My suggestion

[Hortlund]

So I've been thinking on how to solve the sequence of play issue. Now, as you know, I believe that whenever you think of the sequence of play, you also have to think about method of multiplayer.

I've said before that I only think it is possible to play mp tcp/ip, something that would rule out pbem. However, there might actually be a middle ground here. During ye average wif-turn, there are phases which requires much interaction from both players (air, naval movement), and there are phases which doesnt require any interaction at all (land movement). The way this usually works in the face to face games (for us at least) is that the phasing player hovers over the map, while the rest of us play some game on the computer, or watch tv or whatever, and whenever any interaction is required, we are summoned to the table.

So how about this:

1) Make the game "joinable" for other players. Make it a pbem game, where the turns are saved and emailed between the players, but when the phasing player has the game open on his computer, the other players can join him. So in other words, the phasing player hosts a tcp/ip session that the other players can join and leave whenever they want.

Then, and here comes the gist of my suggestion, make all interaction like opportunity fire in SPWAW.
For example, when a naval unit moves through a seazone, the game pauses for 5-10 seconds while a pop-up asks the player "do you want to intercept yes/no". If no answer has been posted within the allotted time, it will count as a "no" and the phasing player can continue to move.

Ok, so suppose someone is on a dial-up, and dont want to host or join during his or the other players turn?

Open up a new "order dialouge" for all units. For example, right click on any unit and open up the "non-phasing options"-dialouge. In this dialouge you can set different parameters for different units. For a naval unit you can choose "do not intercept" or "intercept if enemy stack consists of nothing bigger than BB" or "intercept if enemy stack is known and consists of either ship type (select applicable)". Etc...with a handful of options like this, you can have some control over your units even though you are not "there".

Same with airunits, right-click, open dialouge box, select "do not intercepet" or "intercept unescorted bombers" or "intercept in own hex only" or whatever.

These non-phasing options should be sticky naturally, so you dont have to give new orders at the end of your turn every time.


So, here is an alternative that either lets the players be online at the same time for a "face to face"-game. This is created by letting the phasing pbem-player host if he wants to, and if he does that, other players can join the game during his turn. They can scroll around and do whatever they want, but whenever an interaction is required, they are zoomed to the right part of the map, and a popup asks them for their action. If the player is not online at that time, the computer checks for any options set by the non-phasing player.

This way we can keep the sequence of play. We remove the need to send more than one email per impulse and player, but at the same time, we retain the vital interaction between the players.

Any opinions?

[coregames]

Excellent thinking... and quite a departure from the beginning of the WiF on the computer thread. I like that... what you're saying is that there really is only the need for one mode of play, with asynchronous aspects incorporated optionally into the synchronous sequence. In this manner, players can join or sit-out as it fits the situation. This is much like a thread in the EiA forum, but stated more succinctly. Such a solution makes things especially easy on neutral major powers, who really can't interfere or be interfered with very much, and can kind-of "watch from the sidelines" as the larger war unfolds.

This brings to mind something macgregor was talking about a while back, about using some kind of IM service for the non-phasing prompts during the phasing side's turn. If the input were in a simple enough format for the players to use and the computer to recognize, the non-phasers wouldn't need to have the software running, provided they had a clear idea of what their plans were for the contingency in question. Of course, the boss might not like it if people were IMing their decisions during work hours...

[Froonp]

I like Panzerjaeger's suggestion very much !

Moreover, often during the real cardboard game play, a player knows in advance that he will have to interact, when some events happens.

For example, Germany with SUBs left at sea during the previous turn, knows he will have to interact if the CW and or US have the initiative and choose a naval action. Or Germany know in advance that he will have to interact if the Russia player has the initiative and chose to crack an offensive chit.

So the player could be asked / summoned to connect if he is not already online in such an instance.

There could be a list of events, that you check or uncheck, that should prompts you to connect, with some sort of IM feature, because there is a high probability that you will have to interact.

Thanks for the input !

Patrice

[Froonp]

Wanted to add, that I love the idea of the non-phasing options dialogue.

Patrice

[Hortlund]

Well, I think this method might actually work.

I dont see any solution with more than one email per player and impulse as feasible. Some hardcore fans might put up with that, but no mainstream gamer would. I also dont see any solution possible where you mess around with the sequence of play, because the sequence of play is at the very heart of what makes wif wif.

I dont think there is any need to include some sort of IM into the game though, msn or icq can already fill those functions.

What is important is to allow players join and leave whenever they want. Most other games requires that everyone connects at the same time (at game start) and then players can leave, but no one can leave and return, or join in the middle of a game.

This combined with the non-phasing options would probably work. At least I dont see why it would not work.

[coregames]

An issue does occur to me about this solution. If you are playing a multiplayer scenario, using this method seems to still require all of the phasing players to be logged on at the same time. Any thoughts?

I dont think there is any need to include some sort of IM into the game though, msn or icq can already fill those functions.

Can the software include autochat functions that access msn, yahoo, etc... without ponying up to the respective companies? Having to type questions and input the responses for each non-phasing decision would be very time-consuming... the computer has to handle prompting non-phasers and interpreting their responses automatically to make it smooth.

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: coregames
An issue does occur to me about this solution. If you are playing a multiplayer scenario, using this method seems to still require all of the phasing players to be logged on at the same time. Any thoughts?

No, why? If they are logged on they are prompted for intercepts etc, if they are offline, their non-phasing-options are in place. The only difference with more players is the number of emails sent per impulse really, the mechanics for player interaction are the same.

Can the software include autochat functions that access msn, yahoo, etc... without ponying up to the respective companies? Having to type questions and input the responses for each non-phasing decision would be very time-consuming... the computer has to handle prompting non-phasers and interpreting their responses automatically to make it smooth.

No, I dont think you can include the ability to in-game write messages on msn etc. That is a non-issue though, since its no big deal to alt+tab and write your message and then return to the game.

The way I figure it would work is
Player A tells player B via msn that he is doing his turn. He then opens up the pbem-file and clics a box that says "host" or somesuch. He then proceeds with his turn.

Player B joins the game, if he wants he can look at what units player A is moving, if he wants he can look over his own units or ponder over his convoy chains or whatever. If player A moves a fleet unit through a possible intercept area, player B is moved to the sea-area and a popup asks if he wants to intercept. If he does not answer within 10 seconds, the standing order for the unit kicks in (this to prevent the game from halting because player B went to watch tv or whatever).

Player C on the other hand is fast asleep because where he lives it is now 4am and he has work to do. His units are controlled by his non-phasing standing orders.

Meanwhile, player Bs girlfriend is becoming annoyed, so he has to log out. That leaves player A alone with his pbem turn. As B leaves the game, his units are again controlled by the standing orders.

[coregames]

The issue I see arising, based on the numerous games of WiF I've played, is that each phase is resolved in order for the phasing side. I suppose each major power could have orders for their units for both phasing and non-phasing activities, so that the actual turn isn't resolved until all powers have submitted. Or, each round of emails could represent steps, or even phases. However, this seems like it completely does away with the coordinated flow of allies cooperating through their impulse.

Perhaps some compromise solution would work, where the non-phasing activities could be left via the last side's impulse file, and the phasing players correspond through a series of emails over the course of a day to resolve their impulse, only pausing to wait for those moments when direct cooperation is required. Their impulse could include orders for their opponents' turn.

Of course, two-player would work like a dream using your idea Panzerjaeger.