zMUD is the best I've ever had

Scripts and support for your favorite MUD client.
Faerwynd
Sojourner
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

zMUD is the best I\'ve ever had

Postby Faerwynd » Wed Feb 14, 2001 9:32 pm

Ok, the title was more to provoke people who are fans of other clients in here (Tintin etc.) but I was dorking around with zMUD today and it truly is a marvel of software engineering. My hat's off to Zugg!

Now I'm a real llama when it comes to client scripting, etc. I mean I can make aliases, variables and the most complex thing I've ever come up with was a cool autorescue trigger that keyed off the "T: Turg TC: excellent" part of Sojourn's display prompt.

However, in bringing myself back up to speed with zMUD (at least my old level of proficiency) I have learned tons of new features.

Cool feature #1: You can capture any line of text you want (tells, gsays, whatever) to a file which you can keep open in a seperate window. I didn't know this! I do now!

Cool feature #2: You can create buttons right there on your zMUD windows. You can make them toggles! Again, I didn't know this I do now!

Cool feature #3: You can create "guages" or status bars as zMUD likes to call them. Basically, if you're savvy enough, you can make little health bars that show how many hps/mv/mana/etc. that update every time the prompt pops up. Awesome!

Cool feature #4: Ok I can go on and on, but I want to go back and learn how to do all this stuff and figure out more stuff. But the zMUD automapper just plain owns. Never seen that before zMUD though I imagine newer clients like this Rasputin or TinyFuge or whatever they're called has them.

Well, I've told you mine, now what are y'all's favorite nifty little gadget from zMUD? Or a different client for that matter. I'm all about extras these days.

le jaeb

[This message has been edited by Faerwynd (edited 02-14-2001).]
Bibbe
Sojourner
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Örebro
Contact:

Postby Bibbe » Wed Feb 14, 2001 10:42 pm

Zmud is one hell of a client.

the only problem is the speed. which basically ends up at microsoft jack asses!

I'm one of thoose assholes using microsoft, still cursing it and them.

Anyways, as far as i know TF does not have the automapper. TF is fast though. Some says it doesn't make a difference. And i wouldn't know since i havn't tried TF that much. But Klurg ( rl buddy) been converting to linux now and used TF a lot lately. He says he notice a difference, that TF runs more smooth.

Zmud sends packets of text back and forth, while TF sends single strings.. That makes zmud run a little more hmmm what do u say. It goes fast when the packet arrives but is still while it's waiting hehe .. allmost as lag.
Faerwynd
Sojourner
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Postby Faerwynd » Thu Feb 15, 2001 4:07 pm

Never noticed any lag with zMUD.

Hmm.

Net lag? Isn't everyone broadband these days anyways?

CPU lag? Doesn't everyone have at least a P2 450 these days? Their dirt cheap.

Ok I'm sure some people are still on their old Cyrix 166MHz's but I can't remember even a smidgeon of slowness on my 486 50MHz at 28.8 so where's all this "zMUD is slow" stuff coming from?
Tempus
Staff Member - Areas
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 6:01 am
Contact:

Postby Tempus » Thu Feb 15, 2001 6:57 pm

I always found TF to be faster, not because of the program, but rather, because of where it sits.

TF, unless your using the WIN32 version, lives on your server running under linux or unix, not on your PC presumably running windows. What this means is, if someone attacks your groups mage, and sends a string of text that triggers your auto-rescue, that string only has to travel to your server, at which point the response gets sent back. On Zmud, or 32 bit TF, it has to travel not only to your server, but then all the way up the connection to your PC before the response is sent. If your on a modem, this is a major difference. If you have cable or dsl I imagine the difference is less noticeable, but still there.

Temp

P.S.-Add to that the considerable speed bonus of linux vs. winX and you only exacerbate the differences.
Bibbe
Sojourner
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Örebro
Contact:

Postby Bibbe » Thu Feb 15, 2001 11:06 pm

Hmmm
People using broadband and running TF from their own puter, not the server still says TF feels faster than like Zmud.
This is unix TF though. Not the win one.
Tilandal
Sojourner
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Tilandal » Fri Feb 16, 2001 2:32 am

The thing with zmud is There are rumers that it caches text befor displaying it. This is what people mean when they as it is slow. I dont know if this is true or not.
Saitcho
Sojourner
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: New Orleans, LA, USA
Contact:

Postby Saitcho » Fri Feb 16, 2001 3:17 am

zmud could slow down if many capture windows were open. thats on a fast comptuer too. i have a p3-800 at 1gig now so i havent noticed it being slow. tho that could be the 256 megs of ram. hehe.

saitcho
Drevarr
Sojourner
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Postby Drevarr » Fri Feb 16, 2001 4:17 am

Zmud does cache the inbound text before it is displayed. However there is an option under preferences that alows you to tweak the number of lines before refresh:
preferences
-user interface
--Refresh Amount (local)
Check the help section for more details or just play with it like I did until I found what I liked.

as far as number of child windows open and affects on performance, you might want to limit the number of lines buffered for the child windows to something rather small.

I buffer 10K lines on my main window just so i can save the buffer for a log rather than log everything, but I usually limit my capture windows and editor to ~100 lines or so depending on needs.
Tilandal
Sojourner
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Tilandal » Fri Feb 16, 2001 5:23 am

Cool, Reading the help file zmud defaults to buffering 5 lines before displaying but it triggers after every line so there realy isn't an actual issue with speed. It just looks like it is slower.
Klurg
Sojourner
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Örebro, Sweden

Postby Klurg » Mon Apr 16, 2001 4:43 am

Put up some extensive triggering in Zmud and do the same for TF i say one thing Zmud chokes worse then my gramps.... Of course TF takes more resources aswell but with globing it not much of a problem with extensive triggering using regexp's it can get a little irky though.

Return to “MUD Client Help”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest