> It does when you plock them! > I'll have to check and get back to you on this one. > > What are you talking about, observer sound? > I added in more sound support for observers (they can now hear shields up/down for the ship they are observing). This is where the shield sound problem shows up with short packets on. Oh and I forgot to mention one other pretty important thing. All robots (iggies, practice robots) always show their shields being down when short packets = on, even if the robot has shields up. > Short packets should be extended for more ship positions. > Agreed but how to make it compatable with older clients? > Short packets handle packetloss much better than old packets. They provide > messages and warnings in a form which the client can do more with. You can > get custom kill messages, phaser messages, planet take, and so on. Short > packets reduce the network bandwidth to the server. Short packets should be > considered the standard. Old packets are just for backward compatibility. > Old packets should not change. If protocol enhancements are desired, they > should be incorporated into short packets. > I'm all for making enhancements to short packets, but the impression I got was that it was a by design tradeoff - less information for less bandwidth, and that increasing the information in short packets (i.e. enhancing them by adding more ship position detail) is not going to be approved. Not to mention the issue of making it compatable with older clients. > People with old clients would want to use non-short packets because their > client dooesn't support short packets or doesn't support them correctly. > And so sending them an extra 5 chars in the middle of the phaser message gives them unwanted information or breaks their client how? Bill