Guild of Writers

Not unless you are going to implement proper instancing and those lacking netlinkingrules into Alcugs. (Yeah, I know. I am always nagging about that)

To be compatible with MOUL Alcugs needs public ages, sub ages and child ages. And although I would rather not see those neighborhood instanced child ages back, they are still part of the protocol.
With sub ages however you can do very cool things so I really want support for those. First of all they are correctly instanced and can be shared without the need for book sharing (think Delin, Tsogal or the Er'cana silo). Secondly you can change sdl variables in sub age A while you are in sub age B, and you do not need to own any of them (have them in the AgesIOwnFolder). This means you can create interesting cross age multiplayer puzzles.

Proper instancing got a big step closer when I finally moved GUID generation to the vault server exclusively some weeks ago. There just is no use-case the way Alcugs is currently used. The same holds for public ages.
The sub ages really sound cool, as I already noted somewhere else - I'm not sure if I will find the time to add them though. Are you sure POTS implement them correctly, so that I could use the MOUL converted Delin and Tsogal as testing ground (after tell the client to use the correct linking rules - shouldn't be impossible to get them out of the MOUL hood prp files, I guess)?

If this were really the only issues to add MOUL support, it might be worth it - but I thought about much more low-level problems, like the basic packet format (did they even stick with UDP?) and the way some state machines work. I guess Hoikas wouldn't need to write an own server if MOUL could just log into an Alcugs server after telling it to use another server.

Hehe, this was just my pet peeve issue. I'm sure there are loads of others.

I am not sure if POTS implemented the netlinkingrules correctly, but all the client needs to do is send the number which corresponds to the linking rule. For the rest it is entirely up to the server to respond to that.

You need to trash the current auth, lobby, and tracking servers. They are no longer anywhere close to being correct. The vault is similar, but different; I'm not familiar enough with the alcugs vault to make comment on how similar it is. The game server is essentially the same, it propegates the old plNetMessages inside one of the newer messages. Perhaps when I get some spare time, I will write up some documentation on the MOUL Protocol. The only part that I couldn't get to work myself was the net encryption (ARC4), which was easy enough to wipe out of the exe. As I said before, I am leery of releasing my source code because parts of it are very bad, obviously incorrect, and are just blatant HAX to make it work. Of course, if you have questions as to specifically how parts of the protocol worked, I can probably answer those faster than writing up documentation.

Ok, so a rewrite might indeed be the better solution. Would have been too cool to have on server for POTS and MOUL

D'Lanor wrote:Hehe, this was just my pet peeve issue. I'm sure there are loads of others.

I see you repeating it whenever Alcugs is mentioned I just hope Prad will continue to work on Alcugs for the near future

To reply about the Vault, it's also a bit different from that of UU/Alcugs... For one thing, it has no knowledge of permissions (which is fine, since they were basically completely ignored in UU), and it also has several UUID fields that aren't present in the UU vault...

And yes, someone has worked on this (even before Hoikas)

Zrax wrote:And yes, someone has worked on this (even before Hoikas)

Zrax wrote:To reply about the Vault, it's also a bit different from that of UU/Alcugs... For one thing, it has no knowledge of permissions (which is fine, since they were basically completely ignored in UU), and it also has several UUID fields that aren't present in the UU vault...

Alcugs does not implement permissions either, so it is even more similar to MOUL than to UU here . They are on the ToDo-list though - however if even Cyan scratched them for MOUL, I wonder if it is worth implementing them here. Full admin access to the whole vault for everyone, hm?

Zrax wrote:And yes, someone has worked on this (even before Hoikas)

So when will you unleash your re-written Uru client to that we can finally start fixing engine client bugs?