|
|
| What should we focus on next? |
| Multiplayer |
|
66% |
[ 6 ] |
| Auto Resolve |
|
33% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 9 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Jorbes
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 277
Location: Netherland
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 7:39 pm Post subject: Most needed feature. Multiplayer or Auto Resolve? |
 |
|
As our new client (gonna keep the name G.O. for now) is just about done, we'd like to go to the next level to really get an edge on appr / mws.
What do you guys think we should focus on first, Multiplayer support or autoresolve?
Multiplayer will be Team 1 vs Team 2 where Teams can be 2 or 3 players, not chaos (just yet)
Auto Resolve will be something like WoG auto destroying non-indestructible creatures or Shock dealing 2 damgage or even combat damage auto resolve.
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zardokk
Joined: 08 Nov 2005
Posts: 45
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think that if you're attempting to make the most complete client possible, you should try to work on both. I personally don't think that true autoresolve is even possible (at least not without months and months of coding) because there are so many variables in the game. For now, I would focus more towards multiplayer. When people get used to the client, then you should slowly intoduce features like autoresolve. It would take quite a bit of time to complete, anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jorbes
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 277
Location: Netherland
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zardokk wrote: | | I think that if you're attempting to make the most complete client possible, you should try to work on both. I personally don't think that true autoresolve is even possible (at least not without months and months of coding) because there are so many variables in the game. For now, I would focus more towards multiplayer. When people get used to the client, then you should slowly intoduce features like autoresolve. It would take quite a bit of time to complete, anyway. |
K, thanks, but you should see the difference between rule enforcement and auto resolve.
Auto resolve is really a piece of cake to create, we already have it working for WoG and the likes and some pinpoint damage cards.
We'll implement both features, but we'd like to know wich one we'll do first  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zardokk
Joined: 08 Nov 2005
Posts: 45
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok. I see what you're saying. You would still run into a few issues when trying to create auto resolve, but not as many as I was thinking. I would personally prefer multiplayer first since there's no current client that allows for games with more than 2 people.
[Also, if you have an early beta of this client compiled or anything that I could test on either a Windows or Linux box, send it my way (kingsasquatch@gmail.com). I'm fairly knowledgable about programming and software testing. Maybe I could help you point out some bugs and such.] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NahHolmes
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 588
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| How about a shotclock. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jorbes
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 277
Location: Netherland
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NahHolmes wrote: | | How about a shotclock. |
Can you explain in full what you mean by that?
I know basketball, but i dont really see how that would work in mtg. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Splunge
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jorbes wrote: | | NahHolmes wrote: | | How about a shotclock. |
Can you explain in full what you mean by that?
I know basketball, but i dont really see how that would work in mtg. |
I think what he is referring to is what they use in MODO. Sorta like in chess too. Each time the player gets priority, his clock starts counting down, when he doesnt have priority, it doesn't move. When their clock hits 0, he loses the game (match?). It helps prevent stalling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
quidam
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 196
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Multiplayer. Autoresolve would take too long, probably include some bugs at first and many would dislike it even when fully functional. Multiplayer adds versatility to the game while being completely unnoticeable to those who don't want it, and it's much quicker to code to perfection. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PV
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 77
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
DON'T HAVE AUTORESOLVE.
Not having autoresolve is the reason for which people play apprentice in testing games, and the reason they do play that over magic online.
Apprentice is good because you can do whatever you want. You can go back, you can draw extra cards, you can make cards like shock/hammer to see which is better, you can play Okina Nightwatch and your testing partner will understand it's okina.
PLEASE, PLEASE don't add that. It will screw the software. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jorbes
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 277
Location: Netherland
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hm, auto resolve is not rule enforcement.
To put it this way: What auto resolve would do is pretty much the same thing you would do, but... and here it comes.
Even when it's implemented, you'd still be able to turn it off if you dont want to use it. All auto resolve does is "click cards, move cards, change cards" for you in the way you would need to do it yourself anyway (if you play by the rules)
Anyway, judging from the first reply's we figure multiplayer is gonna win it. A multiplayer test version should be available by next weekend. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koen
Administrator
Joined: 10 Mar 2004
Posts: 338
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jorbes wrote: | As our new client (gonna keep the name G.O. for now) is just about done, we'd like to go to the next level to really get an edge on appr / mws.
What do you guys think we should focus on first, Multiplayer support or autoresolve? |
Focus on neither. Focus on:
- simple, intuitive gameplay
- simple, intuitive deckbuilder (with easy import/export features)
- playing through a server (solves firewall problem) Making something like MWSHost would be best, so people/sites can have their own server.
- any possible cheating problems
- a good way of fixing accidents like drawing an extra card
- proper logging with timestamps
As you know, Apprentice is a program with quite some bugs. Yet it is still widely used. Beating Apprentice will happen when you make an Apprentice without bugs. That's all there is to it. Yet I see many projects fail when people dream of too much features and get stuck in the process and it ends up with bugs/problems.
Just make sure the basics work well, and this league will be very interested.
Where can we follow progress or download this? You didn't mention it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
snoopster
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Posts: 716
Location: nj
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
... why isn't pv at the pt?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jorbes
Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 277
Location: Netherland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koen wrote: |
Focus on neither. Focus on:
- simple, intuitive gameplay
|
Already Done.
| Koen wrote: |
- simple, intuitive deckbuilder (with easy import/export features)
|
Already Done. (used apprentice deckbuilder as example, but made it seperate program so you can use it while in a game)
| Koen wrote: |
- playing through a server (solves firewall problem) Making something like MWSHost would be best, so people/sites can have their own server.
|
Already Done, however the server is not yet available for download.
| Koen wrote: |
- any possible cheating problems
|
We are working on a card server, so even you dont know what the order of your library is untill you really need to. (followed by a shuffle most of the time  )
Reporting results is not needed, so you can't cheat there, server will know who won and even how.
| Koen wrote: |
- a good way of fixing accidents like drawing an extra card
|
Already Done, undo for most common actions.
| Koen wrote: |
- proper logging with timestamps
|
Already Done.
Where can we follow progress or download this? You didn't mention it.
Since we dont have a lot of bandwidth to spend on our webhost, url is available through pm.
Thus far, we have no known bugs, then again, we know exactly what we should do 
Multiplayer is also already done, works nice 2 vs 2. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NightFlare
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 234
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sound liek th perfec progrm  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElvishGod
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 2924
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow.
I think I'm in loev.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
