--- Log opened Thu Mar 22 00:00:10 2018 20180322 00:10:29-!- hk238 [~kvirc@unaffiliated/hk238] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 00:10:32< hk238> hi 20180322 00:11:23<+discordbot2> hello 20180322 00:42:46-!- MadMerlin2 is now known as MadMerlin 20180322 00:43:08<+discordbot2> hello to you too @Vultraz ! 20180322 00:43:12<+discordbot2> how have you been? 20180322 02:42:54-!- celticminstrel [~celmin@unaffiliated/celticminstrel] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 02:47:57-!- hk238 [~kvirc@unaffiliated/hk238] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 20180322 03:13:50<+discordbot2> fine, fine 20180322 03:33:17-!- Narrat [~Narrat@p5DCC66D5.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Quit: They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance.] 20180322 03:44:54-!- Bonobo [~Bonobo@203.63.93.247] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 03:54:38-!- synthpopisback [~synthpopi@cpe-2606-A000-7947-5000-6C0A-D081-1605-A8C4.dyn6.twc.com] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 04:05:03-!- Bonobo [~Bonobo@203.63.93.247] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 20180322 04:05:32-!- Bonobo [~Bonobo@203.63.93.247] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 04:07:11-!- celticminstrel [~celmin@unaffiliated/celticminstrel] has quit [Quit: And lo! The computer falls into a deep sleep, to awake again some other day!] 20180322 05:07:29<+discordbot2> Anyone running 1.13.12 or later here? 20180322 05:15:46<+discordbot2> @Pentarctagon there's one grammatical error in your dunefolk description edit: "less common of in the the more centralized" -> "less common in the more centralized" 20180322 05:16:25<+discordbot2> whoops, fixed 20180322 05:17:06<+discordbot2> I like how you moved the home in the first bold edit, while I left it since vultraz seems to like writing like that 😛 20180322 05:17:53<+discordbot2> well, now "home" isn't there at all 😛 20180322 05:18:16<+discordbot2> indeed 😝 20180322 05:18:45<+discordbot2> the beasts part can be changed as needed, I think someone said that 20180322 05:19:07<+discordbot2> I'm not one to argue what lore goes in so it stayed in my edit 20180322 05:20:46<+discordbot2> Yeah. I know there was talk of adding the wyvern as something that was present but not normally recruitable, and maybe making the Roc another advancement of the Falcon, but at the moment neither of those even exist in the game. 20180322 05:21:00<+discordbot2> So calling them out like that is strange. 20180322 05:40:54<+discordbot2> hello 20180322 05:48:47<+discordbot2> Hello 20180322 05:52:49<+discordbot2> Hi master! 20180322 06:16:23-!- discordbot3 [~discordbo@baldras.wesnoth.org] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 06:16:26-!- mode/#wesnoth [+v discordbot3] by ChanServ 20180322 06:17:07-!- discordbot2 [~discordbo@baldras.wesnoth.org] has quit [Write error: Broken pipe] 20180322 06:19:04-!- discordbot4 [~discordbo@baldras.wesnoth.org] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 06:19:07-!- mode/#wesnoth [+v discordbot4] by ChanServ 20180322 06:19:08-!- discordbot3 [~discordbo@baldras.wesnoth.org] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 20180322 07:26:05-!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: MadMerlin, synthpopisback 20180322 07:27:34-!- Netsplit over, joins: synthpopisback 20180322 07:28:18-!- Netsplit over, joins: MadMerlin 20180322 07:44:29-!- zookeeper [~lmsnie@wesnoth/developer/zookeeper] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 07:58:28<+discordbot4> I greet people with 'master' in real life 20180322 07:58:53<+discordbot4> Don't take it the wrong way... ;) xD 20180322 08:45:39-!- Haudegen [~quassel@178.115.237.87] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 10:51:15-!- octalot [~steve@178.115.131.231.wireless.dyn.drei.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 20180322 10:59:45-!- Bonobo [~Bonobo@203.63.93.247] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 20180322 11:01:04-!- Bonobo [~Bonobo@203.220.138.198] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 12:16:00-!- Haudegen [~quassel@178.115.237.87] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20180322 13:09:52-!- Haudegen [~quassel@212-186-77-29.static.upcbusiness.at] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 13:51:35-!- Bonobo [~Bonobo@203.220.138.198] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 20180322 14:13:09-!- molgrum [~molgrum@databur.st] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 14:13:09-!- molgrum [~molgrum@databur.st] has quit [Changing host] 20180322 14:13:09-!- molgrum [~molgrum@unaffiliated/molgrum] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 14:47:44-!- janebot [~Gambot@unaffiliated/gambit/bot/gambot] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20180322 14:47:50-!- janebot [~Gambot@unaffiliated/gambit/bot/gambot] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 17:47:48-!- Choicerer [b9bd700b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.185.189.112.11] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 18:38:35-!- hk238 [~kvirc@unaffiliated/hk238] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 18:56:54-!- Haudegen [~quassel@212-186-77-29.static.upcbusiness.at] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 20180322 19:04:02-!- Choicerer [b9bd700b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.185.189.112.11] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 20180322 19:17:33-!- Haudegen [~quassel@212-186-77-29.static.upcbusiness.at] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 19:54:59-!- Narrat [~Narrat@p5DCC66D5.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 20:23:05< hk238> hi 20180322 20:27:03< APic> Hi 20180322 20:27:31-!- Bonobo [~Bonobo@203.220.138.198] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 21:02:03< hk238> what to do : 20180322 21:03:36< loonycyborg> to be or not to be: that is the question 20180322 21:05:17< hk238> :D 20180322 21:08:35< hk238> this is an old issue, but has anyone tried thinking about how to enable simultaneous turns in wesnoth? 20180322 21:09:13< hk238> one of the problems with a turn-based multiplayer game is that when there are more than 1 players then you pretty much have to wait number of extra players times average turn length 20180322 21:09:51< hk238> which is a huge problem because while a 6 player game is great fun, waiting 5x average turn length in between your own turns is not fun 20180322 21:10:43< loonycyborg> it will be impossible without changing game mechanics 20180322 21:10:53< hk238> if it was possible to rework the mechanics to such an extent that each player would simultaneously designate their moves, and then the result would be calculated as a single end turn event.. basically each player would check when they have designated their orders, and then a turn would calculated 20180322 21:11:11< hk238> loonycyborg: that's probably true, it might be worthwhile though 20180322 21:11:39< loonycyborg> I remember playing one game in the past that had two turn phases 20180322 21:11:44< hk238> it might be hard to come up with a way of resolving the synchronization problems 20180322 21:11:45< loonycyborg> in one you move units 20180322 21:11:50< loonycyborg> in other plan attack 20180322 21:12:02< loonycyborg> and they were alternating between players 20180322 21:12:36< hk238> that seems to achieve some of the intended properties 20180322 21:13:10< hk238> whether or not it amounts to the type of effect that makes for an enjoyable fantasy strategy game I'm not sure, but it's at least very close 20180322 21:13:35< loonycyborg> yeah, I'm not sure it's intuitive though 20180322 21:13:43< hk238> yeah that's the issue 20180322 21:13:44< loonycyborg> it didn't seem very convenient to me 20180322 21:14:09< loonycyborg> though it was first strategy games I ever played 20180322 21:14:15< loonycyborg> that was really long time ago 20180322 21:14:18< hk238> coming up with a ruleset that works is not so hard, but coming up with a ruleset that also preserves the feel of a fantasy game of this sort.. is very difficult. or at least it feels difficult on first pass 20180322 21:14:47< hk238> what are the problems that need to be solved? 20180322 21:15:04< hk238> also that woudl make a huge difference for making those good old 4X games playable 20180322 21:15:23< hk238> think about for an example Sid Meyer's civilization.. nice game, but waiting for other players... 20180322 21:15:37< hk238> however if you came up with a ruleset that allows for simultaneous turns 20180322 21:15:46< hk238> you coul dhave civilization games on facebook with 2000 players at the same time 20180322 21:16:06< hk238> where as with regular turns you can't have a game with 4 players without waiting forever 20180322 21:16:49< hk238> because of that coming up with a good ruleset is also worth lots of money potentially 20180322 21:17:01< hk238> but at least I'm not interested in pursuing income that way 20180322 21:17:16< loonycyborg> I think it will make things more confusing 20180322 21:17:26< loonycyborg> anyway games went realtime mostly 20180322 21:17:52< hk238> both of those things are true, on the otherhand the result being confusing is a statement about the quality of the idea 20180322 21:18:00< hk238> not a fundamental truth about simultaneous turns 20180322 21:18:38< loonycyborg> I don't see a way to accomplish this without an increase of conceptual comlexity 20180322 21:18:43< loonycyborg> other than going realtime 20180322 21:18:58< loonycyborg> but waiting is not always bad 20180322 21:19:02< loonycyborg> you have time to think 20180322 21:19:19< loonycyborg> also you not only wait but also observer opponent's moves 20180322 21:19:39< hk238> I agree that you're touching upon the relevant problems about the issue 20180322 21:20:12< hk238> but of course if we use the '2000 player civilization game' example and want to work that into something playable.. 20180322 21:20:22< hk238> ...well on other hand that problem has in been solved in tick-based games 20180322 21:20:37< hk238> you have had planetarion with +500.000 accounts I think during it's golden age 20180322 21:20:56< hk238> but that was an era of non-graphical games and poor internet connections, and they too involved waiting. A lot of waiting 20180322 21:20:56< hk238> :D 20180322 21:21:24< hk238> then another successor of planetarion played by some generation of kids is.. Travian I think 20180322 21:21:45< hk238> I've not played that but I did read through the ruleset out of curiosity it seemed reasonably interesting 20180322 21:22:06< hk238> however tick-based games are a genre of their own, and not precisely a solution to simultaneous turns problem 20180322 21:22:28< hk238> but they do achieve that through restrictions on how the game works 20180322 21:23:58<+discordbot4> There are simultaneous tbs games 20180322 21:24:32<+discordbot4> You just have interactions at collisions and such 20180322 21:25:14< hk238> oh that's interesting 20180322 21:25:25< galegosimpatico> Any open source of that @pydsigner? 20180322 21:25:26< hk238> I don't know of any such game, can you name an example? 20180322 21:27:42< Soliton> freeciv has simultaneous turns. 20180322 21:28:39< hk238> oh it seems that someone has then probably followed through the same logic.. although perhaps it's not that complicated to realize there's this problem with TBS games and to try and do something about it.. so I shouldn't try to give myself any credit for having such an idea... 20180322 21:29:01< hk238> still it's interesting to think about what that would mean if wesnoth had such a modification 20180322 21:29:38< Soliton> you can plan moves in wesnoth. chances are your plans are obsolete when it's your turn though. 20180322 21:30:11< hk238> yeah it's.. well if you call that an 'interaction at a collision' 20180322 21:30:22< hk238> but it's well.. 20180322 21:30:24< hk238> I don't know 20180322 21:31:14< galegosimpatico> I'm too dumb to understand freeciv. Is there any other simpler example? 20180322 21:31:23< hk238> one possibility would be to have something like 'command points' a resource of somesort that would distribute through some key units such as acommander and such.. which would mean that you would get a chance to update orders at a certain interval, unless you have enough CPs.. but maybe that's a bad example 20180322 21:31:30< loonycyborg> I think freeciv was rather simple 20180322 21:32:21< hk238> another way would be to include predetermined ways of acting at a collision as part of the turn planning process.. so for an example some unit would default to halting, attacking, retreating.. etc. on certain types of collisions. But it might be too difficult to describe what to do in advance 20180322 21:33:05< hk238> the CPs method would be interesting if the frequency of updating would be determined on something like unit's distance from an unexpected event and/or commander unit 20180322 21:33:14< hk238> but perhaps that's still too difficult to build around 20180322 21:33:49< hk238> another method would be, incase of wesnoth, perhaps something like wesnoth chess 20180322 21:34:06< hk238> where you move only 1 unit simultaneously, in which case collisions are less probable. But there would still be collisions 20180322 21:34:22< hk238> any other ideas? : ) 20180322 21:37:48< Soliton> improve planning mode so if you think your plans will not change you can play your turn quickly. anything else is going to change fundamental rules of wesnoth and thus is not really wesnoth anymore. 20180322 21:39:05< hk238> yeah, the planning mode though involves the idea that turns occur in cycles and not simultaneously.. but yes I agree it's not wesnoth anymore and it's probably too difficult to come up with any such change. the distance to that something else from wesnoth is too much of a transformation 20180322 21:39:07< Soliton> but it's already important to do your own turn in steps to see the outcome of attacks etc and adjust accordingly. not that much use for long time planning most of the time, 20180322 21:39:52< hk238> but it would be fun to have 9 player games in wesnoth and not to have to wait at all 20180322 21:41:00<+discordbot4> The game I saw was Frozen Synapse 20180322 21:41:44< Soliton> that's pretty much built around that mechanic though, i think. 20180322 21:41:52< Ravana_> if those moves are truly independent, then they can be saved locally and synced later 20180322 21:42:08< hk238> although you could combine the CPs method with the pre-determined collision interaction method, such that for an example a unit is in 'guard mode' and will attack hostile units below a certain strength threshold for an example 20180322 21:42:15< zookeeper> i've always found it somewhat interesting to think what would the game become like if you took wesnoth and mainly wanted to give it simultaneous turns. i mean, of course mechanically it'd have to be an almost completely different game then, but still. 20180322 21:42:27< hk238> and then using CPs would amount to modifying currently enabled default action scripts placed on the units 20180322 21:42:54< Soliton> this is certainly not the first discussion about simultaneous moves for wesnoth. :-) 20180322 21:42:58< hk238> you could think of it as basically using an AI to move your units where you determine what the AI attempts to do 20180322 21:43:12< zookeeper> oh yeah, by my calculations it's... let's see... the 87th time 20180322 21:43:15< hk238> I think that could work actually, depending on how easy it is to come up with a control interface for the scripts 20180322 21:43:28< hk238> : ) 20180322 21:43:45< hk238> alright alright so it has been talked about a lot my mistake to assume it wasn't that popular a topic :D 20180322 21:44:22< hk238> you could combine the CPs with the scripts with an AI and key units 20180322 21:44:33< hk238> so for an example you could designate a commander unit and assign subordinate units to the commander unit 20180322 21:44:42< Soliton> long games is certainly an issue for wesnoth mp and a reason why isars is so popular. 20180322 21:44:49< zookeeper> movement would have to be severely limited, perhaps to 1 hex per unit per turn, since movement collisions with current-style movement points/costs would be basically impossible to predict. 20180322 21:44:52< hk238> then you would only determine the script for the commander unit, and the script would then determine how the AI controls the units assigned under the commander 20180322 21:45:42< hk238> and that would sort of allow doing that too, you would have the game update in smaller turns, but the control events would be less frequent 20180322 21:45:58< hk238> sort of alike tiny ticks version of real time (which is sort of what realtime is) 20180322 21:46:30< Soliton> if you split up turns more you need to make up a new economy/healing etc. 20180322 21:47:07< hk238> that's true too.. yeah it doesnt work very easily. I maen it's possible, but the amount of required changes keeps building up 20180322 21:48:32< hk238> for an example you could assign a level 2 unit as a commander, then assign 3 dwarven fighters as subordinates to the unit 20180322 21:49:02< hk238> then you would paint over a certain contious area in the map, and determine what the commander unit attempts to do in the area 20180322 21:49:21< hk238> then the AI would move according to that plan and set up some chain of dwarves as a front or something like that 20180322 21:49:25< hk238> I think I'm getting carried away with this 20180322 21:50:59< zookeeper> having you moves done largely by AI sort of requires that there's a lot of units, and relatively few and simple choices for the AI to make. in wesnoth for example you'd just constantly be frustrated at it, because you only have relatively few units, and the AI would always be making choices that you're not happy with. 20180322 21:51:42< zookeeper> for example in an RTS it might work much better 20180322 21:54:42< zookeeper> it is rather unfortunate that simultaneous turns can't really work in wesnoth in any form, except maybe as simultaneous allied turns in a limited fashion. 20180322 21:56:27< hk238> yeah I agree it's probably a much better fit for something like starcraft, although I have not really played that, I know there's already the ability to group units under certain keys like for fast selection 20180322 21:56:55< hk238> combining such groups with also designating some of various pre-selected scripts might work much better in an RTS 20180322 21:57:02< zookeeper> (i still like my idea of implementing simultaneous allied turns simply by letting the players freely yield control to each other) 20180322 21:57:37< hk238> yeah that's a pretty interesting choice 20180322 21:57:39< zookeeper> yes, because you can change the commands whenever you have time to hit a few keys, whereas in a TBS every turn counts 20180322 22:00:11< zookeeper> if in an RTS you see your stupid AI commander take its units slightly off course, you can immediately fix that, and it only means maybe your units start firing a second later and it's all kind of fuzzy how it affects the outcome. whereas if in a TBS the AI makes a stupid choice, the consequences are likely going to be much worse and you feel more like the outcome was out of your hands. 20180322 22:02:19-!- octalot [~steve@77.119.131.210.wireless.dyn.drei.com] has joined #wesnoth 20180322 22:03:06< hk238> yeah that's true.. on the other hand if all players have to use the same AI, and as long as the different choices you can make by commanding the AI are complex enough to become a game of their own, it might be some fun. At least until it gets boring and frustrating.. : ) 20180322 22:05:05< zookeeper> maybe. and i guess a major factor would be that the AI-controlled units shouldn't look and feel like the units you can control yourself. if they're very different and have different mechanics, then it wouldn't be as annoying that you can't control them yourself even if you wanted to. 20180322 22:06:50< zookeeper> whereas if all the units were mechanically similar and the difference was mainly that "you can control these, but not those" then it'd probably be very annoying because it'd feel like the game was artificially preventing you from making choices you'd want to make (by not letting your control all units). 20180322 22:07:17< hk238> oh I intended this example to be such that the only control the players' have would be by assigning the commander units and telling thme what they're supposed to try and do, and not designate how they're doing it precisely.. but it was a fictional example 20180322 22:07:43< hk238> but having a split like the one you're suggesting is also possible I guess 20180322 22:08:44< zookeeper> it'd certainly be possible to have a wesnoth-like game involve automatic unit actions and choices depending on commands you've pre-set for them, but i guess i wouldn't call it AI 20180322 22:09:56< hk238> oh yeah I didn't mean it would be an AI, I meant there would be an interface where you would designate what the AI is supposed to do 20180322 22:10:32< zookeeper> designate what the AI that doesn't exist is supposed to do? :x 20180322 22:10:47< hk238> such as you would take a commander unit, designate subordinate units, then use some sort of interface to assign a set of actions for the AI to try and take. Such as.. 'capture these villages here' or something like that 20180322 22:11:10< hk238> right sorry I guess it would involve having an AI that has an interface, if there was to be an interface :D 20180322 22:11:59< zookeeper> yeah, if you can tell your commander to try and capture a village, i think there needs to be an AI that can actually do it... 20180322 22:12:12< hk238> part of the point then is that you have like 4-5 units which are not units but rather commander units with subordinate units, and then you 'move' the units by giving them goals, and the exact moves are then decided by the computer 20180322 22:12:28< hk238> sorry that was probably unclear :o 20180322 22:13:34< hk238> and then for an example command points would determine how much the scripts could be changed per turn.. and that could be tied to the units, sothat commander units have a higher CP value, and allow for having more complex orders 20180322 22:14:00< hk238> then if such a group loses the commander unit, some subordinate becomes the new commander for that stack, and it has a lower CP value depending on the new units value 20180322 22:14:10< hk238> sorry .... so how's the weather? : ) 20180322 22:16:23< zookeeper> i got stuck thinking about what it would be like if wesnoth had a simultaneous movement-setting phase, and combat was done according to simple orders you can set for each unit, like "attack anyone who comes adjacent", or "don't attack unless attacked", etc. 20180322 22:16:54< hk238> yeah I think that's interesting too 20180322 22:17:11< zookeeper> i mean, you obviously can't have simultaneous turns where you tell unit A to attack unit B, because usually unit B just isn't gonna be there anymore 20180322 22:17:16< hk238> also you could combine that with something like strength evaluation or having some ruleset that determines how lucrative an offensive is 20180322 22:17:28< zookeeper> oh i wouldn't go that far 20180322 22:17:43< hk238> so if you have a peasant, and a drake flameheart strolls by, then the attack would have -50 value, and the script would choose 'retreat' instead of 'attack' 20180322 22:18:06< hk238> but if you have a spearman and a thief comes by... 20180322 22:18:11< hk238> oh why not? :o 20180322 22:18:22< zookeeper> i'd say too much complexity to try to predict 20180322 22:18:47< hk238> I think so too, except that if you can have this system to determine a single number 20180322 22:18:50< zookeeper> you could substitute the same with an order to "attack if there's no chance to die" or something 20180322 22:18:54< hk238> then you can assign the order as a range 20180322 22:19:22< hk238> like from minus infinity to -50: 'retreat', from -50 to 20: 'hold', from 20 to plus infinity: 'attack' 20180322 22:19:50< hk238> which would essentially be a slider with 2 positions and a drop menu for each of the 3 values to determine what it should do 20180322 22:19:56< hk238> although that's quite complicated already 20180322 22:20:07< zookeeper> massively complicated 20180322 22:22:44< hk238> or 1 slider and two actions 20180322 22:22:44< hk238> :D 20180322 22:23:43< zookeeper> keeping with wesnoth's principles, the mechanics should be exact and predictable. maybe with a very fancy UI you could make your evaluation system immediately obvious (somehow show at all times how each of your units would react to each of the enemy units in range, or something), but seems better to just have the system be simpler. 20180322 22:25:02< zookeeper> it's not like wesnoth lacks depth and emergent gameplay, even though you can always/usually check the exact calculations of what's going to happen and your only possible actions are move and attack. 20180322 22:27:28< hk238> oh yeah that's sort of what I was thinkin about, so for those calculations you could attach a value that describes how good it is 20180322 22:27:45< hk238> sort of like an overall score 20180322 22:56:22-!- zookeeper [~lmsnie@wesnoth/developer/zookeeper] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 20180322 23:48:48-!- celticminstrel [~celmin@unaffiliated/celticminstrel] has joined #wesnoth --- Log closed Fri Mar 23 00:00:11 2018