[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#576) Re: Play By E-Mail - PBEM

["Raimar Falke" <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 02:53:23PM -0700, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> 
> (Moved to RT for recording.)
> 
> On Mon, 26 May 2003, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > Alternating move phases solves this problem. (See TODO on web page.)
> >
> > There is still some unfairness left. If the order is:
> >
> >  1) new turn
> >  2) player 1 moves
> >  3) player 2 moves
> >  4) goto 1
> 
> Goto should be carried out in your movement turn.

It should be "4) goto 1)" i.e. repeat from the start.

> > it is obvious that it is still unfair.
> 
> Why?

Player 1 can always choose to attack or retreat. Player 2 doesn't have
this choice.

> > Better is:
> >  1) new turn
> >  2) generate a random order of players
> >  3) player move according to this order
> 
> Random order -> you may get one player moving twice in a row and one
> player waiting X2 turns for his next turn where X is number of players.
> Bad.

Yes. But IMHO better than the first model.

> There are some advantages to being first (can use new units first), but
> also disadvantages (cannot react to moves by other players in that turn).
> I am not sure which is better overall.
> 
> > Really fair (at least for 2 players) is the following:
> >
> >  1) new turn for player 1
> >  2) player 1 moves
> >  3) new turn for player 2
> >  4) player 2 moves
> 
> This wouldn't be much harder to implement. It is a slight paradigm shift
> from the way things are now, but I like the idea. It is more consistent.

I think it is quite hard. Just think about a consistent save
game. Also the game will be more slow since the other players can't do
anything except reading reports and planning actions.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  This message has been ROT-13 encrypted twice for extra security.