Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7378) Vote command for server
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7378) Vote command for server

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: undisclosed-recipients: ;
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7378) Vote command for server
From: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:02:34 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7378 >

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Once all players have placed their votes or a full turn has passed since
> > the vote was suggested, whichever comes first, a vote is resolved. The
> > votes passes only if no player voted against.
>
> I think for important votes like endyear a minimum number of active
> players should be needed to make the vote succesful. When not
> end-of-turn endyear would be posssible.

I am not sure I understand. Votes are not resolved before a full turn has
passed, this is plenty of time. Are you concerned players might not
notice, or that some players might try this every turn (actually, every
second turn)?

In the first case, the client should notify players prominently of
suggested votes. (I'm considering adding a new packet for information like
this to avoid having to parse server output on the client end.) In the
second case... I don't know.

I don't really like the idea of making some votes special.

> > The 'endgame' command is made CTRL cmdlevel instead of HACK cmdlevel.
>
> Ok. Will a gamelog be written after the endgame or not? Would be really
> nice when a gamelog would be written with the current state (for drawing
> games)

I supposed it did? If not, I can certainly look into it.

> > This patch needs a lot more testing. I want responses on the general
> > design as well.
>
> Will do it when i have time.

Great!

  - Per




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]