Accounts e-mail HP

[morphles game] Some remaining issues

User hosted games

[morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby morphles » Sun Apr 12, 2015 8:48 am

There are some remaining issues:

Lua bindings are a bit limited, so writing game end on 7 wonders requires a bit of work, which I have not yet done, though it should be doable with hour or couple of work. On the other hand, travelers report shows any wonders build, building and destroyed, also with up to date, current owners. Corbeau said he could track it with some building, but there is no need for any special buildings. So if he wants we can track it. Only problem/peculiarity is:
someone has 6 wonders, captures/builds 7th, Corbeu/tracker does not see it (maybe not even online), then someone else takes one wonder from that player and he now only has 6, no one saw (though likely such person would boast about it :) ) game does not end. On the other hand this is kinda nice, with human supervision we could request that someone has to keep having 7 wonders for say 5 turns. (well in theory even that could be programmed with Lua). In any case, opinions on this?

Other issues come from usage of tech upkeep, and how tech situation is quite crappy in freeciv :).
First when you loose tech, it is chosen random (I would prefer that lost tech would be most recent, or at least one that is not a prerequisite to any other known tech). This is not cool in two ways, first of not all techs are created equal so to speak, this means that when loosing tech one person can loose much more vital tech than someone else, all things being equal. This though might be a good deterrent to loosing them, as it can bite oh so bad.
On the other hand, if you loose some crappy tech you no longer need... Say philosophy, it's just better for you - less techs, less upkeep. This tempts me to modify ruleset so that say buildings would not have their effects unless you own their tech. Also possibly making units attack/defense seriously crappy if you loose their techs (I'm less inclined to this, still, might be interesting, or maybe ramp up units upkeep instead of it having crappy stats). Now this would make loosing techs potentially a very very bad , especially loosing library/uni techs would likely mean end game for you, as you would loose so much research output that you would immediately start loosing more techs (also I tested, with sufficient negative research you can loose multiple techs per turn, I for example managed to lose 7 techs in turn in my test game).

Now lastly, most annoying part: tech trade. Trade would allow one getting techs without first having prerequisites, allowing one to circumvent much of the upkeep cost in certain cases. Though maybe this is part of the interest? Dunno, considering this tech cost might need adjusting, that is increasing. Though I would rather like to prevent "holes" in tech tree.

So I talked to devs about these issues on IRC. 2.6 has an option to prevent holes, but 2.5 does not. Though 2.5 has "root_req" which can kinda, a bit, simulate that, somewhat. But dev said it might have performance issues, this might be especially bad considering game will be running on pi. Still I think I should try that and see how much of an issue it might be, because preventing holes in my eyes seems like a very good thing. Though regardless of this, affecting units/buildings of not owned technologies still sounds appealing to me.

So any thoughts on that?
morphles
Co-Admin of GT10-Hexmap
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:43 pm

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby Corbeau » Sun Apr 12, 2015 11:39 pm

Yes, I already mentioned root-req somewhere and it might work. What do they mean "performance issues"? That the game might crash or lag?

As for winning conditions, no reason not to make it, say, "build X wonders and keep them three turns". I believe wonders are already seen at any moment in one of the info screens so it's completely verifiable. Also, if a player builds 7 wonders, he should report it so that we know. No reason not to, because he can't win otherwise. Also, if someone captures or destroys one of those seven before three turns are up, he should also report it because it is obviously in his interest.

So I propose the following system:
- if you build 7 wonders, announce it;
- if you hold them for three turns, on the third turn the admin sets End Game for the next turn; ALSO, admin sets timeout for this turn to 48 hours so that we are absolutely sure that nobody has captured any of the wonders during this turn (for example, someone could capture a wonder a few minutes before the 23-hour turn ends, but the game would end because it's already been set to end the next turn; but if you set this turn to last 48 hours, the admin can log in on the SECOND 24 hours and verify that the wonder has been - or hasn't been captured, and confirm that the game is ending on the next turn)
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby Evan » Mon Apr 13, 2015 8:49 am

Re lost tech consequences

I like the idea of the units getting negative effects on their stats, eg. Musketeers have HP reduced to 15 or 10 if you lose Gunpowder, or maybe the cost goes up to 40 or 50. Since these are really bad effects, and another player could lose a tech and it's actually beneficial, It would be best if you only lose the most recent.
Also, anyhing that creates a snowball effect should be avoided. Maybe library and university could be treated differently. You can still lose them by conquest, but you won't ever lose their effect.
In history, collapsing empires often still had/have strong, functioning seats of learning.

On a separate note, do you have any idea yet of number of players?
Or, once you've sorted things out, are you doing the usual thing with having a sign-up period, say a week? Two weeks?
And the map size will vary with the number of players. (for those who'd like to run a test-game or two)
Test games might also reveal bugs you hadn't come across.
Evan
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 4:08 am

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby morphles » Mon Apr 13, 2015 1:43 pm

I'd try to use root_tech to see what can be achieved using it, but I believe not all holes can be prevented by it. I'm most interested if it affects perormance in nasty way. Yeah, research buildings should not loose their function ever, I agree. In case of collapse, the would be bastion of hope :), but the some spies can sabotage them :). Will see how much holes root_req can solve (btw corbeau I do not think you mentioned it here, though I came by your posts on freeciv dev forums, and obviously droped some messages: ). Evan, if you loose gunpowder you can't build musketters, there can be no cost adjustment, as you can't build. Also I do not know of any ways to adjust cost of things anyway. As I said, ramping up upkeep sounds like best thing, even one aditional gold per unit for units whoose tech you do not have seems good.

I do not know how many players yet. Corbeau is promising to bring in most :), currently I konw, me, Corbeau, Evan, el_perdador, so 4. This is not nice, would like to have at least 10. Sent emails (through GT forum) to Nimrod and monamipierot, though I somehow guess that forum failed to send those messages Anyways haven't heard from them. Sign up period is annoying as hell. If corbeau finds enough people (they might already be waiting), game should start running in 3 days tops, waiting - player disinterst.

I'll try to setup micro test game, for me, Corbeau, and you Evan, with some bots. To remember common GT server options (timouts and stuff), and to see if root_req causes problems (though I'll have to add that to ruleset first...). Another very important thing that this will test is remote login, and usage of authentication system (there will be no login, and type pass in chat field though :), people should be happy about that), that is normal freeciv login system, using two fields for username and password in server browser. Also, I'm planing of not having ether micro test or final game listed in metaserver. Though I might reconsider for real game.
morphles
Co-Admin of GT10-Hexmap
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:43 pm

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby Corbeau » Mon Apr 13, 2015 3:08 pm

Just to make sure I'm understood: I did send some emails, but only one or two people confirmed, so don't count on that too much.

I sent an email to Nimrod last week directly, no reply yet.

About test game, if you mean a quick one during the day, I'm not sure I'll be available, but if I'm online at the time, I'll hop in.
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby dfroger » Mon Apr 13, 2015 3:15 pm

Hello,

Just to indicate I'm interessed to play the game. (brought by Corbeau :-) )

David
dfroger
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:22 am

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby cdoucet » Mon Apr 13, 2015 3:22 pm

Hello,

I would like to be involved in the game too! :-)

Cédric
cdoucet
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:40 am

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby morphles » Mon Apr 13, 2015 3:34 pm

Corbeu, it will be in GT style, mayb with 12 hour turns, and maybe with auto turn change after everyone pressed turn done. Just to see if server works, and people can login.

As for other, nice to hear from you, I hope game can start in next week, I hope :)

Well I might press my friend lgos, maybe I coudl convince him to play, tha would make 7 people. It would be best to have 10. Will see maybe Nimrod will reply eventually. I'll aslo look at people that commented in my old theads and will try to email them throguh forum :)
morphles
Co-Admin of GT10-Hexmap
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:43 pm

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby Evan » Tue Apr 14, 2015 6:07 am

I think increasing unit upkeep is a good way to do this.
It simulates the strategic effect, which is enough, and one could compare it perhaps to a nation resorting to mercenaries, which is very common in the real world, and in history.

I asked about the signup period not just to get an idea from you of the time-frame we're talking about here (I wasn't sure where you were in the process), but also because I thought that maybe some people are waiting to see that everything is ready to go.
So after I saw people expressing interest here in playing, I wrote a note to a few players on the LT34 chat saying that an 'informal' signup had begun, so people could leave a note to say they were interested.
Evan
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 4:08 am

Re: [morphles game] Some remaining issues

Postby Lord p » Tue Apr 14, 2015 11:23 pm

Im in.
Dont really mind what rules or type of game. In fact the more random the better! Then noone really knows what strategy is going to win :)
No tech trading and leakage to make common tech cheaper is working very well on LT though, I think it makes the game more balanced and much less political.
Lord p
 

Next

Return to Mini-Games

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron