Weather Report

Adding a little doo-hickey to the strat host so that when it starts a new day cycle it’s gonna write out the current weather report for the day.

  static const FLOAT64 dayDuration = wthrGetGameDayDuration() ;

  wthrStartNewDay() ;

      " INTO wthr_report (started, cloud, fog, duration)"
      " VALUES (now(), %u, %u, %g)"
        , wthrGetWeatherPattern()
        , wthrGetFogPattern()
        , dayDuration
        ) ;

It’s really nothing special, but Ramp/Wiretap can probably make use of it in some little way. No – it’s not a forecast and no, I’m not going to make it a forecast, that’s actual a real feature development rather than something to do while I eat a donut.


So is this information available somewhere? It’d be so much easier if us flyboys didn’t have to get out of our bunks and into game to check weather :)

Will CRS please use their creativity to make Premium Accounts?

Not everyone will pay to be a Gold Builder, and the sub-builder account offers are not enthusiasm building items to me. I would love to be able to pay more to get more and have you guys get some 401(k) plan action.

But if you sell one weather report, teh Intranet does the rest for the players with a squad website broadcasting the weather daily. Forecasting by one = forecasting by all. Ask Yahoo, WeatherBug, and NOAA. They have to give it away for free and get advertisers to pay for it.

This is good stuff, I am not complaining at all. I just want more *selling* by CRS that will speed up development and features by using those sold features…wait…I’m off on a tangent, based upon an earlier thread on this blog. *bleh*


What the hell?

” INTO wthr_report (started, cloud, fog, duration)”
” VALUES (now(), %u, %u, %g)”

Does C let you take two literal strings and concats them for you like that? If so I had no idea.

In C# I usually just do

INSERT INTO blah, blahh
SELECT more, blahhh
FROM table
WHERE imcool = 1

Having SQL queries in your code is probably the most frustrating thing for me. Everyone has their own way of formatting them. I think companies should include SQL formatting requirements with their coding pratices requirements.

C, C++, and possibly C#.

The actual in-place code has a couple of markers that indicate it is “test” code, that needs signing off before it can be included in a release code. The finished could won’t have its actual SQL code in-line like that, but it makes it a lot easier to work with at first.

I just want more *selling* by CRS that will speed up development and features by using those sold features…wait…I’m off on a tangent, based upon an earlier thread on this blog. *bleh*

Sorry, but while I’m not arguing with the idea you’re expressing here, I have yet to hear of an example that I would agree was worth charging for, other than some ideas we’ve talked about internally (particularly KFS1). And especially not something like the weather forecast. But you can rest assured that the idea is one well valued and oft considered at the highest levels of Playnet.

And not paratroopers either. I disagree entirely with KFS1 and others on that one.

I chalk up a lot of things as the price of customer retention, something too often undervalued by many. I think if you charged for everything you could charge for, you’d push people away a little bit with each thing. It would certainly push me away. But I’m an asshole, so . . . .

Then I’m interested in “other than some ideas we’ve talked about internally (particularly KFS1)” and hope it arrives soon. I happily paid more for my yearly subscription, and I think it was a reasonable additional rate. *note to self, must go check lottery tickets* :)

I wouldn’t disagree with you on the paratroopers we did ship, Bloo; rather my point has always been that we missed out on paratroopers – if we’d been “selling” a paratrooper add-on, it would undoubtedly have gotten more love.

Paratroopers make a great candidate for a whole host of reasons – they don’t bring a new weapon to the battleground, merely a new form of deployment and, in particular, a less convenient form of deployment. They fly in the face of the whole mobile spawn, short time to battle paradigm. Most MMOs usually charge for convenience services, in our game convenience is time to battle and we can’t charge for that.

Paratroopers are also generally perceived as an “elite” type of trooper; in our game there’s (more-or-less) nothing innately elite about them, there’s the sprint thing and a different weapon loadout, but the weapons are still the same as everyone else.

That doesn’t mean that in the end we couldn’t have given paratroopers to everyone as long as the folks who buy the paratrooper add-on always get The Best Of – like loadout selections, the extra sprint, etc, etc.

Re: Other forms of money.

I always wondered what happened to SET, the Special Events. Rafter started that and it seemed that it would be like a money stream. But it was dropped for some reason? Was it not popular enough.

I’m going to, again, blow my own horn here and say that the realism events are the best thing known to man kind. We get typically 40 on 40 for those. I think, if you could streamline those Realism Events, take the admin ‘referees’ out of it as much as possible, then you’d have a vialble alternate source of income.

I’m not going to ask for it, but one day a ‘Realism Event’ patch would just rock in so many ways. As it stands now, it takes 1 hour of organizing to get going.

One of the Rats should really play in the realism event one day.

kfsone wrote:

The pay-per event server is a separate server cluster. That means that every code change we make has to be tested in the context of the event server. That we have the overhead of maintaining all of our tools in the context of the event server. And the events barely brought in enough money to cover the operation of the server never mind the programmer time.

It might have worked out if the SET team had been in the habbit of designing events that the system could handle, but they were encouraged into the habbit of thinking outside the box so that there was a seemingly perpetual annoying feature creep list for the event server that entered the development without due dilligence in the design. Somewhere a feature-concept got devised, it got removed from the coder-review/input process to streamline the process, save time, and prevent programmers from saying “thats a shitload of work”.

The SET guys were never given adequately good enough tools and, aside from annoying the crap out of the coders, the continual feature-creep ensured no development time on polishing/rounding off anything that was already implemented.

Basically one big crapfest and the correct solution, instead of having a fourth type of server configuration that has to be custom built and configured, would be to integrate the “events” concept into the general game cluster so that everything is an event configuration. Live game? A standard event configuration. Training? A special but stock event configuration. Battle of the Ruhr? Custom event configuration.

This is what I’d originally suggested and what has slowly been creeping into the overall game featureset in the guise of the “intermission system” – whereby a server can relatively easily be reconfigured to a predefined setup. However – the toolset that currently uses is a million manhours from being suitable for release to … anyone, rat or player.

I know your points about how we could have sold paratroopers. I just disagree entirely. :)


Hmm, I figured that this would be the best solution for introducing special events (I wouldn’t expect anything more either). When I refered to realism patch, I should have said cross-over patch. One that has a large number of features for both the live server and events.

I am curious to know if there is any thought process that goes along the lines ‘this would benifit both the live server and the people who like to organize events so lets do that over xzy other feature.’ I can’t imagine it happening all the time, but I’d see it happening every once in a while.

If the realism event player created a list of features they want, would it be useful to CRS? Say as a list to fill the roll of the above paragraph. Not features only for the realism event, but for a reference of possible features that would benifit both live server and the realism events. What I’m asking is, would a reference list like that be useful in the decision process making?

Obviously I understand that realism events aren’t seen as a revenue stream, yet.

Really, if you are looking for charging paradigms, The game should be free, and rank advancement should be the extra that you pay for. If you stop paying, you go back to private 1st class and you lose access to the forums.

This would maximize the amount of players and the games addiction value. I doubt many of the player base would cancel their subscription so they could go play riflemen without binoculars.

Leave a Reply

Name and email address are required. Your email address will not be published.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <pre> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> 

%d bloggers like this: