[GL] Game Log 2.0

[TaCktiX]

I think recording the actual dice rolls in any way is complete overkill and unnecessary. Now here's an excerpt in what I think Game Log 2.0 should be:

TaCktiX started with [territory list].
TaCktiX deploys 3 armies on [territory].
TaCktiX attacks [territory] and weakens it from [#] to [#], but loses [#] against the Defender.
TaCktiX attacks [other territory] and conquers it from [player].
TaCktiX fortified [territory] with [#] from [other territory].

So under Game Log 2.0, I'm expecting...

...Each turn knowing what a person started with ("Territory (#)" form)
...Any note of armies lost in attack or defense
...Everything else we've got right now

That shouldn't be as vicious on Lack as specific dice roll records, and will have the same strategic value to us all as we need.

[reconciledthief]

I think recording the actual dice rolls in any way is complete overkill and unnecessary. Now here's an excerpt in what I think Game Log 2.0 should be:

TaCktiX started with [territory list].
TaCktiX deploys 3 armies on [territory].
TaCktiX attacks [territory] and weakens it from [#] to [#], but loses [#] against the Defender.
TaCktiX attacks [other territory] and conquers it from [player].
TaCktiX fortified [territory] with [#] from [other territory].

So under Game Log 2.0, I'm expecting...

...Each turn knowing what a person started with ("Territory (#)" form)
...Any note of armies lost in attack or defense
...Everything else we've got right now

That shouldn't be as vicious on Lack as specific dice roll records, and will have the same strategic value to us all as we need.

Depending on how the DB is laid out, it wouldn't be much more resource intensive to add the dice roll data. I'll concede that it's more data than what your example proposes, but it's far from vicious. It wouldn't necessarily require an insert statement per roll, as the rolls could be cached and then batch inserted at the end of the turn with all of the other detail that already gets inserted at the end of each turn.

Regardless, it's not a necessity at all. Just provides a way to further analyze completed games.

[yeti_c]

So - specifics...

I think we need the following added to the "full logs"...

a) Initial deployment.
i.e.
Red starts the game with afghanistan, kamchatka, china, India.
Blue starts the game with siam, ukraine, great britain, irkutsk.
etc
b) Every attack.
i.e.
Red attacks Great Britain from Iceland with 3 armies against 2 armies, Result 1-1.
Red attacks Great Britain from Iceland with 3 armies against 1 armies, Result 0-1.
Red attacks Great Britain from Iceland with 3 armies against 1 armies and conquers it, Result 1-0.
c) Every Bombardment.
i.e.
Red bombards Great Britain from Iceland with 3 armies against 2 armies, Result 1-1.
Red bombards Great Britain from Iceland with 3 armies against 1 armies, Result 0-1.
Red bombadrs Great Britain from Iceland with 3 armies against 1 armies and annihilates it, Result 1-0.
d) Every "Killer Neutral"
i.e.
Neutral has respawned at Great Britain killing 20 Red armies.

Anymore suggestions?

C.

[Herakilla]

it would be great to add the dice in there but that would really fill it up in some games, if you do that for sure make it into one line for auto attacks (e.g. Red attacks Great Britain from Iceland with 3 armies against 2 armies, Result 12-5.) that way you dont get several lines of 2-0. 1-1, 0-2, 1-0, and 0-1

[yeti_c]

Although not stricly to do with Log 2.0...

However - to make Replays Much better...

It would be good - if the map.php call can be supplied with an array of army counts for it to display.

My only concern - is that this might cause a lot of work for the server.

C.

[BaldAdonis]

I think we need the following added to the "full logs"...

a) Initial deployment.
i.e.
Red starts the game with afghanistan, kamchatka, china, India.
Blue starts the game with siam, ukraine, great britain, irkutsk.
etc

I don't think this is necessary: initial deployment can already be put together based on the state of the board and actions that the current game log gives, except in the case of deadbeats. Maybe then once someone is kicked out of the game, a list of what they left? You'd want that anyways to do proper replays, otherwise the assumption that neutrals start with 3 won't give the right army counts to attacks on neutral territories that were abandoned.

[yeti_c]

I think we need the following added to the "full logs"...

a) Initial deployment.
i.e.
Red starts the game with afghanistan, kamchatka, china, India.
Blue starts the game with siam, ukraine, great britain, irkutsk.
etc

I don't think this is necessary: initial deployment can already be put together based on the state of the board and actions that the current game log gives, except in the case of deadbeats. Maybe then once someone is kicked out of the game, a list of what they left? You'd want that anyways to do proper replays, otherwise the assumption that neutrals start with 3 won't give the right army counts to attacks on neutral territories that were abandoned.

For the sake of a couple of logs at the beginning of each game - I don't see the harm in including it... it would make my job a lot easier to create a replay function.

C.

[Sameroh]

HAve read the thread and didn't find anyone mentioning this yet. I would really appreciate it if we could see deployments, attacks (as long as your own country is attacked), and fortifications to countries adjacent to yours in a game with fog on. This is because the countries next to you are anyway already 'sunny' thus making it illogical that we shouldn't be able to read about them in the log.

E.g: "X fortified ? with 2 armies from Brazil"
"X attacked Venezuela from ? and conquered it from Y"

In case this has been discussed, rejected or otherwise thought about already, plz forgive me

[Timminz]

HAve read the thread and didn't find anyone mentioning this yet. I would really appreciate it if we could see deployments, attacks (as long as your own country is attacked), and fortifications to countries adjacent to yours in a game with fog on. This is because the countries next to you are anyway already 'sunny' thus making it illogical that we shouldn't be able to read about them in the log.

E.g: "X fortified ? with 2 armies from Brazil"
"X attacked Venezuela from ? and conquered it from Y"

In case this has been discussed, rejected or otherwise thought about already, plz forgive me

There are other threads dealing with that suggestion.

[Sameroh]

Ok - sorry then. It seems I overlooked them... :S Sorry!

[chipv]

Game Log XML awaited eagerly...
Specifically referring to the XML:

Agree with:

All attacks displayed (successful AND unsuccessful esp. with armies lost)
Number of armies at turn start/end

Disagree:

Dice rolls - unsuccessful attack display is sufficient and storing this huge amount
of info at the expense of old logs is not a fair swap. Statistical applications objection noted.

Is there a thread appropriate to post the exact XML I expect from the Game log XML?

[chipv]

EDIT: Added defender tag (based on yeti_c's suggestion)

For the Game Logs XML here is a proposed outline with example data:
(assuming you need to specify game # in the URL for the XML, it is omitted from the data)

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<game>
<label></label>
<status>Active</status>
<joinability>Tournament Game: The Long Walk - Round Twelve</joinability>
<type>Standard</type>
<order>Sequential</order>
<bonus>Flat Rate</bonus>
<fortifications>Unlimited</fortifications>
<fog>No</fog>
<maptype>Africa</maptype>
<timeleft>12hrs 16min 20sec</timeleft>
<round>3</round>
<players>
<starting>8</starting>
<surviving>4</surviving>
<teams>4</teams>
<player>
<name>chipv</name>
<rank>New Recruit</rank>
<team>3</team>
<cards>4</cards>
<armies>20</armies>
<status>waiting/playing/eliminated</status>
<territories>4</territories>
</player>
...
<player>
</player>
</players>
<log> (ordered)
<event>
<type>deploy</type>
<from>NA</from>
<to>Irkutsk</to>
<armies>3</armies>
<defender>NA</defender>
</event>
<event>
<type>attack</type>
<from>Irkutsk</from>
<to>Yakutsk</to>
<armies>-3</armies>
<defender>-2</defender>
</event>
<event>
<type>attack</type>
<from>Siberia</from>
<to>Yakutsk</to>
<armies>8</armies>
<defender>-1</defender>
</event>
<event>
<type>fortification</type>
<from>Yakutsk</from>
<to>Kamchatka</to>
<armies>3</armies>
<defender>NA</defender>
</event>
/log>
</game>

This event log shows an assault on Yakutsk with an unsuccessful attack and a successful attack.
I hope this is the best thread to start this off, although I guess its outline is almost done anyway...

[yeti_c]

Is there a thread appropriate to post the exact XML I expect from the Game log XML?

This one.

C.

[yeti_c]

Looks good - however...

Your <armies> tag is somewhat flawed...

As you need to know both sides of the argument - i.e. how many were lost on both sides.

C.

[chipv]

Add a tag!

<defender>-3</defender>

[chipv]

Amended xml format with yeti_c's suggestion:

For the Game Logs XML here is a proposed outline with example data:
(assuming you need to specify game # in the URL for the XML, it is omitted from the data)

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<game>
<label></label>
<status>Active</status>
<joinability>Tournament Game: The Long Walk - Round Twelve</joinability>
<type>Standard</type>
<order>Sequential</order>
<bonus>Flat Rate</bonus>
<fortifications>Unlimited</fortifications>
<fog>No</fog>
<maptype>Africa</maptype>
<timeleft>12hrs 16min 20sec</timeleft>
<round>3</round>
<players>
<starting>8</starting>
<surviving>4</surviving>
<teams>4</teams>
<player>
<name>chipv</name>
<rank>New Recruit</rank>
<team>3</team>
<cards>4</cards>
<armies>20</armies>
<status>waiting/playing/eliminated</status>
<territories>4</territories>
</player>
...
<player>
</player>
</players>
<log> (ordered)
<event>
<type>deploy</type>
<from>NA</from>
<to>Irkutsk</to>
<armies>3</armies>
<defender>NA</defender>
</event>
<event>
<type>attack</type>
<from>Irkutsk</from>
<to>Yakutsk</to>
<armies>-3</armies>
<defender>-2</defender>
</event>
<event>
<type>attack</type>
<from>Siberia</from>
<to>Yakutsk</to>
<armies>8</armies>
<defender>-1</defender>
</event>
<event>
<type>fortification</type>
<from>Yakutsk</from>
<to>Kamchatka</to>
<armies>3</armies>
<defender>NA</defender>
</event>
</log>
</game>

This event log shows an assault on Yakutsk with an unsuccessful attack and a successful attack.

[yeti_c]

Getting there...

Problem is - you can't tell who won the attacks with this format...

You can see that attacker lost 3 and defender lost 2...

However we don't know how many were there to start with?

Perhaps a <Success> tag?

Also - you need to know how many armies were advanced into the space.

The last - and probably most valid point...

This is all well and good - for "auto attacks" - but the normal attack button will spawn a multitude of these logs - is the server meant to condense these into one?

What happens if you attack one territory - kill a few - then attack a different one kill a few - then attack the first territory again?

C.

[chipv]

Problem is - you can't tell who won the attacks with this format...

You can see that attacker lost 3 and defender lost 2...

However we don't know how many were there to start with?

Perhaps a <Success> tag?

Also - you need to know how many armies were advanced into the space.

The last - and probably most valid point...

This is all well and good - for "auto attacks" - but the normal attack button will spawn a multitude of these logs - is the server meant to condense these into one?

What happens if you attack one territory - kill a few - then attack a different one kill a few - then attack the first territory again?

Well, yes you can tell who won the attack, but I haven't clearly explained the scope of the output.
I think it's too much to store every single dice roll, therefore
no point in recording every "sub-attack" either.

So if you restrict to just conquer and failed to conquer
then all you need to do is look at the sign of the armies.

So <armies>8</armies><defender>-1</defender>
means a successful attack moving 8 armies into the space occupied by the 1 defender.

So that means

<armies>-2</armies>
means a cumulative failed attack attempt losing 2 armies.
So the attacker might have made several attempts but ultimately
failed to remove all defenders.

I think that addresses all of your points.

[yeti_c]

Ah I see... yes that does work...

So if you have
<armies>0</armies>
<defender>-2</defender>

Then they haven't conquered - but have just removed 2 armies.

The only problem here is that you can't distinguish bombardment with these rules...

As the above answer could mean annihilation - or just reduction.

C.

[lancehoch]

Maybe instead, you could have the log change when the drop-down menus change. For example, someone is attacking Alaska from Kamchatka and rolls until the attacker loses 5 and the defender loses 7. Then they decide to attack Alaska from Alberta. They change the "from" drop-down to Alberta, and when that changes, if there were changes in army numbers, the changes are posted.

[yeti_c]

Maybe instead, you could have the log change when the drop-down menus change. For example, someone is attacking Alaska from Kamchatka and rolls until the attacker loses 5 and the defender loses 7. Then they decide to attack Alaska from Alberta. They change the "from" drop-down to Alberta, and when that changes, if there were changes in army numbers, the changes are posted.

That could be a viable alternative...

C.

[chipv]

Ah I see... yes that does work...

So if you have
<armies>0</armies>
<defender>-2</defender>

Then they haven't conquered - but have just removed 2 armies.

The only problem here is that you can't distinguish bombardment with these rules...

As the above answer could mean annihilation - or just reduction.

C.

Could have some indicator for bombardment. I'm not exactly sure what this is -
description says conversion of defender's armies to neutral.

So <defender>0</defender> with a positive armies number - could that indicate bombardment?
(Cannot normally move in unless at least one defender has been lost)

I cannot find a good description for this aside from the one-liner on the instructions pages. (Unless I've missed it totally)

[The Neon Peon]

I would really love to see this, and it would solve many of the obstacles that are in the game log: make the game log click-able so that when you click on an action in it, the map will show what it looked like at the point in the game.

This would help both players in the game to better understand what happened (seeing as you can click on the previous action for the before and after kind of thing) and help players viewing the game to look at how it progressed if they only start looking at the end.

[WOTE]

it would be nice to be able to replay the games. I know the code would be not to hard to write for one map but 30maps is a lot, how abo9ut just the classics and popular maps ?

[lancehoch]

Merged