| View previous topic :: View next topic | 
	
	
		| Author | Message | 
	
		| ginolard 
 
 
 Joined: 08 Apr 05
 Posts: 1
 
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:42 am    Post subject: Automating income action? |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| I know there has been some resistance to automating actions on here but why cannot SOME actions be automated? 
 For example, is there any reason why players HAVE to "click to receive income" if they don't have an "8 Gold" or "Harvest Increase" card.  If there's no way for them to change their income, what's the point of waiting for a player to interact with the game?  Just give them the gold and move on to the next player.
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Knave 
 
  
 Joined: 28 Jun 08
 Posts: 258
 
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:00 am    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| I think the reasoning was that some people may not want their opponents to know that they have a card (that they elected not to use) to change their income. 
 There is a way around that of course, make the income phase simultaneous, I forget if there were any objections to that.
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Darius van Duyn 
 
  
 Joined: 03 Jan 06
 Posts: 32
 
 Location: Prague, Czech republic
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:22 am    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| Income phase is makin me go berserk as I always see those guys in front of me with Dakhla playing 8gold cards, but when I had Dakhla, I didnīt have 8gold for ages.....  |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Carmilla 
 
  
 Joined: 13 Jul 08
 Posts: 70
 
 Location: Brooklyn, NY
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:05 am    Post subject: Automating income action? |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| 8 gold -- I'd almost forgotten those existed ...   
 To my surprise, I had a situation recently where simultaneous income might have made a difference.  I was debating whether to use Harvest Increase in that round (where it would have had marginal benefit), or saving it for a later round, when it might have had more.  Since I was last that round, it actually helped to see what my neighbors did before I committed myself.
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| gische 
 
 
 Joined: 12 Oct 05
 Posts: 186
 
 Location: San Carlos, CA
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:32 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| I would envision a simultaneous income phase where anyone other than the first player could click a "wait for the players before me to act" button, which would remove the active marker for that player until it was properly their turn.  In that manner, we could handle the case where it matters while accelerating the game for the majority of the times when it doesn't. |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Dobinator 
 
 
 Joined: 18 Jul 07
 Posts: 383
 
 Location: North Carolina, USA
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:12 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| Unless two people clicked it, in which case the space-time continuum rifts. |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| gische 
 
 
 Joined: 12 Oct 05
 Posts: 186
 
 Location: San Carlos, CA
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 12:20 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				|  	  | Dobinator wrote: |  	  | Unless two people clicked it, in which case the space-time continuum rifts. | 
 
 Not at all.  If P3 and P5 both clicked the "wait button" then P2 would get activated after P1 and P2 acted, and P5 wouldn't get activated until after ALL other players have acted.
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Montu 
 
  
 Joined: 14 Nov 05
 Posts: 36
 
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 12:36 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				|  	  | stud wrote: |  	  | I think the reasoning was that some people may not want their opponents to know that they have a card (that they elected not to use) to change their income. | 
 
 But that's not the situation being described here.  The situation here is that a player has *no* income cards at all.  I don't see how knowing that the player has no income cards could provide a strategic advantage to opponents.  If a player has 4 total cards and his/her income phase is automated (i.e. he/she has no income cards), what does that tell me?  That player could have "Change the Offering" cards, bidding cards, building cards, free farmers, or power cards.  What did I learn?
 
 Not automating events for which no player decision can be made makes no sense to me.
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| HighwayStar 
 
 
 Joined: 09 Apr 04
 Posts: 69
 
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 1:05 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| Why not add a checkbox to the top of each player's screen that says "Auto play income phase" (or something similar). If the player checks this box, their income phase is automated if they don't have an income card. This checkbox is always reset to unchecked after each income phase resolution to ensure that no player accidentally lets it stay checked. This means skipping each income phase is a positive choice by each player and can't be done by accident. Therefore, I see no downside to this solution other than it takes somebody some time to program... |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| freduk 
 
  
 Joined: 18 Jan 06
 Posts: 433
 
 Location: Bristol, UK
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:57 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| My 2-penneth... firstly, any game automation should only be done when it reveals no information about a player's hand. In this case, only when that player has no cards, not simply when they have no applicable cards.
 Secondly, and more importantly, I'd much rather see a new game, than very minor improvements to an existing game. I can live with having to wait for other players to collect income, if that meant another game was to arrive sooner.
 
 Not every player on this site feels the need to rush games through in the shortest possible time.
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Knave 
 
  
 Joined: 28 Jun 08
 Posts: 258
 
 
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:22 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				|  	  | freduk wrote: |  	  | Secondly, and more importantly, I'd much rather see a new game, than very minor improvements to an existing game. | 
 
 This seems to be a standard response from many people.
 
 Person #1:  I propose [wonderful idea]
 Stargate/Rseulow/Freduk:  I would rather have a new game
 
 It implies a false dichotomy, that the choice is between a new game and the improvement.  I have seen many wonderful improvements to the games while I have been here, and I don't believe that had those improvements not been made, we would be looking at a 9th game.
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| stargate 
 
  
 Joined: 09 Dec 04
 Posts: 603
 
 Location: North Attleboro, Ma    USA
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:29 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| my 2 cents I agree with freduk 100 %
 including his small font comment
   
 I would add >> that  a redo feature added  to the "Buy Resources" phase
 would be the FIX most of us would like to see
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Bkruppa 
 
 
 Joined: 08 Nov 05
 Posts: 241
 
 Location: Fremont, Ca, USA
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:49 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| I must say that its comforting to see how little the discussions have changed in the years I have been on here.  I'm fairly sure that this same discussion was the same one that I first read, and ironically, Stargate "guided" me the same way he did today. _________________
 Cry havoc, and slip the dogs of war!
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| t_o_m9 
 
  
 Joined: 14 Apr 06
 Posts: 318
 
 Location: Lakeville, MN
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 4:34 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| Many times I have 8 gold and chose not to play it, waiting for another round.  Likewise with harvest increase, and then saving it for later.  I see far more errors coming from autoplaying cards.  Likewise, money at the end of the game is alot of points and knowing if someone else doesn't have a card in a big advantage. |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Rebelslayer 
 
 
 Joined: 17 Jan 06
 Posts: 298
 
 Location: Adelaide, Australia
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:11 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| Can I get my name added to the Stargate Freduk etc list??? 
 Its a bit sad to have to admit I even agree with him about the fix buying resorces ... my first 100 games = no mistakes ... in the last dozen I have killed 2 games ... one 4 farmers instead of 0, the other 5 instead of 0 !!!!!
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		|  |