A New Mapping Application

[JC the Builder]

UOAM Replacement Discussion

Status: Kiwillian is working on an application. Not yet released.

Screenshots:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of the biggest holdups over this new client acceptance is UOAM. A lot of guilds (including ours) require using it because it is such a useful tool. The main function being the ability to connect and see the location of everyone you are grouped with. While this functionality exists in limited form with the Enhanced Client, it is not enough. We need to be able to see everyone we want, not just party members. It would likely be a huge undertaking for the UO developers to integrate such functionality and make sure it doesn't tax the shards.

For a mapping application to work it only needs 3 pieces of data: An x coordinate, a y coordinate and the facet name. If the developers provided these 3 pieces of information to 3rd party application developers through a client API then someone or a group of people could create the next version of UOAM.

It is actually possible to create a full mapping application in 2D by integrating with the provided UOAssist API. But this creates a catch-22. People won't adopt the Enhanced Client without UOAM. UOAssist won't be updated if not enough people start using the Enhanced Client.

I have wished someone would make a new mapping tool to replace the currently limited functionality in UOAM. The public password is so insecure it is insane and causes our guild a lot of problems. I would especially like to see a real authentication scheme implemented for the server application.

If no one else would be interested in leading such a development I suppose I would. I will not be able to do it by myself and require assistance of other developers with such an endeavor. The only issue at hand is it needs to be someone trustworthy unless the project went open source.

 

[Sweeney]

In my opinion it would be better to hack the x/y/facet yourself since that would be all you're using UOA for in the first place. Don't keep trying to support a product that was not meant to interface with the new client (And this, of course, assumes the new client uses the sama data stream as the classic client).

 

[Kiwillian]

Yeah, one idea I had a while back was making a "proxy" app that sits between KR (now SA), UOAM and the UOAM server. It passes packets from UOAM to its server and injects your position which it pulls from the client via either a Lua mod or some other means (OCR it off the screen if need be lol).

Pretty sure the packets from the KR/SA client are different and/or differently encrypted from 2D. Decrypting that may be against the ToS, and so might my idea of how to do it, who knows?

 

[IanJames]

JC - I'm sure you can find some people willing to develop this with you. It's one of the biggest hold-ups in moving our guild into the new client. We use map constantly to locate each other and keep track of what's going on. It really is something needed.

I would help, but I'm not a coder by any means. if you need help testing anything though, I'm available for that.

Good luck!

 

[Sweeney]

Yeah, one idea I had a while back was making a "proxy" app that sits between KR (now SA), UOAM and the UOAM server. It passes packets from UOAM to its server and injects your position which it pulls from the client via either a Lua mod or some other means (OCR it off the screen if need be lol).

Pretty sure the packets from the KR/SA client are different and/or differently encrypted from 2D. Decrypting that may be against the ToS, and so might my idea of how to do it, who knows?

The only way to get something approved is to make it while it is against the ToS, then after it works submit it for 3rd party status. EA doesn't sell licenses to 3rd party devs. It's a silly bureaucratic way to do this.

Network coding and the interface wouldn't be hard at all (for me at least).. the only thing is I'm not wanting to do is waste hours and hours trying to figure out the UO data packets. Of course if the modders can get the coordinates to display (they can) then maybe there's an easy way to do it.

 

[JC the Builder]

I believe the developers would be open to providing the necessary variables. Manually hacking the client and stealing them would require the new application to be updated frequently. Possibly every time the Enhanced Client is updated. Plus it would likely be illegal to discuss such an application on Stratics or in-game.

On the subject of a UOAM proxy: even if such a thing was built, it won't be compatible with the new Stygian Abyss areas. Those need to be added by the creator of the program. Who knows if that is going to happen. Bexlan has made it very clear that UOAM will never receive another update. Mondain's Legacy support was not even finalized.

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

I believe the developers would be open to providing the necessary variables. Manually hacking the client and stealing them would require the new application to be updated frequently. Possibly every time the Enhanced Client is updated. Plus it would likely be illegal to discuss such an application on Stratics or in-game.

On the subject of a UOAM proxy: even if such a thing was built, it won't be compatible with the new Stygian Abyss areas. Those need to be added by the creator of the program. Who knows if that is going to happen. Bexlan has made it very clear that UOAM will never receive another update. Mondain's Legacy support was not even finalized.

I am not clear why the developers need to do anything.

If the Coordinates can be displayed and the Facet it surely known to the skin. Then all that remains is a means to resolve a server address and the protocol to be used to update the server. I assume the skins are done in lua? If so, it has been a while since I looked at lua (not my first choice for scripting) but I thought it had internet access capabilities, meaning the ability to communicate to a server should be abstracted at a rather high level.

Now having said that, I have been wanting to ask some questions along this venue.

I can easily get it, why one would want to know were friends, family, guild members, alliances etc., but do you also track your enemies?

 

[JC the Builder]

I don't know if skins have that information provided to them. Even if it is there is unlikely to be a process to get that to a 3rd party application.

I can easily get it, why one would want to know were friends, family, guild members, alliances etc., but do you also track your enemies?

Right now some people try to find out enemy UOAM server passwords so they can spy on them. You can't just see someone in-game and start tracking them. They need to be connected to a UOAM server and you need to know that server's password.

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

I don't know if skins have that information provided to them. Even if it is there is unlikely to be a process to get that to a 3rd party application.

Right now some people try to find out enemy UOAM server passwords so they can spy on them. You can't just see someone in-game and start tracking them. They need to be connected to a UOAM server and you need to know that server's password.

The Coordinate are being display in the skins now, I am fairly confident I have seen a macro to determine the facet.

As to the information to the uoam server. If as I remember lua, it would have the ability to connect to that server and have transactions with that server if one knew the protocol and datagram.

So for a public uoam server, then what your asking for could in fact be used to grief people.

Don't read to much into that, it just makes me squirm a bit and I am not and have never been a big fan of uoam anyway so it doesn't really affect me one way or the other.

 

[Chrissay_]

At this time new features for the Enhanced Client have been put on hold until we release Stygian Abyss. However, I will forward this suggestion to the Engineers for them to review after we launch the expansion.

Keep in mind that the client will still be in Beta once the expansion is launched.

 

[kelmo]

Thank you Chrissay!

 

[JC the Builder]

Even if they do provide the API, someone still needs to create the application. If anyone is a programmer knowing C++ or another language (not Java or .Net, needs to be able to run stand alone) and wants to work on this project, private message me.

I've also come up with some new ideas. For example it will be compatible with both clients (2D Classic and Enhanced Client).

 

[Kiwillian]

Why should anyone have to PM you if they want to do it? And what's wrong with .NET? Every one should have the framework by now. 2.0 at least, if not 3.5 (I doubt many have 4.0). I agree about Java though - ugh!

Anyway, I had a dig around today and it looks like you can get the data out of the client using legitimate means, so that's a plus.

As for what Enigma said - the Lua APIs available within the client are very strictly limited for security reasons. You most certainly can't open sockets and connect to things from within the client itself.

And who knows, maybe they will add something like UOAM at some point since Chrissay passed it on (I can dream, ok).

 

[IanJames]

I think JC is just trying to get a group of people together so a project can be organized. Just so we don't have 5 people trying to reinvent the wheel.

Personally, I think we definitely have the talent within the UO community to pull it off. Look how much the modders were able to do with the limited resources available to them.

Like I said, I'm not a programmer, but I'm willing to help with testing and things like that.

The lack of a map program is a major hurdle for adoption of the new client by most of the guilds on Siege.

 

[JC the Builder]

Why should anyone have to PM you if they want to do it? And what's wrong with .NET? Every one should have the framework by now. 2.0 at least, if not 3.5 (I doubt many have 4.0). I agree about Java though - ugh!

.NET is an optional Windows component. Not everyone will have it installed. I think it would be better to use a language which can stand on its own so there is minimal installation issues.

 

[Sweeney]

C/C++/asm would have a smaller memory footprint, smaller app size, less dependencies, and faster performance.

 

[JC the Builder]

Yes, all of those properties are important. UOAM is a bit sluggish. Hopefully that can be corrected.

I'm still trying to find someone to collaborate with. Windows application development is not my forte. Trying to build this by myself would take months.

 

[JC the Builder]

There was an update for UOAssist today. Tug posted the following comment, "Still no word back from EA/Mythic on 3d client topics." So he has apparently inquired about updating for the Stygian Abyss client but the developers have not gotten back to him. If UOAssist is updated for Stygian Abyss then UOAM will continue to work. However UOAM will never work for the new Stygian Abyss facet unless someone creates an unauthorized patch.

 

[Kiwillian]

UOA is a bit of an albatross for Mythic, surely. Having that there means they can't switch to a better encrypted protocol etc which would help deter scripters. I mean, WoW switched to SRP a while back. Not that that stops people, but it makes it a lot harder since you can't recover the key just from sniffing the packets etc.

Anyhoo, I've been tinkering away on something and it's coming along fairly well. Who knows if I'll ever finish it though - lol.

 

[Leeloo Dallas]

Not sure if this is the right place to post this, so my apologies in advance if I am off base...

I am DYING with UOAM!! I have tried many times, very unsuccessfully, to download the program but I have yet to get it to load up an instance of UO. I am getting through the download and getting Downloaded 2 Patches of 6 and then says that I have not downloaded the entire program. If anyone can help at all, I would greatly appreciate it!! I am only running the 2D client so I should be able to work with it. I am fully patched with my client.

Thanks!!
DM

If i posted this in the wrong place, please feel free to move or delete, how ever you see fit.

Also, If anyone needs any assistance with ANY testing please let me know!! I would love to be of some help!

 

[JC the Builder]

UOA is a bit of an albatross for Mythic, surely. Having that there means they can't switch to a better encrypted protocol etc which would help deter scripters. I mean, WoW switched to SRP a while back. Not that that stops people, but it makes it a lot harder since you can't recover the key just from sniffing the packets etc.

UOAssist does not hinder UO development in any way. It is the responsibility of the UOAssist developer Tug to adapt to client changes.

 

[Cear Dallben Dragon]

C/C++/asm would have a smaller memory footprint, smaller app size, less dependencies, and faster performance.

while this is all true.

the mem usage would be less than 15 megs
app size.... modern day 1-5TB HDD's
Less dependencies. word, its to bad .net isnt a windows update.
faster. Not really. tho cpp apps are faster. its generally unnoticable by humans. Ive made plenty of uo2d applications in C#, speed, mem are never issues. IE automatic roleplay for pvp.

 

[Xanth de Orlig]

Not sure if this is the right place to post this, so my apologies in advance if I am off base...

I am DYING with UOAM!! I have tried many times, very unsuccessfully, to download the program but I have yet to get it to load up an instance of UO. I am getting through the download and getting Downloaded 2 Patches of 6 and then says that I have not downloaded the entire program. If anyone can help at all, I would greatly appreciate it!! I am only running the 2D client so I should be able to work with it. I am fully patched with my client.

Thanks!!
DM

If i posted this in the wrong place, please feel free to move or delete, how ever you see fit.

Also, If anyone needs any assistance with ANY testing please let me know!! I would love to be of some help!

i had the same issue when i reloaded everything ... i believe i was trying at uoam.net ... and think it bunked out ...

try this : http://xeonlive.com/uoam/

fairly certain this is where it finally worked for me

 

[Gellor]

One thing that would be nice is a linux "server" to this project. This would just be your standard demon running that recieves/passes info to the clients. This would probably be the easiest part of the whole project

The server part of UOAM has been a bit of a killer for my guild lately. Both from a anti guild security stand point as well as someone being forced to open their network to potential hazards. My concern is largely the latter but I know some PvP guilds are beyond dishonest.

I would also agree with trying to make it in something other than .net. I've always been a tight/compact style programmer and hate all the bloat ware that seems to come out.

The less memory it takes to run, the better... but also the smaller the install the better.

 

[Kiwillian]

A linux server would be a nice feature. However there would be perhaps more serious security risks with such a thing, especially if someone ran it on a shell account that perhaps they have with their web hosting. eeeek!

I don't know why so many think .net is somehow super slow or bloaty or whatever. the vast majority of people already have the framework, and Vista (and Win7) have it as part of the OS anyway. Even then it's what? a 20MB download? That's smaller than the map data for Fel The apps themselves are tiny, much smaller than you could hope to make with C++.

In fact, the map data is the main memory gobbler for a map app. The maps are HUUGGEE. The fel/tram map data in the classic client is 85MB. UOAM makes this into a 28MB bitmap at full res. In EC they are about 18MB for the pre-rendered ones.

 

[JC the Builder]

I don't know why so many think .net is somehow super slow or bloaty or whatever. the vast majority of people already have the framework, and Vista (and Win7) have it as part of the OS anyway. Even then it's what? a 20MB download? That's smaller than the map data for Fel The apps themselves are tiny, much smaller than you could hope to make with C++.

If whoever works on this project wants to do it in .Net, then it would have to be that way. But I would really like to avoid forcing people to download an additional Windows component. Then you have to worry whether they have the right version of .Net.

.Net is good for certain things but you have to consider everyone who will be using this application. A lot are technical novices who would stumble over such additions.

Article on .Net install base

 

[Kiwillian]

Yeah, I understand that, but I think at this point in time it's not really an issue.

Look at the "blog" article you linked. First he states:

"I used the browser user agent string to determine the .net version, Internet explorer always report all installed versions of .net (I disregarded all but the latest), FireFox reports only the latest version and only if it has the ClickOnce plug-in installed, other browsers (Google Chrome, Opera, Safari …) don’t report the .net version at all."

So only people with IE are counted really, I use FF (and Safari on my Mac) and have no idea what that ClickOnce thing is.

Even so his results are:

"17% of visitors don’t have .net at all

80% of visitors are able to run .net 2.0 software without any lengthy download or installation.
56% of visitors have .net 3.0 or later and can use WPF, WCF and WF."

And these numbers don't add up. Even if the 56% are in the 80%, 80+17=97. What are the other 3%?

Anyway 17% of IE users (or does that include Chrome, Safari & Opera users?) not having it (in May, who visited that guys website) is a pretty small amount in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Cear Dallben Dragon]

Yeah, it really is ******** that .net isnt a windows update that happens automatically. To combat that I always program my installers to add .net during installation.
Really is annoying tho. I miss cpp. getting back into it now in school.

 

[Kiwillian]

I thought it was? Especially in Vista, since 3.0 is part of the OS. =/

 

[JC the Builder]

Except not everyone UO player is running Vista. In fact it is probably a very small amount. You need to keep in mind the entire target audience. Some people are still running Windows98. Who knows if that could even be supported if you stuck with C++. I think UOAM was written to be compatible with Windows95.

 

[Kiwillian]

I don't run vista myself, so yeah. But forget Win95 or 98, that is almost as old as UO lol and no longer supported anyway.

Actually, apparently since ML the 2D client requires DX 9 which would barely run on 98 (it needs 98SE, at least, if not XP).

Anyway, I dunno why I keep "arguing" here lol

 

[Old Man of UO]

I thought it was? Especially in Vista, since 3.0 is part of the OS. =/

It's an optional download in Vista, and you have to manually add it. To clear up a point you made earlier, .NET is not part of the OS, it's an add-on. I'm not arguing one way or the other, just clarifying.

Personally, I can't see the point of a "new" UOAM. I think it would be far better to get this functionality in the current 2D+ client straight from EA/Mythic.

 

[JC the Builder]

Personally, I can't see the point of a "new" UOAM. I think it would be far better to get this functionality in the current 2D+ client straight from EA/Mythic.

The biggest functionality that everyone wants is to be able to track any person you want. That is unlikely to ever be implemented. It would take a lot of development time, likely an entire cycle of 2-3 months of just working on it. Even then you would forgo the benefits of having it as a separate application.

 

[Gellor]

It's an optional download in Vista, and you have to manually add it. To clear up a point you made earlier, .NET is not part of the OS, it's an add-on. I'm not arguing one way or the other, just clarifying.

I'll address a few things concerning "bloat" ware.
1) Download size does make a difference. Bandwith is rarely free especially once you start gobbling up LOTS of it. Plus there is the storage issue... storage is less of an issue now days.
2) Bloat ware is usually programmed inefficiently... either actually coding or extra junk that is packaged with the program that doesn't need to be installed.

I'm an "old school" programmer so I like to see and make small tight efficient programs... not just programs "that work".

A map replacement especially if it linked together is going to have a "lot" of work going on: sending your location to a server, receiving a host of locations from the server, plotting your location, and plotting everyone else's location. Bloat ware would compound the slowness of this.

Personally, I can't see the point of a "new" UOAM. I think it would be far better to get this functionality in the current 2D+ client straight from EA/Mythic.

Have you run with a guild? UOAM is a life saver for a guild especially in PvP.

I am not familiar with the latest "3d" client offerings. But UOAM isn't limited by guild, alliance, party, etc.

The other features in UOAM that I like are:

• creating my own labels for locations
• dropping a "marker" to find a place
• Zoom feature
• different color "char" marker... I'm sorry but a white character marker in old 2d client is worthless when walking through snow

As for actually developing this, I think the big thing that needs to be ironed out is the lowest OS offering it would work on. Personally, it should follow the UO box for the most part. OTOH, supporting 95 and 98 is a loosing proposition. I personally don't know anyone running either of those... well, actually I have an old 98 laptop I pop out on occasion. The lowest system I run UO on is Win 2000.

As for .NET vs anything else, I'd like to see what type/size of install package .NET creates.

 

[Sweeney]

The biggest functionality that everyone wants is to be able to track any person you want. That is unlikely to ever be implemented. It would take a lot of development time, likely an entire cycle of 2-3 months of just working on it. Even then you would forgo the benefits of having it as a separate application.

DDS loader/viewer - Easy
TCP/IP server and client code - Easy

The only difficult part would be to get the coordinates/shard info, which probably isn't very difficult seeing how many cheat apps can get it. Once you have that info.. testing time of less than a week. Any half-decent programmer can get everything working in less than 4 hours (again once you know how to get the coordinate info).

 

[JC the Builder]

It will certainly take a lot longer than 4 hours to build this application. You are underestimating the complexity and number of features.

 

[Sweeney]

It will certainly take a lot longer than 4 hours to build this application. You are underestimating the complexity and number of features.

Yeah buddy, I bet I am.. tracking players, tracking position, waypoints. All of that is easy. Even if you wanted to add a useless chat option, easy.

But I do take a bit back, security would take a while.

Too bad I'm busy with school.. this would be an easy $500-$1000 at least at $5 a pop.

 

[Kiwillian]

I agree with JC that you are overlooking a lot of things. There are a lot of small details and options that people will want. Stuff like rotating the map 45% or not, zooming in and out, adding icons from the .MAP files that UOAM uses and being able to mouse over them for details and searching them for shops and landmarks. The list goes on...

Also, the "DDS loader/viewer" part isn't much good if the EC isn't installed. You have to be able to generate the maps from the 2D client .MUL data in that case. (I don't think you can distribute the maps, you have to use the clients data).

 

[Sweeney]

I agree with JC that you are overlooking a lot of things. There are a lot of small details and options that people will want. Stuff like rotating the map 45% or not, zooming in and out, adding icons from the .MAP files that UOAM uses and being able to mouse over them for details and searching them for shops and landmarks. The list goes on...

Also, the "DDS loader/viewer" part isn't much good if the EC isn't installed. You have to be able to generate the maps from the 2D client .MUL data in that case. (I don't think you can distribute the maps, you have to use the clients data).

I was never interested in keeping 2d alive. Most people have said the only thing holding them back from the enhanced client is a mapping app that works. I had no interest in loading .mul files. Doing so would add some work yes. You want a map program to remain 100% compatible with UOAM? You're nuts, don't support that crap, come up with better solution. People will manually move their icon data.

And I don't think you're a C/C++ progammer either. If you know anything at all about graphics programming, rotation/scaling/transformations are as simple as applying a matrix.

Good luck.

 

[Old Man of UO]

The biggest functionality that everyone wants is to be able to track any person you want. That is unlikely to ever be implemented. It would take a lot of development time, likely an entire cycle of 2-3 months of just working on it. Even then you would forgo the benefits of having it as a separate application.

Any self-developed program that interacts with any UO client (in this case intercepting the data stream) will be illegal, and it would have to go through the non-existent 3rd party app approval process, which will take way longer than the 2-3 months you quoted.

Just a point of clarification, in your first sentence, did you mean to say "ANY" person? Don't you mean only those who agree to it? Pretty sure that is what you meant.

And last question, I don't see the benefit of a separate application. In the case of UOAM, which is a separate application, the developer abandoned the project. What prevents this happening on whatever you develop here?

I'll address a few things concerning "bloat" ware.
....


Have you run with a guild? UOAM is a life saver for a guild especially in PvP.

I am not familiar with the latest "3d" client offerings. But UOAM isn't limited by guild, alliance, party, etc.

The other features in UOAM that I like are:

• creating my own labels for locations
• dropping a "marker" to find a place
• Zoom feature
• different color "char" marker... I'm sorry but a white character marker in old 2d client is worthless when walking through snow

...

Hmm.. bloatware... I know what it is. Just having a separate app for the map does not in itself prevent having two applications running that both have bloatware. Adding this feature to the Enhanced Client (which by the way, is NOT a 3d client offering) does not mean we are getting excessive bloatware. You don't know what is involved in adding this feature to the existing map in the new Enhanced Client, only the Developers do.

I'm not saying the mapping feature in the new client can't be improved, it can, but it can already do most of what you listed. You haven't even tried it. Fixing the "guild, alliance, party, etc." limitations in the new map should be straight forward, IF that can be done without exploits.

I am familiar with UOAM, and all of its features, and have used it for guilds and friends. The tracking features was "nice" but not anything I would call essential. What I found was people used it as a crutch so they didn't have to plan ahead.

Anyway, I still think we are better off with an integrated mapping feature in the new Enhanced Client.

 

[Gellor]

Any self-developed program that interacts with any UO client (in this case intercepting the data stream) will be illegal, and it would have to go through the non-existent 3rd party app approval process, which will take way longer than the 2-3 months you quoted.

Actually, UOAssist provides all the hooks that are needed for a map program... which is how the current UOAM works. Thus, if UOAssist is approved for both versions, a seemless integration for a 3rd party map program is assured.

Can you point out something on UO's site that specifically says "interacts" and not modifies? Last I recall, EA didn't want the data stream modified but reading the data stream and interacting with the UO client directly were allowed.

And last question, I don't see the benefit of a separate application. In the case of UOAM, which is a separate application, the developer abandoned the project. What prevents this happening on whatever you develop here?

I am waiting to see how this project runs... BUT, if it is developed as open source, there is nothing that would stop it from being developed in the future. And depending upon how robust it is made, nothing EA could do would prevent it from being usable.

Hmm.. bloatware... I know what it is. Just having a separate app for the map does not in itself prevent having two applications running that both have bloatware. Adding this feature to the Enhanced Client (which by the way, is NOT a 3d client offering) does not mean we are getting excessive bloatware. You don't know what is involved in adding this feature to the existing map in the new Enhanced Client, only the Developers do.

There are several benefits to developing a separate map program:

1. If EA isn't going to provide the features that are desired in a map program, a separate program can be developed to provide those features.
2. Depending upon who develops the map program, one can ENSURE at least one UO feature isn't bloated. With EA in the mix, only thing you can ENSURE is it MAY work... eventually... and even properly.
3. Things can be fixed, deleted, and added in a timely manner. You know... the way REAL developers do things. Not in the we'll think about it in six months that EA works.

I am familiar with UOAM, and all of its features, and have used it for guilds and friends. The tracking features was "nice" but not anything I would call essential. What I found was people used it as a crutch so they didn't have to plan ahead.

So being able to find your buddies is a crutch... okay that is... umm... interesting logic I guess you are a UO location expert and understand when someone says "I'm third tree over from that green rock"

As a long time UOAM user and the track feature, I found it to be darn near essential especially for PvP. Being able to say "fighting over at Gellor's dot" is easier than "I'm in t2a, about 5 screens east of the Delucia". Being able to guide a person to a location when you can look on a map and say "okay, he is at Trinsic West bank" is easier than "did you take a left where I said".

And old man, you are right, I haven't tried the latest EA offering of a client. All the screen shots I've seen of it do not appeal to me. Thus, I will not be installing it on my computer. Add in EA not providing features that people want from third party programs or in the original client are why they will be forced to work on two clients.

Sweeny, the data stream for UOAM is available. There are a couple reasons I can think of for maintaining UOAM compatibility:

1. Servers in use - There are dozens of UOAM servers in use. Forcing people to start new servers isn't overly cool.
2. Reluctance to use non-UO Pro programs - Some people would refuse to use a program not UO Pro. I can't blame them from a security stand point. Even if this was developed open source, not everyone can read source code to ensure nothing bad happens.
3. UOAM data files - Some people have spent hours upon hours making their locations. All of a sudden they are useless? There are two ways to fix this in a new map program: reuse UOAM data files or create an import program. I personally don't see an issue reusing UOAM data files *shrug*

 

[Old Man of UO]

... Can you point out something on UO's site that specifically says "interacts" and not modifies? Last I recall, EA didn't want the data stream modified but reading the data stream and interacting with the UO client directly were allowed. ...

I'm not doing your homework... show me something from EA that says this is allowed. I think you are mistaken.

...I am waiting to see how this project runs... BUT, if it is developed as open source, there is nothing that would stop it from being developed in the future. And depending upon how robust it is made, nothing EA could do would prevent it from being usable. ...

This is certainly NOT true. EA could encrypt the data differently so you can't use the data stream. Of course, that would mean that UO Assist, and UOAM would stop working.

... [*]Things can be fixed, deleted, and added in a timely manner. You know... the way REAL developers do things. Not in the we'll think about it in six months that EA works....

This is certainly a valid point, as seen by the many great Mods we've had for KR and now appearing for the new client. In fact, the only point you've made that I find valid.

And the rest of your statement about finding it easier to locate your buddies, I DID say EA should incorporate that into the existing SA map. That is all they would need to add to make it complete in my opinion. It would be so much better if EA would do this and maintain it as part of the new client, not is some add on. You should try the new client and mapping features before saying you can create something better. There are a few very nice things in the new client that UOAM does not have... nearest healer for a rez, and automatic marking of your corpse, for examples.

 

[JC the Builder]

Any self-developed program that interacts with any UO client (in this case intercepting the data stream) will be illegal, and it would have to go through the non-existent 3rd party app approval process, which will take way longer than the 2-3 months you quoted.

The plan is for the new application to run through UOAssist which provides an API specifically for this type of program. There is no need to get approval from EA because it doesn't touch the UO data stream at all or modify any client files.

I have already had some initial conversations with EA about this. I am doubtful that they will declare this program to be an illegal 3rd party.

Just a point of clarification, in your first sentence, did you mean to say "ANY" person? Don't you mean only those who agree to it? Pretty sure that is what you meant.

When I say it is the biggest feature I mean it is the biggest feature lacking from the new client. There are thousands of people who use UOAM's tracking feature and it would be difficult to suddenly not have it anymore.

 

[IanJames]

When I say it is the biggest feature I mean it is the biggest feature lacking from the new client. There are thousands of people who use UOAM's tracking feature and it would be difficult to suddenly not have it anymore.

And that is what all the guilds are waiting on. And honestly if a new mapping client doesn't have this, then it's not worth using it for me.

 

[Old Man of UO]

The plan is for the new application to run through UOAssist which provides an API specifically for this type of program. There is no need to get approval from EA because it doesn't touch the UO data stream at all or modify any client files.

I have already had some initial conversations with EA about this. I am doubtful that they will declare this program to be an illegal 3rd party...

This I understand now with that explanation. I am NOT against what you are trying to do, I just want that functionality built into the new Enhanced Client. I also hope that EA changes the data stream to block all unauthorized 3rd party programs, but wonder if this would hurt your project. I also wonder how many people would continue to use the old 2D client if all other 3rd party programs are finally blocked.

 

[Gellor]

I'm not doing your homework... show me something from EA that says this is allowed. I think you are mistaken.

Translation "I don't have any facts nor do I know where any are so I can't point you to anything concrete".

But here, let me help you from the RoC on my computer(readme.txt in the support folder):

1. "* You may not modify any part of the Ultima Online Service or Web Site that Electronic Arts does not specifically authorize you to modify." - Nope, a map program doesn't modify the UO service. I think we're safe here.
2. "* You will not attempt to interfere with, hack into, or decipher any transmissions to or from the servers running the Ultima Online Service. " - Nope, using the proposed UOAssist hook, we aren't doing any of those. I think we are safe here. Specifically:
   • We are not interfering with the transmission. Listening to a transmission is not interfering.
   • We are not hacking the transmission... unless listening to a transmission is hacking. And that would be a new definition of hacking to me especially considering the info is coming to/from my hardware.
   • We are not deciphering the transmission... under the proposed UOAssist hook, UOAssist is doing the deciphering and supplying us with specific information(aka map co-ords)

The only pseudo gray area in the map utility is extracting out the map data into separate graphic files. But then again, extracting out information isn't modifying their data files. *shrugs* Add in things like InsideUO are "legal" and this is a non-issue.

This is certainly NOT true. EA could encrypt the data differently so you can't use the data stream. Of course, that would mean that UO Assist, and UOAM would stop working.

There is also the risk of dying in a fiery car crash... should I stop driving because of that too?

How long has UOAssist been functioning? I'd say their track record speaks for itself. Given the proposed hooking into UOAssist, I'd say the proposed map would be very easy to maintain. Tugsoft worries about the encryption, map programmers only have to worry about map related issues.

And the rest of your statement about finding it easier to locate your buddies, I DID say EA should incorporate that into the existing SA map. That is all they would need to add to make it complete in my opinion. It would be so much better if EA would do this and maintain it as part of the new client, not is some add on.

In an ideal world where everyone was millionaires, this might happen. And I agree, EA should be the one to handle all UO related issues. But their track record shows they can't or won't.

I would love to see EA include ALL the current UOAM features in both clients. But the reality of things is EA will not devote anytime to this. A fancy map has less impact that pumping out new shinies for the masses

You should try the new client and mapping features before saying you can create something better. There are a few very nice things in the new client that UOAM does not have... nearest healer for a rez, and automatic marking of your corpse, for examples.

Now you are trying to put words in my mouth and others. What I claimed was a 3rd party app could be developed quicker, fixed quicker, and enhanced quicker than EA could ever think of.

Would it be better? Maybe... maybe not. But it would be different. And more than likely quicker and smaller footprint.

The joys of things like open source is you get a bunch of passionate programmers together and magic happens. Passionate programmers are more likely to make efficient, well engineered code. They are not bound by time limits. EA devs are bound by time limits so their goal is not efficiency or well engineered... their goal is working and published "fast".

I do like the sounds of the healer and body feature but without some of the UOAM features especially tracking, it isn't complete to me. Plus, as I said, I have no interest in playing the new client... it is visually unappealing to me.

So oldman, if you are so against people making their updated UOAM, why are you even in this topic? *confused* By all appearances, you have an "anti-3rd party" attitude and feel that all 3rd party applications are evil. This is like the guy who is anti-gun who goes to gun shows

And back onto the topic at hand, actual development of a UOAM replacement, for those who use UOAM, what features do you use the most? House tracking? Map tilt? Icons for "places"? Map chat?

Also, out of curiosity, how many players do you regularly keep track of? Back in the old days, I was in a guild that fielded 40 regularly but on occasion 50ish showed up. Theoretically, the map program could track an unlimited number of players. Realistically, a max number would aid in some performance related issues

 

[IanJames]

This I understand now with that explanation. I am NOT against what you are trying to do, I just want that functionality built into the new Enhanced Client. I also hope that EA changes the data stream to block all unauthorized 3rd party programs, but wonder if this would hurt your project. I also wonder how many people would continue to use the old 2D client if all other 3rd party programs are finally blocked.

I'm with you on this. I mean I'd really like a list of things you can do in UOA that you can't do in the enhanced client besides recording a long macro.

The map is so close to being able to work for tracking, but even right now the tracking of party members is dodgy at best. If they could change it so you could filter the tracking it would be fine for me. For example, guild, party, guild and party, none, etc. . .

BUT, seeing as they can't get the map waypoints and other things to work reliably, I don't know how they can enhance it.

I think they kind of have a tunnel vision on how to do this. Sometimes you work on something so long, and you miss the obvious solution to the issue. I think that's what we're running into with many of the existing problems in the map in the client. A fresh set of eyes can go a long way.

 

[Old Man of UO]

...
I think they kind of have a tunnel vision on how to do this. Sometimes you work on something so long, and you miss the obvious solution to the issue. I think that's what we're running into with many of the existing problems in the map in the client. A fresh set of eyes can go a long way.

Now this is probably very true. It's easy to get burned out on a long running project like UO and want to try new and interesting things.

 

[Old Man of UO]

Translation "I don't have any facts nor do I know where any are so I can't point you to anything concrete".

... There is also the risk of dying in a fiery car crash... should I stop driving because of that too?...

So oldman, if you are so against people making their updated UOAM, why are you even in this topic? *confused* By all appearances, you have an "anti-3rd party" attitude and feel that all 3rd party applications are evil. This is like the guy who is anti-gun who goes to gun shows

And back onto the topic at hand, actual development of a UOAM replacement, for those who use UOAM, what features do you use the most? House tracking? Map tilt? Icons for "places"? Map chat?

Also, out of curiosity, how many players do you regularly keep track of? Back in the old days, I was in a guild that fielded 40 regularly but on occasion 50ish showed up. Theoretically, the map program could track an unlimited number of players. Realistically, a max number would aid in some performance related issues

You really are being quite a jerk. You started by saying show you where you could find the information... I said that I am not looking for you. Don't get all huffy about it.

I AM against illegal 3rd party programs. You can not convince me that many of the people who refuse to use the new client, are refusing because it does not support many of the illegal 3rd party programs (and yes, they ARE evil). I am not against UO Assist or UOAM, I own copies of those, and never said or implied that. And originally, this project was not just hooks to UOAM but a replacement as you say... there is a difference. JC did a good job of explaining that, you just ranted.

As far as the other features you mention, what has that got to do with me wanting to integrate those into the new client? You are just throwing out nonsense and a red herring. I am in this topic because I want EA to incorporate these features into the new client map, NOT abandon the idea because someone is trying to patch UOAM.

As far as putting words into your mouth, this is what I was referring to in your post when I said you should try the new client and mapping feature... work a bit on your reading comprehension, okay?
"And old man, you are right, I haven't tried the latest EA offering of a client."

 

[Kiwillian]

And I don't think you're a C/C++ progammer either. If you know anything at all about graphics programming, rotation/scaling/transformations are as simple as applying a matrix.

Good luck.

What a silly and childish thing to say. I am just trying to point out that some half-assed job isn't going to do it. Guild/Alliances aren't going to force everyone to use the new client. UO players, for some reason, seem very stubborn and don't like change (just my opinion) so doing something that does everything that UOAM does and works with both clients is a must, I think.