Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls

Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815

Message

Jimmer -> Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/23/2009 3:42:48 PM)
Bresh had an intriguing idea in the release notes thread. Rather than hijack that thread, I'll re-post and comment here: His idea is basically to hide the combat rolls from people while taking their combat turn. I think the idea is to allow them only later to see what they rolled. This would have the effect of making turn reloads useless as a cheating tool. The idea has some merit. I think it will cause more files to be exchanged, though, but perhaps that's worth it? The typical order is: Choose chit (optional) Deal with Outflanks View forces Roll first die Send file to other player In order to hid the roll, the file send would have to be moved up one step. For the first player, this is a negligible change. However, for the second player, other choices ensue: Choose chit (optional) deal with outflanks view forces roll first defender die see results see if outflanking force arrives reinforce send file to other player In order to prevent defender from cheating, at least one and possibly two other files would have to be sent. Is it worth it? I think hiding the attacker's first roll from him would be good for security with no cost. But, after that, the price tag (in terms of time and file transfers) goes up significantly. I'm not sure later rounds are worth it. Comments?

bresh -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/23/2009 4:26:47 PM)
Here are my pointers. For siege battles one might note, that roll is shown first to attacker. Typical land battle : 1. Attacker selects battle (in his battle-phase), selects chit (dont recall if he splits force in case of outflank), then sends the battlefile to the defender, think also he decides if he wanna try reinf+Gd commit. 2.A. Defender loads the battle, selects chit, gd commit/reinf. 2.B Defender selects done game rolls 1.round of battle, game shows all 1.round rolls to defender. (1. combat-round rolls executed). 3. Defender sends battlefile to attacker. 4. Attacker take casulties first, then he selects again if Reinf/gd. 5. Attacker sends battlefile to defender. 6.A Defender selects his casulties for 1.round, after he can chose reinf/gd-commit. 7.B Game shows results for all dice 2.round to defender. 8. defender sends battlefile to Attacker who selects caulties etc same as 4. Etc. XX. Winner selects if pursuit, and sees the roll. XX. B. Winner sends battlefile to the other for casulties. (dont know if 0 pursuit still requires file exchange). The "B"'s are not required its "extra". As far as i can think there is no reason to show them to the side where game rolls the dice, since its always the other player who needs to act on the roll. The "B"s as far as i can tell dont require extra file-exchange, only difference to current is defender wont know the rolls till he takes his own casulties. Regards Bresh

borner -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/24/2009 3:56:35 AM)
interesting

Jimmer -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/24/2009 4:19:15 PM)
I think we're going to have to very carefully document the steps taken in combat before suggesting this idea move forward. Marshall, can you give us pseudocode for the sequence of actions the game takes for battle? Start at the point where the battle has been chosen. While there is still the cheating method of changing combat-location ordering, this thread is only speaking to the actual battle sequence. (Feel free to start with what Bresh has, but we're going to need to know ALL of the steps for maybe 2 rounds of combat. It repeats after that.) Thanks.

NeverMan -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/24/2009 8:00:10 PM)
More files exchanged is never worth it, too many files now.

bresh -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/24/2009 8:35:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan More files exchanged is never worth it, too many files now. I dont, agree. I rather have extra file-exchange, for battles "including the Single-corps" and naval encounters. First of, the 1 Cps-defend(autochit/prechit) is unbalancing, moving the game away from EIA. Naval-retreat is more random, than deliberate. Current battle-system is also not very strong, on the security part. I did some tests had a theory, and it does not appear as strong as it looked, when introduced. If I am to spend alot of time on a game, I dont want to need to question someones "extreme" luck. Offcourse i have no idea if "extra-file exchanges is needed", depends on how its designed currently. What I did, was write a list of how I think its working now. And what I imply does not need extra file-exchange,compared to now, if designed right. Maybe its split as usual between 50% want better security and playablity, while 50% might want to sacrifice some for faster gameplay. Regards Bresh

NeverMan -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/25/2009 12:21:39 AM)
bresh, Sorry, let me clarify... I think: 1. Trivial battles should be resolved with trivial combat rules. 2. All other battles should take place regularly, the AI sucks at picking chits and setting chits doesn't always work out either. 3. I'm not overly concerned with security, personally, if I think someone's cheating I simply won't play with them anymore, which I've already decided in one of the games I've been in... it's easily resolved.

Dancing Bear -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/25/2009 2:46:22 AM)
I'd love to see trival battles brought in (for small field combats and seige battles). There are no chit choices, so the existing die roll reload warning is sufficient security for trival battles. I'd place this high on the priority list of enhancements. Likewise, I'd like to see chit choices for all non-trival battles. Since this can not be that hard to include as an option, I would like to this a relatively high priority item (combined with trival battles). As to the anti-cheating. I have not tried 1.06 to see how it works. It sounds ok to list reloads, but is the concern that the reload function only pops up after the die roll, so someone could see the chit choice and the other players not see a relaod warning? I agree that it can be made secure by adding an extra file exchange, but this seems like it will be a while in development. I'd like to see it, but maybe later, after I have tried the latest version (when ever that comes out as a official release). If 1.06 does not provide adequate security for this, then I would like to see it sooner rather than later.

mr.godo -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/28/2009 7:33:35 AM)
What about sending a pre-determined array of die rolls at the time the attacker picks his chit? Have the battle pre-destined which would eliminate the fear of someone reloading files and re-rolling dice. It would need to be a bit more complex and involve some algorithm for masking the die rolls in the battle file, and it would be more secure than rolling the die at the instant of the event. More files? Anything to prevent more file exchanges.

Mardonius -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/28/2009 1:49:30 PM)
The concept is great. Removes any temptation to cheat.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/28/2009 2:35:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mr.godo What about sending a pre-determined array of die rolls at the time the attacker picks his chit? Have the battle pre-destined which would eliminate the fear of someone reloading files and re-rolling dice. It would need to be a bit more complex and involve some algorithm for masking the die rolls in the battle file, and it would be more secure than rolling the die at the instant of the event. More files? Anything to prevent more file exchanges. We've talked about this a bit but I have not really looked into this??? You're really only talking about 6 std rolls, 1 withdraw & 1 pursuit. The reinf rolls are where it gets a little confusing??? If no leader is in the area then each corps rolls BUT would it really be that important to preroll the reinf?

bresh -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/29/2009 10:10:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis quote: ORIGINAL: mr.godo What about sending a pre-determined array of die rolls at the time the attacker picks his chit? Have the battle pre-destined which would eliminate the fear of someone reloading files and re-rolling dice. It would need to be a bit more complex and involve some algorithm for masking the die rolls in the battle file, and it would be more secure than rolling the die at the instant of the event. More files? Anything to prevent more file exchanges. We've talked about this a bit but I have not really looked into this??? You're really only talking about 6 std rolls, 1 withdraw & 1 pursuit. The reinf rolls are where it gets a little confusing??? If no leader is in the area then each corps rolls BUT would it really be that important to preroll the reinf? Marshall, basicly there are 2 ways to add this, redesign introducing arrays etc. But could you go through how the combat executes now ? Maybe there is a easier way to make a change, using the current design. That is what i based my suggestion on, to remove some boxes(or hide the text) when, the phasing player is done taking looses(or is not). I dont recall when reinf rolls show, nor guard commit(including 1.round), nor withdraw roll, picking outflank, . I think Jimmer asked for a step by step of how it runs now. Regards Bresh

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/29/2009 8:41:05 PM)
Hey guys: I've been studying the code a bit and it looks like I "might" be able to preroll as the battle is created so the reloading is a non issue. The only issue might be that it will change the battle file format a bit SO you should not upgrade to 1.07 in the middle of a combat phase or move phase. Does this sound reasonable?

Jimmer -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/29/2009 9:13:44 PM)
No, that doesn't help (well, not with THIS issue). The key to what Bresh's solution solves is that people can re-roll. If you roll in advance, all they have to do is change the order in which they create the battles, thus getting different sets of pre-rolled rolls in a different order. But, if they never get to see their roll until after the first battle file is sent off, they can't know whether cheating is profitable or not, so they won't do it. So, your response should definitely be implemented, but it's not a complete solution. If you hide the first set of battle rolls (Bresh's idea) in ADDITION to your solution, I think the security package could be called complete (for the first round of combat, anyhow). NOTE: ALL of the rolls have to be hidden. I believe this includes: Combat roll Guard commitment roll Artillery roll However, the combat one is the most important, IMO.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/29/2009 9:31:20 PM)
So the attacker cannot see his 1st round roll and preroll?

Jimmer -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/29/2009 9:53:25 PM)
Not until after the defender sees them. Techically, not until after he sends the battle file to the defender, but it's probably not valid to show them then. So, I suspect the first he will see of them is after the defender sends the second battle file of that round's pair of battle files. NOTE: If Guard and Artillery are harder to hide, they don't have to be done this way. But, if it's a simple matter of: If round = 1 then dieroll.show=false else dieroll.show=true endif then they would be trivial to add. All you really have to do is not paint the screen with the numbers. However, please note that if you first paint the numbers and then over-paint them with a different graphic, it WILL be possible to intercept the code between those two steps, thus showing the results early. I actually have a tool that does just that with over-typed passwords, but it's really simple to write such a thing (simply force a re-paint and then capture all of the changes that occur, then strip off the last one(s)). So, you really have to fail to show them altogether, not just "hide" rolls that are already showing.

Trax -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/29/2009 10:12:09 PM)
Along with the die rolls the defender should not see the attackers chit pick before returning the battle file.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/29/2009 11:57:07 PM)
OK guys let me look at this for a bit...

NeverMan -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 4:05:39 AM)
I agree with Trax.... if the defender can still see the chit pick then it's all bogus and we will still have to be sending our chit picks to an "ally" (which itself is having faith in someone not to cheat).

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 1:09:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan I agree with Trax.... if the defender can still see the chit pick then it's all bogus and we will still have to be sending our chit picks to an "ally" (which itself is having faith in someone not to cheat). I agree that the chit as well as the roll should be hidden until the attacker is removing casualties. So... this is how it would work: Attacker picks chit (All rolls generated) <send file to defender> Defender picks chit (Cannot see attacker chit or roll) <send file to attacker> Attacker picks casualties (Attacker can now see chits and rolls). <send file to defender> Defender picks casualties (Defender can now see chits and rolls). <NEXT ROUND> Does this work?

Trax -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 1:33:57 PM)
Works for me. Could the program determine every possible corps that could reinforce a battle and pre assign the die rolls for each?

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 2:01:47 PM)
I am bundling a 100 d6 rolls for reinf for each combatant. I believe this should cover the possible number of corps without a leader that could roll for reinforcement.

Jimmer -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 5:38:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Trax Along with the die rolls the defender should not see the attackers chit pick before returning the battle file. Agreed. In fact, the attacker shouldn't even be told whether the defender has already chosen one or not. The reason is that if it is already chosen, it's likely the computer chose it, which changes the odds significantly.

Jimmer -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 5:52:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis I am bundling a 100 d6 rolls for reinf for each combatant. I believe this should cover the possible number of corps without a leader that could roll for reinforcement. With the rolls hidden, this becomes a lot more viable. However, you would want to always hide the current round's rolls in this case. In other words, allow the person to see only the rolls that occurred in the previous round. The reason for this is that if the person knows whether a particular army reinforces or not, he could change the order of checking to get a better result. Example: France attacking Prussia. Both sides get average first round results. Soult is running the combat for the French with 3 corps. von Blucher is running the Prussian side with 5 corps. Napoleon with 3 corps and Davout with 1 corps are able to reinforce in. If the player can re-load the turn, ONLY for the purposes of finding out who gets a good reinforcement roll, that's valuable. If the rolls are pulled off a stack of rolls pre-generated, he can use this knowledge to choose which one should try first (if it matters). In the example, let's say Nappy rolls a 6 and Davout rolls a 2. Well, knowing this, he could go back and try again, this time having Davout attempt to reinforce first. If the results are hidden, then he wouldn't be able to discern this knowledge. By the way, holding a variable for "how many reloads have been done" won't help. If I were inclined to cheat, I would have two copies of the game on two different systems. I would load up the game on my test system first, and see where I got the best results. Then, I would throw them away and go back to the primary system and use the knowledge I gained elsewhere to better my results. Thus, reinforcement results need to be kept hidden as well. Of course, with the model in place now, this is impossible. The current model has the leader roll, and if successful, the reinforcing player decides which corps join the battle. It should be "all or nothing". If Napoleon succeeds, then every corps joins the battle regardless of whether Nappy wants to leave some behind. So, you would have to get rid of the two-step reinforcement. However, if that's too hard, you can do it this way: Generate a table of all stacks that can reinforce. For stacks with no leader, separate out the corps in the table. Sort the table by area (and then by corps number in area, if no leader present). Finally, have a check box next to each corps. The player would check the box to indicate it will reinforce IF it succeeds on the roll. This is different that the original method, but security demands in the computer version are quite different from having humans look over the die as it is rolled. :)

Jimmer -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 6:03:20 PM)
Another alternative to bundling "100 rolls" at the start is to bundle 100 individual rolls for every possible die roll that might be made during that one day of combat. This is one of the reasons I asked for a pseudocode. Here is a partial list (possibly full, but I am not sure): - Chit choice for defender when picked by the computer - Artillery roll(s) - Guard commitment roll(s) (by round and player) - Combat roll - Reinforcement roll(s) for every stack with a leader and for every loose corps counter which has a legal reinforcement possibility. (NOTE: You could even roll for the illegal ones, if it is too hard to check that at this point in the code. You also can make the rolls even for things that may not occur.) - Pursuit roll (the roll stays the same even if a cav leader reinforces into the combat -- it's only the modifier that changes). - Outflank roll All of the above should be pre-generated, and should be rolled for all three rounds of combat. This is true even if they don't occur or if that particular roll will not be used. Note that this latter statement means you can pre-roll for ANY combat, no matter what the force composition is, always using the same code to make the rolls (for land; naval would be different). The only exceptions would be reinforcing rolls, which is dependent upon the circumstances. However, you could even go so far as to roll to reinforce for every counter on the map (if need by technical strictures), just to make sure you get the ones that count (that would depend upon whether the roll gets attached to the counter or not).

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 10:47:56 PM)
Baby steps ... :-0! I have coded the following today for inclusion into 1.07.00: All die rolls, casualties, morale losses, and the factors to eliminate are hidden until the attacker is choosing his causalties from the first round! I am writing the pre-rolled dice function as we speak. SO, this is how it will work: Attacker pick chit <send to defender> defender pick chit <send to attacker> Attacker gets file and sees 1st round results. choose casualties <send to defender> Defender sees 1st round results choose casualties <send to attacker> repeat until end. I have also found several battle file cleaning issues that I am working on! Question: Is there any reason that the pre-rolled dice could not be implemented across the board (Non PBEM games as well)? Once the 1.06 general release is out then I will post a 1.07 BETA quickly (After my testers have played with it a bit) so that you guys can try this... Thoughts?

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/30/2009 11:08:27 PM)
Actually, I think the prerolled dice for non-pbem is a non issue since anyone could backtrack to the land phase and restart BUT this would make it easier for me to only have to support one code set. This is scary guys ... I am asking and answering my own questions in the forums! It's like I'm talking to myself and answering :-0!

Dancing Bear -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/31/2009 12:24:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis Baby steps ... :-0! I have coded the following today for inclusion into 1.07.00: All die rolls, casualties, morale losses, and the factors to eliminate are hidden until the attacker is choosing his causalties from the first round! I am writing the pre-rolled dice function as we speak. SO, this is how it will work: Attacker pick chit <send to defender> defender pick chit <send to attacker> Attacker gets file and sees 1st round results. choose casualties <send to defender> Defender sees 1st round results choose casualties <send to attacker> repeat until end. I have also found several battle file cleaning issues that I am working on! Question: Is there any reason that the pre-rolled dice could not be implemented across the board (Non PBEM games as well)? Once the 1.06 general release is out then I will post a 1.07 BETA quickly (After my testers have played with it a bit) so that you guys can try this... Thoughts? This works for me.

bresh -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/31/2009 1:51:13 PM)
Sounds good Marshall. Wish it would come sooner ! Im at point where i would rather wait for this, than start any new games. Btw, while looking at your battlecode, happened to figure out why leader-casulties always took "commanding leader" ? Regards Bresh

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls (7/31/2009 2:33:27 PM)
Bresh: I will take a look at the leader casualty selection as well! Please start some more games Bresh OR get some different friends :-)

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.703613