Skip to Content
 

Operation definitions

5 replies [Last post]
jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008

In tandem with the "Object Definitions" thread, I thought I'd start a thread for "operations" -- what do we want these objects to do?

Some ideas:

Move piece: You could click on a piece that you want to move, then click a destination spot for it.

Nice embellishments: "Shift-clicking", where you could select multiple pieces to move (for games where this was appropriate).

Associate cards with a deck Before "shuffling" or "dealing" can happen, the program must know which games are in the deck to be handled, and must have the flexibility to use subsets of the full deck. I like RookieDesign's "card pile" object. It seems like dragging a card onto the pile should associate it with that pile.

Shuffle cards Obvious.

Draw a card. Obvious.

Nice embellishments Handle the difference between "draw private" and "draw public". Particularly useful for games that have an element of "draw X, keep Y of those, put the others back". But with "reveal card" and "associate card with a deck", these things could be handled.

Reveal card "Flip" a previously private card over.

Rotate object Appropriate for tiles or "tapped" cards.

Nice embellishment Align objects -- for a tile-laying game, e.g., being able to have the tiles snap to a "grid" would be cute.

Roll die. Obvious.

Nice embellishment With shift-clicking, roll several dice at once.

Just a few ideas, I'm sure others can be added. A model I'd encourage others to adopt is to maintain the distinction between core functionalities without which games cannot be played, and "embellishments" that, while not essential, would make game-playing more user-friendly.

-Jeff

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
Operation definitions

Few quick thoughts:

Component Ownership : Assoicate ownership of a game component to a certain player. This might not be needed, but I was thinking about someone clicking your down card (or up card for that matter) and the card switching states. This could cause chaos, but this is also possible for someone to do in RL, so maybe we can get by without it for now. This could also be used along with the "card pile" idea, so that each player could have their own deck of cards.

Spin Spinner : Obvious, basically the same as a die. but do we also factor in a weighted concept? IE, imagine a spiner with 4 outcomes (A, B, C and D at 25% chance each), but now you want outcome A to have a 50% chance while A B and C are 16.67%, 16.67% and 16.67%. Another issue with a spinner is the "force" at which a player spins, which we dont need to get into for this prototype system.

RookieDesign
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Operation definitions

I like what you wrote jwarrend. Move of these are pretty obvious, but...

I was thinking about using the middle button a lot to help handle the operation.

Left Button - Move or select a component.

Right Button - Contextual menu.

Middle Button - Move down
When you have a bank or card pile, you draw card or money from the object.
On a card or token, change it orientation clockwise.

Middle Button - Move up
When you have a bank or card pile, you put cards or money to the object.
On a card or token, change it orientation counter-clockwise.

Middle Button - Press
On a card flip it.

The middle button isn't available on some Apple computer. Will this cause a problem for many ?

phpbbadmin
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2013
Operation definitions

RookieDesign wrote:

The middle button isn't available on some Apple computer. Will this cause a problem for many ?

Keep in mind that Macs still do not come stock with a mouse that even has a right mouse button, so yes it may be a problem. However, with that being said, if someone want to use the program badly enough, I don't see why they can't go out and purchase a $10 USB mouse with 3 buttons. Not sure how Macs work. Also you plan on implementing this in .Net, does microsoft even provide a .Net framework for Macintosh to run the software?

-Darke

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
Operation definitions

Darkehorse wrote:
Also you plan on implementing this in .Net, does microsoft even provide a .Net framework for Macintosh to run the software?

I guess this brings up a question of how and where is the application run? Will this be a standalone application that will run on my machine and players have other connect to it? Or should the be developed as a site addition so that we can have the games available online and various people can play whenever?

I guess my thought was, a "robust chat program" that allowed for virtual game board and component area and configuration. So up to X people could enter to play (Y to watch) and this would be available online through the site. Maybe as a multi user java program or some such thing.

But I guess where and how this will be run needs to be decided since it will help shape the developement environment.

I know this would add additional work on the admin or whomever, but if we could allow for something online (maybe hand in hand with the GDW) it would be a value add to the site.

Oracle
Offline
Joined: 06/22/2010
Operation definitions

Darkehorse wrote:
Keep in mind that Macs still do not come stock with a mouse that even has a right mouse button, so yes it may be a problem. However, with that being said, if someone want to use the program badly enough, I don't see why they can't go out and purchase a $10 USB mouse with 3 buttons. Not sure how Macs work. Also you plan on implementing this in .Net, does microsoft even provide a .Net framework for Macintosh to run the software?

I use both Macs and PCs. For the mouse, use as many buttons as you want. As you say, you can go out and get a $10 3-button mouse. I don't know why Apple sticks with the 1 button unless it's because they don't want to pay for an extra button.

This is the first I've read that .net is being considered for the project.

.Net is a very bad choice for a lot of reasons, some are a matter of practicality; for example, do we want all the developers to have to buy a fairly expensive development environment?

There's also some tin-foil hat reasons. It looks like MS is going to be moving to "trusted computing" in the next version of windows, which will mean only MS approved software can run. If/when that happens, the only way to run a .net app will be for the developers to pay MS a lot for approval.

Jason

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut