1  |   Order by index

Jan 30, 2001, 4:20am

Move and rotate actions were restricted since you were able to encroach,
but, what if you added the option to allow activate move/rotate only (kind
of like the option to disable create url)? If any object is going to
encroach your property, don't click it, simple as that.

Jan 30, 2001, 9:55pm

My idea that. :-p
--
Syntax
syntax at earthcorp.com
www.swcity.net

[View Quote]

Jan 30, 2001, 10:08pm

I 2nd that idea.. :)

--
- Tony56 (Tony M.) [chandler56 at mail.com]
"All typos are optical illusions"
____________________________________________________________
[View Quote]

Jan 30, 2001, 10:21pm

sounds good to me.. but for that some people are dumb and won't realize why
they're rotate command isn't working.. but then again, i wouldn't want
anyone that dumb to build in my world anyway.. :-Þ (thx whoever told me the
0222 hehe)

--
J B E L L
http://platinum.awjbell.com
G O I N G P L A T I N U M
[View Quote]

Jan 30, 2001, 10:50pm

Stealing your ideas me, lol

Feb 1, 2001, 12:28am

I say that we should have a trial run of rotate in AW. If it's abused, its
out the door until AWCOM finds a way to have it "detect" wether it will
encroach. And theres not much damage you can really do with rotate unless
you don't cover some land. But anyways AWCOM reccomends that you do that
anyways. And besides if someone throws some balloons into your house then go
build another somewhere else. And most towns anyways are pretty well covered
so its tough to have someone spin a pole through your walls or something.


--
/ |\ /| |\ /|
/ | \ / | | \ / |
\ | \/ | | \/ |
\_ | | | |

Feb 1, 2001, 12:41am

Better correct myself before someone else does =P

This system won't work, forget it. You could use something like astart
astop to make it move, or have a bot do it for you.

Feb 1, 2001, 4:34am

remind me again how we know that rotate is still going to work, even if it
encroaches...?

--
J B E L L
http://platinum.awjbell.com
G O I N G P L A T I N U M
[View Quote]

Feb 1, 2001, 11:31am

[View Quote] If it *can* be abused, it *will* be abused. You can be certain of that.

> its
> out the door until AWCOM finds a way to have it "detect" wether it will
> encroach.

Must be doable.

> And theres not much damage you can really do with rotate unless
> you don't cover some land. But anyways AWCOM reccomends that you do that
> anyways. And besides if someone throws some balloons into your house then
go
> build another somewhere else.

Now that's a lame "solution"....

> And most towns anyways are pretty well covered
> so its tough to have someone spin a pole through your walls or something.
>
>
> --
> / |\ /| |\ /|
> / | \ / | | \ / |
> \ | \/ | | \/ |
> \_ | | | |
>
>

Feb 2, 2001, 4:23pm

Eh what's the point of a rotate command that won't rotate automatically?
There are some projects I'm working on that I'd like some objects in them to
rotate once they're loaded and not have a person have to click on it to get
it to rotate. The majority of visitor's wouldn't click on it anyways.

What exactly happens when you have a rotate/move command that encroaches?
Does the browser crash? Or does the Inspection Officer flood the chat? If
its the latter, simply have the IO automatically delete the contents of the
action box.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 2, 2001, 7:08pm

It doesnt do anything when a rotate command encroaches. It doesn't check for
encroachment for each rotation step.

--
Wing
This little spot is dedicated to my girl, Jessie.
WHAT TIME IS IT? GAME TIME!
Ravens are goin Festivus Maximus on Purple Sunday
AW Citizen 305004 "Wing"
bathgate at prodigy.net
eyemwing at teleport.com
ICQ #101207433
[View Quote]

Feb 3, 2001, 6:48pm

Being able to activate it is better than nothing right?

Feb 3, 2001, 7:06pm

Correct. But if there is a way to make it automatic, we should look for it.
Could Roland modify the code so that it was checked each step? That's what
he should have done in the first place.

SW Chris
[View Quote]

Feb 3, 2001, 8:07pm

I dunno much about programming, actually I don't know anything, but I have a
feeling that would take A LOT of programming and work to have it check for
encroachment first.

Feb 4, 2001, 2:32pm

[View Quote] afaik, encroachment is checked at the server. So, to have this work, the
client should do it too. I think it would be quite a lot of work indeed,
which might not be worth it considering what other things can be done in
that time.

Rolu

Feb 5, 2001, 6:13am

Anyway, it seems to me impossible to do...

right, the server could check when you put a move/rotate command in an
object, that it won't encroach other objects when moving/rotating... that
would time quite a lot of time from the server though, because it would have
to check for a lot of rotation angles etc... but maybe it's possible...

The real problem comes from the fact that, once an object with a move
command has been placed, and there is no other objet in its trajectory,
nothing ensures someone isn't going to put an object in that place
(somewhere on the trajectory) afterwards.
the server couldn't check, every time an object is added, for every other
object if it has a rotate/move command, and if it does, if any of its
angles/steps encroaches with the object to add, before telling to the client
wether the added object is encroaching or not... that would be insane, and
absolutely impossible to do. that's probably why roland doesn't do it (i
haven't heard him say it, but it seems logical)

Fox Mc Cloud

"rolu" <rolu.university at bigfoot.com> a écrit dans le message news:
3a7d8424 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2001, 11:45am

[View Quote] Instead of doing that, you would check where an object with rotate/move
commands could end up once (when you place it), and then remember that and
treat it as a bounding box/whatever of a normal object. Then you could check
if something you add (anything) ends up in a place where something could
move over it, the same way as it's checked if you encroach or not now. Never
do things more than once if not needed.

Anyway, a much simpler solution would be to make an object invisible as soon
as it starts moving over/under/through objects that don't have the same
owner, and visible again when it leaves other people's property. This must
be doable for the client, but might require some rewriting of stuff.

rolu

Feb 5, 2001, 5:33pm

"rolu" <rolu.university at bigfoot.com> a écrit dans le message news:
3a7eae60$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Instead of doing that, you would check where an object with rotate/move
> commands could end up once (when you place it), and then remember that and
> treat it as a bounding box/whatever of a normal object. Then you could
check
> if something you add (anything) ends up in a place where something could
> move over it, the same way as it's checked if you encroach or not now.
Never
> do things more than once if not needed.

right, but you don't realize how much memory that would take up to
permanently store on the server... it would be really huge.wether you do it
like you said or like i said (and there must be other possibilities), i
don't think there's a reasonable solution.

> Anyway, a much simpler solution would be to make an object invisible as
soon
> as it starts moving over/under/through objects that don't have the same
> owner, and visible again when it leaves other people's property. This must
> be doable for the client, but might require some rewriting of stuff.

mmh... I don't know if that's possible... maybe it would be worth talking to
roland about this idea...
it would be quite a good thing indeed, i hadn't thought about this.

>
> rolu

Fox Mc Cloud

Feb 5, 2001, 5:58pm

[View Quote] Do you actually know? Or are you just talking out of your hat? Anyway, it's
already done for normal objects, so it must be possible for those rotated
and moved objects too, without too much effort. Just do it efficiently, I'm
sure it's quite easy to find a decent way to do it.

> wether you do it
> like you said or like i said (and there must be other possibilities), i
> don't think there's a reasonable solution.

Reasonable in what way? CPU, memory, bandwidth, rewriting lot's of things?

rolu

Feb 5, 2001, 7:23pm

Why not have the client handle it? Just check all objects in visibility on
it's current citnum for encroachment AS it moves/rotates/does
backflips/whatever, not beforehand.

--
Wing
This little spot is dedicated to my girl, Jessie.
She paints her nails, and she dont know, he's got her best friend on the
phone,
She'll wash her hair, his dirty clothes, for all he gives to her. And he's
got posters on the wall
Of all the girls he wish she was, and he means everything to her. Her
boyfriend, he dont know,
Anything, about her... She's just the flavor of the week.
AW Citizen 305004 "Wing"
bathgate at prodigy.net
eyemwing at teleport.com
ICQ #101207433
[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2001, 12:11am

Go back to the activate only command. It seems like a good idea, but you
can still encroach with astart astop. Maybe if they just made the
punishment for encroaching extreme, like being banned from AW for a months
=D

If it the rotating object encroaches and object made after it was, you could
simply check the built dates, that would stop people from trying to get
others in trouble.

Too bad the built date doesn't go down to the second, that could be a
problem eh?

1  |   Order by index