[DEV] Conquer 53xx (Monk) Emulator [Yuki,Beatz]

So wait... I was the first one to log into the monk source and take a walk around? That's cool =] Anyways... I hope that spot isn't assumed to be me =[ lol
I don't want to start another project. I just cut back on all my projects. >< haha

@Hunter: Not talking about Current Client, Talking about the Test Client with monks :D

@Pro: Pm´d and thanks :)

@Fang: Yep u were the first one :) And no i that open place wasnt for you, it was for anyone who could contribute, you could aswell.

Quote:

Originally Posted by |NeoX @Hunter: Not talking about Current Client, Talking about the Test Client with monks :D @Pro: Pm´d and thanks :) @Fang: Yep u were the first one :) And no i that open place wasnt for you, it was for anyone who could contribute, you could aswell.

Good ^^ Well I can contribute either way. I'll PM you the 5250+ Item Detail Packet.

I could be a helper for this project, i have 3 years working with C#. this project is good. but need good coders.

I have to agree with Basser on a level. Don't focus on developing a server to reach a certain patch, focus on making a good base (that's easily configured to another patch!), then focus on upgrading it to the newer patch. Elseway, you are most likely to work backwards (coding a crappy way just to get the main features working, and when you want to optimize your code it's hard since there's a bunch).


Anyway, goodluck.

@Fang: Thanks for that packet! Was going to figure it out today but now i dont have to! Thanks!

@Albert0: Yeah, how about now.

@Emme: We focus on the efficency aswell as on the Patch, i think it will result in something sexy. But still, effcency has priority.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmmeTheCoder I have to agree with Basser on a level. Don't focus on developing a server to reach a certain patch, focus on making a good base (that's easily configured to another patch!), then focus on upgrading it to the newer patch. Elseway, you are most likely to work backwards (coding a crappy way just to get the main features working, and when you want to optimize your code it's hard since there's a bunch). Anyway, goodluck.

Focusing on a certain patch is not a bad thing, but focusing on certain features, before efficiency is bad.

U know what I mean (Im bad at explaining) >_<

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1337 H4X0R Focusing on a certain patch is not a bad thing, but focusing on certain features, before efficiency is bad. U know what I mean (Im bad at explaining) >_<

I think I know what your talking about and we are focusing on efficiency and to everyone that said it, yes this will be easy enough to upgrade packets to a newer patch or vice versa.

Alright, sounds good! The best luck to you guys!

oh dang now i gotta get the test client haha

Quote:

Originally Posted by hunterman01 oh dang now i gotta get the test client haha

2bad its not on their ftp anymore xD

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1337 H4X0R Focusing on a certain patch is not a bad thing, but focusing on certain features, before efficiency is bad. U know what I mean (Im bad at explaining) >_<

Focusing on a certain patch is a bad thing; makes the server likely to become patch dependent.
You shouldn't have to start from scratch when moving to a newer or older version. Nor should you have to edit the old one, I'd make it compatible with all patches and have the 'patch dependent' things in a separate project.
But nvm, patch dependence isn't a real problem, just make sure the design is good and focus on efficiency.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Basser Focusing on a certain patch is a bad thing; makes the server likely to become patch dependent. You shouldn't have to start from scratch when moving to a newer or older version. Nor should you have to edit the old one, I'd make it compatible with all patches and have the 'patch dependent' things in a separate project. But nvm, patch dependence isn't a real problem, just make sure the design is good and focus on efficiency.

I was thinking more like, "Hey, let's write this code in any way possible just to get it working, then we'll refine it later on.." Time goes, they add lots of features, for examples monsters and npcs, then realise game is a little bit slow and bad performance, so they go: "Hey, let's rewrite the screenfunction and hope for less lag!", and they'll end up rewriting tons of shit depending on the screenfunction. Just make sure the base is good, rest is good2go.

Nab Yuki :D Me wantz to help :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Basser Focusing on a certain patch is a bad thing; makes the server likely to become patch dependent. You shouldn't have to start from scratch when moving to a newer or older version. Nor should you have to edit the old one, I'd make it compatible with all patches and have the 'patch dependent' things in a separate project. But nvm, patch dependence isn't a real problem, just make sure the design is good and focus on efficiency.

This isn't necessarily true. Certain features (i.e. nobility for one) are not backwards-compatible with older patches in anyway or form.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmmeTheCoder I was thinking more like, "Hey, let's write this code in any way possible just to get it working, then we'll refine it later on.." Time goes, they add lots of features, for examples monsters and npcs, then realise game is a little bit slow and bad performance, so they go: "Hey, let's rewrite the screenfunction and hope for less lag!", and they'll end up rewriting tons of shit depending on the screenfunction. Just make sure the base is good, rest is good2go.

Procrastination is bad, yes, as in continuing to say "it's fine for the time being, but I'll have to come back and fix it later". However, this is not to say that a complete rewrite of something can't be done -- it just rarely is.