Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Rails-devel] Changes to Stockmarket
|
From: brett l. <bre...@gm...> - 2014-09-10 19:43:31
|
Thanks for the clarification. It looks like we're all in agreement about the behavior. I don't see any reason to bikeshed the implementation details. HexGrid seems as good as LinearGrid to me for this case. ---Brett. ---Brett. On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote: > Resubmit with correct indentation of the sketch below, if it works this > time... > > > Brett, Martin and Erik: > you all make good points. I do not claim that it IS a hexagonal market > and it IS NOT a rectangular or anything else. > > I only wanted to point out, that treating it as hexagonal is a good > representation and potentially a better one as the alternatives. > > A sketch easily shows the equivalence of mine interpretation to that of > Brett below: > > /-\ /-\ /-\ /-\ /-\ > | 1 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 9 > \-/ \-/ \-/ \-/-\-/ > | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | > \-/ \-/ \-/ \-/ > > Actually any hexagonal grid is equivalent to a rectangular one with a > half square offset: There are six directions from each square (two each > at the top and bottom, one each left and right) and this is equivalent > to a hexagon grid. > > And as Martin already pointed out by using adapted movements it can also > be modelled as rectangular grid without any offset. > > My mere intention was to point out that the stockmarket of 1860/1862 is > very similar to the one of 1837/1854 and thus could be treated > at a variation of an hexagonal market. Even the movement directions of > 1860/1862 are identical to those of 1837/1854 (selling shares movement > to lower left, dividend payments to the right). > > How the UI displays the market in the end is a completely different matter. > > Stefan > > > On 09/10/2014 05:48 PM, brett lentz wrote: > > Stefan - > > > > Your description is not entirely accurate. > > > > The market in 1862 is quasi-linear, not hexagonal. It is two rows of > > values with a half-value offset between the rows. > > > > For example: > > > > +------------------------+ > > | 1 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 9 | | | > > |-------------------------| > > | | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 10 | > > +------------------------+ > > > > Stock values start on the top row. In this example, let's say a > > company's par value is at 3. > > > > When dividends are paid, the value goes "forward" to 5. The value stays > > in the same row. > > When revenue is withheld, the value goes "backward" to 1. The value > > stays in the same row. > > > > When shares are sold during the stock round, the value moves in a > > "zig-zag" fashion between the rows. So, if the market value is at 5, and > > three shares are sold, the value moves 5->4->3->2, which leaves the > > stock price ending on a different row. From that value, the stock price > > will again move "forward" or "back", linearly, during the operating > round. > > > > An additional wrinkle to 1862 is that values have a tiered forward > > progression. Depending on the value of dividends paid, a stock value may > > move "forward" between 1 and 4 spaces. So, for example a company with a > > stock price of 5 may move forward one space if they pay out between > > 3-10, two spaces if they pay 11-20, three spaces if they pay 21-30, and > > four spaces for paying 31+. > > > > (Note: all of these numbers are completely fictitious, as I don't have > > my copy of 1862 in front of me.) > > > > Ultimately, this is really just a linear stock market with different > > movement multipliers for different actions. The visual representation is > > largely separate from the basic math. Rails can represent the 1862 > > market entirely linearly, if we want. A single "forward" movement is > > simply moving 2 spaces on a one-dimensional market, where a sale would > > be a movement of -1 space. > > > > ---Brett. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we... > > <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote: > > > > Follow up with details on 1860/1862 stockmarket: > > > > My understanding of the stockmarket of 1860/1862 is that it > resembles a > > hexagonal stock market with pointy topped hexagons (or East/West > > orientation as it is called in Rails for 18xx maps). > > > > It has two rows of hexagons and wraps around at the upper/lower edge. > > > > In the following I refer to the definitions used by > > http://www.redblobgames.com/grids/hexagons/. > > > > In axial coordinates we have the following: > > > > * The first coordinate is identical to the column number of each > row, if > > we assign the bankrupt field to the first column. > > * The second coordinate is not vertical, but 60 degrees going from > NW to > > SE. It is identical to the row number (0 and 1). > > > > Using this for the 1862 stock market: Bankrupt hex has coordinates > (0,0) > > then 7 is (0,1), followed by 14 (1,0), 20 (1,1), 26 (2,0), 31 (2,1) > etc. > > > > * Wrap around at the bottom implies that we jump from a "virtual" > > coordinate (x,2) to coordinate (x+1,0) > > * Wrap around at the top implies that we jump from a "virtual" > > coordinate (x,-1) to coordinate (x-1,1). > > > > Selling shares implies a transition of (-1, +1): > > > > * From 26 (2,0) to 20 (1,1) > > * From 20 (1,1) to virtual (0,2) => wrap around edges => 14 (1,0) > > * From 14 (1,0) to 7 (0,1) > > * From 7 (0,1) to virtual (-1,2) => wrap => bankrupt (0,0) > > > > Paying dividends is simply increasing the first coordinate according > to > > the number of spaces moved. > > > > A more complex version of a hexagonal stockmarket is used in 1854. > > > > Stefan > > > > On 09/08/2014 06:38 PM, Stefan Frey wrote: > > > Mike: > > > below you find a proposal how to restructure StockMarket. This is > an > > > example how I would like to change other components of Rails in > the > > > longer run. > > > > > > Please feel free to comment. > > > > > > I will write a mail on 1862/1860 stock market specifics later. > > > > > > Stefan > > > > > > Suggestions for a component structure. Example: Stockmarket > > > > > > Currently the core parts of logic, data and creation for the > > Stockmarket > > > is combined in one class: Stockmarket. > > > > > > A) Separation