BaseItem & BaseMobile

[Vorspire]

Yeah but I can't see a point in that. Is it so it's "easier" to make changes later on? I would rather create BaseFlyingCreature. Out of which I could have something like SlowBaseFlyingCreature and FastBaseFlyingCreature etc. Then accordingly Bird would go out of SlowBaseFlyingCreature, while something like Hawk could be FastBaseFlyingCreature.

I mean for me it is much easier that way. Maybe it's a preference I dunno. I just can't see the point in loading stuff into base classes. I mean even the Stream class doesn't have all the stuff the NetworkStream needs or MemoryStream.

But it's his way of coding I suppose.

That whole thing defies the point in making things easier...
Why would you make yet another child class just for flying mobs, when you can just implement a bool CanFly property on BaseMobile? Look at CanWalk, CanSwim, etc
Even then, slow and fast flying? Why derive two entirely new child classes when, again, you can have a single property to determine the FlightSpeed?

I don't think you quite understand yet, the big picture to reduce the effort, your suggestion only increases the effort needed to make these mobs, if you have the specific classes for FastFlying and SlowFlying, you have to then hard-code each of those classes with Flying code, you'd HAVE to replicate the flying code in both, this is why you would add the basic features for flying to the BaseMobile class, so at least you don't have to repeat your code.
This is a fundamental logic of Object Orientated Programming.

As for the statement about the Stream class; It provides the necessary functionality for all child classes, you'll find that it does actually have everything needed for both NetworkStream and MemoryStream, but both child classes override Stream's functions to determine what to do with the data. You would also havea very had time performing proper IO operations if the native methods didn't accept the Stream as a base.

 

[Peoharen]

I said no. There should be an IAttributes and such. That I think won't mess saves up and handle comparing items for props effortlessly. But why try to work in what is it? Five files? To edit Items? No thank you, try not making this harder for new people to understand.

I could even stand with the concept of making a new BaseItem for the purposes of replacing Static, as you only handle Light, X, Y, Z, Map, ItemID, and Hue opposed to the dozens of properties your typical Decoration saves in an effort to optimize the couple hundard thousand items generated. But BaseItem>Item>SetItem>BaseClothing>BaseHat>WizardsHat? How you tried just coding better? Google override some time, it's awesome. Like did you know BaseWeapon should not contain the Acid Elemental HP drain on weapons or a Vampire Bat's leech life? The mobile it's self should contain the code. Same for the ML Addons method of coding a bandage method every single mobile checks thousands of times per minute yet only ONE mobile in the entire game uses it. I actually released the various mobile fixes but Thil never added them and I didn't care to archive them.

So here is an idea. Rather than saying ADD THIS ADD THIS so I can bog it down too, why not submit a patch trimming things as is?

 

[Vorspire]

I said no. There should be an IAttributes and such. That I think won't mess saves up and handle comparing items for props effortlessly. But why try to work in what is it? Five files? To edit Items? No thank you, try not making this harder for new people to understand.

IAttributes? Explain. It's confusing since an interface doesn't actually contain any managed code. An inteface provides (you guessed it) an interface, which in turn applies logic that you MUST inherit and implement in the class that's using the interface, so that's totally pointless unless your interface is blank and used as a place-holder or identifier, which in turn is just as silly.
You' also have to apply that interface to all of the base classes, which is counter-intuitive and beyond the point of this thread.

Also, BaseItem and BaseMobile will not mess up saves unless you make the edit *after* your shard's *first boot*, or you just don't understand how serialization works and write crappy code that would break it.

If you actually pay attention, I've already wrote a tutorial on how to implement a BaseMobile/BaseItem, of which someone of your level could even understand effortlessly.

I could even stand with the concept of making a new BaseItem for the purposes of replacing Static, as you only handle Light, X, Y, Z, Map, ItemID, and Hue opposed to the dozens of properties your typical Decoration saves in an effort to optimize the couple hundard thousand items generated. But BaseItem>Item>SetItem>BaseClothing>BaseHat>WizardsHat? How you tried just coding better? Google override some time, it's awesome. Like did you know BaseWeapon should not contain the Acid Elemental HP drain on weapons or a Vampire Bat's leech life? The mobile it's self should contain the code. Same for the ML Addons method of coding a bandage method every single mobile checks thousands of times per minute yet only ONE mobile in the entire game uses it. I actually released the various mobile fixes but Thil never added them and I didn't care to archive them.

"BaseItem>Item>SetItem>BaseClothing>BaseHat>WizardsHat"

I lol'd.
Tell me why Item would inherit BaseItem? That would involve a core-mod which would (again) make this thread totally pointless.
Where did SetItem come from? It's not hard to make an item a part of an equipment set without actually editing the item itself, I know, because I've done it and it works.
Replace Static with BaseItem? Seriously?

Item (Core) -> BaseItem -> BaseClothing -> BaseHat -> WizardsHat

If your inheritance chan is longer than that, you're doing OOP wrong.
I don't suppose I have to remind you that RunUO, by far, doesn't live up to most standards of programming and if you use RunUO as a standard for your work, you're going to run into issues, we both proved that with the random locations array initializer that you copy-pasted from the RunUO core.

So here is an idea. Rather than saying ADD THIS ADD THIS so I can bog it down too, why not submit a patch trimming things as is?

Here's an idea, learn about what you're talking about before making a fool of yourself, or at least read through your posts and check them before you reply.
Sorry if it's harsh, but I'm not the only one who thinks you talk absolute bollocks, I know for certain that's why you were previously banned twice, for giving bad advice and asserting it, or just plain not making any sense.

 

[Pure Insanity]

I believe if you simply create a new class that handles all the virtual methods marked in Item.cs and use this as your new BaseClass (meaning anything inheriting from Item would need to be changed to the new class name) it would most likely save you from ever having to do a core edit again on Item.cs. As these methods are usually the only ones that anyone needs to mess with when it comes to items. Yes there are a few helper methods in the Item class too, like HeldBy and other stuff. But no reason to ever mess with this. Could create your own new different method if you needed to mess with the results in between.

I believe the point of all this is that the two main base classes in RunUO is Mobile and Item. And every single other item inherits these classes directly, instead of a middle man. Thus any change you want to make that would possibly effect all of your items, would always need a core edit and recompile. Adding a new class to handle this indeed save time and trouble if you needed to edit something that would normally be a core edit, instead of a distro edit.

Doing this would not bog down the server at all, it would be another class linking to the main base class. Imagine the impact would be minimal. Although if you go in and add a ton of if statements or switches in the overridden methods, it would slow it down as all items that used to inherit from Item (everything...) would be forced to run this bit of code. But if someone just wanted to quickly make it so the PublicOverheadMessage message that Item.cs handles to log all messages that are sent to some log file, then it would indeed require a core edit with the way things are currently setup. With a new distro based BaseItem, you could quickly edit the override there and it would effect all items (amusing you've replaced all the Item inheritance calls with BaseItem.)

But to be honest, I think Item.cs is a bad example as I've rarely ever had to do a distro edit when it comes to it. Mobile is another story though. But I just believe all base classes should have a secondary base class, distro side. That acts as the main base class for all items/mobiles. You could even go as far as to moving all the serialization stuff over to the new base class.

Edit: I believe I'm looking at it the way Vorspire is, which completely makes sense. It's something that should of been done to RunUO along time ago. Without something like this, it makes most novice new comers get completely lost and confused when everyone starts talking about core edits for this usual stuff. This would make it so core mods will never be needed again for something that someone would need to change in the base classes. I can't think of anything they'd need to edit/change in the base class that's not marked virtual. So a setup like this would work perfect I believe. =P

 

[Vorspire]

It's also possible to replace methods and properties that are not marked virtual in Mobile and Item via the use of the "new" keyword.
This method is called inheritance hiding, with intent.

Here's an example;
Item has the "public void MoveToWorld(Point3D location, Map map)" method, it can't be overridden, but it can be replaced if you want to override the functionality in a specific child class.

For example, in BaseItem, you would use the code:

new public void MoveToWorld(Point3D location, Map map)
{
        base.MoveToWorld( location, map ); //Keep original functionaility

        //Use this replacement override in order to verify something, or do something, anything, when MoveToWorld is called.
}

Now, heres the issue, since this is not an actual override, it doesn't get called if you call Item.MoveToWorld, doing this will call the original MoveToWorld method in Item and will not bubble up to the BaseIem.MoveToWorld, as a virtual overridden method would.

But since we'd be using this mod in BaseItem and typically all items derive from BaseItem, any child class (of BaseItem) you use to cal MoveToWorld by reference will ignore the original Item.MoveToWorld.

Here's a example:

BaseItem sword = new Longsword( );

sword.MoveToWorld( loc, map ); //Calls the "new" BaseItem.MoveToWorld method - since you're initializing the Item as a BaseItem type.

Versus:

Item sword = new Longsword( );

sword.MoveToWorld( loc, map ); //Calls the "base" Item.MoveToWorld method - even though Longsword derives BaseItem

Here's an example of real usage, it works by replacing the Dictionary<string, T> native indexer accessed by "this" - because the class this code is used in derives directly from Dictionary<string, T>:

new public object this[string key]
{
	get
	{
		if (ContainsKey(key))
		{ return base[key]; }

		return null;
	}
	set
	{
		if (ContainsKey(key))
		{ base[key] = value; }
		else
		{ Add(key, value); }
	}
}

 

[Peoharen]

IAttributes? Explain.

See AOS.cs GetAttributes and all other such scripts. They compare the item to be Base(Armor/Clothing/Jewel/Weapon/Talsiman/Spellbook/Godknowswhatelse). They could simply compare for a BaseAttributes class that all equipment is based on (like part your BaseItem suggestion), but to implement that change you would wipe world saves putting countless users unable to benefit from the change and outright avoid it. I think an interface would be fine though I've never tested it, but snap at me like wiping saves is the most brilliant idea you've ever had.

Also, BaseItem and BaseMobile will not mess up saves unless you make the edit *after* your shard's *first boot*,

Someone raise your hand if you're willing to wipe your shard for updates so I know at least two people think this is a wonderful way of doing things.

Where did SetItem come from?

You mentioned something about SetItems in your custom BaseItem, really you're right and I didn't finish reading the post. Last time I read something posted by you it was against text written at MSDN, the first hit on google for comparison, and you wanted to validate two arrays on subpar use against my single array done in style of RunUO as if logically they were equal. Truth is, I can't finish reading you post or take much of what you say as token value. All I got out of your post was wipe saves so you can have an extra place to edit that isn't in the Core.

If the last 280ish revisions and major publishes are any clue. RunUO won't include anything that doesn't support older saves, in short you're suggest will never be implemented as is and that's fact. Find a way to support existing saved data and then we can talk about use and if you are half of what you claim to be you'll figure out how.

 

[Pure Insanity]

If the last 280ish revisions and major publishes are any clue. RunUO won't include anything that doesn't support older saves, in short you're suggest will never be implemented as is and that's fact. Find a way to support existing saved data and then we can talk about use and if you are half of what you claim to be you'll figure out how.

If what you say is true. Then the RunUO will never fix the Container serialization issue that's been there for since the last major edit to that file (doesn't serialize a version number at all.)

What you say is silly completely. Serialization isn't as scary as everyone makes it. It would be in fact rather easy to make a simple method that could fix the (import) the old save file and then correctly modify it to accommodate any edits. Proof of this lays all around the source of RunUO, old methods used to update old things or fix things. Just do some digging.

A distro base class could easily be implimented (even made to handle all the serializing) and still support old saves (wouldn't support an edited Item.cs) but even fixing the Container bug wouldn't support people if they've already edited that bit and it's not the old code. The idea would be to make it work with the old saves that the default RunUO runs on. Reading and working with just the bit of data that the base class serializes would be easy, so I don't really see the problem.

 

[Vorspire]

See AOS.cs GetAttributes and all other such scripts. They compare the item to be Base(Armor/Clothing/Jewel/Weapon/Talsiman/Spellbook/Godknowswhatelse). They could simply compare for a BaseAttributes class that all equipment is based on (like part your BaseItem suggestion), but to implement that change you would wipe world saves putting countless users unable to benefit from the change and outright avoid it. I think an interface would be fine though I've never tested it, but snap at me like wiping saves is the most brilliant idea you've ever had.

If it wasn't for you, I wouldn't get my laughs in on these forums.

Someone raise your hand if you're willing to wipe your shard for updates so I know at least two people think this is a wonderful way of doing things.

LMAO

You mentioned something about SetItems in your custom BaseItem, really you're right and I didn't finish reading the post. Last time I read something posted by you it was against text written at MSDN, the first hit on google for comparison, and you wanted to validate two arrays on subpar use against my single array done in style of RunUO as if logically they were equal. Truth is, I can't finish reading you post or take much of what you say as token value. All I got out of your post was wipe saves so you can have an extra place to edit that isn't in the Core.

You say I said things that go against MSDN? So where's the link and the evidence? Again - you provide NOTHING, that's expected from you.
The arrays you are talking about were an out of context example, which can barely be compared to a fully blown class - you agreed on that, but yet you still bring it back up? Cry more...

I used to cover the OPL edits in BaseItem, but now I've found a way to extend the ObjectPropertyList without ANY edits to ANY distro files, but you wouldn't understand how to hook th packets properly, so I won't go into detail...
You also just prove that you're a total ass-hat by telling me you can't finish reading my post, probably because you can't handle so much information at once and can only cope with nit picking the less important facts.

If the last 280ish revisions and major publishes are any clue. RunUO won't include anything that doesn't support older saves, in short you're suggest will never be implemented as is and that's fact. Find a way to support existing saved data and then we can talk about use and if you are half of what you claim to be you'll figure out how.

