davidachamberlain -> RE: Netplay - keeping track of what the other side is doing (2/27/2017 1:07:28 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets The flags on the Main Form should tell you which major power has finished its moves for the other side (disabled) and which haven't finished moving yet (enabled). But yeah, you need your opponent to tell you where he is making decisions. If you are using Skype, there is the capability of seeing the other person's computer screen - live. I thought about having the detailed map track what your opponent is doing (not that difficult to code) but it would be annoying to have your detailed map jumping around if you were trying to figure something out for yourself (e.g., planning your future moves). Of course, the standard user interface solution to this is to provide the capability and let the player(s) turn it on/off whenever they like. Of have some kind of a 'replay' feature. But all of those ideas require new code to be written - not high on my priority list. The global map can help you track naval moves - just set it for your opponent's active major powers. Thanks Steve. I am aware of the flags and that normally helps, but I can switch the order of moves for each impulse by clicking on those flags, so for Axis, I could start land moves in Germany, do some in Japan, and then in Italy, before going back and finishing Germany. I also keep the Global map open in the corner to more quickly jump to the location where the action is, but there is a lag in catching the change unless your opponent is conscientious of narrating what they are doing and sometimes a little subterfuge is intended and hopefully missed. I am using TeamViewer to allow for 4 of us (2 per team) to participate from 3 different locations. I am thinking I might need to allocate some monitor space for the other side to keep track of this. When you get into the more than 2 player development, please keep this consideration in mind as well. Though the coding to enable it might not be complicated, it might have some other usability considerations. Dave
|
|
|
|