 |
|
 Feature requestsDo you miss something on BrainKing.com and would you like to see it here? Post your request into this board! If there is a more specific board for the request, (i.e. game rule changes etc) then it should be posted and discussed on that specific board. For further information about Feature Requests, please visit this link on the Brainking.Info site : http://brainking.info/archives/20-About-feature-requests.html You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Knight. Mode: Everyone can post
1. February 2011, 23:28:01 Subject: i say again...  auto-pass for Ludo, *please*? i can't help but think i've already wasted a lot more time dismissing games that i can't move on - to say nothing of all the other players who are doing the same thing - than it would take to implement auto-pass on BrainKing's end. is it a lot more involved than copying and pasting a few lines of code from one of the games that already features auto-pass? if it is, i'll be quiet (i try not to be a complainer as it is). but if it's something that would take five or ten minutes to do, i'd like to ask that it be moved up the priority list and done, so it can be checked off the list once and for all and forgotten. one less thing on the to-do list! woohoo! that would save a lot of players a lot of wasted time and clicking, is all. thanks, Filip! 2. February 2011, 09:18:12 Subject: Re: i say again...  plaintiger: The current model of games is not designed for mutual autopass (both players are unable to move several times in a row, which is very usual in Ludo games). You know, we started with Chess and similar games, and didn't expect to add games of this kind.  However, the new (completely rewritten) game model will cover all different game aspects, including Ludo features. It will be included in the new version of BrainKing.2. February 2011, 10:21:07 Subject: Re: i say again... Modified by rabbitoid (2. February 2011, 10:21:40) Fencer: By the way in chess there's a variant that could conceivably use auto-pass too: anti chess. But I don't think there are a lot of anti-chess players who would like to use that possibility. I certainly wouldn't. 2. February 2011, 10:29:34 Subject: Re: i say again... rabbitoid: Agreed.  2. February 2011, 19:09:24 Subject: Re: i say again...  rabbitoid: I would like very much auto-pass in antichess!! In ludo better!! 2. February 2011, 21:07:36 Subject: Re: i say again... I would really like to see autopass in antichess. It might even push me to start playing it here again. ;-) 3. February 2011, 09:32:04 Subject: Re: i say again... Thad, sacha : actually anti chess is different: it wouldn't exactly be auto-pass, it would be auto-move-the-only-available-option, and I'm sure this would be more much more difficult to code. 3. February 2011, 09:57:51 Subject: Re: i say again... rabbitoid: Actually it's not that difficult because some games are already checking if your opponent can make a move after submitting your move (all checkers variants, for instance). So it would be only modified to "check opponent's moves and if there is only one, insert it to the database" condition. 3. February 2011, 11:04:14 Subject: Re: i say again... Fencer: recursively? Watch it, because there may be positions where both have only one available move. and since your s/w doesn't check repetitions in position you're looking at trouble. 3. February 2011, 11:08:29 Subject: Re: i say again... rabbitoid: Not recursively, just a single pass. I thought the typical situation in Anti Chess was that one player moves a piece and the opponent is forced to capture it, or am I wrong? 3. February 2011, 21:48:30 Subject: Re: i say again... rabbitoid: We can call it whatever you like, rabbitoid, just lemme have it! ;-) 2. February 2011, 19:43:04 Subject: Re: i say again... Most games have certain positions where autopass/automove would be useful. That is, any position where there is only one legal move (including “pass”). I would use it in any game if it were available, it quite simply saves time. I am surprised whenever I see that others disagree. Any chance of an opinion poll on this subject? ;) 2. February 2011, 23:28:18 Subject: Re: i say again... MTC: the only reason i can think of for disagreeing is not wanting a game to "get away from you" in the event of a chain-autopass, such that when you look at it again you don't even recognize it as the same game you last moved on. but even so, i can't see this as justification for not including the *option* of autopass in such games; it would just be a justification for a player who wants to avoid that situation leaving the autopass option unchecked for that game. it seems clear to me that there should be an autopass option for every game in which it could conceivably be used, and whether to enable it or not should be left to the discretion of each individual player. problem solved! 2. February 2011, 23:22:07 Subject: Re: i say again... Fencer: ah, i see. i'm glad to know it'll be in the next version. thanks, Filip! 2. February 2011, 23:29:48 Subject: Re: i say again...  Fencer: "not designed for mutual autopass (both players are unable to move several times in a row)" But as this is not completely impossible in Backgammon as well, this has to be taken care of somehow already now? 2. February 2011, 23:43:10 Subject: Re: i say again... kleineme: No. I will take care of it when it actually happens.  2. February 2011, 00:44:37 Subject: Re: i say again... Bwild: i'll just let this lie until we see how Fencer responds. i trust he'll know an opportunity to build goodwill when he sees it... |
Date and time
Friends online
Favourite boards
Fellowships
Tip of the day
|
|
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved. Back to the top |