of Data and Logic > > > > > > The data parts of Stockmarket should be moved to a separate class > > (e.g. > > > xxxMarketModel). > > > Possible classes depend on the StockMarket: > > > e.g. RectangularMarketModel, HexagonalMarketModel, > LinearMarketModel > > > > > > The logic part replaces the existing StockMarket class and > contains > > > method called from Rails that operate on the > > > StockMarket, e.g. payout, withhold, sharesSold, etc. > > > > > > Most likely there will be some default Markets, like > > RectangularMarket, > > > HexagonalMarket or LinearMarket, but more > > > specialized are possible. > > > > > > Customization should be possible in two ways: > > > > > > i) Internal configuration due to xml settings. > > > > > > ii) Implementing StrategyInterfaces that adjust part of the > internal > > > working of the default market. > > > E.g. there could be a SoldOutStrategy interface, that allows to > > change > > > how the market behaves if > > > shares are sold out after a stock round. > > > > > > B) Move Creation to a Builder/Factory class (StockMarketFactory) > > > > > > Creation of the StockMarket is then done by a separate class, > > that wires > > > together the different classes according > > > of the needs of the specific 18xx. > > > > > > I prefer to use code to wire together Java elements, so no class > > names > > > should appear in xml files. This allows easier refactoring > > > and code optimizations. > > > > > > C) Roadmap > > > > > > I offer to create the basic components for 1830 according to the > > > structure outlined above. Then other > > > stockmarkets can be modelled along these lines. > > > > > > On 09/07/2014 09:18 AM, Michael Alexander wrote: > > >> Yes, it is extremely similar to 1860. It might be that the only > > >> difference is that the one in 1862 is longer at the high end. > > >> > > >> No hurry on the response, there are plenty of other things to do. > > >> > > >> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we... > > <mailto:ste...@we...> > > >> <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>>> wrote: > > >> > > >> Mike: > > >> I will come up with a more detailed answer later today. > > >> I have not played 1862 yet, however from a short glance, it > > seems that > > >> the stock market is similar to the one of 1860. > > >> I would not recommend that path, instead please wait on my > > thoughts, if > > >> you do not mind ;-) > > >> Stefan > > >> > > >> On 09/07/2014 05:42 AM, Michael Alexander wrote: > > >> > And now that I'm looking at the stock market... > > >> > > > >> > I don't think I can use much of the existing Stock Market > > class for > > >> > it. It just won't fit in a rectangle. I could make a > > new "Stock > > >> > Market" class for this one and make the .xml file specify > > which one to > > >> > use. Should I take that direction? > > >> > > > >> > Mike > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Michael Alexander > > >> > <out...@gm... <mailto:out...@gm...> > > <mailto:out...@gm... <mailto:out...@gm...>> > > >> <mailto:out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...> <mailto:out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...>>>> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > I've pushed up my changes - I think I did it > > correctly, please let > > >> > me know if I messed something up. > > >> > > > >> > I have the Parliament Round mostly working. My next > > step is to > > >> > work on the stock market. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 2:46 AM, Stefan Frey > > <ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...> > > <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>> > > >> > <mailto:ste...@we... > > <mailto:ste...@we...> <mailto:ste...@we... > > <mailto:ste...@we...>>>> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > I will delay for a further day, as I will only > > return on > > >> > Saturday. Change of plans. ;-) > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Michael Alexander <out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...> <mailto:out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...>> > > >> > <mailto:out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...> > > >> <mailto:out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...>>>>schrieb: > > >> > > > >> > I unfortunately had something come up. Don't > > wait for me. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Michael > > >> > Alexander<out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...> <mailto:out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...>> > > >> > <mailto:out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...> <mailto:out...@gm... > > <mailto:out...@gm...>>>> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > I can get it to a state where I can do > > that tonight. > > >> > Thanks for the heads up. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Stefan > > >> > Frey<ste...@we... > > <mailto:ste...@we...> > > >> <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>> > > <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...> > > >> <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>>>> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Martin & Alexander: > > >> > I have now rewritten a lot of the > > tile and token > > >> > lay UI code and intend > > >> > a new alpha tomorrow end-of-day. > > >> > So if you would like to merge some > > code into > > >> > rails_2_develop, there is > > >> > some time left to do so. > > >> > Good coding, > > >> > Stefan > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Want excitement? > > Manually upgrade your production database. > > When you want reliability, choose Perforce > > Perforce version control. Predictably reliable. > > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rails-devel mailing list > > Rai...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Want excitement? > Manually upgrade your production database. > When you want reliability, choose Perforce > Perforce version control. Predictably reliable. > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Want excitement? > Manually upgrade your production database. > When you want reliability, choose Perforce > Perforce version control. Predictably reliable. > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > |
