Ggs Cpr

[Nath]

Inspite of the meeting, GGS hasn't seen much activity lately. I suggest anyone still following development posts here by the 6th of March - one week from now - so that we have a list of everyone interested.

[S. Kroeze]

Yes, I am still interested in this project and still hope something can be accomplished. I cannot help with technical problems -I know next to nothing about them- but I think I can be useful because I have quite some experience playing games.

During the last meeting -which was an agreeable experience- the point was raised that designing a computer game is radically different from a board game. I do not believe this at all.
Essentially both are still games!
The main differences being that a computer can make calculations a lot faster and makes it easier to keep some information 'invisible'. Or the information that different players possess on some data can much more easily vary. So essentially we should just try to makes a good game, using the extended possibilities a computer gives us.

I would suggest to concentrate for the moment on the map.
The earth can be imagined to consist of eight equilateral triangles. One such equilateral triangle can be divided in four also equilateral triangles, or sixteen smaller triangles, etc.
Having made a structure of triangles this can be easily modified into hexagons: the most northern tringle becomes part of the north pole; all other triangles can be converted into hexagons or parts of hexagons.
I suggest to start with a rather small map. Would it be possible to program such a structure?

[amjayee]

I'm of course still interested, as I have said earlier. But I do not have any extra time at all, I don't even have time for all the schoolwork I would like to do. So do not count on me for at least two months. On summer I could perhaps do more - unless I get a job. Anyway I should be able to participate on summer at least more than now. The good thing is, though, that since I have been active with my studies, I have learnt many things that will be useful for us. Now I know a lot more of organizing large computer programs and object-oriented design and programming, and I know also a lot about algorithm design, artificial intelligence, neural networks and many such things that will be useful in a computer game. Most importantly, I think it's quite possible to create a good AI opponent, and I will be able to do such a thing (if I get time for that that is). But anyway, I'm still in, but don't expect anything special for some time.

[Maniac]

I keep checking the forums...

[Bereta_Eder]

plz ignore. sorry.

[chrispie]

I'm still very much here.

Some points from S. Kroeze's last post;

the point was raised that designing a computer game is radically different from a board game. I do not believe this at all. Essentially both are still games!

I think this is true only to an extent, yes they are both games - but taken from radically different perspectives. The main point being that a computer of course has a big extra bit, that of the processor who can act as one or more players as well as co-ordinate a much larger amount of data than any human playing on a board game.

The best computer games for me are ones that best potray the charm and straight forward simplicity of a board game mixed with the underlying complexities that only a computer can give.

I would suggest to concentrate for the moment on the map.

I'm gunna stick my neck out here and say that I believe a lot of us programmers here are scared by what we've all percieved that the map should/can be. I'm starting to think that we really need to stick to a relatively simple hex based 2d map - after all I think there are much much more important issues for GGS to cover.

Oh, you are a wise man S. Kroeze, I dearly hope I can chat with you, will you be in attendance at another meeting? Hopefully I'll be at most meetings from now on.

Great to see a post here from amjayee, all we need now (well in combination of what I've seen here and on the email list) are Leland, Joker and Elmo (yeah, bring elmo's graphics back!!), anyone I've missed???

[RonHiler]

Errrr, are you guys done? This appears to have become more of a Diplomacy playing forum than a game design forum. Tell me it isn't so!

[Nath]

It certainly appears to be dead, but hopefully it'll randomly come back to life as usual. It did the same sort of thing last year.

[amjayee]

GGS isn't dead as long as there is at least one individual interested in carrying on. And GGS isn't dead at least for me. It's just hibernating. I should have time and enthusiasm to continue the project on summer, we'll see. But we are not done yet!

[Jon Shafer]

I'm willing to help out if anyone is interested. I might not be able to do all that much at present (which seems to be the norm at this moment), but in a couple weeks I can start doing a lot, if anyone is going to start work again.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by RonHiler
Errrr, are you guys done? This appears to have become more of a Diplomacy playing forum than a game design forum. Tell me it isn't so!

Yeah so? If Velocyrix gets his personal fan forum, why shouldn't we!?!

[S. Kroeze]

Here is a previous post about the structure of the map, that -at least in my view- was of some use. Unfortunately it was hardly noticed.
That is the reason why I bring it to attention again.

Originally posted by S. Kroeze
I would suggest to concentrate for the moment on the map.
The earth can be imagined to consist of eight equilateral triangles. One such equilateral triangle can be divided into four also equilateral triangles, or sixteen smaller triangles, etc.
Having made a structure of triangles this can be easily modified into hexagons: the most northern triangle becomes part of the north pole; all other triangles can be converted into hexagons or parts of hexagons.
I suggest to start with a rather small map. Would it be possible to program such a structure?