall.
[View Quote]

Sep 2, 2002, 5:45pm

Wow, something must be blocking your way.. if your on Win XP see if the
firewall is turned on...

Sep 15, 2002, 12:17pm

Alright!! Finally got the new build 43 up and going... For anyone who is
having problems with it... are you ready for this. 2 things you need to
do... Get rid of Norton and Norton Internet Security in particular and
manually upgrade. To manually upgrade this is what you have to do: 1:Do a
property dump, attribute dump; elv/terrain dump for all worlds. 2.make note
of world names, passwords, registries and caretakers. 3. Install world
server to a new path. I changed the name of my active worlds server folder
to Build 42 before I tried to install the build 43. That works. 4. Copy
any registry files to the new path. 5. Add the worldsto the world server.
It asks for the world info upfront when it's installing so it's not really
too hard for the first one. 6. do a property load, attribute load,
elev/terrain load for all worlds... And you should be up and running. This
info was finally sent to me from Will Gerraty of Active Worlds. Wanted to
pass it on... (Thanks Will)
[View Quote]

Sep 16, 2002, 12:15am

wow lol

1  |   Order by index