Re: [Rails-devel] Implementation levels

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

Phil,
with respect to 18EU:

Which issues did you run into? From my only true ftf test game we only 
experienced the usual undo-related ones (which should be a thing of the past 
hopefully) and the wrong bankruptcy scenario, which stopped our play 
eventually.

I do not know if 18EU belongs to the category of those games where no player 
should ever go bankrupt (as in 1835), and we (or at least the one who went 
bankrupt) did something out of the norm.

Stefan


On Wednesday 17 March 2010 13:20:44 Phil Davies wrote:
> Stefan,
>
> I think your definitions are pretty good, although under B, you put
> 'version incompatibilities possible'.  Theoretically with the amount
> of shared code that impacts across multiple games and the shared tile
> database, version incompatibilities could always creep in?  Obviously
> we would want to minimise them but I think it's not unreasonable to
> expect people to use a consistent version for their games.
>
> For existing support levels, my opinions:
> 1825: D
> 1830: B (Can you swap the M&H at any time now?  A bugfix release that
> resolves the private swap bug might put this very close to A)
> 1851: B
> 18AL: B
> 18EU: C/B (I had a lot of issues in 1.1.3, I should retry a game in
> 1.2 to see how the bugfixes hold up
>
> Phil
>
> On 16 March 2010 22:33, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:
> > After some discussion with Erik and Brett how to assign the playability
> > of the variants I am supporting now, I tried to assign some definitions
> > to each level of implementation.
> >
> > As Erik already remarked, there none of the variants fits into A) for
> > now, but that is hardly surprising given that Rails is still in beta.
> >
> > I would be glad to hear more opinions on both the categories themselves
> > and how to assign the current supported 18xx variants.
> >
> > Stefan
> >
> > My suggestions are:
> > 1870 - D
> > 1889 - B
> >
> > Implementation Levels:
> >
> > A) Mature
> > - Several independent plays until the end reported
> > - Full implementation of the ruleset
> > - All possible moves are available
> > - No illegal move possible (except tile and token lays, revenue
> > calculation) => Serious ftf play possible
> > => pbem play possible
> >
> > B) Fully Playable
> > - Full implementation of the ruleset
> > - All possible moves are available
> > - Might still allow a few illegal moves (in addition to tile and token
> > lays, revenue calculation)
> > => Serious ftf play possible, but bugs are possible
> > => use with caution for pbem play, version incompatibilities possible
> >
> > C) Almost Playable
> > - Nearly complete implementation of the ruleset
> > - Not all possible moves are available
> > - Illegal moves are possible
> > => Serious testing possible, do not expect to complete a game
> > => not recommended for pbem play
> >
> > D) Experimental
> > - Rules and components are incomplete
> > => Some testing possible
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >----- Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
> > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
> > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
> > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>--- Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel