[DROPPED] Move Order

[Matija]

Why not randomise the order in which players are taking their moves every turn?

I think that would be only fair, since the player that goes first has an advantage in recruiting.

[Natmus]

I have noticed the same thing. One problem is randomised move order in two-player games. The chance for two moves in a row would be great, and this could totally upset games. I know I wouldn't like it.

For 3+ player games, perhaps, but with the rule that no player can have two move-turns immediatly after each other.

The problem is only relevant during recruitment, though. Later in the game a constant move order is better, I think.

[Matija]

Yes, there is that. I should have thought things through. I think it's impossible to vary the order in the way that wouldn't put two moves of one player before the move of the other.

For example, turn 1: 1 2 3

turn 2: 2, 3, 1 - 2 gets two turns before it's 1's turn again.
turn 2: 2, 1, 3 - same situation
turn2: 1, 3, 2 - 3 makes two turns before it's 2's turn again.
And if 3 starts the second turn, he/she gets two turns in a row.

[Ringthane]

For 8 players it dillutes completely, I think...

[Freiegeister]

Letting someone have two turns in a row would be ok if it did not impact the position of any other players.

ie In the first few turns of recruiting before players start crossing paths, or long games where both parties have retrated to rebuild.

The algorithm would for each player character, calculate whether it could move onto a location an enemy character may have moved to if they went first.

An additional buffer could be used to account for inflence the second players move colud have on the first. ie They may be forced to move differently because there is an army near to where they may have moved to if they had their turn in the right order. Of course, this brings us back to the question of who should get to go first and how that affects what you do.

[Ringthane]

Dave, vice-arch-enemy of mine and sci-fi writer extreme ;D

[Matija]

Ringthane said:

For 8 players it dillutes completely, I think...

Say you have n players. As soon as you change the positions of i an j, j has two moves before i moves again. If j was chasing i, he probably caught him.

[Ringthane]

Yes, but that might be a way of emulating real-life unpredictabilities like someone having to take a detour into the woods to send a fax or something... While it is true that 1 to i-1 players will be handicapped by that, it's also true that some horses are faster than others...

[Natmus]

If we sort of all agree that a ficed move order is unavoidable, I may have a suggestion for a slightly different feature, that may solve a bit of the problem.

At present the move order is determined by the player that set up a game. This player has the first move of every turn, and the other players move in the order they were selected in the setup. So the first player can effectively make his/her first move immediatly after the invitaion has been sent out.

Why not randomly determine move order independently of who takes initiative to a game? It's not perfect, but it would correct that small injustice that the person who set up the game _always_ have the first move. And I bet that it is reasonable to implement too

[sparrowhawk]

I'll take a look.