🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <departedD...@netcom.com>, depa...@netcom.com (just
passing through) wrote:

> Here's something interesting for people who are using the direct serial
> link option, and some questions for Blizzard support.
> 
> I think I did try w/o the DLINK option when I had regular boring serial
> ports, and then the game would crash, but I'm not sure.
> 
> I'd just like to suggest to serial-link players that they try 'high-speed'
> serial ports w/o DLINK, but I'm also curious what the DLINK option actually 
> did, why it made play somewhat jerky, and why a 16550 UART would make
the DLINK
> option unnecessary, if it ever was necessary.

How do you do this without the DLINK option? Thanks.

      John.

-- 
ro...@bert.cs.byu.edu(John Rosenquist)
Try my  FTP site:  lupan.byu.edu
login as anonymous and use your address as the Password please.
or my World Wide Web homepage        WWW-site   http://lupan.byu.edu

-Here's something interesting for people who are using the direct serial
-link option, and some questions for Blizzard support.

-I was using Warcraft 1.21 with two serial ports, both sides with the
-DLINK option, 9600.  This worked OK, but the play was often quite jerky
--
-mouse response was pretty bad, especially in the setup screens and also
-while playing, if the other guy was doing a lot of stuff.

-I broke down and bought a couple of 'high-speed' serial ports, the kind
-with 16550 UARTS in them.  (These have a bigger I/O buffer.)

-Somewhat to my disappointment, direct-link play was still jerky in the
same
-manner.  Maybe a little less.

-Today, I tried a direct-link without the DLINK option, and much to my 
-surprise, the jerkiness was almost completely gone.

-So, what does the DLINK option actually do?

-I think I did try w/o the DLINK option when I had regular boring serial
-ports, and then the game would crash, but I'm not sure.

-I'd just like to suggest to serial-link players that they try
'high-speed'
-serial ports w/o DLINK, but I'm also curious what the DLINK option
actually 
-did, why it made play somewhat jerky, and why a 16550 UART would make the
-DLINK
-option unnecessary, if it ever was necessary.

The DLINK option, which is probably over-used, was specificly designed for
a problem when playing either an 8250 against another 8250 or against a
16550.
All it does is add an extra conrimation to each game cycle.  It can be
used by only one player, especially if one player has an 8250 and one a
16550, in which case the player with the 8250 would be the one to use it. 
It is unnecessary for situations where both players are using 16550's (in
which case the 1.12 version will probably work just fine).

Tymothi Loving
CSE
Blizzard Entertainment

In article <3vr174$7...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
BlizzrdEnt <blizz...@aol.com> wrote:
>[...]
>-I broke down and bought a couple of 'high-speed' serial ports, the kind
>-with 16550 UARTS in them.  (These have a bigger I/O buffer.)
>
>-Today, I tried a direct-link without the DLINK option, and much to my 
>-surprise, the jerkiness was almost completely gone.
>
>-So, what does the DLINK option actually do?
>
>-I think I did try w/o the DLINK option when I had regular boring serial
>-ports, and then the game would crash, but I'm not sure.
>
>-I'd just like to suggest to serial-link players that they try
>'high-speed'
>-serial ports w/o DLINK, but I'm also curious what the DLINK option
>actually 
>-did, why it made play somewhat jerky, and why a 16550 UART would make the
>-DLINK
>-option unnecessary, if it ever was necessary.
>
>The DLINK option, which is probably over-used, was specificly designed for
>a problem when playing either an 8250 against another 8250 or against a
>16550.
>All it does is add an extra conrimation to each game cycle.  It can be
>used by only one player, especially if one player has an 8250 and one a
>16550, in which case the player with the 8250 would be the one to use it. 
>It is unnecessary for situations where both players are using 16550's (in
>which case the 1.12 version will probably work just fine).
>
>Tymothi Loving
>CSE
>Blizzard Entertainment

Thanks very much for the lucid and complete explanation ...

May I suggest this would be useful information to include in your readme.txt
packaged with the 1.21 patch, or also somewhere in your web page?

It is much nicer with the 16550 I/O cards, and that makes a lot of difference
to hapless Warcraft addicts like me.

Thanks for the excellent game, and for the unit editor, which is a terrific
bonus.

-- Rich
(depa...@netcom.com)