MUD Builders and Areas

karlan · 05-21-2003, 02:37 AM

Not being much of a builder (coder here), I am looking at automating some of the olc stuff in my MUD, I have added some inline help stuff, as I fell thet the more information a builder can access the better. While doing this I strated looking at automation.

Example:
[code] once a builder selects the menu option to set the type of an object (lets make a wearable object).
Drop them through into the wear flags,
Drop into the Default wear position,
then cost, weight, ..., values, ...[/quote]
and so on.

As builders (I hope at least some read these boards) would it be useful? Would it get irritating?. Opinions...

Sidmouth · 05-21-2003, 03:01 AM

Some builders might like it, but other might find it annoying. When I'm building, I often like to tackle the fields in a certain order, or even leave some until much later in the building process. If one could turn it off it certainly couldn't hurt, but I think even then most builders, while finding it helpful, probably wouldn't go hogwild over it.

The best thing a coder can do for his builders is to make sure everything works the way it's supposed to and everything is documented well.

karlan · 05-21-2003, 03:59 AM

I try to make sure everything works properly, but it gets very frustrating when a builder does not finish and obj/room/mob it is not a deliberate thing (well I hope it isn't), but people do get distracted and forget to set values, or make an object with a weight of 0, or clothing with no wear positions.

I like the toggle idea tho, thanks

Iluvatar · 05-23-2003, 01:59 PM

The more complex the OLC to suit the flexibility of the builders needs, the greater chance there will be required yet missing fields. We use a system of assigning both a proofer AND a balancer to verify a zone before it's actually published. This seems to work well for us, but even so there are occasional missed things just because of the sheer scope.

Would it be reasonable to 'force' a minimum of specific field entries like weight, material_type, value, alias and general name before OLC can be quit and saved?

Crystal · 05-23-2003, 04:50 PM

I'm slightly confused as to what you mean by drop into the wear flags and default wear positions. Do you mean that it shows all of the available wear flags or do you mean by selecting a type of item, it automatically sets the default wear flags for the builder?

Given the endless circumstances when building, I find it hard to try to cover all of your bases when trying to create a hardcoded system. It can be done I'm sure.

As long as I wouldn't have to sift through the options to backtrack and possibly change something I've already set, I don't see a problem with your system. As long as it doesn't add any unnecessary steps I can definitely see the advantage to having it.

Can you give a little more detail as to the steps you plan to have builders take in your automation?

karlan · 05-26-2003, 01:41 AM

By drop through, I mean go into that menu/question without a return to the main menu in between, still have the option to view/edit the menus individually, but when changing a value that is integral to the object (one that would change everything about it - ie: type) then there are somethings that have to be changed, or at least reviewed and maintained if appropriate

Building Automation - Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Art of Building	Neranz Laverani	MUD Builders and Areas	18	08-08-2005 08:13 PM
Mud building	Sesshomaru	MUD Builders and Areas	1	11-16-2004 11:56 AM
Building a new MUD	Mierza	MUD Coding	42	01-11-2004 01:59 PM
Building a MUD	Shlim	MUD Builders and Areas	1	08-21-2003 06:22 PM
Building	Tocamat	MUD Builders and Areas	9	02-22-2003 09:02 PM

05-21-2003, 02:37 AM	#1
karlan Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Brisbane Australia Posts: 74	Not being much of a builder (coder here), I am looking at automating some of the olc stuff in my MUD, I have added some inline help stuff, as I fell thet the more information a builder can access the better. While doing this I strated looking at automation. Example: [code] once a builder selects the menu option to set the type of an object (lets make a wearable object). Drop them through into the wear flags, Drop into the Default wear position, then cost, weight, ..., values, ...[/quote] and so on. As builders (I hope at least some read these boards) would it be useful? Would it get irritating?. Opinions...

05-21-2003, 03:01 AM	#2
Sidmouth Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 35	Some builders might like it, but other might find it annoying. When I'm building, I often like to tackle the fields in a certain order, or even leave some until much later in the building process. If one could turn it off it certainly couldn't hurt, but I think even then most builders, while finding it helpful, probably wouldn't go hogwild over it. The best thing a coder can do for his builders is to make sure everything works the way it's supposed to and everything is documented well.

05-21-2003, 03:59 AM	#3
karlan Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Brisbane Australia Posts: 74	I try to make sure everything works properly, but it gets very frustrating when a builder does not finish and obj/room/mob it is not a deliberate thing (well I hope it isn't), but people do get distracted and forget to set values, or make an object with a weight of 0, or clothing with no wear positions. I like the toggle idea tho, thanks

05-23-2003, 01:59 PM	#4
Iluvatar Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Mississippi USA Posts: 142	The more complex the OLC to suit the flexibility of the builders needs, the greater chance there will be required yet missing fields. We use a system of assigning both a proofer AND a balancer to verify a zone before it's actually published. This seems to work well for us, but even so there are occasional missed things just because of the sheer scope. Would it be reasonable to 'force' a minimum of specific field entries like weight, material_type, value, alias and general name before OLC can be quit and saved?

05-23-2003, 04:50 PM	#5
Crystal Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Name: Crystal Location: Pennsylvania Home MUD: Advent of the Mists Home MUD: Advent of the Mists Posts: 134	I'm slightly confused as to what you mean by drop into the wear flags and default wear positions. Do you mean that it shows all of the available wear flags or do you mean by selecting a type of item, it automatically sets the default wear flags for the builder? Given the endless circumstances when building, I find it hard to try to cover all of your bases when trying to create a hardcoded system. It can be done I'm sure. As long as I wouldn't have to sift through the options to backtrack and possibly change something I've already set, I don't see a problem with your system. As long as it doesn't add any unnecessary steps I can definitely see the advantage to having it. Can you give a little more detail as to the steps you plan to have builders take in your automation?

05-26-2003, 01:41 AM	#6
karlan Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Brisbane Australia Posts: 74	By drop through, I mean go into that menu/question without a return to the main menu in between, still have the option to view/edit the menus individually, but when changing a value that is integral to the object (one that would change everything about it - ie: type) then there are somethings that have to be changed, or at least reviewed and maintained if appropriate

MUD Builders and Areas

Building Automation