View topic - Questions about resigning from game



All times are UTC + 1 hour


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2008, 19:58 
Spring Developer

Joined: 24 Jun 2007, 07:34
Location: 50┬░ 56' N, 11┬░ 35' O
  • Is complete selfdestruction cancelable? Should it be or should it not?

  • "Give everything to" may be suboptimal because each player should decide on his own if he want to take control of the team or not (and it is not given to a player who has his base on the other side of the map). Why not remove the this and make it possible to resign from a game and abandon the current team without exiting game so other players can take control of it?

  • When giving away everything, should luaRules->AllowResourceTransfer be ignored or respected?

  • Currently, units beeing built are not given away. This is bad because you won't become spectator when one of your factory is building something. Is there a reason why not to give them away?

I'm asking because I currently do something like this: http://spring.clan-sy.com/mantis/view.php?id=688


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2008, 20:07 
Game Developer
User avatar

Joined: 25 Jun 2006, 07:44
Location: Germany
I'm sure you mean AllowUnitTransfer. Should be respected IMO, the mod will probably assume no transfer is going to happen. Something the mod stops from being transferred may be something the receiving player isn't allowed to have (e.g. in Fibre I don't allow transferring Citadels because they break stuff if transferred). I'd consider it the duty of the mod maker to prevent a give everything from leaving any units behind (in Fibre the Citadel is destroyed when you do that).

The selfD should be cancellable at least by the mod, some things just shouldn't be destroyed (e.g. control points).

Overall I think it would be worthwile to allow turning yourself into a spectator without any giving or destroying.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2008, 20:35 
Spring Developer

Joined: 08 Oct 2006, 15:58
I do not see the point of implementing #2. If you want to
stop playing but still spec out a game, you tell your allies
and simply let them decide on who best to give your stuff
to. A resign-without-quit option would merely relocate the
time of that discussion, not prevent it.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2008, 21:26 
Moderator

Joined: 22 Aug 2006, 15:19
Units being built allow for parasitic behavior between allies; this should be a game option, just like com ends/continues IMHO.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2008, 22:12 
Spring Developer

Joined: 24 Jun 2007, 07:34
Location: 50┬░ 56' N, 11┬░ 35' O
imbaczek wrote:
Units being built allow for parasitic behavior between allies; this should be a game option, just like com ends/continues IMHO.

Would you please explain? I don't get it...


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2008, 22:41 
Moderator

Joined: 22 Aug 2006, 15:19
Guess was tired, because I can't explain what I was thinking about 8)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Jan 2008, 01:02 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2005, 03:26
Location: St Louis
Units under construction should be transferred, along with all orders. You should not be able to give units to enemies. I would be fine with getting rid of the give everything to option, as this would prevent noobs from giving their units to the wrong person. Also, usually the better players are more observant and hit .take faster, which is better for their team.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Jan 2008, 01:07 
Redacted
User avatar

Joined: 08 Jan 2007, 06:13
Location: Don't be silly. If there's no machine heaven, where do all the toasters go?
imbaczek wrote:
Guess was tired, because I can't explain what I was thinking about 8)

...
Uhh, you meant that, for example, you could start a bertha and give all the cons working on it to an ally, leeching their resources to make it.

That or you went on some kind of insane tangent.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Jan 2008, 15:10 
Game Developer
User avatar

Joined: 25 Jun 2006, 07:44
Location: Germany
In SimBase you can leech by making a construction near allied nanotowers so giving cons isn't THAT farfetched...

EDIT: Wait, doesn't giving a unit set it to wait automatically?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Jan 2008, 16:00 
Spring Developer

Joined: 24 Jun 2007, 07:34
Location: 50┬░ 56' N, 11┬░ 35' O
But when people push the give-everything-button they expect that everything is given and they become spectator after this. So what to do if everything is given away except 1 or 2 units beeing built? (Note: I'm only talking about giving away everything at gameEnd, not unit/ressource-sharing in mid-game)

Same problem exists with selfdestruction. Can AllowSelfDestruct (don't remind exact name) be ignored?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2008, 11:42 
Game Developer
User avatar

Joined: 25 Jun 2006, 07:44
Location: Germany
They should become spectators anyway and the units should be treated as if they had left. After all a give everything won't work with limited units either.

I use canSelfDestruct to mark things that should never be destroyed because they are meant to be captured. If a player self-Ds all his self-Dable buildings the indestructible ones revert to Gaia, waiting for another player to grab them. They must never be removed from the game entirely.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2008, 17:04 
Spring Developer

Joined: 24 Jun 2007, 07:34
Location: 50┬░ 56' N, 11┬░ 35' O
OK, I'm going to respect luaRules (for giving both units and resources) and canSelfD tags. Even if there are units left the player will become spectator afterwards.

Next question: Should selfdestruction and give-everything be ignored when Com-sharing? Would be a good idea in my opinion.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jan 2008, 18:39 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2005, 03:26
Location: St Louis
Auswaschbar wrote:
Next question: Should selfdestruction and give-everything be ignored when Com-sharing? Would be a good idea in my opinion.

Seems reasonable to me, so long as when one comsharer drops it reverts to the normal behavior.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Site layout created by Roflcopter et al.