Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

how PBEM games will be handled ?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> how PBEM games will be handled ? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
how PBEM games will be handled ? - 5/26/2006 12:54:11 AM   
Manfred

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 8/19/2004
From: France
Status: offline
hi, and sorry if the answer is somewhere else on this forum but I wonder how a PBEM game will be playable if you follow the WiF's rules ?
for example, each time a naval unit crosses a sea area countaining ennemy units, it can be intercepted. Will we have to send a pbem file each time the non-phasing opponent has to make a choice ?
there are numerous actions a non-phasing player may have to do during an impulse : naval interceptions, CAP, air interceptions, HQ supports and many other things. a single impulse could see the sending of dozens of PBEM files, and make the game so long that his interest (at least in PBEM) would be crippled.
So how will you handle PBEM ?
thanks and sorry for the bad english

_____________________________

"Nous vaincrons parce que nous sommes les plus forts."
Paul Reynaud, 20/03/1940
Post #: 1
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 5/26/2006 1:24:36 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Manfred

hi, and sorry if the answer is somewhere else on this forum but I wonder how a PBEM game will be playable if you follow the WiF's rules ?
for example, each time a naval unit crosses a sea area countaining ennemy units, it can be intercepted. Will we have to send a pbem file each time the non-phasing opponent has to make a choice ?
there are numerous actions a non-phasing player may have to do during an impulse : naval interceptions, CAP, air interceptions, HQ supports and many other things. a single impulse could see the sending of dozens of PBEM files, and make the game so long that his interest (at least in PBEM) would be crippled.
So how will you handle PBEM ?
thanks and sorry for the bad english


Oh, what the heck. This hasn't been posted for a while.

The PBEM design was worked on extensively from July to October, 2005. What follows is only part one of a two part design specification. The second part is longer and describes Standing Orders in minute detail. I have both of these documents as PDFs if anyone is interested (send me an email: SHokanson@HawaiianTel.net).
--------------
Proposed Design for Play by Email (PBEM)
(as of October 17, 2005)

Background
As general background, MWIF controls what the player can do at any point in the game by proceeding through the sequence of play in the World in Flames’ Rules as Written 7 (RAW). During each phase/subphase the player is only able to make decisions, move units, build units, and so on, if those actions are appropriate for that phase/subphase. The player controls when a phase is complete by clicking on a “phase complete” button. Control is passed back and forth between the players by MWIF, and in some phases a player has nothing to do because MWIF is waiting on his opponent to move (or make some decision).

One of the concerns with PBEM is that it will take too long to play a game because of the numerous changes in control in the RAW sequence of play. If RAW were implemented faithfully for PBEM, there would be literally hundreds (or thousands) of emails needed to play a single game. To make the PBEM system more efficient, a revised sequence of play is used that reduces the number of emails substantially.

Elements of PBEM
One of the big differences between playing MWIF live over the Internet and playing by email, is rolling the dice. During an Internet game MWIF can roll the dice and show the results to everyone immediately. In a PBEM game that is not possible; so a solution was needed to prevent the players from repeatedly rolling the dice until a favorable result is achieved. To do that, MWIF includes eMWIF, a small program that runs separately from MWIF.

eMWIF exists for one purpose: to roll the dice and report the result to all the players in a game. eMWIF can be run on any host Internet server and Matrix Games will run a copy that is available to everyone. You can run eMWIF on some another system if you like. When you start a PBEM game, you ‘register’ it with a running copy eMWIF, identifying who is playing what countries.

As you play the game there will be times when you need a random number (e.g., rolling for weather). At that point MWIF will send a query to eMWIF over the Internet, asking for a random number. eMWIF will validate that the player is in the game and that he is scheduled for asking for a random number for the specific event. By this I mean that eMWIF will know where in the sequence of play the players are and who should be doing what next. Once the request is validated, eMWIF will roll the dice and send the results to all players. This means that players cannot cheat since the dice are only rolled once. Note that communication between MWIF and eMWIF is automated and requires no action by the player.

At the start of a PBEM game each player sets up an ‘INI’ file that lists all the players in the game with their email addresses. It also contains the Internet address of the copy of eMWIF that will be “rolling the dice”. Once the scenario, optional rules, and sides have been decided by the players, MWIF registers the game with the eMWIF dice roller.

During a PBEM game, each player runs a copy of MWIF. Each copy sends emails to the other players in the game, as well as eMWIF. The emails are generated by MWIF when the player clicks on “phase complete”. From the player’s point of view this is identical to playing over the Internet or solitaire. The process for completing a phase will be the same. However, the sequence of play is different, as discussed in glorious detail below.

Types of Email
The PBEM system operates with three types of email. The most common, Sequential, is when a player completes a phase and sends his decisions (e.g., moves) to the other player(s). This type of email transfers control to the other player. That is, the other player now becomes the phasing player and makes his decisions.

The second type of email, Simultaneous, occurs when multiple players are making decisions at the same time. For example, production is done simultaneously by all players. This second type does not transfer control directly from one player to another. Instead, MWIF waits until all the players have sent their emails marking the phase as complete. Then, and only then, does it reveal the other players’ decisions/actions. What this means in practice is that a player may receive an email from an opponent (say, about production), but be unable to read its contents until he has sent off his own email that contains all his own production decisions. In a game with more than 2 players simultaneous emails can cause delay because MWIF waits until everyone has sent their emails.

The third type of email, Announcements, are generated by MWIF. These are generated when MWIF determines: who has the initiative at the start of a new turn, that the end of turn has occurred, and that the end of game has occurred.

Standing Orders
In order to eliminate emails, most decisions by the non-phasing player are handled using Standing Orders (SO). There are 24 locations in the sequence of play where standing orders might be used. At appropriate times during the sequence of play, players are prompted by MWIF to review their SOs to make sure they are up-to-date. All players select settings for each standing order. The details of the selection process depend on the specific standing order being set. The AI Assistant later uses SOs to make decisions on behalf of the non-phasing player when the opponent, the phasing player, moves units, conducts combat, and performs other game activities. The use of standing orders enables hundreds, if not thousands, of emails to be eliminated from a PBEM game of MWIF.

In each location the choices for the SO are different. Therefore, for each of the 24 standing order locations, there is a separate interface designed specifically for that standing order. Of course, they are as similar as possible with common terminology and placement of panels, text, and so on. The key point is that you should think of each SO as solving a unique problem.

The portion of MWIF which executes SOs is referred to as the AI Assistant (AIA). The AIA makes decisions on behalf of the player, but is indirectly under the control of the player, through the settings of the SOs. The default setting/choice is the one implemented by the AIA if no standing order has ever been entered by the player. The default is usually to do nothing or if that isn’t possible, to choose the simplest choice. Once you set a standing order, it remains in effect until you change it. That is the current SO and there are at least 24 of them. Through the help system the player can ask for advice on setting standing orders. The help system contains suggested SOs from experienced WIF players. These are recommended standing orders. Sadly, it is not possible to know how well the authors play MWIF and the advice you are given may not be ideal. It is up to you to judge.

There may arise situations where the non-phasing player wants to make a decision with an extra e-mail instead of having a SO applied by the AIA. This might be because he feels there are too many variables, or the situation is too crucial to be left to SOs. To accommodate these circumstances, the player has the ability to indicate that one or more of the 24 possible SO locations require an email in lieu of a SO.

This goes directly against the thrust of the PBEM system design to eliminate as many emails as possible and it can be very annoying when an opponent starts requiring emails for every little decision. Be that as it may, whether SOs or emails are used is a question for the players to decide amongst themselves. It is akin to the situation in playing WIF over the board, where the German player, in the middle of moving all his land units in Russia during a summer turn, decides to take a 2 hour break for lunch. Note that Australian Design Group didn't write any rules to cover such situations in WIF.

Therefore, use of SOs is optional, even in a PBEM game. The capability to require an email instead of a SO will be part of MWIF and it can be turned on or off for each of the individual 24 SO locations. Furthermore, the on/off flags can be set either at the beginning of the game (like an optional rule), or dynamically toggled during play. However the flags are set at the beginning of a game, those are their settings unless the players unanimous agree to change them during a game.

Nomenclature
The references to the rules in the sequence of play are to RAW 7. The emails are labeled by game segment:
S1 - S3 are for Setting up units.
W1 - W3 are for declarations of War.
P1 is for Passing.
A1 is for Air Actions.
N1 - N5 are for Naval Actions.
L1 is for Land Actions.
C1 - C2 are for Combined Actions.
E1 - E8 are for End of turn/game.

PBEM Sequence of Play
What follows is a very detailed list of the sequence of play for PBEM and the emails that are generated by the players and MWIF. All player emails are colored blue. Branching logic is colored red and refers to the numbers in the left hand margin. Emails from MWIF to eMWIF are colored purple. Standing Orders are colored green. Be sure to read the notes at the end. There is also a separate document describing the details of each standing order.

---------------------------------------------------- Start of Game
∙ Email communications to decide who is playing, scenario, optional rules, bidding for countries, and choosing countries (MWIF facilitates bidding if so desired). Game is registered with eMWIF.
---------------------------------------------------- Set Up
∙ Email S1 from Italy: 1 => 3.1 - Italy initializes all SOs
1 Setup (Rules 24.1)
2 Reinforcements (Rules 4.0)
2.1 Force pool changes (Rules 4.1)
2.1.1 Remove Air Units (Rules 4.1.3)
2.1.2 Replacement naval units (Rules 4.1.4) Option 67
2.2 Placing reinforcements (Rules 4.2)
3 Lending Resources (Rules 5.0)
3.1 Trade agreements (Rules 5.1)
∙ Email S2 from all Allies: 1 =>3.1 - the Allies initialize all SOs
∙ Email S3 from Japan & Germany: 1=> 3.1 - Japan & Germany initialize all SOs
--------------------------------------------------- Action Stage
∙ Email W1 from side with the initiative: 5 => 7.4 (scenarios always state who starts with the initiative)
5 Action stage (Rules 7.0) - repeat 6 through 12 until end of turn
6 Weather, only when player with initiative is phasing player (Rules 8.0) - eMWIF
7.1 Declare War (Rules 9.0)
7.1.1 US entry check (Rules 9.4); roll is made immediately but the USA player does not decide where to place a chit until the next time he is the phasing player - eMWIF
7.1.2 Neutrality pacts (Rules 9.5) - Checked by MWIF
7.1.3 [See W2 below]
7.1.4 Control new minor countries (Rules 9.7) - SO 2
7.1.5 Aligning minor countries (Rules 9.8)
7.1.6 Japanese occupation of Indo-China (Rules 9.10)
7.2 Nazi-Soviet pact (Rules 19.5)
7.3 Soviet border rectification (Rules 19.6)
7.3.1 The USSR claims the Finnish borderlands (Rules 19.6.1) - SO 3
7.3.2 [See W2 below]
7.3.3 The USSR claims Bessarabia (Rules 19.6.2) - SO 3
7.3.4 [See W2 below]
7.4 The Ukraine (Rules 19.12) Option 62
∙ Email W2 from non-phasing player to set up units if war is declared (7.1.3, 7.3.2, and 7.3.4)
7.1.3 Calling out the reserves (Rules 9.6) - SO 4 may be used
7.3.2 Germany denies USSR claim to the Finnish borderlands (Rules 19.6.1)
7.3.4 Germany denies USSR claim to Bessarabia (Rules 19.6.2)
∙ Email W3 from phasing player: 7.5 + (P1, or A1, or N1, or L1)
7.5 Choose action (Rules 10.0)
--------------------------------------------- Movement and Combat
One of more of the following Action Phases occur depending on the action chosen by the phasing player. Note that parts of the Air Actions can occur during Naval and Land Actions.
--------------------------------------------- Pass Action
∙ Email P1 from phasing player: 8.1
8.1 Passing (Rules 11.1)
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- Air Action
∙ Email A1 from phasing player: 9.1 => 9.15
9.1 Combat air patrol, CAP (Rules 14.2.1) - SO 5
9.2 Port attacks (Rules 11.2) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action - SO 11
9.3 Naval air missions (Rules 11.3) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.4 Strategic bombardment (Rules 11.7) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.5 Carpet bombing (Rules 11.8) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.6 Ground Strike (Rules 11.9) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.7 Rail movement (Rules 11.10)
9.8 Air transport (Rules 11.12) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.9 Paradrop (Rules 11.15) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.10 Shore bombardment (Rules 11.16.2)
9.11 Ground support (Rules 11.16.4) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.12 Aircraft rebases (Rules 11.17)
9.13 Air resupply (Rules 11.18.1) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.14 HQ reorganization (Rules 11.18.2)
9.15 TRS resupply (Rules 11.18.3)
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- Air Combat
The sequence X.1 => X.5 takes place when any of the actions listed in X.4 occur
X.1 Committing air units to combat
X.1.1 Non-phasing player flies CAP to hex or sea box (Rules 14.2.1) - SO 5
X.1.2 Phasing player flies air units to hex or sea box (Rules 14.1)
X.1.3 Non-phasing player flies air units to hex or sea box (Rules 14.1) - SO 6
X.1.4 Phasing player flies interceptors (Rules 14.2.1)
X.2 Air to air combat (Rules 14.3)
X.2.1 Phasing player arranges fighters and bombers (Rules 14.3.1)
X.2.2 Non-phasing player arranges fighters and bombers (Rules 14.3.1) - SO 7
X.2.3 Roll for non-phasing player’s attacks (Rules 14.3.2) - eMWIF
X.2.4 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3) - SO 8
X.2.5 Roll for phasing player’s attacks (Rules 14.3.2) - eMWIF
X.2.6 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3) - SO 8
X.2.7 Phasing player decides whether to continue (Rules 14.3.3)
X.2.8 Non-phasing player decides whether to continue (Rules 14.3.3) - SO 9
If both players decide to continue air to air combat, go to X.2.1. Otherwise
X.3 Anti-air (Rules 11.2, 11.5.9, 22.4.2) Option 3
X.3.1 Anti-air combat on attacker’’s planes - eMWIF
X.3.2 Anti-air combat on defender’’s planes (occurs in naval air attacks) - eMWIF
X.4 Air bombardment (port attack, naval air attack, ground strike, ground support, strategic bombing, or carpet bombing), paradrop, or air supply - eMWIF
X.5 Return to base
X.5.1 Phasing player returns planes to base (Rules 14.3.2)
X.5.2 Non-phasing player returns planes to base (Rules 14.3.2) - SO 10
--------------------------------------------- Naval Action
∙ Email N1 from phasing player: 10.1 => 10.4.3
10.1 Port attacks (Rules 11.2) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
10.1.1 Search - eMWIF
10.1.2 Surprise points - SO 11
10.2 Naval air missions (Rules 11.3) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
10.3 Naval movement (Rules 11.4)
10.3.1 Task forces (Rules 11.4.3)
10.3.2 Naval transport (Rules 11.4.5.)
10.3.3 Naval interception (Rules 11.4.6) - SO 12
10.4 Naval combat initiated by phasing player (Rules 11.5)
[∙ Email N5 from phasing player: 10.4.1 => 10.4.3], for multiple naval combats and rounds ]
10.4.1 Phasing player adds air units (Rules 11.5.3)
10.4.2 Phasing player commits subs (Rules 11.5.4)
10.4.3 Phasing player search (Rules 11.5.5) - eMWIF
∙ Email N2 from non-phasing player: 10.4.4 => 10.4.10
10.4.4 Non-phasing player adds naval air units (Rules 11.5.3)
10.4.5 Non-phasing player commit subs (Rules 11.5.4)
10.4.6 Non-phasing player search (Rules 11.5.5) - eMWIF
10.4.7 MWIF determines who chooses combat type (Rules 11.5.7)
10.4.8 Non-phasing player chooses sea box, when permitted (Rules 11.5.5)
10.4.9 Non-phasing player uses surprise points, when permitted (Rules 11.5.6)
10.4.10 Non-phasing player chooses combat type, when permitted (Rules 11.5.7)
∙ Email N3 from phasing player: 10.4.11 => 10.4.17
10.4.11 Phasing player chooses sea box, when permitted (Rules 11.5.5)
10.4.12 Phasing player uses surprise points, when permitted (Rules 11.5.6)
10.4.13 Phasing player chooses combat type, when permitted (Rules 11.5.7)
10.4.14 Naval surface combat (Rules 11.5.8) - eMWIF
10.4.15 Naval air combat (Rules 11.5.9) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
10.4.16 Submarine combat (Rules 11.5.10) - eMWIF
10.4.17 Phasing player takes and inflicts losses in naval combat, when permitted - the phasing player updates SO13
∙ Email N4 from non-phasing player: 10.4.18 => 10.4.20
10.4.18 Non-phasing player takes and inflicts losses in naval combat, when permitted
10.4.19 Phasing player aborts naval combat (Rules 11.5.11) - SO 13
10.4.20 Non-phasing player aborts naval combat (Rules 11.5.11) - the non-phasing player updates SOs 11, 12, and 14
If both sides decide to continue naval combat in this sea area, go to 10.4, Email N5.
Otherwise
If more sea areas were selected by the phasing player go to 10.4, Email N5 (for the next sea area). Otherwise10.5 Naval combat initiated by non-phasing player (Rules 11.6) - SO 14
Repeat same sequence as for 10.4 but with roles of phasing and non-phasing reversed.
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- Land Action
∙ Email L1 from phasing player: 111 => 11.10

11.1 Rail Movement (Rules 11.10)
11.2 Land Movement (Rules 11.11)
11.2.1 Overrun (Rules 11.11.6 )
11.2.2 Forced Air Rebase - SO 15
11.2.3 Forced Naval Rebase - SO 16
11.2.4 Overstacked Losses (Naval) - SO 17
11.3 Air Transport (Rules 11.12)
11.4 Unload Land Units from Ships (Rules 11.13)
11.5 Invasion (Rules 11.14) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
11.6 Paradrop (Rules 11.15) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
11.7 Land Combat (Rules 11.16)
11.7.1 Land Combat Declaration (Rules 11.16.1)
11.7.2 Shore Bombardment D (Rules 11.16.2) Option 38 - SO 18
11.7.3 Shore Bombardment A (Rules 11.16.2)
11.7.4 Emergency HQ Supply (Rules 2.4.2) Option 6 - SO 19
11.7.5 HQ Support Defender (Rules 11.16.3) Option 13 - eMWIF - SO 20
11.7.6 HQ Support Attacker (Rules 11.16.3) Option 13 - eMWIF
11.7.7 Ground Support (Rules 11.16.4) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action - SO 21
11.7.8 Ignore Notional Unit - SO 22
11.7.9 Land Combat Resolution (Rules 11.16.5)
11.7.9.1 Choosing land combat table - SO 23
11.7.9.2 Rolling the dice for combat results - eMWIF
11.7.9.3 Choosing Losses - SO 24
11.7.9.4 Path of Retreat
11.7.9.5 Advance after combat
11.7.9.6 Forced Air Rebase - SO 15
11.7.9.7 Forced Naval Rebase - SO 16
11.7.9.8 Overstacked Losses (Naval) - SO 17
11.8 Air Rebase (Rules 11.17) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
11.9 Air Supply (Rules 11.18.1) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
11.10 Reorganization (Rules 11.18)
11.10.1 HQ Reorganization (Rules 11.18.2)
11.10.2 TRS Supply (Rules 11.18.3)
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- Combined Action
A Combined Action is a combination of 9, 10, and 11 above:
It starts with the phasing player’s Naval Action (10) which may involve several emails - N1 => N5;
The non-phasing player updates his standing orders in email C1;
Next is the phasing player’s Strategic Action (9.4 and 9.5) resulting in email A1;
The non-phasing player updates his standing orders in email C2; and
Ends with the phasing player’s Land Action (11) which generates email L1.
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- End of Turn Test
12 Last impulse test (Rules 12) - MWIF decides
If not end of turn, switch who is phasing and non-phasing and go to 5.
Otherwise
--------------------------------------------- End of Turn
End of Turn Stage (Rules 13)
13.1 Partisans (Rules 13.1) Option 46 - eMWIF
∙ Email E1 from MWIF to both players announcing End of Turn (and Partisans, if any)
∙ Email E2 from both sides: 9.1 (if partisans appeared)
∙ Email E3 from both sides: 9.2 => 9.3.3
13.2 Entry markers (Rules 13.2) - eMWIF
13.3 US entry (Rules 13.3) - part of the USA (only) email
13.3.1 Entry markers (Rules 13.3.1) - eMWIF
13.3.2 US entry options (Rules 13.3.2)
13.3.3 US entry actions (Rules 13.3.3)
∙ Email E4 from side that had the initiative this turn: 9.4
13.4 Return to base or stay at sea (Rules 13.4)
∙ Email E5 from side that did not have the initiative this turn: 9.4
13.4 Return to base or stay at sea (Rules 13.4)
∙ Email E6 from both sides: 9.5 => 14, 2 => 4 - all players update their SOs
13.5 Final reorganization (Rules 13.5)
13.5.1 Use oil (Rules 13.5.1) Option 48
14 Production (Rules 13.6)
14.1 Breaking down units (Rules 22.4.1) Option 2
14.2 Building units (Rules 13.6.5) - eMWIF randomly selects units from force pool
14.3 Intelligence (Rules 22.1) Option 63
14.4 Factory Destruction (Rules 22.2) Option 30
14.5 Reforming units (Rules 22.4.1) Option 2
15 Peace (Rules 13.7) - MWIF decides
15.1 Conquest (Rules 13.7.1) - MWIF decides - eMWIF (for where the units go)
15.2 Allied support (Rules 13.7.2) - MWIF decides
15.3 Mutual peace (Rules 13.7.3) - either side can offer mutual peace. If this happens then the other side needs to respond with an email either accepting or rejecting the offer.
15.4 Vichy declaration (Rules 13.7.4)
15.4.1 Creation (Rules 17.1) - eMWIF (for which countries go Free French)
15.4.2 Determine control (Rules 17.2)
15.4.3 Setup Vichy units (Rules 17.3)
16 Liberation (Rules 13.7.5)
17 Surrender (Rules 13.7.6)
18 Victory check (Rules 13.8) - MWIF decides
If End of Game, go to 19 below.
Otherwise
--------------------------------------------- Reinforcements & Initiative
2 Reinforcements (Rules 4.0)
2.1 Force pool changes (Rules 4.1)
2.1.1 Remove Air Units (Rules 4.1.3)
2.1.2 Replacement naval units (Rules 4.1.4) Option 67
2.2 Placing reinforcements (Rules 4.2)
3 Lending Resources (Rules 5.0)
3.1 Trade agreements (Rules 5.1)
4 Initiative (Rules 6.0) - both players provide standing orders for rerolls and deciding who has the initiative to start the next turn - SO 1
∙ Email E7 from MWIF to both players announcing who has initiative
Go to 5 above
--------------------------------------------- End of Game
19. End of game
∙ Email E8 from MWIF to both players announcing who won
------------------------------------------------

Notes
I. Air combat can occur in 3 places during a Naval action, 5 places during a Land action, and 9 places during an Air action. For each of these ‘places’ there can be several combats (e.g., four ground strikes). Clearly this has the potential for making PBEM take a long time. Therefore, I have removed from PBEM the options: #22 Bounce, #51 En-route aircraft interception, and #57 Limited aircraft interception. I have also required Standing Orders for all non-phasing player decisions during air combat so the air combat sequence can be completed without any emails. These decisions detract from keeping PBEM faithful to WIF, so I do them reluctantly. However, I believe they are essential to keep PBEM from taking excessively long to play (i.e., dozens of emails per impulse).

II. S1 - S3 are based on the Global War scenario. The order for the countries may be different for the other scenarios.

III. W2 does not occur unless the phasing player declares war and the non-phasing player needs to set up units in response. However, even then this email can also be skipped if there are Standing Orders for how to set up units for the small minor countries (e.g., Iran). When W2 is not needed, the phasing player combines W1 and W3 into a single email. Since W2 happens only when war is declared, most of the time one email, W1, is all that is needed for the declaration of war segment.

IV. The Pass, Air, and Land actions are done with a single (one, 1, uno) email. Naval actions might take a lot of emails because several are needed for each round of combat in each sea area. However, naval combat is much less frequent than land and air combat. Given that: (1) control of sea areas is vital for maintaining supply to units, preparing for and defending against invasions, and for shipping resources to factories, and (2) the high cost in build points and time for naval units, the players have direct control in deciding the type of combat, how to use surprise points, losses, and return to base. In making the trade off between the crucial nature of naval combat and the number of emails, I decided the increased number of emails was warranted.

V. As the phasing player proceeds through his turn and requests die rolls from eMWIF, MWIF incrementally builds the email that is later sent to the opponent. Each email contains all the decisions (moves) that the phasing player made. The phasing player is still able to undo moves/decisions right up to the point where he either: (1) requests a die roll from eMWIF, or (2) takes an action that causes a SO to be activated. For example, when the phasing player tries to move surface naval units through a sea area that the other side could possibly search, he is committed to that move as soon as he exits the sea area. This is because passing through a sea area entitles the non-phasing player to perform a search. The decision whether to search or not is made by the AIA on behalf of the non-phasing player. It does not matter whether the AIA, using the SO, decides to search or not. Simply because the SO was consulted by the AIA means that the move can no longer be undone.

VI. Overruns can result in air and naval units having to rebase. The non-phasing player can just let the AIA make these decisions. Alternatively, he can use a SO to give a rebase destination (hex or prioritized hex list) for each of his units prior to the phasing player’s move, just in case they get overrun. Likewise he can let the AIA decide which units to eliminate if overstacking is caused when units have nowhere else to retreat.

VII. In land combat, choosing tables and losses is very important. Therefore, the standing orders for these decisions include a variety of ways for the player to instruct the AIA how to make them.

VIII. In air combat, choosing losses is very important. Therefore, the standing orders for these decisions include a variety of ways for the player to instruct the AIA how to make them.

IX. The most difficult SO interface to design was for deciding when to sent fighters to intercept enemy air activities (SO 6). The reason this was so hard is because there are so many different ways a player can use his fighters. The SOs in this one location have been split into the 10 separate parts, one for each type of enemy air mission: (1) port attacks, (2) naval air combat, (3) strategic bombing, (4) carpet bombing, (5) ground strikes, (6) air transported land units, (7) paradrops, (8) ground support, (9) air resupply - using ATRs to reorganize of land units, and (10) fighter escort for friendly bombing missions. The player can enter 10 separate SOs for fighters in this one location in the sequence of play.

X. There are still a couple of loose ends. It is possible that some emails can be skipped because there is nothing for the other player to do. For example, the non-phasing player might not be capable of initiating any naval combats. MWIF should detect these situations and expedite the game by eliminating emails when there is nothing to do. Of course, MWIF needs to inform all the players when this happens. Another topic that came up in the forum discussion was letting the non-phasing player review his SOs after the phasing player chooses his action type. This requires some major changes in the PBEM sequence of play. I have decided to play test the current design and see how loud the play testers complain about not knowing the phasing player’s choice for action type. One possibility is to code two PBEM sequences of play and let the players choose which one they prefer. I have no interest in writing the extra code unless it proves to be necessary.



< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 1/27/2014 6:45:31 PM >


_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Manfred)
Post #: 2
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 5/26/2006 3:20:12 AM   
Rexor

 

Posts: 295
Joined: 5/4/2005
From: The Oort Cloud
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Manfred

hi, and sorry if the answer is somewhere else on this forum but I wonder how a PBEM game will be playable if you follow the WiF's rules ?
for example, each time a naval unit crosses a sea area countaining ennemy units, it can be intercepted. Will we have to send a pbem file each time the non-phasing opponent has to make a choice ?
there are numerous actions a non-phasing player may have to do during an impulse : naval interceptions, CAP, air interceptions, HQ supports and many other things. a single impulse could see the sending of dozens of PBEM files, and make the game so long that his interest (at least in PBEM) would be crippled.
So how will you handle PBEM ?
thanks and sorry for the bad english


Oh, what the heck. This hasn't been posted for a while.

The PBEM design was worked on extensively from July to October, 2005. What follows is only part one of a two part design specification. The second part is longer and describes Standing Orders in minute detail. I have both of these documents as PDFs if anyone is interested (send me an email: Steve@PatternDiscovery.us).
--------------
Proposed Design for Play by Email (PBEM)
(as of October 17, 2005)

Background
As general background, MWIF controls what the player can do at any point in the game by proceeding through the sequence of play in the World in Flames’ Rules as Written 7 (RAW). During each phase/subphase the player is only able to make decisions, move units, build units, and so on, if those actions are appropriate for that phase/subphase. The player controls when a phase is complete by clicking on a “phase complete” button. Control is passed back and forth between the players by MWIF, and in some phases a player has nothing to do because MWIF is waiting on his opponent to move (or make some decision).

One of the concerns with PBEM is that it will take too long to play a game because of the numerous changes in control in the RAW sequence of play. If RAW were implemented faithfully for PBEM, there would be literally hundreds (or thousands) of emails needed to play a single game. To make the PBEM system more efficient, a revised sequence of play is used that reduces the number of emails substantially.

Elements of PBEM
One of the big differences between playing MWIF live over the Internet and playing by email, is rolling the dice. During an Internet game MWIF can roll the dice and show the results to everyone immediately. In a PBEM game that is not possible; so a solution was needed to prevent the players from repeatedly rolling the dice until a favorable result is achieved. To do that, MWIF includes eMWIF, a small program that runs separately from MWIF.

eMWIF exists for one purpose: to roll the dice and report the result to all the players in a game. eMWIF can be run on any host Internet server and Matrix Games will run a copy that is available to everyone. You can run eMWIF on some another system if you like. When you start a PBEM game, you ‘register’ it with a running copy eMWIF, identifying who is playing what countries.

As you play the game there will be times when you need a random number (e.g., rolling for weather). At that point MWIF will send a query to eMWIF over the Internet, asking for a random number. eMWIF will validate that the player is in the game and that he is scheduled for asking for a random number for the specific event. By this I mean that eMWIF will know where in the sequence of play the players are and who should be doing what next. Once the request is validated, eMWIF will roll the dice and send the results to all players. This means that players cannot cheat since the dice are only rolled once. Note that communication between MWIF and eMWIF is automated and requires no action by the player.

At the start of a PBEM game each player sets up an ‘INI’ file that lists all the players in the game with their email addresses. It also contains the Internet address of the copy of eMWIF that will be “rolling the dice”. Once the scenario, optional rules, and sides have been decided by the players, MWIF registers the game with the eMWIF dice roller.

During a PBEM game, each player runs a copy of MWIF. Each copy sends emails to the other players in the game, as well as eMWIF. The emails are generated by MWIF when the player clicks on “phase complete”. From the player’s point of view this is identical to playing over the Internet or solitaire. The process for completing a phase will be the same. However, the sequence of play is different, as discussed in glorious detail below.

Types of Email
The PBEM system operates with three types of email. The most common, Sequential, is when a player completes a phase and sends his decisions (e.g., moves) to the other player(s). This type of email transfers control to the other player. That is, the other player now becomes the phasing player and makes his decisions.

The second type of email, Simultaneous, occurs when multiple players are making decisions at the same time. For example, production is done simultaneously by all players. This second type does not transfer control directly from one player to another. Instead, MWIF waits until all the players have sent their emails marking the phase as complete. Then, and only then, does it reveal the other players’ decisions/actions. What this means in practice is that a player may receive an email from an opponent (say, about production), but be unable to read its contents until he has sent off his own email that contains all his own production decisions. In a game with more than 2 players simultaneous emails can cause delay because MWIF waits until everyone has sent their emails.

The third type of email, Announcements, are generated by MWIF. These are generated when MWIF determines: who has the initiative at the start of a new turn, that the end of turn has occurred, and that the end of game has occurred.

Standing Orders
In order to eliminate emails, most decisions by the non-phasing player are handled using Standing Orders (SO). There are 24 locations in the sequence of play where standing orders might be used. At appropriate times during the sequence of play, players are prompted by MWIF to review their SOs to make sure they are up-to-date. All players select settings for each standing order. The details of the selection process depend on the specific standing order being set. The AI Assistant later uses SOs to make decisions on behalf of the non-phasing player when the opponent, the phasing player, moves units, conducts combat, and performs other game activities. The use of standing orders enables hundreds, if not thousands, of emails to be eliminated from a PBEM game of MWIF.

In each location the choices for the SO are different. Therefore, for each of the 24 standing order locations, there is a separate interface designed specifically for that standing order. Of course, they are as similar as possible with common terminology and placement of panels, text, and so on. The key point is that you should think of each SO as solving a unique problem.

The portion of MWIF which executes SOs is referred to as the AI Assistant (AIA). The AIA makes decisions on behalf of the player, but is indirectly under the control of the player, through the settings of the SOs. The default setting/choice is the one implemented by the AIA if no standing order has ever been entered by the player. The default is usually to do nothing or if that isn’t possible, to choose the simplest choice. Once you set a standing order, it remains in effect until you change it. That is the current SO and there are at least 24 of them. Through the help system the player can ask for advice on setting standing orders. The help system contains suggested SOs from experienced WIF players. These are recommended standing orders. Sadly, it is not possible to know how well the authors play MWIF and the advice you are given may not be ideal. It is up to you to judge.

There may arise situations where the non-phasing player wants to make a decision with an extra e-mail instead of having a SO applied by the AIA. This might be because he feels there are too many variables, or the situation is too crucial to be left to SOs. To accommodate these circumstances, the player has the ability to indicate that one or more of the 24 possible SO locations require an email in lieu of a SO.

This goes directly against the thrust of the PBEM system design to eliminate as many emails as possible and it can be very annoying when an opponent starts requiring emails for every little decision. Be that as it may, whether SOs or emails are used is a question for the players to decide amongst themselves. It is akin to the situation in playing WIF over the board, where the German player, in the middle of moving all his land units in Russia during a summer turn, decides to take a 2 hour break for lunch. Note that Australian Design Group didn't write any rules to cover such situations in WIF.

Therefore, use of SOs is optional, even in a PBEM game. The capability to require an email instead of a SO will be part of MWIF and it can be turned on or off for each of the individual 24 SO locations. Furthermore, the on/off flags can be set either at the beginning of the game (like an optional rule), or dynamically toggled during play. However the flags are set at the beginning of a game, those are their settings unless the players unanimous agree to change them during a game.

Nomenclature
The references to the rules in the sequence of play are to RAW 7. The emails are labeled by game segment:
S1 - S3 are for Setting up units.
W1 - W3 are for declarations of War.
P1 is for Passing.
A1 is for Air Actions.
N1 - N5 are for Naval Actions.
L1 is for Land Actions.
C1 - C2 are for Combined Actions.
E1 - E8 are for End of turn/game.

PBEM Sequence of Play
What follows is a very detailed list of the sequence of play for PBEM and the emails that are generated by the players and MWIF. All player emails are colored blue. Branching logic is colored red and refers to the numbers in the left hand margin. Emails from MWIF to eMWIF are colored purple. Standing Orders are colored green. Be sure to read the notes at the end. There is also a separate document describing the details of each standing order.

---------------------------------------------------- Start of Game
?? Email communications to decide who is playing, scenario, optional rules, bidding for countries, and choosing countries (MWIF facilitates bidding if so desired). Game is registered with eMWIF.
---------------------------------------------------- Set Up
?? Email S1 from Italy: 1 => 3.1 - Italy initializes all SOs
1 Setup (Rules 24.1)
2 Reinforcements (Rules 4.0)
2.1 Force pool changes (Rules 4.1)
2.1.1 Remove Air Units (Rules 4.1.3)
2.1.2 Replacement naval units (Rules 4.1.4) Option 67
2.2 Placing reinforcements (Rules 4.2)
3 Lending Resources (Rules 5.0)
3.1 Trade agreements (Rules 5.1)
?? Email S2 from all Allies: 1 =>3.1 - the Allies initialize all SOs
?? Email S3 from Japan & Germany: 1=> 3.1 - Japan & Germany initialize all SOs
--------------------------------------------------- Action Stage
?? Email W1 from side with the initiative: 5 => 7.4 (scenarios always state who starts with the initiative)
5 Action stage (Rules 7.0) - repeat 6 through 12 until end of turn
6 Weather, only when player with initiative is phasing player (Rules 8.0) - eMWIF
7.1 Declare War (Rules 9.0)
7.1.1 US entry check (Rules 9.4); roll is made immediately but the USA player does not decide where to place a chit until the next time he is the phasing player - eMWIF
7.1.2 Neutrality pacts (Rules 9.5) - Checked by MWIF
7.1.3 [See W2 below]
7.1.4 Control new minor countries (Rules 9.7) - SO 2
7.1.5 Aligning minor countries (Rules 9.8)
7.1.6 Japanese occupation of Indo-China (Rules 9.10)
7.2 Nazi-Soviet pact (Rules 19.5)
7.3 Soviet border rectification (Rules 19.6)
7.3.1 The USSR claims the Finnish borderlands (Rules 19.6.1) - SO 3
7.3.2 [See W2 below]
7.3.3 The USSR claims Bessarabia (Rules 19.6.2) - SO 3
7.3.4 [See W2 below]
7.4 The Ukraine (Rules 19.12) Option 62
?? Email W2 from non-phasing player to set up units if war is declared (7.1.3, 7.3.2, and 7.3.4)
7.1.3 Calling out the reserves (Rules 9.6) - SO 4 may be used
7.3.2 Germany denies USSR claim to the Finnish borderlands (Rules 19.6.1)
7.3.4 Germany denies USSR claim to Bessarabia (Rules 19.6.2)
?? Email W3 from phasing player: 7.5 + (P1, or A1, or N1, or L1)
7.5 Choose action (Rules 10.0)
--------------------------------------------- Movement and Combat
One of more of the following Action Phases occur depending on the action chosen by the phasing player. Note that parts of the Air Actions can occur during Naval and Land Actions.
--------------------------------------------- Pass Action
?? Email P1 from phasing player: 8.1
8.1 Passing (Rules 11.1)
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- Air Action
?? Email A1 from phasing player: 9.1 => 9.15
9.1 Combat air patrol, CAP (Rules 14.2.1) - SO 5
9.2 Port attacks (Rules 11.2) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action - SO 11
9.3 Naval air missions (Rules 11.3) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.4 Strategic bombardment (Rules 11.7) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.5 Carpet bombing (Rules 11.8) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.6 Ground Strike (Rules 11.9) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.7 Rail movement (Rules 11.10)
9.8 Air transport (Rules 11.12) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.9 Paradrop (Rules 11.15) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.10 Shore bombardment (Rules 11.16.2)
9.11 Ground support (Rules 11.16.4) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.12 Aircraft rebases (Rules 11.17)
9.13 Air resupply (Rules 11.18.1) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
9.14 HQ reorganization (Rules 11.18.2)
9.15 TRS resupply (Rules 11.18.3)
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- Air Combat
The sequence X.1 => X.5 takes place when any of the actions listed in X.4 occur
X.1 Committing air units to combat
X.1.1 Non-phasing player flies CAP to hex or sea box (Rules 14.2.1) - SO 5
X.1.2 Phasing player flies air units to hex or sea box (Rules 14.1)
X.1.3 Non-phasing player flies air units to hex or sea box (Rules 14.1) - SO 6
X.1.4 Phasing player flies interceptors (Rules 14.2.1)
X.2 Air to air combat (Rules 14.3)
X.2.1 Phasing player arranges fighters and bombers (Rules 14.3.1)
X.2.2 Non-phasing player arranges fighters and bombers (Rules 14.3.1) - SO 7
X.2.3 Roll for non-phasing player’s attacks (Rules 14.3.2) - eMWIF
X.2.4 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3) - SO 8
X.2.5 Roll for phasing player’s attacks (Rules 14.3.2) - eMWIF
X.2.6 Choose planes lost, damaged, and/or cleared through (Rules 14.3.3) - SO 8
X.2.7 Phasing player decides whether to continue (Rules 14.3.3)
X.2.8 Non-phasing player decides whether to continue (Rules 14.3.3) - SO 9
If both players decide to continue air to air combat, go to X.2.1. Otherwise
X.3 Anti-air (Rules 11.2, 11.5.9, 22.4.2) Option 3
X.3.1 Anti-air combat on attacker’’s planes - eMWIF
X.3.2 Anti-air combat on defender’’s planes (occurs in naval air attacks) - eMWIF
X.4 Air bombardment (port attack, naval air attack, ground strike, ground support, strategic bombing, or carpet bombing), paradrop, or air supply - eMWIF
X.5 Return to base
X.5.1 Phasing player returns planes to base (Rules 14.3.2)
X.5.2 Non-phasing player returns planes to base (Rules 14.3.2) - SO 10
--------------------------------------------- Naval Action
?? Email N1 from phasing player: 10.1 => 10.4.3
10.1 Port attacks (Rules 11.2) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
10.1.1 Search - eMWIF
10.1.2 Surprise points - SO 11
10.2 Naval air missions (Rules 11.3) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
10.3 Naval movement (Rules 11.4)
10.3.1 Task forces (Rules 11.4.3)
10.3.2 Naval transport (Rules 11.4.5.)
10.3.3 Naval interception (Rules 11.4.6) - SO 12
10.4 Naval combat initiated by phasing player (Rules 11.5)
[?? Email N5 from phasing player: 10.4.1 => 10.4.3], for multiple naval combats and rounds ]
10.4.1 Phasing player adds air units (Rules 11.5.3)
10.4.2 Phasing player commits subs (Rules 11.5.4)
10.4.3 Phasing player search (Rules 11.5.5) - eMWIF
?? Email N2 from non-phasing player: 10.4.4 => 10.4.10
10.4.4 Non-phasing player adds naval air units (Rules 11.5.3)
10.4.5 Non-phasing player commit subs (Rules 11.5.4)
10.4.6 Non-phasing player search (Rules 11.5.5) - eMWIF
10.4.7 MWIF determines who chooses combat type (Rules 11.5.7)
10.4.8 Non-phasing player chooses sea box, when permitted (Rules 11.5.5)
10.4.9 Non-phasing player uses surprise points, when permitted (Rules 11.5.6)
10.4.10 Non-phasing player chooses combat type, when permitted (Rules 11.5.7)
?? Email N3 from phasing player: 10.4.11 => 10.4.17
10.4.11 Phasing player chooses sea box, when permitted (Rules 11.5.5)
10.4.12 Phasing player uses surprise points, when permitted (Rules 11.5.6)
10.4.13 Phasing player chooses combat type, when permitted (Rules 11.5.7)
10.4.14 Naval surface combat (Rules 11.5.8) - eMWIF
10.4.15 Naval air combat (Rules 11.5.9) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
10.4.16 Submarine combat (Rules 11.5.10) - eMWIF
10.4.17 Phasing player takes and inflicts losses in naval combat, when permitted - the phasing player updates SO13
?? Email N4 from non-phasing player: 10.4.18 => 10.4.20
10.4.18 Non-phasing player takes and inflicts losses in naval combat, when permitted
10.4.19 Phasing player aborts naval combat (Rules 11.5.11) - SO 13
10.4.20 Non-phasing player aborts naval combat (Rules 11.5.11) - the non-phasing player updates SOs 11, 12, and 14
If both sides decide to continue naval combat in this sea area, go to 10.4, Email N5.
Otherwise
If more sea areas were selected by the phasing player go to 10.4, Email N5 (for the next sea area). Otherwise10.5 Naval combat initiated by non-phasing player (Rules 11.6) - SO 14
Repeat same sequence as for 10.4 but with roles of phasing and non-phasing reversed.
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- Land Action
?? Email L1 from phasing player: 111 => 11.10

11.1 Rail Movement (Rules 11.10)
11.2 Land Movement (Rules 11.11)
11.2.1 Overrun (Rules 11.11.6 )
11.2.2 Forced Air Rebase - SO 15
11.2.3 Forced Naval Rebase - SO 16
11.2.4 Overstacked Losses (Naval) - SO 17
11.3 Air Transport (Rules 11.12)
11.4 Unload Land Units from Ships (Rules 11.13)
11.5 Invasion (Rules 11.14) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
11.6 Paradrop (Rules 11.15) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
11.7 Land Combat (Rules 11.16)
11.7.1 Land Combat Declaration (Rules 11.16.1)
11.7.2 Shore Bombardment D (Rules 11.16.2) Option 38 - SO 18
11.7.3 Shore Bombardment A (Rules 11.16.2)
11.7.4 Emergency HQ Supply (Rules 2.4.2) Option 6 - SO 19
11.7.5 HQ Support Defender (Rules 11.16.3) Option 13 - eMWIF - SO 20
11.7.6 HQ Support Attacker (Rules 11.16.3) Option 13 - eMWIF
11.7.7 Ground Support (Rules 11.16.4) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action - SO 21
11.7.8 Ignore Notional Unit - SO 22
11.7.9 Land Combat Resolution (Rules 11.16.5)
11.7.9.1 Choosing land combat table - SO 23
11.7.9.2 Rolling the dice for combat results - eMWIF
11.7.9.3 Choosing Losses - SO 24
11.7.9.4 Path of Retreat
11.7.9.5 Advance after combat
11.7.9.6 Forced Air Rebase - SO 15
11.7.9.7 Forced Naval Rebase - SO 16
11.7.9.8 Overstacked Losses (Naval) - SO 17
11.8 Air Rebase (Rules 11.17) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
11.9 Air Supply (Rules 11.18.1) see X.1 => X.5 in Air Action
11.10 Reorganization (Rules 11.18)
11.10.1 HQ Reorganization (Rules 11.18.2)
11.10.2 TRS Supply (Rules 11.18.3)
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- Combined Action
A Combined Action is a combination of 9, 10, and 11 above:
It starts with the phasing player’s Naval Action (10) which may involve several emails - N1 => N5;
The non-phasing player updates his standing orders in email C1;
Next is the phasing player’s Strategic Action (9.4 and 9.5) resulting in email A1;
The non-phasing player updates his standing orders in email C2; and
Ends with the phasing player’s Land Action (11) which generates email L1.
Go to 12
--------------------------------------------- End of Turn Test
12 Last impulse test (Rules 12) - MWIF decides
If not end of turn, switch who is phasing and non-phasing and go to 5.
Otherwise
--------------------------------------------- End of Turn
End of Turn Stage (Rules 13)
13.1 Partisans (Rules 13.1) Option 46 - eMWIF
?? Email E1 from MWIF to both players announcing End of Turn (and Partisans, if any)
?? Email E2 from both sides: 9.1 (if partisans appeared)
?? Email E3 from both sides: 9.2 => 9.3.3
13.2 Entry markers (Rules 13.2) - eMWIF
13.3 US entry (Rules 13.3) - part of the USA (only) email
13.3.1 Entry markers (Rules 13.3.1) - eMWIF
13.3.2 US entry options (Rules 13.3.2)
13.3.3 US entry actions (Rules 13.3.3)
?? Email E4 from side that had the initiative this turn: 9.4
13.4 Return to base or stay at sea (Rules 13.4)
?? Email E5 from side that did not have the initiative this turn: 9.4
13.4 Return to base or stay at sea (Rules 13.4)
?? Email E6 from both sides: 9.5 => 14, 2 => 4 - all players update their SOs
13.5 Final reorganization (Rules 13.5)
13.5.1 Use oil (Rules 13.5.1) Option 48
14 Production (Rules 13.6)
14.1 Breaking down units (Rules 22.4.1) Option 2
14.2 Building units (Rules 13.6.5) - eMWIF randomly selects units from force pool
14.3 Intelligence (Rules 22.1) Option 63
14.4 Factory Destruction (Rules 22.2) Option 30
14.5 Reforming units (Rules 22.4.1) Option 2
15 Peace (Rules 13.7) - MWIF decides
15.1 Conquest (Rules 13.7.1) - MWIF decides - eMWIF (for where the units go)
15.2 Allied support (Rules 13.7.2) - MWIF decides
15.3 Mutual peace (Rules 13.7.3) - either side can offer mutual peace. If this happens then the other side needs to respond with an email either accepting or rejecting the offer.
15.4 Vichy declaration (Rules 13.7.4)
15.4.1 Creation (Rules 17.1) - eMWIF (for which countries go Free French)
15.4.2 Determine control (Rules 17.2)
15.4.3 Setup Vichy units (Rules 17.3)
16 Liberation (Rules 13.7.5)
17 Surrender (Rules 13.7.6)
18 Victory check (Rules 13.8) - MWIF decides
If End of Game, go to 19 below.
Otherwise
--------------------------------------------- Reinforcements & Initiative
2 Reinforcements (Rules 4.0)
2.1 Force pool changes (Rules 4.1)
2.1.1 Remove Air Units (Rules 4.1.3)
2.1.2 Replacement naval units (Rules 4.1.4) Option 67
2.2 Placing reinforcements (Rules 4.2)
3 Lending Resources (Rules 5.0)
3.1 Trade agreements (Rules 5.1)
4 Initiative (Rules 6.0) - both players provide standing orders for rerolls and deciding who has the initiative to start the next turn - SO 1
?? Email E7 from MWIF to both players announcing who has initiative
Go to 5 above
--------------------------------------------- End of Game
19. End of game
?? Email E8 from MWIF to both players announcing who won
------------------------------------------------

Notes
I. Air combat can occur in 3 places during a Naval action, 5 places during a Land action, and 9 places during an Air action. For each of these ‘places’ there can be several combats (e.g., four ground strikes). Clearly this has the potential for making PBEM take a long time. Therefore, I have removed from PBEM the options: #22 Bounce, #51 En-route aircraft interception, and #57 Limited aircraft interception. I have also required Standing Orders for all non-phasing player decisions during air combat so the air combat sequence can be completed without any emails. These decisions detract from keeping PBEM faithful to WIF, so I do them reluctantly. However, I believe they are essential to keep PBEM from taking excessively long to play (i.e., dozens of emails per impulse).

II. S1 - S3 are based on the Global War scenario. The order for the countries may be different for the other scenarios.

III. W2 does not occur unless the phasing player declares war and the non-phasing player needs to set up units in response. However, even then this email can also be skipped if there are Standing Orders for how to set up units for the small minor countries (e.g., Iran). When W2 is not needed, the phasing player combines W1 and W3 into a single email. Since W2 happens only when war is declared, most of the time one email, W1, is all that is needed for the declaration of war segment.

IV. The Pass, Air, and Land actions are done with a single (one, 1, uno) email. Naval actions might take a lot of emails because several are needed for each round of combat in each sea area. However, naval combat is much less frequent than land and air combat. Given that: (1) control of sea areas is vital for maintaining supply to units, preparing for and defending against invasions, and for shipping resources to factories, and (2) the high cost in build points and time for naval units, the players have direct control in deciding the type of combat, how to use surprise points, losses, and return to base. In making the trade off between the crucial nature of naval combat and the number of emails, I decided the increased number of emails was warranted.

V. As the phasing player proceeds through his turn and requests die rolls from eMWIF, MWIF incrementally builds the email that is later sent to the opponent. Each email contains all the decisions (moves) that the phasing player made. The phasing player is still able to undo moves/decisions right up to the point where he either: (1) requests a die roll from eMWIF, or (2) takes an action that causes a SO to be activated. For example, when the phasing player tries to move surface naval units through a sea area that the other side could possibly search, he is committed to that move as soon as he exits the sea area. This is because passing through a sea area entitles the non-phasing player to perform a search. The decision whether to search or not is made by the AIA on behalf of the non-phasing player. It does not matter whether the AIA, using the SO, decides to search or not. Simply because the SO was consulted by the AIA means that the move can no longer be undone.

VI. Overruns can result in air and naval units having to rebase. The non-phasing player can just let the AIA make these decisions. Alternatively, he can use a SO to give a rebase destination (hex or prioritized hex list) for each of his units prior to the phasing player’s move, just in case they get overrun. Likewise he can let the AIA decide which units to eliminate if overstacking is caused when units have nowhere else to retreat.

VII. In land combat, choosing tables and losses is very important. Therefore, the standing orders for these decisions include a variety of ways for the player to instruct the AIA how to make them.

VIII. In air combat, choosing losses is very important. Therefore, the standing orders for these decisions include a variety of ways for the player to instruct the AIA how to make them.

IX. The most difficult SO interface to design was for deciding when to sent fighters to intercept enemy air activities (SO 6). The reason this was so hard is because there are so many different ways a player can use his fighters. The SOs in this one location have been split into the 10 separate parts, one for each type of enemy air mission: (1) port attacks, (2) naval air combat, (3) strategic bombing, (4) carpet bombing, (5) ground strikes, (6) air transported land units, (7) paradrops, (8) ground support, (9) air resupply - using ATRs to reorganize of land units, and (10) fighter escort for friendly bombing missions. The player can enter 10 separate SOs for fighters in this one location in the sequence of play.

X. There are still a couple of loose ends. It is possible that some emails can be skipped because there is nothing for the other player to do. For example, the non-phasing player might not be capable of initiating any naval combats. MWIF should detect these situations and expedite the game by eliminating emails when there is nothing to do. Of course, MWIF needs to inform all the players when this happens. Another topic that came up in the forum discussion was letting the non-phasing player review his SOs after the phasing player chooses his action type. This requires some major changes in the PBEM sequence of play. I have decided to play test the current design and see how loud the play testers complain about not knowing the phasing player’s choice for action type. One possibility is to code two PBEM sequences of play and let the players choose which one they prefer. I have no interest in writing the extra code unless it proves to be necessary.




Great bearded Jesus. I could follow for a while, then... well, it was like seeing bright starbursts before my eyes. With fuzzy little bears. Or something. And then I woke up.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 3
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 5/26/2006 3:32:09 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
Perhaps a picture might help?

When I get around to documenting this, I'll give a graphic to show the changes to the sequence of play.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Rexor)
Post #: 4
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 5/26/2006 5:13:11 PM   
mlees


Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline
Sticky this thread, please.

Helps to keep this info from being buried in a week or two.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 5
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/24/2007 2:00:38 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
what is the scale to these turns. .seems they may make pbem impractical

(in reply to mlees)
Post #: 6
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/24/2007 4:23:12 AM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

what is the scale to these turns. .seems they may make pbem impractical


1 turn (consisting of several impulses) = 2 months

An impulse is when one side performs various actions then the other side performs various actions. At the end of each impulse a die roll to see if the turn ends.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 7
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/24/2007 9:57:37 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
Are the moves done at the same time? thsi could solve the PBEM "forever" issue by allowing all players to input there turns and then have the game work out the results.

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 8
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/24/2007 10:31:42 AM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

Are the moves done at the same time? thsi could solve the PBEM "forever" issue by allowing all players to input there turns and then have the game work out the results.

Each side (Axis or Allies) takes it in turns to do impulses, but there are occasions where one can react to opposition moves. What you suggest wouldn't be possible with this system.

Don't worry. A lot of work has gone into working out the best way to do PBEM and there will be a way of setting up one's reactions automatically to speed up play, as well as some other trickery.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 9
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/24/2007 11:41:07 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

Are the moves done at the same time? thsi could solve the PBEM "forever" issue by allowing all players to input there turns and then have the game work out the results.

Here is an except from post #2 in this thread that relates to your question - th efirst 3 paragraphs in particular.
=======
Types of Email
The PBEM system operates with three types of email. The most common, Sequential, is when a player completes a phase and sends his decisions (e.g., moves) to the other player(s). This type of email transfers control to the other player. That is, the other player now becomes the phasing player and makes his decisions.

The second type of email, Simultaneous, occurs when multiple players are making decisions at the same time. For example, production is done simultaneously by all players. This second type does not transfer control directly from one player to another. Instead, MWIF waits until all the players have sent their emails marking the phase as complete. Then, and only then, does it reveal the other players’ decisions/actions. What this means in practice is that a player may receive an email from an opponent (say, about production), but be unable to read its contents until he has sent off his own email that contains all his own production decisions. In a game with more than 2 players simultaneous emails can cause delay because MWIF waits until everyone has sent their emails.

The third type of email, Announcements, are generated by MWIF. These are generated when MWIF determines: who has the initiative at the start of a new turn, that the end of turn has occurred, and that the end of game has occurred.

Standing Orders
In order to eliminate emails, most decisions by the non-phasing player are handled using Standing Orders (SO). There are 24 locations in the sequence of play where standing orders might be used. At appropriate times during the sequence of play, players are prompted by MWIF to review their SOs to make sure they are up-to-date. All players select settings for each standing order. The details of the selection process depend on the specific standing order being set. The AI Assistant later uses SOs to make decisions on behalf of the non-phasing player when the opponent, the phasing player, moves units, conducts combat, and performs other game activities. The use of standing orders enables hundreds, if not thousands, of emails to be eliminated from a PBEM game of MWIF.

In each location the choices for the SO are different. Therefore, for each of the 24 standing order locations, there is a separate interface designed specifically for that standing order. Of course, they are as similar as possible with common terminology and placement of panels, text, and so on. The key point is that you should think of each SO as solving a unique problem.

The portion of MWIF which executes SOs is referred to as the AI Assistant (AIA). The AIA makes decisions on behalf of the player, but is indirectly under the control of the player, through the settings of the SOs. The default setting/choice is the one implemented by the AIA if no standing order has ever been entered by the player. The default is usually to do nothing or if that isn’t possible, to choose the simplest choice. Once you set a standing order, it remains in effect until you change it. That is the current SO and there are at least 24 of them. Through the help system the player can ask for advice on setting standing orders. The help system contains suggested SOs from experienced WIF players. These are recommended standing orders. Sadly, it is not possible to know how well the authors play MWIF and the advice you are given may not be ideal. It is up to you to judge.

There may arise situations where the non-phasing player wants to make a decision with an extra e-mail instead of having a SO applied by the AIA. This might be because he feels there are too many variables, or the situation is too crucial to be left to SOs. To accommodate these circumstances, the player has the ability to indicate that one or more of the 24 possible SO locations require an email in lieu of a SO.

This goes directly against the thrust of the PBEM system design to eliminate as many emails as possible and it can be very annoying when an opponent starts requiring emails for every little decision. Be that as it may, whether SOs or emails are used is a question for the players to decide amongst themselves. It is akin to the situation in playing WIF over the board, where the German player, in the middle of moving all his land units in Russia during a summer turn, decides to take a 2 hour break for lunch. Note that Australian Design Group didn't write any rules to cover such situations in WIF.

Therefore, use of SOs is optional, even in a PBEM game. The capability to require an email instead of a SO will be part of MWIF and it can be turned on or off for each of the individual 24 SO locations. Furthermore, the on/off flags can be set either at the beginning of the game (like an optional rule), or dynamically toggled during play. However the flags are set at the beginning of a game, those are their settings unless the players unanimous agree to change them during a game.
==========

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 10
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/26/2007 5:45:01 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
I assume that , not always a good idea, the countries can be played as a group ie , two players can devide the world and play one as allies and one as axis?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 11
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/26/2007 6:01:18 PM   
Neilster


Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

I assume that , not always a good idea, the countries can be played as a group ie , two players can devide the world and play one as allies and one as axis?

Yes. That's common. There are recommended groupings of powers for more than 2 players too.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 12
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/26/2007 8:45:16 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

I assume that , not always a good idea, the countries can be played as a group ie , two players can devide the world and play one as allies and one as axis?

Yes, but most of the decisions are made by major powers. For example, the USA decides how to set up its units, then China, then Italy, ... Of course there is a player controlling each major power and one player can control multiple major powers. However, a player can only controll major powers on one side, either Axis (Germany, Italy, Japan) or Allied (USA, USSR, France, China, Commonwealth).

Almost the entire decision making process of the game is by major power, with only a few decisions made "by side".

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 13
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/27/2007 4:31:04 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
can one play "hotseat" ?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 14
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/27/2007 5:13:13 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

can one play "hotseat" ?

If by that you mean two people using the same computer and alternating being in control of the keyboard and mouse - yes. I am calling it Head2Head internally (program documentation).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 15
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 6/27/2007 7:09:46 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
head 2 head and hotseat are both used in the industry

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 16
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 5/9/2008 10:38:25 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
I'm a bit confused as to why you are using a seperate program (that the user apparently has to run on his/her own) just to get random numbers?

Why would a player have the ability to roll the dice over and over again? Why not just generate one roll internally? I'm just curious as to why you made this design decision.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 17
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 5/10/2008 12:46:10 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

I'm a bit confused as to why you are using a seperate program (that the user apparently has to run on his/her own) just to get random numbers?

Why would a player have the ability to roll the dice over and over again? Why not just generate one roll internally? I'm just curious as to why you made this design decision.

If you are playing PBEM there are obviously two players (maybe more for MWIF product 2) using different computers. Those computers are not connected while either side is making its moves. So, if random numbers are generated internally, there is nothing to prevent a player from making the same decision over and over again (by restoring a saved game) until he gets the die roll he wants. Yes, I might be able to do something very tricky to prevent that, but equally clever people could work out ways around whatever system I devise - assuming it is all done on one computer.

Instead, eMWIF will run on a third party computer. Matrix assures me that they can provide that function, though any other IP server would work as well. eMWIF will be a little program that justs keeps track of who is playing and where the game is in the sequence of play.

When making PBEM moves, each decision point that requires a random number will dial out over the internet to the eMWIF program to fetch a new random number(s). eMWIF will inform both players what random number was generated. In order for player A to advance his game through the sequence of play, he will have to access eMWIF, which will send an email to the other player (B) with the same information. A and B will learn about the random number at the same time - no cheating possible.

Now you might be very good friends with the other player and believe this is a foolish excess on my part. But based on my personal over-the-board playing experience, years of friendship will not matter what-so-ever after 10 bad die rolls in a row - a dark frown of suspicion will arise on the losing player's face. If your opponent can't cheat, and you get really bad luck, then you simply have to accept the fact that the gods deem you unworthy of winning at WIF.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 18
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 5/10/2008 3:20:07 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
Ok, I understand what you are saying. Yes, I guess I just figured that you could prevent them from "reloading" once combat started.

< Message edited by NeverMan -- 5/10/2008 3:21:44 PM >

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 19
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 12/12/2008 5:27:04 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
I have never dived in to the details of this thread but I think I might some more when free time allows, I had to stop after absorbing one portion of it.

I like the Standing Orders concept. Basically it sounds like any time you are generating an email, you would have the option of modifying Standing Orders and these would go out with the new email, but would remain invisible to your opponent. Neat.

Perhaps if this game ever develops a player rating system, one of the things that could be listed would be how many times a player requested to slow things down to an email per die roll. That would vary considerably among players and it would help in selecting opponent playing style you are comfortable with.

This might be feature creep, but ideally there would be a way to conduct critical air/naval combats over Internet chat or by players talking on the phone. Perhaps a standing order could be to allow the enemy player a limited power to enter your decisions during such a 'live' combat.

For naval combat, adding the new 'randomised naval combat results' optional would greatly speed up the micro-managing of naval combat that is so easy in ftf but would seem to be so time-consuming via email. We used such house rules before they even appeared in the Annual, and I really like them.



Anyway, I checked in to this thread with a simple question...how big do you estimate will be the biggest move files, say the one sent out right after a busy set of land moves in the middle of the game?

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 20
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 12/12/2008 9:30:17 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I have never dived in to the details of this thread but I think I might some more when free time allows, I had to stop after absorbing one portion of it.

I like the Standing Orders concept. Basically it sounds like any time you are generating an email, you would have the option of modifying Standing Orders and these would go out with the new email, but would remain invisible to your opponent. Neat.

Perhaps if this game ever develops a player rating system, one of the things that could be listed would be how many times a player requested to slow things down to an email per die roll. That would vary considerably among players and it would help in selecting opponent playing style you are comfortable with.

This might be feature creep, but ideally there would be a way to conduct critical air/naval combats over Internet chat or by players talking on the phone. Perhaps a standing order could be to allow the enemy player a limited power to enter your decisions during such a 'live' combat.

For naval combat, adding the new 'randomised naval combat results' optional would greatly speed up the micro-managing of naval combat that is so easy in ftf but would seem to be so time-consuming via email. We used such house rules before they even appeared in the Annual, and I really like them.



Anyway, I checked in to this thread with a simple question...how big do you estimate will be the biggest move files, say the one sent out right after a busy set of land moves in the middle of the game?

Tiny. Even without compression, there are only a dozen bytes or so per unit moved. So if you moved 100 units (say, naval units) we are still looking at only a thousand or so bytes. By comparison, a JPG that is 100 by 100 pixels is 30000 bytes (24 bit color => 3 bytes per pixel).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 21
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 12/12/2008 5:38:19 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
Ahhh, only something that changed from a previous email would generate new data. That would help a lot.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 22
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 12/13/2008 10:27:59 PM   
hjaco

 

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline
One thing I don't get is how to avoid or solve conflicts in standing orders on the same side?

Say Italy and Germany for some reason choose different SO for intercepting enemy bombers in an impulse i.e. Italian FTR stays down and Germans wan't to intercept at all cost?

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 23
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 12/13/2008 11:44:11 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hjaco

One thing I don't get is how to avoid or solve conflicts in standing orders on the same side?

Say Italy and Germany for some reason choose different SO for intercepting enemy bombers in an impulse i.e. Italian FTR stays down and Germans wan't to intercept at all cost?

A good point. For now, I am planning on only two players for a PBEM games.
---
If there were multiple players on each side, then a player's standing orders would only affect his units. Actually, it seems likely that Standing Orders might be by major power most of the time. Which means that the CW might have one set of SO and the USA a different set. I'll think about that the next time I read through what I have written for Standing Orders.
---
By the way, I have the technical code working for NetPlay (over the Internet), though it is only a stand-alone program at this point. The techinical code for PBEM will be similar. In fact, after looking through the documentation Indy 10, sending and receiving emails will be easier to write than creating and maintaining Internet connections between computers.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to hjaco)
Post #: 24
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 12/14/2008 7:31:25 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
I've decided that for PBEM games, I will give the players the ablity to enter the requiaite information for Internet play as well - if they so desire. The additional information is pretty simple: (1) who will Host the game, and (2) the IP Address and Port number the host machine will use.

The purpose is to let the players switch from PBEM to NetPLay and back whenever they want to. This would speed things up a lot during some of the places in the sequence of play where the decision maker's switch back and forth a lot. Note that the game will have to have been started either as a PBEM game, or as a 2-player NetPlay game.

Of course this would be totally at the players' discretion, to be used whenever they want.
===
I have also given some thought about changing mode of play, in general, during a game. There are conflicting goal sets involved I quickly realized:
1 - prevent cheating by preventing players from looking at the US and neutrality pact markers during a game;
2 - enable players to continue playing abandoned games.

Case in point:
1 - If the players can switch from NetPlay to Solitaire, they will be able to see all the markers (cheat).
2 - If the players cannot switch from NetPlay to Solitaire and their opponent simply stops playing, the player who wants to continue will be unable to do so.

Perhaps that is a poor example, but you see the overall problem. I would like to assure players that their opponents are not cheating while at the same time avoid players having useless "abandoned games". My current solution (10 minutes old) is to enable players to switch mode, if all players agree.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 25
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 12/15/2008 12:32:19 AM   
Ullern


Posts: 1837
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
Thats a fair solution.

And generally I think if you have taken steps to prevent cheating its ok that the game is rendered useless after a player quits.

I would circumvent such a restriction anyways, since I trust the people I will play with, by sending saved hot seat games instead of using the e-mail with cheating restrictions.

But if you want cheating prevention mechanisms to work, a method won't work.



(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 26
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 12/15/2008 6:15:06 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
"The purpose is to let the players switch from PBEM to NetPLay and back whenever they want to. This would speed things up a lot during some of the places in the sequence of play where the decision maker's switch back and forth a lot. "

This made me think...why put much into a pure PBEM system? If NetPlay can handle the connections, a huge majority of people would prefer to play like this: I start my impulse and offer to be 'live online' at an agreed time to handle naval interceptions (just finish all the non-interceptable ones first), combats and the air strike phases. Then we go offline and wait while some land moves (like say the Russian front) are all decided on, then go back to live-online to handle ground strikes and combat. If someone wants to play via email and skip days or weeks between emails and use all kinds of standing orders to cover this that and the other thing, let them stay with the two freeware programs that one can already use. So perhaps the Standing Orders system can be kept quite simple...if you don't like such broad standing orders, arrange to be online with your opponent. Given the capabilities of the internet now, I wouldn't really want to play a purely email game.

This part, I think you can dial in for the ease of the users a little bit more:

"give the players the ablity to enter the requiaite information for Internet play as well - if they so desire. The additional information is pretty simple: (1) who will Host the game, and (2) the IP Address and Port number the host machine will use."

I have some experience with coaching people through the intricacies of using BitTorrent programs and the joys of Port Forwarding and firewalls. MWiF will not need high-speed connections, so maximizing the throughput of what a particular ISP is willing to give up is not really needed; just a secure way through the firewall for each player. But very few internet users want to deal with IP Addresses and Port numbers themselves. I would suggest keeping this invisible to everyone, with the exception of a small bit of coaching for whatever security pop-up window XP or Vista initiates when this process first runs. Just have each player connect to the eMWiF server. Lots and lots of video games are played this way and this shouldn't be too hard to set up for the players. Asking them to find their IP address and enter it on their own will annoy them. If the server capabilities aren't available, let MWiF generate and send a special MWiF email bundle with the IP information to the other computer. And then of course people will want access to their game from different places, so the IP address and such will have to be dynamic anyway.


For the problem of entry chits, why not keep them on the eMWiF server? The server would only allow the owning player to see them (not the whole side, an actual rule in WiF), and could handle showing them to other players during US Entry actions. If the game ends by mutual agreement, a standard saved-game could be created for anyone who wants to explore "What If"? Ahhh, but what if a petulant opponent refuses to give this agreement? Perhaps the server could give up the information needed after an adequate time delay.

[I'll bet you didn't know that Japan can only build 8 new factories; after that they are out of spots to put a blue factory. I have a Japan in a game that is laying down every ship in the force pool; they own Capetown, 4 of the 6 oil in the Middle East, Suez, Irkutsk, Burma, and the Allied colonies in Indonesia. Although China, India, and Australia are still fighting, there is no oil left in any of those countries and they can't really threaten the Co-Prosperity Sphere's internal communications. Since Russia has been conquered, the US has it's hands full keeping the UK alive. This on-game board won't be continued until automatic victory (London; the Kriegsmarine Plan Z force is still under construction) and would be a perfect candidate to explore what happens to the West after Russia goes out of the game entirely.]

(in reply to Ullern)
Post #: 27
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 1/29/2009 1:10:51 AM   
rmdesantis


Posts: 130
Joined: 2/25/2007
Status: offline
I have been away from WIF for many years, having moved away from friends and been bogged down with work and life. Reading about the immenent release of MWIF is really quite exciting for myself and a friend (with whom I used to play). For me, I am on the opposite side regarding netplay. It's a nice to have, but without a robust PBEM setup, the game won't be playable. I will play on the road (I travel 70% of the time) crossing many time zones, so for me, PBEM is the only way I'll be able to do anything with the game.

I realize that the decision on what features to put into the game are based on economic reality, but here's one vote for a robust PBEM system.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 28
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 1/29/2009 7:50:29 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rmdesantis

I have been away from WIF for many years, having moved away from friends and been bogged down with work and life. Reading about the immenent release of MWIF is really quite exciting for myself and a friend (with whom I used to play). For me, I am on the opposite side regarding netplay. It's a nice to have, but without a robust PBEM setup, the game won't be playable. I will play on the road (I travel 70% of the time) crossing many time zones, so for me, PBEM is the only way I'll be able to do anything with the game.

I realize that the decision on what features to put into the game are based on economic reality, but here's one vote for a robust PBEM system.

PBEM is much easier to code than NetPlay. But they both require the same firm sequence of play code foundation. NetPlay needs it to deal with the widely distributed decision making. PBEM needs it because to cut the number of emails to a reasonable number, the sequence of play needs to be tweaked.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to rmdesantis)
Post #: 29
RE: how PBEM games will be handled ? - 4/5/2009 12:40:37 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
I am going over the changes to the sequence of play for PBEM and I am beginning to wonder if there are any places in the SOP where the non-phasing side has to choose which units are destroyed because of overstacking.

1 - In a discussion with the beta testers, the conclusion was that the attacker chooses the order in which units retreat from a land combat, so if overstacking prevents units from retreating and they are therefore destroyed, the decision as to which unit(s) are destroyed is made by the phasing side.

2 - If a change in the weather causes units in lakes to drown or be destroyed by freezing (boat planes), then all the units are destroyed, so no decision needs to be made.

3 - If a land atack destroys a unit in the defending hex that was provvidnig an air unit stacking bonus (e.g., an HQ or ENG), then the non-phasing player has to choose which air unit to destroy. If this happens to the attacking side, then the phasing player decides which of his air units to destroy.

Only #3 seems to require a decision by the non-phasing side.

Are there other times in the game when overstacking occurs? You can't overstack voluntarily, which removes a whole lot of possibilities.

- Perhaps there is a possiblity concerning foreign troop commitment?

- Overstacking doesn't apply to minor country units outside their home country, since the restriction is on 'moving' outside the home country. Once your passport has been stamped, they can't deport you.

If the only place where this decision is needed by the non-phasing side in #3 above, then I'll let the program decide which is the worst air unit and destroy that, rather than develop a Standing Order for dealing with such a miniscule issue.

< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 4/5/2009 12:42:39 AM >


_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> how PBEM games will be handled ? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.687