Bots and Simulations > Internet Mode Commentary
Who else is online?
Peter:
The reverting of code won't be the issue, but the added stuff. Not that I see why it should be reverted, tbh, but ok weren't huge changes anyway.
I won't plan to be switching the port to the minecraft port. Host blocks it for some reason.
spike43884:
--- Quote from: Peter on April 13, 2015, 04:50:35 AM ---The reverting of code won't be the issue, but the added stuff. Not that I see why it should be reverted, tbh, but ok weren't huge changes anyway.
I won't plan to be switching the port to the minecraft port. Host blocks it for some reason.
--- End quote ---
just try a different port, I just gave an example port. Or multiple ports.
More ports, more compatibility <3
Numsgil:
--- Quote from: spike43884 on April 10, 2015, 06:34:06 AM ---
Just as a sidenote if you do do an update to change IM, coudl you also include a little change to maybe 10 free memory locations to store longterm memory that remains for maybe 20 cycles unless overwritten? It'd be incredibly useful if I were to attempt an "All For One" bot
--- End quote ---
Any memory locations that aren't sysvars won't get reset frame to frame (unless something is broken). I think that's what you're asking for? If you want them to wipe once every, say, 20 cycles, you could do something like
--- Code: ---*.timer 20 mod 0 = 0 .somememloc store
--- End code ---
Botsareus:
The only thing in the current IM code that is concerning me is the attempt to correct for simulation speeds. Imo seemed to work better without that feature.
The port thing requites some thinking. As far as I knew port 79 should be open for most people. I have no idea what the compromise port should be.
The other three changes should not be too bad, however I will have to publish the visual basic portion first, I currently have no way of doing that.
Botsareus:
If you google for "common open ports" it should give you a nice list.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version