The reason RunUO will not implement this is because they love making it extremely hard for anyone to get a shard off the ground, unless you've been living under a rock for the past 5 years, you should know that, but oh wait, you don't have any of the team on your contacts list so how could you possibly know? So I'll let that one slide. Suffice to say, you talk out of your ass too much without knowing the facts first.

Also, I don't use RunUO's standard serialization, because it's flawed - if it wasn't flawed, there wouldn't be any posts about serialization messing up. There is indeed a way to serialize properties and fields without explicitly telling the write/reader what to do with your object reference, but I'm not going to elaborate because it would certainly be beyond your comprehension.

Again, if you PAY ATTENTION, you'll realise the thread is aimed at those who are about to start up a shard, not those with a functional shard, that's even a massive statement pointed out in the implementation thread - You make me wonder how you can even research and read up MSDN when you can't even read most of a post on these forums, as you've just clearly stated.

Also, do you have a problem with me because I refused your begging me to come to Orb because they "could use someone like me"? - Not that I'd be caught dead in that place because they allow people like you and Old_School in there, the entire attitude at Orb sucks more balls than a ball cleaning machine.

 

[Pure Insanity]

Orb sucks more balls than a ball cleaning machine.

At least it puts on a new dress every few weeks and forgets everything you've ever told it.

 

[Peoharen]

What you say is silly completely. Serialization isn't as scary as everyone makes it. It would be in fact rather easy to make a simple method that could fix the (import) the old save file and then correctly modify it to accommodate any edits. Proof of this lays all around the source of RunUO, old methods used to update old things or fix things. Just do some digging.

Yeah, it isn't a terrible nightmare. Thing is you really would need a full fledge separate item save since altering the inherited class wipes the item. I think someone release a separate save system that would probably help that out.

As Zippy or whom ever mentioned to me over dropping dozens of properties for decoration items, is the effort spent really providing an equal amount or more of benefit? I kinda of murmured back it's up to the guy coding it. I mean, if the person does it for you then be happy right? Lazyness of course won out after I learned the difference wasn't worth it, a few bytes per item against a SATA's read speed and all that. But the problem is, Vor doesn't care for supporting old saves and would rather bitch about RunUO like his little rant on RunUO not liking people to get a shard up and going while he laughs about ditching reverse compatibility with saves. So that kind of flops, this clearly isn't that.

Also, do you have a problem with me because I refused your begging me to come to Orb because they "could use someone like me"? - Not that I'd be caught dead in that place because they allow people like you and Old_School in there, the entire attitude at Orb sucks more balls than a ball cleaning machine.

Actually the post was a nice way of telling you to put your money where your mouth is. Personal, as much of as an idiot you seem to be (friends = skills? my mom's farmville makes her a super genius!), every body has a use. I'm just hoping with all those rants about how RunUO is such crap you'll step up and prove your knowledge by submitting a nice tweak here and there to improve things. Excluding "everyone start your shards over because my custom PlayerMobile has a lot of code in it" of course.

***

Speaking of which. I was right on Interfaces. Where you can't change a class name or inheritance without a save crash, you can freely add/remove or tweak inherited interfaces. Totally called it before trying, it counts.

 

[Vorspire]

Yeah, it isn't a terrible nightmare. Thing is you really would need a full fledge separate item save since altering the inherited class wipes the item. I think someone release a separate save system that would probably help that out.

As Zippy or whom ever mentioned to me over dropping dozens of properties for decoration items, is the effort spent really providing an equal amount or more of benefit? I kinda of murmured back it's up to the guy coding it. I mean, if the person does it for you then be happy right? Lazyness of course won out after I learned the difference wasn't worth it, a few bytes per item against a SATA's read speed and all that. But the problem is, Vor doesn't care for supporting old saves and would rather bitch about RunUO like his little rant on RunUO not liking people to get a shard up and going while he laughs about ditching reverse compatibility with saves. So that kind of flops, this clearly isn't that.

Laziness, everything you epitomise with your copy & paste submissions.
I have no idea where you assume I don't want to support old saves, something else you've made up in your little world of make-believe, obviously you still need to learn to read an entire post.

Actually the post was a nice way of telling you to put your money where your mouth is. Personal, as much of as an idiot you seem to be (friends = skills? my mom's farmville makes her a super genius!), every body has a use. I'm just hoping with all those rants about how RunUO is such crap you'll step up and prove your knowledge by submitting a nice tweak here and there to improve things. Excluding "everyone start your shards over because my custom PlayerMobile has a lot of code in it" of course.

I wouldn't want to waste my time attempting to fix something that's broke beyond belief, I've had the misfortune of having to correct some 20+ null reference crashes in the past few days due to a certain shard installing SA crap from Orb, if they (and i assume you) can't even program null reference checks properly, I dread to think what else is messed up.

