Pitboss 18 IT and Tech Issues Thread

[novice]

This page looks like it could contain useful information and/or tools.
http://aluigi.altervista.org/papers.htm#gsproto

EDIT: It appears there should be full-fledged open source gamespy protocol implementations available:
http://restartreplay.com/pc/saving-whats...lefield-2/

[Bacchus]

I didn't miss the turn, as far as I recall -- I played around 0100 today. Replaying now.

[novice]

I think this is worth taking a look at, it's another gaming community's open-source gamespy replacement.
https://github.com/AncientMan2002/PRMasterServer

[HitAnyKey]

Damn. I'm at work now, it'll be about ten or eleven hours until my play window comes back around.

If someone can play for me I can do gchat instructions during the play session, perhaps. LP's heroics are admirable but it would be better for anyone else to sub this turn for me if we can't wait for me to play myself, lest LP be at war with himself. I don't know if LP's doublethink training is far enough ingrained to safely play both sides. You need doubleplusgood doublethink to pull that off.

Ok, so basically it looks like Xenu is now the last to play (at least as far as I can see, since I still can't see the top of the scoreboard in-game...can we PLEASE get that fixed at some point?) and it is paused with 37 minutes left on the clock.
11 hours from when he posted this about 6 hours from now.

[novice]

Here's a description of how NAT negotiation worked in Gamespy and why it existed.
https://web.archive.org/web/201303180338...ll_Support
(Accessed through the wayback machine)

Reading it, it appears that NAT negotiation is used if the users have failed to set up port mapping (which I believe is the same thing as port forwarding) on their routers. I know I haven't done that, and I didn't bounce before (presumably due to the NAT negotiation feature). If I were to set up port forwarding I might be able to do without NAT negotiation though, at least as long as I was only connecting to other users who had also set up port forwarding.

So we might be able to get some concurrency going again if everybody configured port forwarding on their routers.

[Boldly Going Nowhere]

Here's a description of how NAT negotiation worked in Gamespy and why it existed.
https://web.archive.org/web/201303180338...ll_Support
(Accessed through the wayback machine)

Reading it, it appears that NAT negotiation is used if the users have failed to set up port mapping (which I believe is the same thing as port forwarding) on their routers. I know I haven't done that, and I didn't bounce before (presumably due to the NAT negotiation feature). If I were to set up port forwarding I might be able to do without NAT negotiation though, at least as long as I was only connecting to other users who had also set up port forwarding.

So we might be able to get some concurrency going again if everybody configured port forwarding on their routers.

I live on a college campus and do not manage my network, so I can't enact any changes. Would this plan work if MOST players configured port forwarding and those who were unable to make any changes to settings would just be the pariahs who bounced everyone all the time? This would still leave the pariah players like me unable to receive a diplo-freeze rescue log in, but other than that the game pace would improve over the current situation for the majority of players who can effect router changes.

Or would this require unanimous implementation to work?

[Caledorn]

Here's a description of how NAT negotiation worked in Gamespy and why it existed.
https://web.archive.org/web/201303180338...ll_Support
(Accessed through the wayback machine)

Reading it, it appears that NAT negotiation is used if the users have failed to set up port mapping (which I believe is the same thing as port forwarding) on their routers. I know I haven't done that, and I didn't bounce before (presumably due to the NAT negotiation feature). If I were to set up port forwarding I might be able to do without NAT negotiation though, at least as long as I was only connecting to other users who had also set up port forwarding.

So we might be able to get some concurrency going again if everybody configured port forwarding on their routers.

I believe people need to change the port they use to connect in their civ4 ini file for this to work. We need a map of who's using what port too then to avoid people using the same port. Also, the whole range of ports probably need to be forwarded (including the actual game ports), so a full negotiation is possible.

Example:

Server is on port 2058, player 1 has modified his ini file to play on port 2071, player 2 has modified his ini file to play on port 2072. Both players have forwarded ports 2056 (which is necessary no matter what), 2058, 2071 and 2072 in both their routers, and I as the host have forwarded the ports in my router.

It's worth a try!

[Ruff_Hi]

I just gave my gaming PC a dedicated IP address inside my lan network. I have set up port forwarding for 2056-2065 to that IP address. It seems like I should also forward some other ports (as per Cale above) as well as editing my civ.ini file (snip below). Anything else?

Code:

; NetComm Port
Port = 2056

[Fintourist]

So we are waitin for xenu or did he finish earlier already?

[spacetyrantxenu]

I'm logging in to play now.

Edit: pwnd by the diplo screen twice. BGN is going to unpause for me.