Concerning etpromapscripts

mortis · Post by **mortis** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 2:08 pm

I've been asked on many occasions why third party mapscripts haven't yet been included in etpro. Obviously, some of the third party scripts only fix bugs, such as my fixes for supplydepot for example. ( http://bani.anime.net/banimod/forums/vi ... 32&start=0 ) and others seriously alter gameplay aspects.

I think that leagues and players alike can agree on exploit fixes as being beneficial to all parties. The purpose of etpro is to fix, debug and improve ET.

I'd like to propose two options:

Option 1 : Adopt existing and verified bug-fixing scripts in future releases of etpro. Many good scripts are going unused simply right now, even in competition. Who really wants the spawn bug on Supplydepot? I don't! Hell, I wrote the bugfix for it!

Option 2: Allow map scripters to present bug fix code on a case by case basis to the etpro team, allowing the etpro team to assemble a 'master script' for popular third party competition maps. For certain original maps, other fixes ( http://bani.anime.net/banimod/forums/vi ... 15&start=0 ) are also available from the community. There are many other scripters who would love to make additional contributions.

I'm not suggesting that we make radical alterations, as that should be left to individual server operators, but I think a comprehensive bug / exploit fix effort would be well worth our time. I can't see how anyone could reasonably complain about script fixes that correct serious bugs and exploits.

One radical change I'd like to see considered is the possibility of making the CP on railgun spawnable to whoever owns the CP. This is as radical of a change as the dynamiteable backdoor on battery. Scripts like this already exist for battery, I think battery might have more potential as a competition map with a few changes to spawns.

Nevertheless, 99.9% of my interest lies in de-exploiting and debugging the game.

Thoughts?

--Mortis

Post by **bani** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:33 pm

mappers should really release bugfixed versions of their maps.

for the stock maps obviously that cannot be done, therefore we include fixed scripts for them.

mortis · Post by **mortis** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 10:13 pm

I agree, but mappers frequently don't, ginc for example handed supplydepot to me and EB over at splashdamage, but getting people to download a whole new pk3 is harder even than getting them to use the scripts. I have the .map file and I could recompile the fixed map, but getting people to adopt it worldwide would be a challenge. Marko is still doing some bugfixes and doing some map-making, but others are not. Some have disappeared entirely. While I'm at it, I could fix the supplydepot tracemap, but again, it would be very difficult to get people to accept it. A silent bugfix script seems a lot easier to me, IMHO.

--Mortis

Post by **bani** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 11:17 pm

shipping it as part of etpro is something altogether different.

not everyone runs the same version of maps. a bugfix for one version might break other versions.

also, one persons bugfix is another persons antichrist. foisting fixes unilaterally on everyone is something we generally avoid unless its critical.

one possibility is to ship 'fix' scripts, but in another directory instead of etpromapscripts, eg "thirdpartyfixes". it wouldnt be enabled by default but it would be available for admins in etpro proper by setting b_mapscriptdirectory.

deej · Post by **deej** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 12:40 am

Isn't it also possible to create a way to certify scripts so that you add an MD5 sum or something, making it possible for leagues to impose & check certain scripts (or deny others?).

This way you could have the "compscripts" directory and make a list of scripts that need to be there.

It would require leagues & script creators to work a more closely but it might also fix a number of bugs that annoy comp players (mainly SD2

).

mortis · Post by **mortis** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:09 pm

bani wrote:one possibility is to ship 'fix' scripts, but in another directory instead of etpromapscripts, eg "thirdpartyfixes". it wouldnt be enabled by default but it would be available for admins in etpro proper by setting b_mapscriptdirectory.

Well, I guess that could work also. It just seems more complicated that way. I'll take whatever I can get!

It's illogical, but I'm still pk3 shy (from the old crash-and-burn download bug days). Also - the etpro specific changes, like fakebrushes, only work under etpro anyway, so scripts still seem easiest, although a checksum could be used on pk3 script package, I suppose, to assure integrity.

Maybe if I create one giant pk3 of all known script fixes and distribute it with a billion warnings about the scripts being for etpro only, there will only be a bajillion posts (instead of two bajillion) announcing that the script pk3 is borked and don't work on shrub, blah blah....

--Mortis

dA*Rogue · Post by **dA*Rogue** » Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:34 am

bani wrote:one possibility is to ship 'fix' scripts, but in another directory instead of etpromapscripts, eg "thirdpartyfixes". it wouldnt be enabled by default but it would be available for admins in etpro proper by setting b_mapscriptdirectory.

Better than nothing...I like it.