Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

Ive noticed something that is coming up more and more as people get their own home networks linking their router, computer, printer, laptop, xbox, webcams, etc etc. Some with proxies.

When you start a Network Server on your machine, it might tell you something like you have started a network game on 192.168.2.101 port 8888. Any IP address where the first group of numbers is 192, 172, or 10.

An address like that is the internal IP for the LAN (local area network). It is not the IP players need to connect. Telling them that IP is like shouting "Im in the bedroom" when they need the house address. One way to get the address that your system uses out on the net is to use a program such as ifconfig (which comes with windows and linux).

Or to check a site such as http://whatismyip.org/ with your browser. That site will tell you the IP it sees you coming from. That should be the IP that your friends use to connect to your game.

The reason I mention this here is I want to annotate that the game might want to give a more involved response to aid in setting up a server game.

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

Gandalf,
Possible typo: ifconfig = ipconfig?

(I have noticed the same confusion over internal network addresses and even fell victim to it when I was starting out. Good post! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif)

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

Ahhh good catch.
Yes, and no. I probably should have tested it and typed ipconfig since its usually windows people who are confused.
But my fingers automatically typed ifconfig which is the linux command for the same thing. Im not sure what it is for mac.
Thanks for catching that.

Edit:
Hmmm ipconfig was recommended by someone else but now that I try it Im not sure if its a good choice either. It still gave me my local lan IP, not my internet IP

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

ifconfig is the unix command that Linux and Mac use. ipconfig is the equivalent from Microsoft.

While this thread is certainly useful and interesting, I don't think it should be stickied. It didn't receive any responses (almost) for two years, and I think that stickies should be reserved for important topics.

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

Usually topics that get fairly frequent responses dont need stickies. Its the important ones that get lost from lack of use.

This thread is mostly for the devs. One sticky for each portion of development. Maps, Mods, Server, Bugs. I suppose since no one else uses it I could just move it to the Dom3 forum for the beta testers.

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

Apparently something never got into this file altho it has been discussed in beta group.

<font color="green">--cheatdetect off</font>

This would greatly increase the options of a server in order to offer more scenario type games that were server created.

edited: --nocheatdet has been added

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

I would still like to have <font color="green">--enablemod</font> fixed up some altho if its a big project and some of the others are little ones then I can understand.

edited: fixed in patch

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

What do you mean by that? That mods should be loaded during / before game creation from command line?

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

The timing that they kick in makes some server uses difficult. Such as offering modded nations, or the all-in-one games. The difference in sequence that things are done between desktop games and server games can be confusing. For command switches, mods, and maps.

Re: Server Wishlist (command line options)
 

A bleed-over from a request in the mappers wishlist.

Since its a hosting thing, and the extensive time it would add to hosting could be a factor, maybe we could have a hosting switch rather than a game command that would curb the creation of castles. Something like

--enfcastles &lt;#&gt; enforce castle limits.

Possibly the overhead on this is already licked. The program might have already done all the figuring for "is this too close to another castle" for the AIs and can use the data for general enforcement. If so then the &lt;#&gt; can be dropped to save overhead. But it might be nice to be able to set a game for enforced no castles next to castles, or no castles within one province of another castle, or even no castles within 10 provs of castles just to avoid late-game clutter and the drag it causes to final-win.