Also, I think I've proved my worth with the countless, dynamic and innovative releases I've made on these forums, the next 5 releases are going to top that off just nicely, again, vesus your cop & paste releases and tiny little tweaks and fixes, why don't you actually attempt to create something from scratch, with your own code? We both know the answer to that, so no need to elaborate with excuses.

Speaking of which. I was right on Interfaces. Where you can't change a class name or inheritance without a save crash, you can freely add/remove or tweak inherited interfaces. Totally called it before trying, it counts.

That may be the case, but your actual knowledge of how an interface *should* be used is lacking to say the least, go read up on standards.
You still have about as much of a clue about programming as a generic doorstop, you've yet to prove otherwise.

...And you still refuse to see the fact that you've been proven wrong, over and over and over (insert recursive call here)

 

[MarciXs]

That whole thing defies the point in making things easier...
Why would you make yet another child class just for flying mobs, when you can just implement a bool CanFly property on BaseMobile? Look at CanWalk, CanSwim, etc
Even then, slow and fast flying? Why derive two entirely new child classes when, again, you can have a single property to determine the FlightSpeed?

I don't think you quite understand yet, the big picture to reduce the effort, your suggestion only increases the effort needed to make these mobs, if you have the specific classes for FastFlying and SlowFlying, you have to then hard-code each of those classes with Flying code, you'd HAVE to replicate the flying code in both, this is why you would add the basic features for flying to the BaseMobile class, so at least you don't have to repeat your code.
This is a fundamental logic of Object Orientated Programming.

As for the statement about the Stream class; It provides the necessary functionality for all child classes, you'll find that it does actually have everything needed for both NetworkStream and MemoryStream, but both child classes override Stream's functions to determine what to do with the data. You would also havea very had time performing proper IO operations if the native methods didn't accept the Stream as a base.

Uhm,
See the problem I see it with his way of flying is rather simple. You say it'd be so easy wouldn't it, CanFly property to true. Sweet. Now I would have to go through every Mobile that is supposed to fly and set this property to true. But, here's the thing. Say your flying method was a bit more complicated like , having a lift and drag coefficient. You would need mass, maybe the angle of wing and so on.
What he would do is add all those properties to the BaseMobile. Why on earth would some , say human, had wing properties? Sure they would be set to zero/null. But hey, now every Mobile that is supposed to fly has to have these set to values. Which means going through Bird,Hawk blah blah.
Sure, the way around is to have a BaseFlyingCreature out of BaseMobile and just set those values. Yeah okay cool, would work. But why would the BaseMobile need any of those properties?
There are (yet again, just for the sake of example) properties in MemoryStream like capacity, and, the network has dataavailable. They aren't implemented on the base level because they have no use on every stream.

Just because I said Fast and Slow, I didn't just think the speed. I mean a total change of flying. What you would suggest? To come up with a formula that would just work on every way of flying just by changing the properties? What if I want the bird to, I dunno fly 3 times high once go down, or some other weird sort of bullshit. So I would open up BaseMobile and add this? Add the properties of IsMadFlying, MadFlyingRange etc.
I don't see point in this. Cause now I would even have to add Serialization for it also. Which means every BaseMobile would get these properties.
I honestly don't see a point in it.

" You would also havea very had time performing proper IO operations if the native methods didn't accept the Stream as a base."
^ .. uhm yeah...
"It provides the necessary functionality for all child classes, you'll find that it does actually have everything needed for both NetworkStream and MemoryStream"
Because Stream doesn't contain properties the MemoryStream has nor NetworkStream, I'm gonna disagree on this one. By what I'm trying to say is that Stream can't "become" MemoryStream just by setting few properties to certain values. In the case of flying,where any human can fly because it's on a base level.

There's a point where feature is no longer a feature.

 

[Vorspire]

Uhm,
See the problem I see it with his way of flying is rather simple. You say it'd be so easy wouldn't it, CanFly property to true. Sweet. Now I would have to go through every Mobile that is supposed to fly and set this property to true. But, here's the thing. Say your flying method was a bit more complicated like , having a lift and drag coefficient. You would need mass, maybe the angle of wing and so on.
What he would do is add all those properties to the BaseMobile. Why on earth would some , say human, had wing properties? Sure they would be set to zero/null. But hey, now every Mobile that is supposed to fly has to have these set to values. Which means going through Bird,Hawk blah blah.
Sure, the way around is to have a BaseFlyingCreature out of BaseMobile and just set those values. Yeah okay cool, would work. But why would the BaseMobile need any of those properties?
There are (yet again, just for the sake of example) properties in MemoryStream like capacity, and, the network has dataavailable. They aren't implemented on the base level because they have no use on every stream.

Just because I said Fast and Slow, I didn't just think the speed. I mean a total change of flying. What you would suggest? To come up with a formula that would just work on every way of flying just by changing the properties? What if I want the bird to, I dunno fly 3 times high once go down, or some other weird sort of bullshit. So I would open up BaseMobile and add this? Add the properties of IsMadFlying, MadFlyingRange etc.
I don't see point in this. Cause now I would even have to add Serialization for it also. Which means every BaseMobile would get these properties.
I honestly don't see a point in it.

" You would also havea very had time performing proper IO operations if the native methods didn't accept the Stream as a base."
^ .. uhm yeah...
"It provides the necessary functionality for all child classes, you'll find that it does actually have everything needed for both NetworkStream and MemoryStream"
Because Stream doesn't contain properties the MemoryStream has nor NetworkStream, I'm gonna disagree on this one. By what I'm trying to say is that Stream can't "become" MemoryStream just by setting few properties to certain values. In the case of flying,where any human can fly because it's on a base level.

There's a point where feature is no longer a feature.

Everything you've said here would be achieved by overrides in a child mobile class that you wish to fly.
By your logic, there's no need for the Item.Name property, because not all Items have a Name...
Seriously, why do people even question it? I'm sorry but 11 "yes" votes, 3 "no" votes and 3 "unsure" votes... The statistics do not lie.
I suppose the concept of inheritance needs to be fully, and I mean FULLY understood, before anyone who questions this mod should post why it's not useful.

- Just to outline the fact that Jeff did oppose this mod, but that's only because he has the knowledge to edit the core...
I don't actually use this mod any more, not since RunUO 1.0 - I only posted about it to make people's lives easier and all I get is a load of stuck up bullshit from people who know next to nothing, typical.
If you can't trust the word of someone who gets paid to do this for a living, then good luck achieving anything, I'm about 98% ready to ditch off this community and subsequently ditch the release of the auto PvP systems, because quite frankly, I don't think some people in this community deserve it, so thanks to those who are so vey close to spoiling it all for the majority, kudos to you.- Doesn't matter how dedicated I said I am, I don't like hanging around bad smells.
It's like talking to a brick wall around here, I could explain the concept of any idea and people still just won't get it, I give up.

 

[mitty]

Uh, Vorspire, your outta line bashing Orb because of your frustration here, and what version of the SVN did you download from there? I've had no problems with the core or otherwise as I AM in charge of the SVN side of things. As far as the community you have no clue as to what your saying?? You don't even know who is on the team who does/submits what etc. WE also don't BASH RunUO over there, WE don't even bother with any of it?? I'm not flaming here, just keep this on a professional level as a professional should. People are entitled to their opinions as you are also. Oh, and before you keep bashing Peo's abilities, I'd really get to know him better! LMAO You have no clue of his knowledge, I work with him every day, you probably have used some of the tools he has helped develop for RunUO (silently of course). So I close, this turned into a bash and a tantrum because people voiced their opinions, and 1 let it get to him. Nothin constructive came out of this whole section of posts. Why, because *people* can't handle negative criticism. I for one think your a decent coder Vorspire, and have helped me in the past. But c'mon, stay professional, and don't tarnish perceptions of you by *bashing*, stay in context of this whole post/mess.
LOL, Well, ty everyone, but I could not stay silent any longer....

 

[Vorspire]

Uh, Vorspire, your outta line bashing Orb because of your frustration here, and what version of the SVN did you download from there? I've had no problems with the core or otherwise as I AM in charge of the SVN side of things. As far as the community you have no clue as to what your saying?? You don't even know who is on the team who does/submits what etc. WE also don't BASH RunUO over there, WE don't even bother with any of it?? I'm not flaming here, just keep this on a professional level as a professional should. People are entitled to their opinions as you are also. Oh, and before you keep bashing Peo's abilities, I'd really get to know him better! LMAO You have no clue of his knowledge, I work with him every day, you probably have used some of the tools he has helped develop for RunUO (silently of course). So I close, this turned into a bash and a tantrum because people voiced their opinions, and 1 let it get to him. Nothin constructive came out of this whole section of posts. Why, because *people* can't handle negative criticism. I for one think your a decent coder Vorspire, and have helped me in the past. But c'mon, stay professional, and don't tarnish perceptions of you by *bashing*, stay in context of this whole post/mess.
LOL, Well, ty everyone, but I could not stay silent any longer....

I know enough professionals to know that Peo is talking out of his ass and you nor him have proved his abilities, you say he's coded tools, yet you don't mention a single name of any of them?
I'm not the one who downloaded things from Orb, I've never visited Orb for at least 2, 3 years. - I'm the poor SOB who has to fix the problems for the guy who downloads things from Orb.
The reason I'm bashing Orb is because:

1) Your community members are coming over here with their massive ego's, spilling tonnes of garbage all over the place and degrading the only seriously dedicated members of this forum, including myself, Pure Insanity and others.

2) Extremely reliable sources tell me that Orb has an issue with RunUO in general - the attitude of the squatters that come over here from Orb only embellishes that fact and it seems that those who fail on these forums and/or get banned see to end up on Orb.

3) The sheer arrogance and lack of ability to coherently understand or even read a full post is enough to piss me right off, considering I have enough respect to at least read an entire post before making a reply, this gives me actual grounds to base my opinions and facts on.

4) Old_School. UOKGames, whatever - The very fact that he is allowed over on Orb epitomizes your general "professional" attitude, because he's one of the most degenerate and annoying members to have ever persistently evaded multiple bans from this forum.

This whole thing has been instigated by Peoharen and it was not just in this thread, he's the one you haveto blame for my negative attitude towards himself and Orb, because he's representing you.
A far as opinions are concerned and your statement about it getting at one person, that's pretty hypocritical considering you're here crying about my opinion about Orb.
You're lucky that I don't come over to Orb and put a boot up the ass of the people writing the code over there TBH.

You don't have to tell me I'm a decent coder, my portfolio pretty much proves that.
You're telling me to stay in context of this post, by thelooks of your post, you didn't eve bother to read the thread title, obviously Peoharen went crying to you for backup.
Don't worry, I'm not bothered about how people perceive me here, for the most part, my thirty-something followers would probably back me up, not to mention the countless people I help on a one-to-one basis, both on these forum and off.
If people think I'm an ass-hat for telling some idiot that he's full of shit, then so be it, but that will not hinder me from continuing to help those that request it, and I will achieve that in the most polite, friendly and professional manner as possible, like always.
Your post has made a dent neither here nor there in my opinion of Orb.

 

[Peoharen]

Peo says he don't like it, Peo is an idiot.
MarciX says he don't like it, MarciX is an idiot.
Spam bot says thanks and he gets excited.
Jeff says he don't like it

I don't actually use this mod any more,

And Vor kicks it to the wind, even Vor doesn't believe in this modification enough to use it.

It is good enough for RunUO, after all. (and this is from the only other thread I've had to deal with him this week)

I don't suppose I have to remind you that RunUO, by far, doesn't live up to most standards of programming and if you use RunUO as a standard for your work, you're going to run into issues, we both proved that with the random locations array initializer that you copy-pasted from the RunUO core.

I guess can't blame you directly for that code then, but it comes as no surprise, RunUO itself is full of crappy code, I won't lie for the sake of argument.

This is also why I'm against copy-paste programming.

The problem is that, RunUO gives the image of professionalism, but when you dig deeper, there are still a lot of flaws and sloppy designs - My point is that people under the false impression then learn by example and end up writing crappy code too, under the assumption that it must be good because the RunUO Team did it, which isn't the case.

Recap, the author doesn't want to support saves and the author doesn't even use his own submission. His BS even reached a point where you can quote his rants and his posts to watch him argue with his self too. Enough said.

 

[Vorspire]

Peo says he don't like it, Peo is an idiot.
MarciX says he don't like it, MarciX is an idiot.
Spam bot says thanks and he gets excited.
Jeff says he don't like it

And Vor kicks it to the wind, even Vor doesn't believe in this modification enough to use it.

It is good enough for RunUO, after all. (and this is from the only other thread I've had to deal with him this week)

Recap, the author doesn't want to support saves and the author doesn't even use his own submission. His BS even reached a point where you can quote his rants and his posts to watch him argue with his self too. Enough said.

You're too cute, really Mostly because you haven't bothered to deny or defend what I've said about you, just goes to show, huh?
Anyway, this entire mod was aimed at new developers to give them an easier platform to work with.
You and MarciX are not idiots for going against the mod, you're idiots because 99% of the stuff you've said is just utter bullshit and/or makes no sense.

Oh, should I mention or nag the fact; for the n'th time, that you still haven't actually provided anything that proves me wrong, or any actual evidenceto suggest you actually know what you'retalking about?

I don't use the mod, because I can freely compile my own core, that isn't the case for most new developers, but obviously your agenda is to hinder helping members of this community, no surprise, you're from Orb, you probably ended up there after your first or second ban from these forums

This is why I think you're cute, you're trying to troll me and it's failing.
Even called for backup lol, well I'm obviously able to hold my own vs you 3 egotistical, annoying and disrespectful jerks.

Please by all means, post some more bullshit that I can laugh at, it makes my day

To summarise; why should I care what some anonymous jerk thinks he knows, I know he's wrong and have facts to prove it, but whenever I present those facts, the claim they can't read my entire post and can't even refute my claims - there's no point in going along with it, I'll just let it go because they are just random, poor little kids with a Napoleon complex that probably just need a hug or two.

 

[MarciXs]

Idiots for going against the idea. What the hell man? I mean seriously, I disapproved the idea of adding flying to base class.. Seriously dude, where have I said this idea is so bad? You want to know what bullshit sounds like?
"If you can't trust the word of someone who gets paid to do this for a living, then good luck achieving anything"
Or the fact that , all of sudden you won't share your auto PVP system. Which I don't even need as far as I remember I even cast my vote as don't bother.
That's what bullshit is. Get a grip man.

And on the subject of not all items doesn't have a name, when you design a parent class it is supposed to have everything that child will need as they will inherit from it. Which means you don't create an item out of Mobile. And just set values so it's an item. It's all about coding style, I've mentioned coding style/preference quite a few times.

 

[Vorspire]

Idiots for going against the idea. What the hell man? I mean seriously, I disapproved the idea of adding flying to base class.. Seriously dude, where have I said this idea is so bad? You want to know what bullshit sounds like?
"If you can't trust the word of someone who gets paid to do this for a living, then good luck achieving anything"
Or the fact that , all of sudden you won't share your auto PVP system. Which I don't even need as far as I remember I even cast my vote as don't bother.
That's what bullshit is. Get a grip man.

You need to learn English for a start.

I said: "You and MarciX are not idiots for going against the mod,"
- I really don't see how you read that wrong - but it means, well, you are not idiots for going against the mod,

I said: "you're idiots because 99% of the stuff you've said is just utter bullshit and/or makes no sense"
- THIS is why; anyone who has an opinion better be prepared to be shit on in the event someone has a different opinion, especially when said opinion is based on "facts" that clearly do not make any sense because said person does not have the knowledge in order to know those facts. That said person refers to you and Peoharen, who by the way, you can thank for bringing you back into this, because I forgot you were even involved until he posted it.

- I will still release the PvP system.

I did not say I wouldn't, well, I did, but I did not set it in stone. It is a very strong warning. Basically, if Peoharen's bullshit continues, then I'm out of here and the entire community can kiss the PvP system bye-bye, because I'm sick and tired of giving, giving and giving and the only thing I'm getting back is total disrespect.
Peoharen started this pathetic little exchange by indirectly insulting my intelligence in another thread, it was completely unfounded and the "facts" he provided when he did it were so full of shit I was indeed offended.
I proved him wrong in that thread and I'll do it in any thread.

I DO NOT purposely refute people's opinions in such a strong manner unless they are asserting opinions with "facts" that do not even make sense. In other words, people who think they know everything and in reality, know nothing, but are too damned ignorant to listen to people who aren't afraid to tell it how it is, or are too damn proud to admit when they may be wrong when presented with facts from, what should be a trusted source; but since they are introverts, chose to remain ignorant and in their own little bubble when the could be living up to the RunUO standard, LLCC.

In short words, Peoharen is a know-it-all-know-nothing person who seems to get off on "being right" and with great shame and pitty, seems he can not accept times when he is wrong and learn from it and would rather remain ignorant to the truth than admit when he is wrong. - Reminds me of a 10-year-old me TBH.

I honestly don't care what people's personalities are like, just don't come round here thinking you own the place, give members bad advice and sloppy code and teach them bad habits, then strut out the door back to their own community, it's a complete lack of respect.

I used to be stubborn in the past, I used to constantly be at war with Jeff about this and that, he used to correct my advice, sometimes he corrected it with wrong advice and I refuted his posts - the reason I was never banned for that was because I actually provided a sound argument, whereas the likes of Peoharen come across as rather narcissistic and do get banned. - I'm not saying I was always right, there are times when I am wrong, the difference is I can admit it, which enables me to learn more, because I'm not ignorant. I've learned a lot of things from Jeff in just the past week that I'd not known beforehand, some simple, some complex like Emit, learning LI to avoid using reflection.

I am NOT wrong about this mod and the many, many uses it would provide to new developers.
I AM WRONG about one thing, the naming convention. There's no way it should be called a BaseMobile or BaseItem, because by standards, if you name something a Base* - you expect it to be a base, but in the case of this mod, they are not bases.

The correct naming convention to use would be:

BaseItem (Core) > Item > Weapon > Longsword
BaseMobile (Core) > Mobile > Creature > Rat

But that would defy the entire point in the mod as you would have to edit the core to change the class names.

I'm not willing to write out another thousand-word essay, so let's just leave it here... and the eventual, predictable reply from Peoharen with nothing but more negativity and ignorance?

 

[MarciXs]

Can you quote out the bullshit I've said. I'm really curious.