EQoffline, bots and more.. - Page 15

Zengez · #**211** 08-02-2007, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Adams

Zengez, can't you diff the version Magoth is using against it's original source, and merge the changes into a current version? I don't think Magoth should bump all his changes from version to version just so we stay on the latest... and, I am not sure this will become "core" because it is so very custom (though it could be a nice addition). The problem for over a year has been no one has labeled anything a "stable" version. I personally use the 931 build as an anchor point because it matches the Luclin PEQ database... but even that is not tagged as "stable". No one has gone through and tested every feature to give it that tag in some time.

Maybe when we go Anniversary, we'll branch to 0.8.0 and start all over.

Well I for one don't know how to diff, although I think there's a wikki part somewhere that can tell me, but that's not really my point...

Haven't heard anyone say they wouldn't want to use this on their server, and if they didn't it seems to me to be fairly straight foward to just make a rule for bots on and bots off to enable/disable the entire bot structure, then fold it into mainstream... don't even need bot update work done every time magoth does something, just diff it once a week or two weeks of work or whatnot at his discreation (or someone else if they feel like doing it themselves) and that way you can fold in the newest diffed version into the newest server version and life is peachy, best of both worlds... Seems to me that any version released as pre-constructed binaries is 'stable' by any test definition, so I don't see the need to have to wait for someone to lable it stable before doing the above... and I'm not suggesting we update the binaries under download every time anyone makes a change to anything... it's merely been a while, something like 3 months or so between magoth's version with his bot's folded in, and the latest compiled version availible to download under the download section, so I was suggesting an update... wouldn't even have to be a continued update, a one time update would help... Although it seems silly to go that route when building into the mainstream fold seems to be just as easy....

/shrug it's somewhere on the order of a billion degrees in my house right now, so perhaps i'm not thinking straight, but makes sense to me is all.

narcberry · #**212** 08-03-2007, 09:57 AM

I'm going to implement this on my server. I'm excited to buff up Kurns and do lower level raids

. Really really great work, thanks for spending so much time on this.

Anyhow, I have a question about bot ownership. Let's say that I own 5 bots and someone else owns 5 bots, can we raid together with our bots?

Magoth78 · #**213** 08-03-2007, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by narcberry

...
Anyhow, I have a question about bot ownership. Let's say that I own 5 bots and someone else owns 5 bots, can we raid together with our bots?

You can raid together (1 raid per player) but you can't raid a single raid for both of you.

What you can do is instead of creating a raid of 24 bots bots, just create 2 of 12 bots. Both of you will be the raids leader.

**GeorgeS** · #**214** 08-04-2007, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Adams

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Adams

Maybe when we go Anniversary, we'll branch to 0.8.0 and start all over.

Now that sounds good - we've been on 0.7 for ages..

Thanks for the continuing work on the offline bots

GeorgeS

Bjerlk · #**215** 08-04-2007, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magoth78

You can raid together (1 raid per player) but you can't raid a single raid for both of you.

What you can do is instead of creating a raid of 24 bots bots, just create 2 of 12 bots. Both of you will be the raids leader.

I was just wondering what happends to loot issues then... SInce the mob will be tagged for either one of the 2. Since they cant be in same raid. Or am I completely off the charts?

Magoth78 · #**216** 08-04-2007, 10:35 PM

Bjerlk> I see what you mean. Well, the issue there is if your raid (let's say 12 bots so 2 groups) has the most damage, you will be able to loot items on corpse then equip your own bots. The other guy couldn't loot and so, equip his own bot.

Actually, that's the way EQoffline is working. The other guy should wait to be able to loot.

But, I think I will make thoses command working on Player Character, in a soon future : "#bot group add <target_who_is_a_player>" while grouped, or "#bot raid group create <target_who_is_a_player>" while raiding.

Magoth78 · #**217** 08-04-2007, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Adams

...
Maybe when we go Anniversary, we'll branch to 0.8.0 and start all over.

If EQEmu ever decides to go on Anniversary, that could be a cool thing because I would rewrite the entire EQoffline code base. This way it would be easier for me to create a separate project that people could add easily to the EQEMu code if they want to play at EQoffline.

John Adams · #**218** 08-05-2007, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magoth78

This way it would be easier for me to create a separate project that people could add easily to the EQEMu code if they want to play at EQoffline.

If you mean like a plugin (or maybe like GuildWars was?) that would be perfect. If the code was not so dependent on EQEmu, admins could turn it on and off easily, and it could become a part of the core, too.

There is no question, this is a fantastic add-on to EQEmu.

sonicvt · #**219** 08-06-2007, 06:35 AM

Is there any issue with the Bot code for if you update (source into MySQL) to a newer version of the PEQ database? Will they still work since the database was modified (create table botinventory, botleader, and botsowners)? I'm not a coder and wouldn't want to source the most recent PEQ database and have all the information (equipment) on the bots be lost. Thanks and great work.

Zengez · #**220** 08-06-2007, 07:20 AM

The PEQ updater only drops the tables it replaces, so if you use the update system files rather than the create new database tables you should be fine. At least so far as I remember of how PEQ works...

**cavedude** · #**221** 08-06-2007, 07:27 AM

Yes, the newest PEQ database is compatible with eqoffline. However, if you have existing bot data then you do not want to run drop_player.sql. I would suggest running drop_system.sql and then load_system.sql against your current db (back it up first before doing this of course) and then you should be set. The bot tables are considered player and not system, so sourcing drop_player.sql will destroy that data.

John Adams · #**222** 08-07-2007, 02:57 AM

Will it actually drop the bot* tables? That would mean someone would have added those tables to drop_players.sql. If they did not, the PEQ drop_players.sql should just skip anything it is not told to drop? Or is that sql a "drop everything"? I can't remember.

**cavedude** · #**223** 08-07-2007, 03:39 AM

Yes, it'll drop them because I added them to the file. By newest PEQ I assume the CVS is meant.

If the older Luclin package is implied, then no those bot tables will remain after running drop_player.sql.

John Adams · #**224** 08-07-2007, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cavedude

Yes, it'll drop them because I added them to the file.

Oooh, do I sense a Bots-Core merge?

/rumor on

Blakine · #**225** 08-09-2007, 03:18 AM

Has anyone had an issue where your bots stop responding to anything but the attack order?

Normally I dont have this problem, but the last couple of night I have been camping spawns in Charasis and at some point my bots will:

- Quit buffing and/or healing
- Stop following me

I can summon them and use the "attack" order, which they will respond to. But nothing else. Not sure why this dungeon seems to be the one place this happens in, I did fall through some of the pit traps. Anyway, thought I would mention it.