[GL] Game Log 2.0

[Resin8]

I there were more detailed game logs, then someone else might be able to develop and add-on that would show and animated game playback. Knowing how many armies a player moved from one country to another after conquering it (and other tid-bits) would help with this I think. Just my 2 cents...

[ronsizzle]

I there were more detailed game logs, then someone else might be able to develop and add-on that would show and animated game playback. Knowing how many armies a player moved from one country to another after conquering it (and other tid-bits) would help with this I think. Just my 2 cents...

me after then informative spoils cards, how others throw instantly jump on this would view that too.

just my thoughts...

[multilis]

What I have seen done in another turn based strategy game (Battle for Wesnoth):

At end of game a special replay file is created, in a zipped/compressed text format. That file can then be loaded to have a replay of entire game one turn at a time. Any multiplayer game played with "public" setting can be viewed by others later.

[zimmah]

with more detailed logs, it would even be possible to get a grapical replay function which will convert the log to a replay.

sicne the log wil then allready excist, it doesn't even take extra storage, and you have 2 mayor updates in one.

[sherkaner]

I there were more detailed game logs, then someone else might be able to develop and add-on that would show and animated game playback. Knowing how many armies a player moved from one country to another after conquering it (and other tid-bits) would help with this I think. Just my 2 cents...

I don't know, part of it is quite possible with the current log (deployments and a replay of the player locations), but it will be hard to make a good interface for that, which will have to work for both extremely long and short escalating games.

[max is gr8]

Previous Thread, check the to-do list, it may not have everything but it has this.

[GazduRam]

I demand more detailed game logs too.
They are necessary for contracts (agreements).

Currently only "to the floor" attacks are logged which cause occupying: "P1 assaulted A2 from A1 and conquered it from P2".
Only a (very) limited types of contracts are possible. (E.g. "I will not conquer A2 if you will not conquer A1.")

If "weakening" attacks were logged too, then a much wider range of contracts would be possible. E.g. "I will do xx effort if you will do yy effort".

E.g.
"A 7:3 assault from A1(P1) to A2(P2)"
(A1 was owned by P1, A2 was owned by P2, P1 won 7 times (= P2 lost 7 troops), P2 won 3 times (= P1 lost 3 troops).)
(P1 made a "10 troops"-effort.)

[ic]

The log should list all attacks, not just ones where a territory was taken.

Right now you can notice that the number of troops in a territory changed, so some attack obviously occurred and troops were lost, but you have no idea what the attack or attacks were. (Or there was some major bug, but that's a different issue.)

This is a serious enough issue that it could actually alter the strategies being used.

Off the top of my head I can think of two possible implementations of this. One, each assault gets its own line in the log, or two, assaults which didn't result in a territory being taken can be added to the log when a user's turn ends. The first is probably easier to implement and would result in a more verbose log. The second minimizes the log size but still doesn't tell you the order that the assaults took place in.

[ic]

The log should indicate how many troops were lost (on both sides) in a given attack.

[pmchugh]

Im pretty sure this is on the to-do list.

[nagerous]

I don't think this should be implemented as it takes away some of the strategy of memorising what the map looked like - taking away from some of the gameplay.

However, this would be good in freestyle speed games, when reviewing cheating and abuse cases. Back in the day and I'm sure this still takes place, a lot of the top players were rigging eight player escalating games so that certain players would win and 'break records' and this was partly done by slyly attacking enemy stacks so that the user could then sweep and kill everyone and if this feature was implemented, this would prevent this abuse from continuing.. or at least catch the culprits in action.

[fumandomuerte]

That will kill some of the magic of foggy games.

[fumandomuerte]

You can take snapshots of the map with BOB...

[ic]

Im pretty sure this is on the to-do list.

I didn't see it on the list but I could have missed it if the title/description was different enough from what I was expecting.

I don't think this should be implemented as it takes away some of the strategy of memorising what the map looked like - taking away from some of the gameplay.

However, this would be good in freestyle speed games, when reviewing cheating and abuse cases. Back in the day and I'm sure this still takes place, a lot of the top players were rigging eight player escalating games so that certain players would win and 'break records' and this was partly done by slyly attacking enemy stacks so that the user could then sweep and kill everyone and if this feature was implemented, this would prevent this abuse from continuing.. or at least catch the culprits in action.

Even if you consider memorizing the map a strategy, this is still an issue.

The simplest example I can think of right now: Someone has three troops on a territory. They reinforce with three troops on that territory. Surrounding this territory are territories containing one army from all other players. The log says they ended their turn. Your turn is next. You see they have three troops on that territory. The log indicates nothing. They obviously lost three troops attacking. Who did they attack?

The problem becomes progressively worse the more players there are and the more events are separated by turn order.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
EDIT: I checked the todo list again and it is discussed http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=19837 although I'm unclear as to what the final result will be.

[ic]

That will kill some of the magic of foggy games.

It can be masked similarly to the territory names for foggy games (if I understand you correctly).

___________________________________________________________________________________________________
EDIT: I checked the todo list again and it is discussed http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=19837 although I'm unclear as to what the final result will be.

[fumandomuerte]

Even if you do that... In multiplayer games everybody will know if you lost a stack, that will kill feudal, peloponnesian war, poland, and several other maps.

[Irather Nottell]

Then leave fog games the way they are, but in no fog games it would be nice to be able to see what happened while you were gone as if you were there the whole time.

[iamkoolerthanu]

I don't think this should be implemented as it takes away some of the strategy of memorising what the map looked like - taking away from some of the gameplay.

If it is a non-fog game, who ever said that players had to memorize an entire map, times however many games they are playing... I do not really agree with you when you say its part of the game play, and I think this idea should be implemented... CC games are basically interpreting the act of war. You have armies or troops attack and defending against the other 'generals' armies. In a real war, you would know that yellow had attacked you, didn't take the territory, but did take a few troops. It would be properly documented, and you would without a doubt know that you have been under attack, and by whom you were under attack by.

You can take snapshots of the map with BOB...

Taking a snapshot of each game every round and for every game, and then having to review those shots each turn for every game... that would increase the time taken for each game by at least 5 minutes, and most player (including myself) does not have the time or the patience to take that much time on each game... which is why having the log updated would be a great option in my opinion

[Caymanmew]

Concise description:
add in defended territory into game log

Specifics:
when red attacks blue but does not take the territory game log would say
(blue defended reds assaulted on Vancouver) or something along those lines

This will improve the following aspects of the site:
make game log more informing and able you to see who attacked you if your stack goes down to a lower number

[ArkaAP]

Concise description:

• I believe that if the attack failed were logged it would become more easy and "realistic" to understand what other player have done and their general strategy.

Specifics:

• Suppose a plyaer start playing and attack from x to y..as soon as the action change (attack from x to z or from anywhere else to anyhwere else) the log show player nnn attacked province y from x and failed. (or something like that)

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• As it is, I found it difficult to understand what attack other player have tried and failed, this diminish the possibility to understand what player are planning and their general strategy
• Also if a player you are cooperating is expected to do some attacks it can be difficult to understand if he actually tried and failed or simply did not tried.

[Dako]

I think being able to understand what the opponent did is a part of the strategy and that is what differs good players from bad ones.

[AndyDufresne]

I think this idea is included in the infamous 'game log 2.0' suggestion...


--Andy

[sm8900]

I agree with this suggestion. we need some actual record of in-game actions, not just taking of territories.

[ArkaAP]

I think being able to understand what the opponent did is a part of the strategy and that is what differs good players from bad ones.

I think that what you say si correct, but it works with the current system only if you stay all time online...if you can connect only a few time a day,in many player game it is currently almost impossible to really understand what other player did....

[Dako]

I play CC twice a day. And yes, it is possible to see what the other people have done before your turn. Harder for singles games, easier for team games - still possible for both.