Turn Chat Improvements!

Turambar · January 22, 2003, 19:36

Well the last turn chat has just finished and we managed to only get 6 turns done. This is far too slow in my (and the others there) opinion.

After the chat Locutus and myself came up with a couple of ideas that would help speed them up:

1) One reason it was so slow was that Pedrunn was posting screenshots alot to give us an idea of what was happening. His time should be used to just play the game and get orders IMO.

So I think it would be a far better idea if someone else who's playing along posted the shots instead of Pedrunn.

2) When moving units we were moving one unit and then Pedrunn was coming back to us for orders for the next.

If orders were given in bulk for units e.g. Warrior 1 go north, Warrior 2 go South etc. Pedrunn can then just play out all the orders and end the turn reasonably quickly.

3) All ministers should appoint delegates! Luckily Maq had appointed me as his delagate and left orders for the units which was a big help. All ministers should follow his example.

I'm going to take a look at how the other demo games running have handled chats and see what we can learn from them.

If anyone has any other ideas please post them!

Frozzy · January 22, 2003, 20:02

a) Go faster, screen shots every 2/3 turns
b) Please Pedrunn, take the orders and run with them.
c) If you don't turn up, your problem. I suggest minimum 10 turns per chat REGARDLESS.

Tamerlin · January 22, 2003, 20:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Turambar
So I think it would be a far better idea if someone else who's playing along posted the shots instead of Pedrunn.

Tell me if I am wrong but is there not a random element that will produce a different gift out of a goody hut if the game is played on another computer?

Will the result of a combat be exactly the same?

Locutus · January 22, 2003, 20:38

A) As it is, Pedrunn is asking everyone what our orders are and when the answer isn't 100% clear or discussion ensues and everyone gets distracted, he has to ask a second time. This is too slow. We should supply him with orders. Whenever he's off executing orders, we should start discussing what to do next and come up with orders if possible. Then the Ministers or their delegates can simply post 'ORDER: blah' when a decision has been made. Then Pedrunn can just scan the chat for ORDERs when he's done with the current batch and briefly evaluate them and, unless he disagrees with them or has useful feedback, he can go off again to execute the new orders.

B) Orders are executed in batches as much as possible, without Pedrunn returning with results after each and every individual order. If we have 10 units, there's no use in reporting results after having moved each unit. Moving all 10 units first and then posting a screenshot or whatever with the result is much faster. A little initiative from the President's side shouldn't be discouraged either. We voted him as President because we trust him with the game, so he can make small decisions on his own from time to time (if a unit is moving along a river, continue to move along the river unless there might be a reason to do something else).

C) At the start of the chat delegates are appointed for missing Ministers (if the Ministers failed to do so themselves), who will be the only ones allowed to make ORDERs (and only for their own office of course). This way it's always clear who makes the call.

D) Some other player (preferably (but not necessarily) a Judge) can play the game alongside Pedrunn and provide the people in the chat with info (how much gold do we have, how many turns until growth, what's the opponents regard/ranking, etc?) and post screenshots if needed (normally no more than once a turn, once every 2/3 turns if possible). We may have to find a middle road here: this other player has to execute the same orders as Pedrunn but at the same time communicate with everyone in the chat. That's bound to cause him to lag behind Pedrunn, which makes it more difficult for him to supply up-to-date info to the chatroom.

E) The orders we prepare in the forum beforehand should be more specific and detailed. The more specific they are, the less room there is for discussion during the chat and the faster the chat can move forward. In today's chat, we barely spent any time discussing diplomacy, but we spent an eternity discussing where to move the units. This is in part because the results of unit moves are harder to predict, but also in part because very specific diplomatic orders were available. Do A, if B happens, do C, if D happens instead, do E. This should be done for unit moves as well, as much as possible.
For example for the southern Warrior, the instructions Maq left us today were okay (move south, then along the border, look for city sites) but we had no orders for the northern Warrior so we spent a good deal of time discussing what to do with it once we ran out of river. And we were lucky we got the Hoplite, or decision making would have been even harder.
This probably also required more specific and detailed polls (exampes: Should Warrior 1 move north or west? Should Warrior 2 move south or east? If the terrain is very poor, do we change direction to look for future city locations or do we continue to search for huts/other civs? If we encounter a river going in the 'wrong' direction, do we follow or ignore it? etc...).

Tamerlin · January 22, 2003, 20:39

Stupid double post...

Locutus · January 22, 2003, 20:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Tamerlin

Tell me if I am wrong but is there not a random element that will produce a different gift out of a goody hut if the game is played on another computer?

Will the result of a combat be exactly the same?

I'm not sure about this, but to some extend this doesn't matter. The chats only last 10-20 turns at most, so if minor discrepancies occur that won't affect the game so much that we take different decisions over it. If the differences become too large or critical, it's a small effort to let the President email the latest savegame to the other player or to post it on the forum. That's still a lot faster than when the President has to post screenshots and stuff all the time.

Tamerlin · January 22, 2003, 20:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
I'm not sure about this, but to some extend this doesn't matter. The chats only last 10-20 turns at most, so if minor discrepancies occur that won't affect the game so much that we take different decisions over it. If the differences become too large or critical, it's a small effort to let the President email the latest savegame to the other player or to post it on the forum. That's still a lot faster than when the President has to post screenshots and stuff all the time.

If the results can vary, the second player can still use the cheat menue to emulate the results of the real game played by Pedrunn.

Frozzy · January 22, 2003, 20:45

Locutus, propal D violates Article I Section 5 of our constitution:

Quote:

5. The government may not knowingly hide information or give false information to the people. Therefore all citizens shall have access to the saved games. However, no Citizen shall ever 'play ahead'.

No playing ahead

Oh, Pedrunn, if you press Alt + TAB you can minimize CtP2 if you didn't already know.

Locutus · January 22, 2003, 20:50

Tamerlin,
Good point. Agreed.

Frozzy,
Who says anything about playing ahead? One player would play concurrently with the Prez, like mapfi did today, nothing unconstitutional about that...

Turambar · January 22, 2003, 20:52

But he wouldn't be playing ahead but alongside using the same orders as the pres gets.

Good ideas Locutus. Orders should definatley be more detailed before the chat.

Another question: How oftern should chats be? How many a week? Should we have a regular date(s) for them each week?

Locutus · January 22, 2003, 20:56

I think we should have at least 1 chat a week if possible. Two would be even better but that would leave little time for polling and discussing in the forums, which is crucial to make the chat move forward at a decent pace. Unless we can find a time when everyone is available, we shouldn't have regular dates, as that would exclude those people who can't attend on those dates from ever participating in a chat. However, I do think chats should be announced well in advance whenever possible (at least 3 days, to give enough time to organize polls between the announcement and the chat).

HuangShang · January 22, 2003, 21:08

is it possible to "play along side" in games

Tamerlin · January 22, 2003, 21:10

Why not use a very different system based on overall orders decided earlier in the forum.

Example :

Explore the southern part of the map with the first warrior without trespassing the Austrian territory.

Move the first warrior to the east and report any goody hut result, neighbor (in order to apply the overall diplomatic policy voted in a thread), or barbarian (act as decided if we meet barbarians).

Build one settler that will be moved to found a city in the plains west of Good Land then a warrior that will explore the northern part of the map, report blah, blah, blah...

Pedrunn could then play successive turns and would only have to come back to the chat room to report events that would bring a significant change and would thus need a collective decision. I think this could really speed up the game and give it the feeling of an executive government applying the overall policy voted by the people of Lemuria.

mapfi · January 22, 2003, 21:20

From what I could tell today I got the exact same results as Pedrunn - proposal and goody hut wise. However, I think there are a few random functions scattered in the slics, so we shouldn't do the playing along too long. As long as we get only 5 turns done it's ok anyway...

HuangShang · January 22, 2003, 21:26

what ever works

Turambar · January 22, 2003, 21:29

Perhaps using maps / diagrams etc when planning unit movement would help. Here's something I made earlier for a thread I'll probably start tommorrow on where to explore / which unit to defend our city etc.

Similar things could be done before the chat to illustrate orders / plan invasions:

(I like messing about with paint

)

Locutus · January 22, 2003, 21:51

Tamerlin,
With your proposal Pedrunn might as well play the game on his own and report significant events in the forum, after which we discuss them properly and decide what to do. Once decided, Pedrunn can play on again on his own.

I think turn chats are fun, useful and give the people more power. A little bit more of a hands-on approach for the people in the chat would be desirable, without slowing the game as much as we presently do. So basically we're looking for something that keeps the middle between your proposal and the current situation.

mapfi,
Yes, for diplomacy and goodie huts it shouldn't make a difference as they're no real random factor involved. Combat could be different though, don't know how that would work out... And then of course there SLIC, as you said...

Turambar:

HuangShang · January 22, 2003, 21:57

Turambar's proposal get a

when ministers/cits are sure they'll be absent

Maquiladora · January 22, 2003, 23:53

I would agree with Turambar's diagram, preferably the southern warrior moving East first, keep it close to our city just in case but to get a more informed view around our city. The northern warrior moving west around the Austrian border.

Pedrunn · January 23, 2003, 01:18

Turambar,
1) I like the idea of someone posting the screenshots for me. That actually the part that makes my job more difficult.

2) Unfortunetly we have currently exploring the terrain so we need to discuss every move to get the best path. I dont think we should implement this at all. Although in cases like the one pointed by Tamerlin diagram it works nicely. Even the diagram is not needed. Just tell me. Return the hoplite to home. And i will do it. But in case of explorer units thats impossible.

3) Last chat IW was missing and i chose Locutus to be in his place. It works quite well. That wont give any speed up.

Locutus.
A) & B) See response to 2). This is not good enough to be implemented.

C) Same as 3) no change at all.

D) This idea is terrific and we should implement it as you can see in 1).

E) It is impossible to predict every future action specially for the explorer units.

BTW, slic, huts, diplomatic events and other events do not change if we get two people working at the same time. It just look pre-defined in the begginning of the game. Even the function: Random(); always give the same result.
I dont know about battles though.
So D) and 1) can implemented.

J Bytheway · January 23, 2003, 06:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
D) Some other player (preferably (but not necessarily) a Judge)

I think it's not so important that the screenshot-poster be a judge as have a fast internet connection - that will surely be the most significant delaying factor in doing such posts. Though being a judge would be good too.

Tamerlin · January 23, 2003, 06:28

Thanks for the comments Pedrunn but the diagram idea is from Turambar and D point has bot been raised by me.

As I wrote it before, the second player can emulate the President's game using the cheat menue if there are some differences. Of course, the second player must be someone used to the cheat menue and able to work rather fast with it. This should not be a problem as the flow of the game is regularly interrupted by the chats needed to define the course of the game.

Locutus · January 23, 2003, 10:56

Quote:

2) Unfortunetly we have currently exploring the terrain so we need to discuss every move to get the best path. I dont think we should implement this at all. Although in cases like the one pointed by Tamerlin diagram it works nicely. Even the diagram is not needed. Just tell me. Return the hoplite to home. And i will do it. But in case of explorer units thats impossible.

It is IMO imperative that we DO implement this. We're not talking about walking 3 turns with 1 unit, we're talking about 1 turn with 3 units. As it is, the situation is like this:

Code:

Cit1: We should move Warrior 1 north, Hoplite easter and Warrior 2 south
MoD: I agree with Cit1.
Ped: What should be do with the northern Warrior?
Cit1: north
(silence)
Ped: Where should the northern warrior go?
MoD: north, like Cit1 said
(long silence)
Cit1: P, did you move the units?
Ped: What should we do with the Hoplite?
Cit1: East :rolleyes:
MoD: east
Ped: you sure you want to go east?
Cit2: actually, I think we should go south...
...
(long discussion and 10 minutes later)
...
Ped: so, where should the Hoplite go?
MoD: east, and the other Warrior south
(silence)
Cit1: did you move the units yet?
Cit2: yeah, this is going rather slow
Ped: okay, I posted a screenshot of the map
Cit1: who asked for a screenshot?
Ped: so, what should we do with the warrior in the south?
Cit1: aaarrrgghh...
MoD: south
(long silence)
Ped: units moved, a new screen is in the thread. shall I end the turn now or offer them a proposal first?
...
etc

Well, you get the idea (we did 3 chats like this so you ought to

). This takes us over half an hour, while we could also do it like this:

Code:

Cit1: We should move Warrior 1 north, Hoplite easter and Warrior 2 south
Cit2: shouldn't we go south with the Hoplite?
Cit3: no, not yet, first go a littel further east, then south
Cit1: Agreed
Cit2: Agreed
MoD: ORDER: N Warrior north, Hoplite east, S Warrior south
Ped: orders received
Cit2: so, what about next turn, should we give the Austrians any gold
...
(discussion ensues)
...
MoDST: ORDER: offer Austrians 100 Gold in exchange for map
Ped: okay, I moved the units, see thread for new map. will offer 100 gold for map now.

Which wouldn't have to take more than 10 minutes (probably less) and doesn't change anything about decision making. We would still decide over every little detail only we'd do it a heck of a lot faster. We only need info on what the surroundings of a unit look like if we can actually move them, so supplying this info as soon as a unit just finished movement is not useful: it will be a while before we can move again, so do some other stuff first and report back with *all* new info later.

Right now we can still do 5 turns a chat, but if we continue with this pace, moving around when we have a few dozen units is gonna be a hell and we'd need 2 or 3 chats to move 1 turn...

Locutus · January 23, 2003, 11:07

Quote:

Originally posted by J Bytheway
I think it's not so important that the screenshot-poster be a judge as have a fast internet connection - that will surely be the most significant delaying factor in doing such posts. Though being a judge would be good too.

Agreed.

Quote:

Originally posted by Pedrunn
It is impossible to predict every future action specially for the explorer units.

Agreed, but as it is, we don't even bother to try...
Some generic guidelines should be set up in advance, and preferably polled too (Maq told us to look south for city sites but I would have preferred to stay closer to the city for defense, there was hardly room for discussing this during the chat).

Maquiladora · January 23, 2003, 11:28

I said something like, move the warrior south but keep it close to our city. I usually have 3 garrisoned in SAP, then move 2 out with the settler when its done and begin building units again. The hoplite will make it before any barbs get there so we can keep the southern warrior a little close but doesnt need to be garrisoned yet.

Pedrunn · January 23, 2003, 11:37

Locutus, I cant find this conversation in the chat log

You made that up?

Locutus · January 23, 2003, 11:40

It's not *exactly* what happened in a real chat but it's along the same lines, mainly based on my memories of yesterday's chat (but the first 2 chats were little different)...

Pedrunn · January 23, 2003, 11:57

I see!

Although the long silence because is true in order to prepare the screeshots - aiming the frame to get a good shot, alt-tab to photoshop (who uses it know it takes a while), making it fit in a 600 width jpg (max permitted in attachements) and still be undrestadable, save in the desktop, load "post reply button" (Apolyton takes an eternity we all know), look for the picture in the Desktop and press the submit post button - really takes a while! Not to mention when something goes wrong like image too big or you already posted 30 seconds before, etc...

But if you remember ok the question "Ped: you sure you want to go east?"

That made a 10 minutes chat (we both know it wasnt that much) was because i was against the move of the hoplite to go east. I thought he had to go north because i thought he could reach the hut first than the warrior. We end up moving east because i realize they bothe reached the hut at the same time.

BTW, make up lines like "Cit1: aaarrrgghh..." is difamation by the way.

Locutus · January 23, 2003, 12:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Pedrunn
That made a 10 minutes chat (we both know it wasnt that much) was because i was against the move of the hoplite to go east. I thought he had to go north because i thought he could reach the hut first than the warrior. We end up moving east because i realize they bothe reached the hut at the same time.

Well, if you don't agree, then discussion is good, you too should have a chance to give feedback. But if we had had a decent chance to discuss things up front, odds are the discussion would have been shorter. Plus it decreases the chance that a minister makes a questionable decision in the first place.

Quote:

And made up lines like "Cit1: aaarrrgghh..." is difamation by the way.

What is it with you and defamation?

People have repeated expressed their frustration with the snail pace at which the chats move forward, this was just an example of that...

Pedrunn · January 23, 2003, 12:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
What is it with you and defamation?

People have repeated expressed their frustration with the snail pace at which the chats move forward, this was just an example of that...

Becuase everybody says the game is slow and i am slow when seeing the progress of the game. But you will never see a line like "you are taking too long on this issue" or "aaarrrgghh..." or "lets just move now, cant wait more". They never complaint about a single event taking long. But do complain the game pace as a whole.
So your comment is not in accordance with reality therefore difamation.

Quote:

then discussion is good, you too should have a chance to give feedback.

Exacly.
I wonder if the citizens who complain realize that the game is taking long because the discussions are taking too long. I just ask "where to move the unit?" or "Any new proposals" and await for the ministers feedback. So if the pace of the game is slow is because of the ministers and the citizens.
I just think the orders should be done separetly and not altogether (specially in case of explorers move in which a previous plan cant be made). i am just afraid that two different discussions at the same time can mess up the chat.

If i am to blaim about something is the time to post screenshot and the info for our situation. Probably next chat wont have this problem since i will try to find someone to do it for me.