Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Rails-devel] Special tile laying
|
From: Stefan F. <ste...@we...> - 2011-12-08 12:33:32
|
Erik: thanks for addressing that in 1889. See comments below. Stefan On Thursday, December 08, 2011 10:49:59 am Erik Vos wrote: > I have now added the new validations to 1889. Also, the extra private C > tile is now required to be green. One tiny bit of validation is still missing: If a player (who is not owner of the operating company) requests the special tile lay, he is offered to lay standard tiles as well and such a lay is not rejected. > > Stefan's procedure for laying the B and C extra tiles has not changed in > any way. The B port tile can only be laid in the tile laying step of any > company, and that is reasonable, as this step is always the first in a > company turn. If the operating company is not owned by the private B > owner, the Special menu is highlighted, and selecting the relevant option > in that menu acts as a turn request by the B owner. IMO that's a nice > solution. A change (to the better) is that your changes allow a port lay even for players who own B but it is not their turn. I like the solution however I would like to address the issue of "interrupting actions" more generally. I will write an e-mail on this later today or tomorrow. > > I don't believe port laying is possible in 1889 stock rounds yet. > > Stefan, can you check if this all works? I don't have any specific test > cases handy, but the existing 1889 JUnit tests are OK. It works and I will a further test case (where a player without an operating company lays the port tile) for the future. > > BTW the 1835-related fixes appear to have broken my three new 1835 JUnit > test cases again. I'll see if I can fix these, otherwise I'll have to > withdraw or replace these cases. > > Erik. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...] > > Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 12:30 PM > > To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game > > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] Special tile laying > > > > Erik: > > I remember that the 1889 special tile lay had an unresolved issue > > remaining: > > For me it was never exactly clear when the owner of B is allowed to lay > > the > > > port. > > > > Quotation from the rule: > > "Player owner may place the port tile on a coastal town (B11, G10, I12, > > or > > J9) > > > without a tile on it already, outside of the operating rounds of company > > controlled by another player. The player need not control a company or > > have > > > connectivity to the placed tile from one of their companies. This does > > not close the company." > > > > Being a non-native I cannot figure out what "outside of the operating > > rounds > > > of company controlled by another player" means: Taken literally I believe > > this > > > is complicated wording for "inside the operating rounds of (a) company > > controlled by the owner". > > > > This is the current implementation: As long as a company of the owner of > > B operates. the port tile lay can be activated. > > > > However I was always unsure if this is really correct, as the second > > sentence > > > indicates that the player need not control a company at all: But when is > > the > > > owner of B without any company allowed to lay the tile? > > Most likely anytime? > > > > Until now nobody complained, but maybe John Tamplin can help with this > > issue. > > > > Stefan > > > > On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 10:13:00 pm Erik Vos wrote: > > > I have created a new OperatingRound method named > > > validateSpecialTileLay(), which contains all of the prevalidation code > > > that previously existed in getSpecialTileLays(). Most of that code was > > > > added in my previous commit. > > > > > This change enabled me to fix the 1835 cases, in addition to the > > > previous > > > 1830 and 18AL cases. In OperatingRound_1835 the former rather than > > > the latter method is now overridden. Some code duplication has been > > > removed as well this way. > > > > > > Still to do: 1889, where the situation is even more complex. > > > > > > Erik. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Erik Vos [mailto:eri...@xs...] > > > > Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 8:44 PM > > > > To: 'Development list for Rails: an 18xx game' > > > > Subject: RE: [Rails-devel] Special tile laying > > > > > > > > Stefan, > > > > > > > > In OperatingRound, I have excluded SpecialTileLay as a property that > > > > > > causes > > > > > > > the addition of a UseSpecialProperty action (which duplicated the > > > > LayTile action). > > > > > > > > However, you have added special code in OperatingRound_1889 to add a > > > > UseSpecialProperty for this specific case, and I have not touched > > > > that > > > > > > code. > > > > > > > So my new precautions will not apply to this 1889 case yet, and have > > > > not sorted out how to accomplish that. Some refactoring will be > > needed. > > > > > Erik. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...] > > > > > Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 1:08 PM > > > > > To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game > > > > > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] Special tile laying > > > > > > > > > > Follow-up to Erik: > > > > > Have you pushed the commit already in which you removed the > > > > > special tile option from the Special menu? > > > > > I checked my 1889 test games and the tile lay is still available > > > > > from the Special Menu. > > > > > Stefan > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, December 01, 2011 02:47:56 pm Stefan Frey wrote: > > > > > > Erik: > > > > > > quick answer on the last issue: > > > > > > The special menu entry was used to facility the special tile lay > > > > > > of private B in Rails: Player B is allowed to lay the tile > > > > > > independent of an ownership of the company. > > > > > > So removing that possibility breaks 1889 support and potentially > > > > > > existing game files. > > > > > > Stefan > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) I have removed the additional inclusion of such special > > > > > > > tile lays as options in the "Special" menu. This was > > > > > > > accomplished by a different mechanism and would not follow the > > > > above new rules. > > > > > > > > > I'm not entirely sure why this menu option had been included, > > > > > > > and if it is really needed. I'll check my old emails later, > > > > > > > but I can think now of two reasons: > > > > > > > - special tiles lays exist that are permitted outside the > > > > > > > normal tile laying step, > > > > > > > - increasing user-friendliness by adding an alternative > > > > > > > procedure, with the usual "special action" highlight. > > > > > > > In any case, if this feature must be retained, it will have to > > > > > > > be provided by the UI rather than by the game engine, as it > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > previously. > > > > > > > > > > > Erik. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > ----- > > > > > > > -- --- All the data continuously generated in your IT > > > > > > > infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, > > > > > > > application performance, security threats, fraudulent > > > > > > > activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of > > it. IT > > > sense. > > > > > And > > > > > > > common sense. > > > > > > > > > > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Rails-devel mailing list > > > > > > > Rai...@li... > > > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > -- > > > > > > ----- > > > > > > --- All the data continuously generated in your IT > > > > > > infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, > > > > > > application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, > > > > > > and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. > > And > > > common sense. > > > > > > > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Rails-devel mailing list > > > > > > Rai...@li... > > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > ---- > > > > > -------- All the data continuously generated in your IT > > > > > infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, > > > > > application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, > > > > > and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. > > And > > > common sense. > > > > > > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Rails-devel mailing list > > > > > Rai...@li... > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > --- Cloud Services Checklist: Pricing and Packaging Optimization This > > > white paper is intended to serve as a reference, checklist and point > > > of discussion for anyone considering optimizing the pricing and > > > packaging model of a cloud services business. Read Now! > > > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51491232/ > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rails-devel mailing list > > > Rai...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > - -- > > > Cloud Services Checklist: Pricing and Packaging Optimization This white > > paper > > > is intended to serve as a reference, checklist and point of discussion > > for anyone considering optimizing the pricing and packaging model of a > > cloud services business. Read Now! > > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51491232/ > > _______________________________________________ > > Rails-devel mailing list > > Rai...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- Cloud Services Checklist: Pricing and Packaging Optimization > This white paper is intended to serve as a reference, checklist and point > of discussion for anyone considering optimizing the pricing and packaging > model of a cloud services business. Read Now! > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51491232/ > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel |
