TripleA Rules Sets

Cernel

I think it would make sense to divide TripleA into 6 rules sets, named from "first" to "sixth", "1RS" to "6RS" for short.

1RS: the first (default) rules set (also known as v1 or second edition).
2RS: the second rules set (also known as third edition).
3RS: the third rules set (also known as v2 basic or Revised).
4RS: the fourth rules set (also known as LHTR or Revised LHTR).
5RS: the fifth rules set (also known as v3 or v4).
6RS: the sixth rules set (also known as v5 and used by the game of the v6 map too).

The way I would consolidate v3 and v4 into a single rules set (the fifth one, or "5RS") is by retroactively applying any difference of v4 to v3 too (so no rules set would have the behaviour of keeping unplaced units off the map across turns, which currently applies to anything from v3 onwards (the behaviour itself remaining available, as a property, for non-standard games)).

Every current definition would cease to exist but for legacy, rules wise (for example, "v3" would be the name of a map, not any longer the name of a rules set (you would say "5RS" instead of saying "v3"), whereas "v2" would be nothing but legacy because the map is called "Revised" and has two games, one based on the "3RS" and the other one based on the "4RS").

CC: @Panther

TheDog

I dont play many ww2 maps, so I dont know the detail of what these mean, but could any of the rule sets be classed as Ancient/Medieval or Napoleonic or any other historical period?

Panther

@Cernel

I agree that rulesets might be separated from the v(x) denomination.

I would suggest to even consolidate a bit more, then.

Maybe:

1RS for v1 second and third edition (I am not convinced that the third edition "deserves" a separate ruleset, as I see it as a rather small enhancement of Classic 2nd ed.)
2RS for v2 OOB
3RS for v2 LHTR
4RS for v3 and v4
5RS for v5 and v6, assuming that you intend to classify the 1940-theater and -combined games as an enhancement of v5, too.

Schulz

Old habits die hard. Most people would still continue to call them either v2 or v3 rules. The other ones are not unique enough to have distinct category.

I even argue that there should have been just 3 category.

v2= Naming them simply old rules. The logic and trend shows its not much reason to create new scenarios based on these rules when v3 rules are objectively better in any aspects.

v3= New rules.

Unique rules= Games that it rules distinct enough to not fit either category.

Cernel

@Panther said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Cernel

I agree that rulesets might be separated from the v(x) denomination.

I would suggest to even consolidate a bit more, then.

Maybe:

1RS for v1 second and third edition (I am not convinced that the third edition "deserves" a separate ruleset, as I see it as a rather small enhancement of Classic 2nd ed.)

This might be a possibility, but a major issues (and maybe not the only one), with this, is that the basic dice system of rolling for all dice (instead of only for all same-strength dice) before selecting any casualty starts from the third edition. The only reasonable way I see not to have the third edition as a rules set is by not supporting either the second or the third edition. I believe the current default TripleA behaviour is a confused mix of second edition, third edition and a few Revised rules (and, of course, many wrong default behaviours and unsupported features).

5RS for v5 and v6, assuming that you intend to classify the 1940-theater and -combined games as an enhancement of v5, too.

Not necessarily: it depends on the single games, not on the maps. For example, nothing forbids that I use the "Global" map with "Classic" "1RS" rules (if I get a game (modification) of "Global" working by "Classic" rules added into the "games" folder of the map).

Every element not present in the games of the v3/v4 or v5 maps would count as special rules, independent of the rules sets of the games.

Trevan

I think it might be useful to actually define what rules are in these rulesets. And I don't mean what TripleA properties/attributes are in each rule, but something independent of the TripleA engine and xml that can then be used as the definite source and used as a reference when saying there is a bug or defect in the engine or xml.

Cernel

@Trevan said in TripleA Rules Sets:

I think it might be useful to actually define what rules are in these rulesets. And I don't mean what TripleA properties/attributes are in each rule, but something independent of the TripleA engine and xml that can then be used as the definite source and used as a reference when saying there is a bug or defect in the engine or xml.

This can really only be done by writing an entire rule-book fully covering the the first (default) rules set and, then, either writing other 5 documents fully covering the changes from that rule-book or writing other 5 full rule-books. I don't think we can reasonably expect anyone doing this (because I think it would take hundreds of hours) and, if anyone would, I fear the document would be riddled with inaccuracies and missing items, so unusable as a rules reference (like our current TripleA rule-book indeed is).

Trevan

@Cernel said in TripleA Rules Sets:

This can really only be done by writing an entire rule-book fully covering the the first (default) rules set and, then, either writing other 5 documents fully covering the changes from that rulebook or writing other 5 full rule-books. I don't think we can reasonably expect anyone doing this (because I think it would take hundreds of hours) and, if anyone would, I fear the document would be riddled with inaccuracies and missing items, so unusable as a rules reference (like our current TripleA rulebook indeed is).

Then I don't understand the discussion of rulesets if they aren't defined somewhere. Who gets to decide the difference between 1RS and 2RS?

You said

I believe the current default TripleA behaviour is a confused mix of second edition, third edition and a few Revised rules (and, of course, many wrong default behaviours and unsupported features)

But if there is no definition of second edition, third edition, and Revised, then why not just say that default TripleA behavior is actually 1st edition? And then if you flip all of the properties to true, you have 2nd edition? And that's it. Only two editions and then you have custom rule sets.

Cernel

@Trevan said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Cernel said in TripleA Rules Sets:

This can really only be done by writing an entire rule-book fully covering the the first (default) rules set and, then, either writing other 5 documents fully covering the changes from that rulebook or writing other 5 full rule-books. I don't think we can reasonably expect anyone doing this (because I think it would take hundreds of hours) and, if anyone would, I fear the document would be riddled with inaccuracies and missing items, so unusable as a rules reference (like our current TripleA rulebook indeed is).

Then I don't understand the discussion of rulesets if they aren't defined somewhere. Who gets to decide the difference between 1RS and 2RS?

You said

I believe the current default TripleA behaviour is a confused mix of second edition, third edition and a few Revised rules (and, of course, many wrong default behaviours and unsupported features)

But if there is no definition of second edition, third edition, and Revised, then why not just say that default TripleA behavior is actually 1st edition? And then if you flip all of the properties to true, you have 2nd edition? And that's it. Only two editions and then you have custom rule sets.

Let's first make sure we are on the same page here. I think I've been very clear, but do you understand that, under my classification, the first rules set is the so-called second edition and the second rules set is the so-called third edition? I don't believe I ever mentioned the so-called first edition, so I'm wondering why you are.

Trevan

@Cernel said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Trevan said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Cernel said in TripleA Rules Sets:

This can really only be done by writing an entire rule-book fully covering the the first (default) rules set and, then, either writing other 5 documents fully covering the changes from that rulebook or writing other 5 full rule-books. I don't think we can reasonably expect anyone doing this (because I think it would take hundreds of hours) and, if anyone would, I fear the document would be riddled with inaccuracies and missing items, so unusable as a rules reference (like our current TripleA rulebook indeed is).

Then I don't understand the discussion of rulesets if they aren't defined somewhere. Who gets to decide the difference between 1RS and 2RS?

You said

I believe the current default TripleA behaviour is a confused mix of second edition, third edition and a few Revised rules (and, of course, many wrong default behaviours and unsupported features)

But if there is no definition of second edition, third edition, and Revised, then why not just say that default TripleA behavior is actually 1st edition? And then if you flip all of the properties to true, you have 2nd edition? And that's it. Only two editions and then you have custom rule sets.

Let's first make sure we are on the same page here. I think I've been very clear, but do you understand that, under my classification, the first rules set is the so-called second edition and the second rules set is the so-called third edition? I don't believe I ever mentioned the so-called first edition, so I'm wondering why you are.

I don't see the so-called second edition or the so-called third edition defined any where so I'm not sure what the point of renaming them is. It looks more like you just want to rename the maps. So instead of saying "ww2global40_2ndEd_move1st.xml", you want to rename it as "ww2global40_6RS_move1st.xml". And I don't really see the point in renaming 2ndEd to 6RS when it appears that neither are defined anywhere.

Panther

@Cernel said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Panther said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Cernel

I agree that rulesets might be separated from the v(x) denomination.

I would suggest to even consolidate a bit more, then.

Maybe:

1RS for v1 second and third edition (I am not convinced that the third edition "deserves" a separate ruleset, as I see it as a rather small enhancement of Classic 2nd ed.)

This might be a possibility, but a major issues (and maybe not the only one), with this, is that the basic dice system of rolling for all dice (instead of only for all same-strength dice) before selecting any casualty starts from the third edition. The only reasonable way I see not to have the third edition as a rules set is by not supporting either the second or the third edition. I believe the current default TripleA behaviour is a confused mix of second edition, third edition and a few Revised rules (and, of course, many wrong default behaviours and unsupported features).

5RS for v5 and v6, assuming that you intend to classify the 1940-theater and -combined games as an enhancement of v5, too.

Not necessarily: it depends on the single games, not on the maps. For example, nothing forbids that I use the "Global" map with "Classic" "1RS" rules (if I get a game (modification) of "Global" working by "Classic" rules added into the "games" folder of the map).

As far as I know, the games of the
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global
map would be classified as "5RS" for
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global/blob/master/map/games/ww2global40.xml
and "6RS" for
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global/blob/master/map/games/G40CanadianMod.xml
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global/blob/master/map/games/Ozteas_1941_Global_Setup.xml
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global/blob/master/map/games/ww2global40_2ndEd_move1st.xml
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global/blob/master/map/games/ww2global40_2nd_edition.xml
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global/blob/master/map/games/ww2global40_balanced.xml
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global/blob/master/map/games/ww2global40_balanced_move1st.xml
https://github.com/triplea-maps/world_war_ii_global/blob/master/map/games/ww2global42_2nd_edition.xml

Every element not present in the games of the v3/v4 or v5 maps would count as special rules, independent of the rules sets of the games.

I understand and I agree with your precise classification.

Cernel

@Trevan said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Cernel said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Trevan said in TripleA Rules Sets:

@Cernel said in TripleA Rules Sets:

This can really only be done by writing an entire rule-book fully covering the the first (default) rules set and, then, either writing other 5 documents fully covering the changes from that rulebook or writing other 5 full rule-books. I don't think we can reasonably expect anyone doing this (because I think it would take hundreds of hours) and, if anyone would, I fear the document would be riddled with inaccuracies and missing items, so unusable as a rules reference (like our current TripleA rulebook indeed is).

Then I don't understand the discussion of rulesets if they aren't defined somewhere. Who gets to decide the difference between 1RS and 2RS?

You said

I believe the current default TripleA behaviour is a confused mix of second edition, third edition and a few Revised rules (and, of course, many wrong default behaviours and unsupported features)

But if there is no definition of second edition, third edition, and Revised, then why not just say that default TripleA behavior is actually 1st edition? And then if you flip all of the properties to true, you have 2nd edition? And that's it. Only two editions and then you have custom rule sets.

Let's first make sure we are on the same page here. I think I've been very clear, but do you understand that, under my classification, the first rules set is the so-called second edition and the second rules set is the so-called third edition? I don't believe I ever mentioned the so-called first edition, so I'm wondering why you are.

I don't see the so-called second edition or the so-called third edition defined any where so I'm not sure what the point of renaming them is. It looks more like you just want to rename the maps. So instead of saying "ww2global40_2ndEd_move1st.xml", you want to rename it as "ww2global40_6RS_move1st.xml". And I don't really see the point in renaming 2ndEd to 6RS when it appears that neither are defined anywhere.

Since now you are saying that I want to rename the maps, which is exactly what this thread is not about (I believe I've made this very clear), I'm not even sure about what page we are on.

Firstly, what you are mentioning is not a map: it is a game.

Secondly that is not the so-called second edition (at all): that is the so-called second edition of the so-called 1940 edition. So, in your example, "ww2global40_2ndEd_move1st.xml", as I already said, the game would be classified as "6RS". This is not about changing the names of maps nor games, anyways. If I have to say, the only one I would most likely change is
https://github.com/triplea-maps/big_world/blob/master/map/games/Big_World_1942_v3rules.xml
that would be better renamed as Big_World_1942_5RS, under my proposal.

Thirdly, I already covered this point when I said

"v3" would be the name of a map, not any longer the name of a rules set

Meaning that the "v" classification would kept being used merely as a maps classification (you have the v3, v4, v5 and v6 maps like you have the 270BC Wars map).

Trevan

@Cernel said in TripleA Rules Sets:

Since now you are saying that I want to rename the maps, which is exactly what this thread is not about (I believe I've made this very clear), I'm not even sure about what page we are on.

I don't know what you are trying to rename since you've said that there is no definition of 1RS or 2RS so it feels like you renaming something that doesn't exist. If you aren't trying to rename maps, then what are you renaming?

You say "1RS: the first (default) rules set (also known as v1 or second edition)." But then you say "default TripleA behaviour is a confused mix of second edition, third edition and a few Revised rules". So the default TripleA behavior isn't 1RS? Why? Why are you defining it differently? Why not define the default TripleA behavior as 1RS.

And then maps just define their own rule sets that go on top of 1RS.

I guess I just don't see the point of renaming rule sets when there is no definition of these rule sets.

LaFayette

We do need working definitions of what these things are to be useful. I don't agree it would require a 100 page rule book.

Without a definition, how do we code up what the game (TripleA) should do?

Part of the problem is that the rules as implemented are not tied to a specific rule set and and are hodge.

What would be ideal is to have a table describing different behaviors by rule set. For example, have a row for "naval bombard casualties fire back", then go across each column being each rule-set and mark yes or no. Then the game engine when it needs to know if naval bombard can fire back, it would use the current rule set and then look up if the answer is yes or no. That is a lot better than compared to the hodge of different heuristics used today.

Once we get to that point in the code, it's a much easier jump to then make that logic customizable per game instance at game start.

LaFayette

@LaFayette said in TripleA Rules Sets:

What would be ideal is to have a table describing different behaviors by rule set.

We are actually on our way there. We have example maps that follow each rule set, all we need to do is to start teasing apart the behaviors that are different and then answer for each map, "does this follow that behavior, yes or no?"

If we find that some rule sets are only very slightly different, simpler is better. The 'v3' moniker will be difficult to drop, if we can keep it simple and say "old edition", "revised edition" and "new edition", it could be easier to adopt. At this point though, without knowing what the rule sets actually are, it seems to be a first priority to know which rules are in each rule set before we do much of anything else.