Diplomacy 2.0

by **datapolitical** » Sat Jul 04, 2020 4:55 pm

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑
Sat Dec 01, 2018 9:36 pm
I believe that over Christmas break Kestas is planning to finish his rewrite of the site engine and to add support for api's to permit mobile applications.

Any updates on this?

by **orathaic** » Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:58 pm

No? I'm sure it has been discussed.

Did I mention grey press (where you can send anon messages aswell as non-anon ones), or full black press (where only anon messages are allowed).

I think a combination of Touch 1/2, and black press global chat would be great.

So you can talk non-anonymously with your neighbours, but you can also have a global chat where nobody knows who the messages come from...

That leans more towards full press than towards gunboat, but with some minor limitations...

by **JECE** » Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:06 pm

orathaic: Interesting. I haven't heard of that before.

by **wulfheart** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:09 pm

Thank you, @orathaic. It is definitely planned to implement different modes.

by **orathaic** » Sun Jan 13, 2019 10:17 pm

JECE wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 10, 2019 4:39 am
What is touch diplomacy?

Touch is a variant where you can only communicate with countries where you have units touching their units.

There are a few minor alternative versions, such as touch 1 and 2, where the units are 1 move away or 2.

But it is an interesting variant somewhere between gunboat and full press.

I like the idea of play a game of chaos with touch 1 rules.

by **JECE** » Sun Jan 13, 2019 4:29 pm

wulfheart wrote: ↑
Sun Jan 13, 2019 12:26 pm

JECE wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 10, 2019 4:39 am
What is touch diplomacy?
I'm afraid I don't understand what you are talking about. Please explain further.

No. Read on:

http://webdiplomacy.net/contrib/phpBB3/ ... macy&t=934

by **Kagou** » Sun Jan 13, 2019 2:40 pm

Would there be fixed maps? As well as new ones?

by **wulfheart** » Sun Jan 13, 2019 12:26 pm

JECE wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 10, 2019 4:39 am
What is touch diplomacy?

I'm afraid I don't understand what you are talking about. Please explain further.

by **Yigg** » Thu Jan 10, 2019 6:28 am

I would also like to know more about this "touch diplomacy." And how much do you tip for it?

by **JECE** » Thu Jan 10, 2019 4:39 am

What is touch diplomacy?

by **wulfheart** » Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:13 pm

Claesar wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:52 pm
You misunderstood me
I'm not recruiting a rogue team of developers. Even if I was, I think you should give it a chance instead of killing it with fire but that's just my personal opinion

But we are.

Just kidding. At the end of the day we are all the same: Diplomacy-Lovers

A_Tin_Can wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:13 am
Another advantage to open discussion is that we don't end up developing features that the site wouldn't accept (I've been against adding features just because we can - people who have been around for a while may remember some analysis I did a while back that suggested that the more options we had for games, the fewer games actually got played).

This is a really valuable insight. Would you provide more data?

by **Claesar** » Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:52 pm

A_Tin_Can wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:13 am
...
I think it's really important that people are empowered to be able to work on webdip if they want. And a good way to empower people is to have people collaborating (or at least running a change past others). This is why we have a section of the forum (right here). I think saying "yeah, we have a team, let me PM you" undermines the value of this section of the forum.
...

You misunderstood me

I'm not recruiting a rogue team of developers. Even if I was, I think you should give it a chance instead of killing it with fire but that's just my personal opinion

by **A_Tin_Can** » Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:13 am

So, I've been "looking after" the source for webdiplomacy for a few years now - largely what that means is writing emails to people saying "yeah go ahead, I'd love to have you work on X", and then never hearing from them again.

I think it's really important that people are empowered to be able to work on webdip if they want. And a good way to empower people is to have people collaborating (or at least running a change past others). This is why we have a section of the forum (right here). I think saying "yeah, we have a team, let me PM you" undermines the value of this section of the forum.

Another advantage to open discussion is that we don't end up developing features that the site wouldn't accept (I've been against adding features just because we can - people who have been around for a while may remember some analysis I did a while back that suggested that the more options we had for games, the fewer games actually got played).

This is the reason that we maintain the issue tracker in github - anything sitting open in there is something that we'd definitely like to add at some point.

If you want to add a feature that isn't in the issue tracker, a good place to start is either to open an issue or to discuss it here.

by **A_Tin_Can** » Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:48 am

Claesar wrote: ↑
Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:54 pm

NotInTheFace wrote: ↑
Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:51 pm
I would like to offer my hand as a developer / contributer. Is there a central location I can use to contact others working on the project.
We'd love to welcome you to the team! I'll send you a PM.

Is there some sort of development team that I'm not aware of?

by **orathaic** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 9:51 pm

Cool ATC, it has been a while.

Fog of war and touch would be great additions, IMHO.

by **A_Tin_Can** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 3:57 pm

Pretty sure they're already separate, Orathaic?

by **Peregrine Falcon** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 3:45 pm

orathaic wrote: ↑
Sat Dec 29, 2018 9:47 am
Is it possible to alter the variant system so every map variant has some press options.

Perhaps I misunderstand you, but it is currently possible to change press options for variant games. You can already play Ancient Med gunboats, for example.

As for adding new press variants, I'd say that most of what you listed are pretty niche, compared to what we have. For that reason, I don't see a need to host them here while vDip has them. Fog of War would be super cool to add, but from what I understand, would need to be almost coded from scratch in order to fit.

by **orathaic** » Sat Dec 29, 2018 9:47 am

Just because I was reminded elsewhere.

Is it possible to alter the variant system so every map variant has some press options.

So ancient med with full press/public press/gunboat would be one variant, but with three options.

With a future possibility of adding new press options (like grey and black press, and touch diplomacy), and ultimately also a fog of war option (which is not technically a press option, but map information limitations are like press limitations, in that they don't change the underlying map/movement options, it only limits information which the players have to make decisions about what moves to make...)

Is there a system to separate out these options so they would be available for every map variant?

by **wulfheart** » Sat Dec 22, 2018 8:12 pm

I understand your point. Especially the async/await is really painful BUT I think we have to differentiate between server- and clientside js.

by **flash2015** » Sat Dec 22, 2018 4:45 pm

VillageIdiot wrote: ↑
Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:05 am
There’s nothing wrong with node or JavaScript via modern frameworks. 88% of all websites use JavaScript and many of the top ones utilize Node.js (NetFlix, Uber, eBay). Not sure why anybody would turn their nose up at these options aside from lack of proficient resources.

I have a strong preference for strongly typed languages vs. interpreted languages like javascript...and I have seen enough poorly written javascript code in my time (javascript gives you more than enough rope to hang yourself with) or incompatible code written by multiple teams/companies (I have gone through many mergers) that I don't like to deal with it. And then you have the flavour of the month frameworks (perhaps we are finally getting to stability?). Again there are some great developers out there that do wonders with it, but you want something that is easy to maintain by your bog standard average developer over the longer term.

Javascript also has a lot of limitations to work with a browser (e.g. everything is async, thread limitations). Why in $DIETY name bring over all these limitations to the server when it doesn't add anything other than making simple things harder and more error prone?

Perhaps things like TypeScript make things better and easier to maintain...or using a different compile from language (Dart, closure, GWT etc.).

But this is just my opinion. I am sure you disagree.

Diplomacy 2.0

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0

Re: Diplomacy 2.0