Page 1 of 1

Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 11:33 pm
by juntoalmar
Hi all,

I'm playing a PBEM game of MWiF at the moment. It is very enjoyable, although not extremely quick game, as you probably suppose. But that's ok, still faster than a TeamViewer/Hotseat game when you can meet once a week, anyway.

We play interchanging the files through Dropbox and writing notes on a txt file that we share in the same folderl.

Besides the Mini IA that I exposed in this thread (tm.asp?m=4003499) there are some other things that probably require a minimum effort and will greatly improve the PBEM experience.

For instance, we can't save the game at any time: after the initiative roll, the game "can't be saved at this point", so I can't send the game back to my opponent. Instead I have to ask what he wants to do and wait for answer. Do you think that technically could be possible to implement saving the game in all (or most) of the phases?

Do you think of any other feature that would help the PBEM experience of MWiF?

Cheers,

RE: Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 3:03 am
by paulderynck
I think "Standing Orders" are a more likely improvement than a mini-AI. Similar to your text file idea but would formalize the process in-game. But don't hold your breath for those anytime soon, either.

There are a number of places where the game is in a mid-decision point and will not permit saving. Most likely this is because it presents too many variables and unknowns than can be accommodated by the save file format. Changing that format now would then require additional code to be written in order for any save file written before now to remain usable by the game.

I think your best bet is to do what we do for some of the simpler interactions in our Teamviewer game. Use instant messaging on Skype or something similar to Skype like phone texting. It doesn't guarantee your opponent can respond immediately but if you both have access on your computer (and/or especially on your mobile phone) then these kind of interactions are greatly facilitated.

RE: Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 7:42 am
by juntoalmar
I didn't know technically it could be that difficult to save any time. I was expecting some kind of memory dump of the data into a file. I could freeze the virtual machine where I'm playing it and sending... although the weight of the file... [:D]

True, I will ask his whatsapp for this quick questions, although we live with 7 hours difference...

RE: Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 10:56 am
by lecrop
ORIGINAL: juntoalmar

True, I will ask his whatsapp for this quick questions, although we live with 7 hours difference...
Great idea! [;)]



RE: Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2016 2:08 am
by Shannon V. OKeets
If someone reminds me at the end of March, I will post more information on standing orders for PBEM that might be of help in your PBEM game. The files are on my home computer and I won't be home until the end of March.

Steve

RE: Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2016 3:08 am
by juntoalmar
I will be on holidays at the end of March, but I put on my calendar... I will post on this thread either end of March or first week of April.

Thanks!

RE: Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:21 am
by juntoalmar
Hi Steve,
I've sent you a PM reminding this thread.

Cheers,



RE: Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:00 pm
by brian brian
The decision request for including SUBs in a port strike could be handled by a default setting.

RE: Improvements for PBEM

Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2016 4:12 pm
by Orm
ORIGINAL: brian brian

The decision request for including SUBs in a port strike could be handled by a default setting.
I like this idea. [:)]

I hope that it can be implemented easily, so it can become a reality.