> Care to share your findings? How many players clients have you checked and > during what period of time have you done this? > > It doesn't work on continuum anymore, so where have you done this? Sending 5 spaces to all board still works to get client info from all players. Right off the bat, 75% of players use Netrek XP or Netrek XP Mod, which has 32 pos bitmaps. Current COW and Paradise users also have 32 pos bitmaps. Current game on continuum: 12 Netrek XP or XP Mod 3 Netrek XP 2006 1 Netrek 1999 3 Paradise 2000rc5 1 Paradise/Tedturner 1.3.1 1 COW 2.02 2 COW 2.10 32 view pixmaps were put in COW as of 3.00, so those 3 players don't have em, But if they used the latest version of their client, they would as well. Same for the 1 Tedturner user (the lastest version of Paradise has em). The other 19 users have the 32 pixmap sets. > I strongly disagree. Between 16 and 32 there's "only" twice as many > positions. In the 16 position setup there's four positions in a 90 degree > turn, in 32 there's eight. That's a big noticable difference, but with 256 > positions there's an amazing 64 positions in a 90 degree turn, so with 256 > positions the ship moves virtually seemless, so all the position fake > moves are useless. So anyone playing with a client that has 256 ship > position is unaffected by the, very difficult, position fake move. In a dogfight you can't turn to the degree, maybe if you are a borg but no one is that good ;P. I've played with the client in both 32 position mode and 256 position mode, I really don't notice the difference in combat. It's more noticeable during orbiting, or when you are going at high warp. > One might argue (which you are not) that it's so much prettier with 256 > ship positions and that it's okay to have clients with that many ship > positions just because it makes the game prettier and therefore draws more > people, like when we went from 5 to 10 updates per second (which really > screwed with dogfighting and made it a lot easier for poor dogfighters). > That's a more legitimate argument, and if that's the way the developers > want the game to go it's an easy call to make. > Thought about using that argument but it didn't address the concern you brought up. But yes that's the way I'd like to go, I want to make the client look better, that includes smoother ship turning, higher resolution bitmaps, larger tactical window, etc.