A Symposium on rules and terminology
-
Hi all. While I am not involved in any of the current ongoing tournies... I thought I might create this thread as a way to discuss idea's around issues that come up during a tourney instead of spamming the actual tournament threads. Since I was present for some of the issues we are seeing I thought I might be able to help.
Fist thing I think that is important for you guys is finding accurate terminology as a method to differentiate between the arguably unique things that can cause issues between players...
Now I am not proposing I am best qualified to determine what should be used... but while reading some of the conversations it became apparent....there is a clear need for a definition of what is being discussed.
As a suggestion.... define the difference between a game play edit and a mechanics edit...
Edit; the act of changing one's moves due to a missed or forgotten play.
Alteration; the act of changing moves due to some mechanical issue caused by the game interface.
I think it is clear that these two things are not the same.... and I think it would serve tournament participants well to have a clear understanding of the differences between the two and find agreed upon settings prior to starting a match.
Furthermore... I think if the tourney participants (or experienced ones) sat down and discussed all of the potential 'issues' that can arise during the course of a game.... then you could create a checklist for each individual game. Then each set of players could fill out the sheet prior to commencing a game and post it in the tourney thread at the start of their match. This would then ensure that a mediator(s) would have the ability to objectively assess an issue and make a determination based on something empirical rather than an interpretive assessment that can be biassed by personal view-points.
-
BTW this could also be achieved by adding a bid phase within tournament games so that you check all the appropriate boxes at the outset of the match and then continue playing. This way the agreed upon settings would be inside the game save.
I am available for hire upon request.
-
@Hepps Good proposal! Set officially the rules of gaming before it begins based in the existing rules which are clear enough. Good day.
-
@hepps I agree there are different types of edits and that agreements around edits tend to be pretty vague. The way I tend to classify edits focuses on dice rolls and start of the next player's turn. I think this fits into your classification for the most part but here is a bit more detail.
-
Edit during your turn and only things since the last dice roll (I guess this would be an Alteration?) - If a player wants to change anything from the last time dice were rolled and the next player's turn hasn't started then I don't think there are many logical arguments against this. I'd also classify moves that could have been made later in the turn under this as well. Examples (on traditional purchase/move/place maps):
-- Player hasn't finished their combat moves and realized they want to change their purchase.
-- Player is placing units but realizes they want to change their non-combat moves.
-- Player makes a non-combat move during combat move phase (really is no benefit in doing so and mostly is just to speed things up or laziness) and wants to change this during non-combat move phase (they could have done the move during non-combat phase so dice don't matter in this case)
-- Player misclicks casualty selection and notifies their opponent before any other dice are rolled -
Edit after someone else's turn has started or something before the last dice roll (I guess this is Edit?) - This tends to get into the gray area pretty fast as you can start arguing if dice impacted or if seeing what another player's actions are made you want to edit.
-- Player asks for an edit after their opponent has started doing combat moves (seeing the opponents moves could influence the edit)
-- Player asks to change their purchase after beginning combat rolls on their turn (dice could impact their purchase decision)
-- Player asks to change a combat move after battle dice were already rolled (dice could impact the decision on attacks)
-- Player asks to change casualty selection after further dice were rolled (further dice could impact their casualty selection)
-
-
@hepps First of all, as a matter of terminology, I think "edit" should just mean anything that you do by using "Edit" mode (so, both your "Edit" and your "Alterations" are Edits, in my book). I think this is how the current nomenclature works, and how most people would intend it, and I suggest keeping that for the meaning of "Edit", being the catch-all term, thus rather finding other words to define its subsectional applications.
A check list is really a good idea, at least over nothing at all, tho I would rather have forcefully same edit rules for a same ToC (and, then, the ToC organizer could refer to the official cecklist, defining it for its tournament).
When I used to play v3, I had the abit, at start game, of telling my opponent to agree with
"No edits except bugs and rules compliance",
but later on I usually expanded to
"No edits except bugs, rules compliance and missclicks".
It looks like people around here that don't play live fail to imagine how frequent missclicks are, when you play live.
Really, this could be easily expanded to comprise also "editing non combat moves, during the same turn, comprising non combat moves made during combat move (meaning only those that, by rules, the engine should not have allowed you to do during Combat Move)".
I didn't use to add that too, because, then, the matter becomes too long, and people can misunderstand what I'm saying, and do more harm than good, thereafter.
Tho missclicks editing means that you have to recreate the whole battle with edit, if it happens in the middle of it, and it may be a somewhat exploitable allowance.But, really, while the proposal has merits, unless you, then, start having an arbiter watching the whole live game, that is still something not competitive, as I could just blatantly lie about what was done or said, and nobody can know what is what (partial exception is that on bots you can get the chatlog).
Another matter is that live games will never be a serious competitive way of playing until a good timer will be made. What is stopping me from taking 2 hours to do each turn, to assure I don't forget anything? If you cannot set a time limit, then live matches cannot be competitive, just friendly.
Not having a timer is, on the other hand, an additional reason for allowing edits, otherwise people could just take a ridiculous amount of time to try to assure they don't need any.
@redrum It would be nice having xml options for adding purchase or placement to a movement phase, normally, but not necessarily, to make you able to purchase while you do combat move and place while you do non combat move (of course, newly placed units should be restricted from moving). But only as an option, so you can retain the current behaviours, or, on the other hand, even having both purchase and placement during non combat move (so, even a same phase doing 3 things together), like in the case of Total World War.
That would also solve those few rules changes that you get by putting combat move before purchase (and have to document in Notes), that would better not having, if the aim wasn't to change the rules of the game, but just making it easier to manage. -
@cernel My issue is that "misclicks" and "bugs" are almost just a vague as "edits". That still leaves way to much up for interpretation IMO. Which is why if you are going to try to reduce "edit" confusion, you need to set more clear boundaries on what/when is valid. Otherwise a player can argue just about anything is a misclick. Given that we can't determine someone's intentions, it should be based on if additional knowledge that wasn't originally available is now available such as dice results or opponents moves made.
-
@redrum I agree, for this proposal. That was just something that I used to do starting a live game; so, you see, I couldn't spam my opponent with rules, but had to keep it short. I have to say that I never really had any such problems tho (about what is a bug and what are rules compliance (practically this applies that if you did an illegal move with air, you can edit it, instead of just losing the game)).
For the matter at hand, you would say "bug edits", and then write down a whole bunch of stuff about what is and what is not an actual "bug edit", of course.
Also don't forget that v3 has Chinese and Americans as "chained" turns; so that should be clarified (meaning threated as a single turn, of course). -
Making a checklist is a good idea. But a couple items that I would disagree with as being harmless edits are below. As well as other suggestions.
-
NCM made during a CM should not be allowed for edit after combat. Reasoning is it is possible the combat rolls influenced the edit request. (although best to disallow Purchase/CM/NCM/Place edits in TOC or competitive play).
-
Really all but one (except misclick) of those alterations in @redrums point 1, can be result of mis-planning. And mis-planning is the what we all are supposed to intrinsically exploit. To allow those edits rewards the sloppy planner and punishes the good planner. This is like giving a handicap imo.
-
Suggest, edits should not be allowed after the player ends their turn. Reason is, that the next player may have already begun in earnest planning. But has not yet made any actions even though it is their turn. So if a player takes 5 or 10min before doing anything, they may have planned and calculated the whole turn already. This is a whole lot of effort to go down the drain if edits are allowed. Also if actions are actually made, that might influence the edit request itself.
-
TOC edits rules should ultimately be decided by the organizer in the official rules. I would recommend the following simple edit rule. All Purchase/CM/NCM/Place are not allowed for edit. Except for an illegal move made by someone with air units and acc. All misclicks, bugs, player enforced type should be allowed for edit. With a caveat of battle misclicks, must be requested immediately.
-
Need an in game feature that allows setting of how many mouse clicks (and or spacebar presses) are actually needed to confirm (on existing buttons) all in game actions for the player. Maybe with a range of 1- 3 clicks available. This could resolve the majority of misclicks, thus eliminate many edit requests. I also would push to resolve the chat spacebar issue in a better way than currently available as well. My feature request link for chat dialogue lock below.
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/644/chat-dialouge-lock-mechanism
-
I agree that a timer would be great for TOC and or competitive play. The only issue I would see is that one side (usually allies) typically requires much more time than the other, to plan, due to multi national coordination and logistical prerequisites. So that needs to allow a generous time limit. If we used a chess style point system, we could use chess clocks with an allotment of time (the amount set by toc rules) for each player to use as they wish.
I am referring primarily to competitive play edit rules. Since in casual play it doesn't matter as much, if at all, thus very lenient with all edits.
Edit: Here's a link to a new feature request for customizable clicks/presses.
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/663/customizable-ui-mouse-clicks-spacebar-presses-for-action-buttons-game-engine-preference -
-
@general_zod I strongly disagree about possibly allowing editing Non Combat Movement, made during the specific phase, while forbidding editing Non Combat Movement made during Combat Movement. That is really the same thing, and anticipating NCM during CM should not be discouraged, as it makes the game faster and easier, thus reducing the need of edits, as well.
In my opinion, such two cases should not even be present as separate choices.
Moreover, for rules compliance, you may be obliged to edit NCM you did during CM (example, in case you moved out of the way a carrier that was not needed to validate air CM, but, then, would be obliged to pick up surviving air, from the original position; thus that anticipated NCM becomes illegal, as you would not be allowed to do it, had you waited the proper phase for it, and have to be edited).
I've no doubt that if making any kind of allowance for editing Non Combat Movement during NCM, then you should keep the same possibility for Non Combat Moves made during Combat Movement, on the same turn (or chained turns).
Being able to decide, thus edit, Non Combat Moves after having seen battle results is the whole point of having NCM after Combat (if this is the case for the particular game).
An argument against what I'm saying may be that allowing editing (during or after NCM) NCM made during CM, that is strictly an illegal practice, would be that, this way, this practice may get abused, in the moment you know that, anyways, you can edit what you did thereafter (so not even a point waiting to do your NCM in the proper phase). -
@cernel To be clear, I've no problems with abusing NCM during CM, as it speeds up the game (and one of the reasons of allowing edits is speeding up the game, as well).
-
A solution would be allowing the engine to recognize and keep in memory NCM done during CM, allowing undoing them during the subsequent NCM phase, practically adding them up to it, like they were actually made in it; again, if that is even feasible, this is stuff for the engine wizards.
-
@general_zod said in A Symposium on rules and terminology:
- I agree that a timer would be great for TOC and or competitive play. The only issue I would see is that one side (usually allies) typically requires much more time than the other, to plan, due to multi national coordination and logistical prerequisites. So that needs to allow a generous time limit. If we used a chess style point system, we could use chess clocks with an allotment of time (the amount set by toc rules) for each player to use as they wish.
Yes, I agree. In the moment you change the rules, you have a different game. Adding a timer is indeed a rules change, so you have a different game, that it is differently balanced from the original one. I think it is more or less the same matter as playing dice or low luck or putting on/off whatever important game options.
People would be just, eventually, expected to bid differently, according to the timer set and their judgment.
However, as long as you don't go GTO, but just set a very manageable time out, intended just to avoid people taking ridiculously long and encouraging them not to be lazy with thinking ahead, then I'm positive there would be minimal balance changes. -
Imo, NCM during CM edit request types can absolutely be affected by combat rolls. Thus if there is a possibility they can, edit should be disallowed in competitive play.
For me casual play can go either way, usually don't mind any edits at all, unless the other guy is really making bold challenge statements.
You are correct that they speed up game, however they are generally bad game practice for the following "edits" reason as well as from game strategy point of view. For instance you should wait to make the NCM till after combat to see what areas need what bolstering etc. If you see the rolls this can be drastically different moves. It will actually improve ones game to wait, imo. And as a side effect reduce edit requests.
Although I do recognize that these moves are the players right to do after combat, there still can be cases where the moves they commit to, can be affected by seeing the combat rolls . They will surely improve their overall games if they simply wait. We will be encouraging bad game practice to allow these edits.
Furthermore echoing @redrum above comment. Making NCM during CM is technically against the rules, thus this will upset a group A&A diehards if we officially allow them.
btw, I did make exception for the air/acc illegal moves, they must be edited to follow rules.
I also make exception to all edits other than the typical purchase/cm/ncm/place mistakes. So bugs, misclicks, game rules edits allowed. Exception battle misclicks must be requested immediately.
Edit: I suppose a softer fringe exception can be made if clicking "done" button to end a phase is immediately requested as a misclick. Thus allowing an edit, however will really muck things up as a whole.And a double or triple click setting (on some existing game actions buttons) would resolve many misclicks unless the guy is click crazy.
Edit: Here's a link to a new feature request for customizable clicks/presses. -
Edit in tourney is usually restricted to bugs only.
Over the course of some years, the edit convention I've come to see as common:
- assume no edits are allowed except for bug fixes
- agree at start of game if there will be a strict-no edit policy (default), or if some edits can be allowed
- request all edits before turning on edit mode
- usually edits that are for moves after any dice rolls are agreed
- edits for actions before the last dice roll are usually not agreed to, but may be agreed in cases of extremely good sportsmanship
Personally, I've wanted to solve this by allowing 'undo' to undo the 'end phase' action and allow you to go back a phase all the way until the last dice was rolled. Most players generally will allow these kinds of edits, the strict-no-edit players are rare, but do exist.
