"Computer Aids Devolpement." Topic

We need more of this. Anybody currently working on any projects?

Er, yes. What?

?? Do you mean CAD Computer aided design?
Or perhaps 3D modelling?
Why do we need more of it?

Computer Based Game Aids

In most cases the input out weighs the preceived output

I did a couple back in the 80s -- WWII surface naval actions, and what started out as a Napoleonics program but ended up going 1702-1902. They worked pretty well in concept; in application, they really moved the game along and introduced fog of war by reporting data in words, not numbers or stats. And weapons ranges were somewhat flexible too, so no standing at the limit of range and blazing away with no fear of being hit in return. The problem wasn't that input took a long time but rather that players wanted to roll their own dice, input the dice results, and have the computer calculate the effects (which included ammunition expenditure, fatigue, casualties, etc.). So, I eventually dropped the project.

Since then, I've done only several more (Windows-based instead of DOS) -- for sailing ships, design tools for GZG games, combat resolution tools (especially for Dirtside). But the same underlying problem persists -- players want to roll their own dice and track their own information. They're just flat not happy when can't see exactly how many rowers became casualties in the last shearing attack, or how much ammo is left for the 9-pdrs, and so on.

I've come to the conclusion that players like the minutiae. Using the computer to assist removes the visibility of minutiae (unless you request a report) while still tracking it. It allows players to focus on decision-making and provides sufficient information for them to make intelligent decisions (there are several Fog of War levels). So, it moves the game along very quickly. But, it seems, even in the 21st Century, players still are entranced by the minutiae, so the program (and enhancements) languish on the back burner.

Jizbrand is correct in his assessment about the underlying problem with a specific segment of players…they want to roll their own dice and keep track of things that a real battlefield commnader would have no knowledge of…in answer to the original question, computer based games, there are several on the market. I use Carnage and Glory for a variety of period, AWI, Napoleonics, GNW and ACW.

db

I've made a number of spreadsheets to streamline calculations, vehicle design, etc. That's about it, though.

I use random number driven spreadsheets for army creation in Piquet. It saves hours of prep time!

It might be useful for wargames that need a GM or umpire or even solo games

Thee are drawbacks, the time spent inputting the positions can interrupt the flow of play

I've come to the conclusion that players like the minutiae.

I think the main problem is that the game mechanics are hidden in a computer moderated game

In most computer games the computer peeks at the other players positions and the options are limited to produce the outcome the level designer wants

Many things to respond to.

Rolling the bones: I know many want the dice in hand so while more complicated for me to program, I have decided to provide the option for either computer generated numbers or user input from actual dice.

I am convinced of the utility of computer assists. I think they would greatly help deflect some of the complaints about playing time, learning curve, record keeping and Fog of war. It is possible and I think will get easier to create programs that can provide fog of war on a miniatures table.

It would be intrested to know from those currently working on a computer assiist what there trying to accomplish with it and what computer programing language they are using.

I investigated many and settled on learning the Visual Basic family primarily cause I found the most self help books on them and it came with a GUI. I am though, having a time with Object orientated programing. Though I read that older procedural or imperative programing would be to difficult maintain and produce bugs. I am beginning to disbelieve that. I think IF I could have my Color Basic back I could have this done already.

Se the part about wanting to track statistics is frustrating cause many players claim they don't like book keeping. But many that say that complain about a computer doing it too. I understand you cant please everyone but why do so many directly contradict themselves? This is one of many issues where I have heard somebody complain about a problem and complain about a good solution also.

Supergrover: people who complain about the book-keeping actually secretly like it. Those who don't like book-keeping already play rules which have none. ;-)

I'm serious. Most rules now don't have complicated systems that require much memory, so there is no point in automating them. Think FoW or BKC, say. The systems that do still require complicated assessments are strictly for rivet counters, and removing the sense of knowing what is going on will spoil the game for them, regardless of how annoying the details are to figure out.

I have considered computer assisted rules -- I have the programming to do it -- but rejected it for three reasons.

1. Entering the data is a bore and more work than just figuring out the game frankly. This applies to both the pre-game work entering all the units present and their status and the during-game stuff of what happens to them.

2. It is inflexible. Sometimes I like to break the rules to reflect reality better. Good luck with that in a computer!

3. By the time you finally write the rules the system you use will be out-dated. Both computer and gaming. I wrote a whole bunch of automated army lists, only to find the lists changed and the rules changed! You'll just be getting to be handy with Visual Basic when it becomes superceded.

I am convinced of its utility. If veteran war gamers wont use it. It will invite a breed of new players that wouldn't have played previously. The people contradicting themselves is weird and frustrating, but ultimately I will take the advice Ive gotten before and just do it anyway.

PC obsolescence is annoying and quick. But VB has been around a long time in different forms and it will deploy to PC's for some time to come. Conversion to other languages will be a pain but I will overcome it when its needed..

You'll never convert miniatures to be a PC game though many keep trying. But with a wargame assist you can deflect the complaints about time and complexity. Some you'll never please no matter what. I think there's a group that talk about miniatures but really don't play anything but PC's they are the ones that want a PC minis game I think. Alot of others I feel are really looking in the wrong place and should be playing RPG's

But automating basic miniatures game that came with some charts and moderate rules that will work fine.

Been down this road many times, been writing computer-assist wargame programs since 1982.

I'm a big fan of the concept, but there are many gamers who don't like the idea and will not enjoy it, for all the reasons listed above.

Based on my experience, there are several big advantages to using computer-assist wargames:

* It's great for solo play.
* It allows you to do larger battles than you could with standard rules at a similar level of detail.
* It generally plays much faster.
* It discourages cheating.

As an example of the first three, I frequently use the example of being able to play large naval battles like Tsushima (56 ships) or Jutland (72 ships, BB-BC-CA) in 4 to 6 hours, even solo.

On the other hand, the disadvantages are summed up nicely by Mark Plant above: many of the gamers who are looking for the quicker-faster-easier advantages have already found standard rules that are less detailed and give the same advantages without the added burden of using a computer. Many of the rivet-counters, the gamers who most appreciate the added level of detail, don't like not having all that detail at their fingertips.

Oh, to answer the original question:

I'm currently working on a computer-assist WWII ruleset. This particular package is a nostalgia project for me, so I'm programming it in GW Basic and Turbo Basic in MS-DOS. In all likelihood the last major project I do for DOS.

Also on the semi-backburner I'm slowly working on updating the D-CATR Naval package, the latest version of the Shipbase series of naval miniatures rules. It's coded in Visual Basic in Windows. This project sat idle for nearly 10 years so progress is very slow.

It will invite a breed of new players that wouldn't have played previously.

Most new gamers prefer the easy rules and speed of play, just read the posts on TMP

I don't think that the kind of programmes used to automate wargame rules would put a strain on a PC
It would not be as graphically intense as a 3D first person shooter

Yes there are many programming languages out there
Each has its own advantage Java for instance can be used even on hand-held devices

OOP (Object Orientated Programming) should make things easier, as you tend to think about the way things are done breaking them down into easily programmed objects.
Objects are reusable so if you create a Superclass Dice you can easily make sub classes for D6, D20 D100

You can read others code and see how they have done things

From a practical point of view you either have to have one player who likes to umpire (Rare)

1 computer and a player from each side to takes turns updating the moves (Only really good for IGUG)

The game is limited by the battery life on the laptop if no power points are available

You may find these sites of interest
Pygame
pygame.org/news.html

A* algorithm tutorial
link

Allegro
alleg.sourceforge.net/docs.html

Amit's Game Programming Information
link

A list of good links
link

Other people who hade done a similar thing to what you intend:

Racing Spider
racingspidergames.com/devBlog

TMP own computer moderated games board
TMP link

computer strategies
link

rhino software
link

Army builder
link

I am convinced of its utility. If veteran war gamers wont use it. It will invite a breed of new players that wouldn't have played previously.

There are two attitudes to human nature -- work with it, or work against it. Working against it doesn't get good results. People cannot be changed in their basic nature.

No amount of you being convinced about something will make people behave even slightly differently. Your "ideal" system will only be ideal to you if it ignores this.

If you want to make computer moderation work, then you have to accept what people are like and work with it.

There are even some of us old Napoleonic figure gamers who for various reasons do the whole shooting match on a computer screen these days. True its not the same without the lovingly painted miniatures but its fast, pretty accurate within the confines of the program and it allows us to play anytime against opponents anywhere in the world ( time zones permitting ). There are even some who may argue that when actions are played 'in real time' it adds a great deal of authenticity and requires some fairly rapid decision making.

s15.invisionfree.com/ntw1revival

Thanks for the links.

I am having a hard time with OOP programing I had heard that Turbo Basic could be distributed to windows. Maybe that may be a more logical leap from my old TRS 80 Color Basic.

Hah! That's funny. I started with TRS80 Color Basic too, back in 1982. I wrote my first couple of computer-assist wargame programs in Color Basic.

It's an easy transition from Color Basic to GW Basic but it's a little bit of a leap to go from there to Turbo Basic.

Visual Basic and OOP (Object Oriented Programming for you folks following along at home) is another bowl of wax entirely. It's pretty much like starting over from scratch.

Incidentally, all my old GW Basic and Turbo Basic programs still run in Windows XP. I run it in a DOS window but you might need to use DosBox.

Have a look at this free book

Thinking in Java It is a good start
codeguru.com/java/tij

Have a look at something easy at first like a dice programme
you will need to use something like this in you computer aided wargame

Here
link
or here
link

I had heard that Turbo Basic could be distributed to windows

So long as you're distributing an executable, not an interpreted script, and the code is not dependent upon machine interrupts, the executable should work fine on the same class of operating system (i.e., a DOS-based program will work in a Windows DOS-window). A VB program compiled under Windows will continue to work under the same restrictions.

Now, porting something from a PC to a Mac is a whole different ball of wax (or to Linux, for that matter).

I agree rather strongly with all that Mark Plant has said. GAPs are to my mind a silly thing. There is seldom sufficient trustworthy historical data available to justify highly-detailed rules, but even when there is, good game design (and good simulation modelling) consists in simplifying the detail, not hiding it in a humming electric beige box.

Aristotle didn't cover it in his theatrical unities, but it seems to me that in any wargame the authoritative representation of the simulated world must exist either entirely on the tabletop, or entirely in the computer. Attempting to split it between the two results in a lot of clerical data entry work. I want to play being a General, not a data-entry clerk; computers are supposed to relieve people of work, not make more for them (amazing how few people in computing get this).

Having said all that, the very first program I ever had compiled, in 1976 (not the first I wrote, I started in BASIC, but computers weren't easy to get hold of in 1968) was an implemetation, in Algol-60, of a combat results procedure based on that from SPI's "Tank!" boardgame. I think I still have the punched cards lying around somewhere. It didn't take long to realise that this was a lot more trouble than it was worth.

A vastly more sensible use of the computer is in the preparation of rules, particularly combat results tables, and (paper or card) game aids. As an example, a pal of mine, many years ago, wrote a set of WW2 armour & infantry rules that stole quite a lot of the good ideas from SPI's "Firefight". The combat results tables, of which there were dozens, simply showed the attack rating of a particular weapon at a series of ranges -- against a bunch of different armour classes if it was an ATk weapon. The attack rating, suitably modified for circumstances, gave one a line to roll on using the appropriate (hard or soft target) CRT, and 2d6 quickly produced the result. Assigning the ratings, though, that required a good deal of personal judgement. So, in desultory fashion, I have been working towards automating the production of these CRTs, especially the anti-armour ones. I have a P(hit) calculator, and an implemetation of James Dehn's armour penetration formula, and most recently I have been beating my brain against the vexed question of trajectory modelling (about which a frightening amount of nonsense is available on the internet). I have tried using Cronander's values for cubic splines decribing the Gavre G1 and G7 drag curves. The G1 seemed to work, but when tested did not produce a very good approximation to the official 1918 fleet range table for the 9.2" gun (which ought to have a form factor of 1.0, given that it's a square-tailed 2 c.r.h. projectile). The G7 didn't work at all, having a mysterious discontinuity in the middle of the drag curve. Having also determined that fourth-order Runge-Kutta approximations are a total waste of time for trajectory modelling, I now intend to use a simple point-mass trajectory model with linear interpolation between the points I have for the Gavre drag curves. If I can find or estimate form factors and muzzle dispersions for projectiles, I can get the trajectory shape and hence P(hit), and then apply Dehn's penetration formula to find penetration. A pal of mine tells me he has found a very close formulaic approximation to the P(kill) curve in Shepherd, Hartley, Heysman, Thorpe and Bathe that I mentioned in another thread. So, at the end of all this, it will be possible to estimate an SSKP for a given set of shot conditions, and convert this to the single rating our simple 2d6 CRT requires.

Similar, if simpler, approaches can obviously be taken to estimating the effects of various quantities of small-arms or artillery fire. All the staggering tedium of calculation will have been done long before the game starts, and the results melted down into a small, simple table.

I've just taken delivery of my eagerly-awaited copy of "Birds of Prey", and have been struck by the very clever use of nomograms in the rules. For a peek at what this means, visit

projectrho.com/nomogram

Now, this seems an excellent scheme to me -- don't make the players muck about with a PC when they want to be playing a tabletop game, but, instead, give them single-purpose paper computers in the form of nomograms which can be used simply by applying a straght-edge (sorry, "isopleth").

What's more, if you program in Python, there exists a package to help you produce your own nomograms, called PyNomo, which I intend to download and play with when time allows:

link

I am wondering how hard it will be to produce a P(hit) nomogram, given that it seems to require at least a five-stage calculation.

Incidentally, I would strongly recommend Python as a programming language for most personal programming, as it is

1. Free and open-source
2. Available for PC, Mac or Unix
3. Supported by a mass of useful packages
4. Properly object-oriented (supports genericity and multiple inheritance)
5. Dynamically typed
6. Well-documented and well-behaved
7. Full of Monty Python references

All the best,

John.

GAPs are to my mind a silly thing. There is seldom sufficient trustworthy historical data available to justify highly-detailed rules, but even when there is, good game design (and good simulation modelling) consists in simplifying the detail, not hiding it in a humming electric beige box.

I agree with your reasoning, except for one very important thing:

I like computer-assist wargaming.

I like to play them (the ones I write, anyway), I really like to write them, and I don't even mind the data entry. It's sort of calming, actually.

Case in point: somewhere on my very long "things I'd like to do someday" list, I'd like to get into SPI's very old board wargame "Air War". Nobody else in their right mind would touch the thing. Neither would I without a computer. Given the spare time, I'd like to write a program for it, key in all the data (there's not that much of it, compared to some of the other projects I've done over the past 27 years) and poke at it for a bit. I doubt if anyone else would be interested in playing it even after I'd written a program to do all the grunt work, so it'd be a perfect solo project.

I wouldn't call it "accurate", but I'd probably have fun doing it. Isn't that the whole point of it all?

I should also probably add that there are, although admittedly not as many as I'd like, other gamers who enjoy playing computer-assist wargames too.

Having moved around a number of times in recent decades and consequently having been a member of several different game groups, I'd even go so far as to say that I've been in game groups that enjoyed computer-assist wargames and others that clearly didn't.

Throw in my own experience producing and selling a set of commercial computer-assist rules ("Shipbase III", published back in 1993) and getting feedback from customers and players since, I feel comfortable in saying that yes, there are some gamers out there who do like that sort of thing.

Also based on that business experience, I'd have to agree that the number of gamers that don't like that sort of thing outnumber the ones that do by a large number, but I'd rather not guess at the proportions.

Well.. sure hell is easy to find discouragement opposed to encouragement. With the ever present complaints about time and complexity I think its silly not to look at using these programs. The people that complain about inputting clicking a few buttons well then they better wait for a PC game you can move with your mind or go back to watching movies. A mosue is input, typing your player name is input any intercation with the computer is input.

Wargames are about thinking, don't want to think? get a PlayStation. Sorry but the frustraion of constant complaints about problems and then complaints about solutions has stripped some restraint from me. Hell complaints about everything in wargamoing. I think a large amount of complainants about the complexity and over detail aren't about the rules but about a far to common class of wargamer that is just to damn persnickety about everything.

What do women want? hell a easy question to answer compared to what wargamers want.

FACT: there are plenty interested in using wargame assists

FACT: They are a sensible and usable solution to certain problems with wargaming.

Just like a rules the design has to be good. And just like rules some of the more unreasonable complaints and demands must be ignored if your going to proceed.

What I am looking for is those with experience in programing and developing these things, Id like to discuss methods and tools to create them. Specifically, using Data bases or other Data structures, and non OOP programing that if for no other reason then my age, makes more sense to me and would be easier to use for me.

I already have a To hit and penetration system in VB.net. The code works but it would considered poorly organized and written. Even after not touching a COCO in 20 years or more I can envision, with the the help of Tankbase code, at least a portion of what I want in old COLOR basic. I need to be able to get at least GW basic knowledge so I can make the thing usable on a modern PC.

even with not knowing that much programing. I know enough about technological development in general that overcoming any reasonable demand or complaint is possible with programing a computer. I remember when I bought my first Pentium machine and there was a article that personal PC's of the time had exceeded the computing power that was used to control the trip to the moon. Computers helped us to the moon in 1969 they can help us play a game in 2009. Solving this a minor game issue WILL work. Will there be some that will complain about its use and design no mater what? Sure there always is with anything in wargaming. That doesn't negate it as a viable tool.

Sorry if this is a bit intense. I usually try to heavily restrain my comments but the immense negativity is really getting frustrating.

When presenting a product sure you have to listen to what the potential customer wants but when the customer's demands are so unreasonable to be ludicrous, well then you'll have to just throw up your hands to that specific customer and say I cant help you. But the fact those unreasonable demands aren't meant doesn't in any way mean it isn't a useful product many will want.

Say it was cars being sold. Want a car with four doors instead of two, no problem. want a car with leather interior instead of cloth, no problem. want a car that has a manual transmission but you don't have to shift and is a two seater that you can put an adult and child passenger in at the same time Uhh…sorry cant help you. You wont please everybody with anything. Some though you wont please with anything. The frustration is that sometimes those that refuse to be pleased present themselves as actually in the market for your type of product. You can end up chasing you tail trying to sell to somebody that really had no intention of buying no matter what you present to them even though that acted as if interested in the product. I am getting better at spotting these people but still need to improve so I don't waste my time.

And some customers just aren't looking in the right place. A person says they want a computer assist that doesn't require any user input. What They really want is PC game. Not a miniatures game.

If a person wants a wargame that requires no data for the player to know and no paper rules or charts at all. Then I recommend the laser engagement systems that come with some RC tanks. Not a miniatures game.

If a persons wants a game that plays out like they are a character in a movie plot then they really want an RPG can have war themes they aren't all D&D. I think some don't look at RPG as an option because of the stereotype associated with D&D type players.

For those that just want to have charts and to hit type mechanics that are "self calculating" then they want a Calculator or computer assist.

If none of that works for a person. It might be time for a new hobby. clearly they are very discontent with this one and some seemingly intent on being so no matter what solutions or products are provided to them.

ON the positive side. Thanks for more links. Every bit helps. What I have in VB.net is a dice program, and a to hit with modifiers that can be chosen when applicable. The next is getting the option for manual input of a die result. But I think GW basic is a good switch. My problem with that to lean though is GUI programing for it. As far as OOP I understand the modular concept and the implied advantage of reusable code but so far not convinced it reacquires less lines of code. And for me personally, its not easier to understand.

Then the database thing. Hooking a access database up to VB was overwhelming. SQl would be a whole another language to learn for a novice. And there is my inherent distrust of the reliability of anything Microsoft. I know many forms of BASIC are MS but even with that I am wary of Gates products. Two words that are never accurate in anything PC is quick and easy.

And thanks for more links. More information can always help.

when the customer's demands are so unreasonable to be ludicrous, well then you'll have to just throw up your hands to that specific customer and say I cant help you

I am glad you are enthusiastic, but you seem to be doing market research and then condemming the answers because you don't like then.

There are many rule writers on this board, they ask what the members want and find away of giving it to them.

They do not say you the customer are wrong!

PC's of the time had exceeded the computing power that was used to control the trip to the moon.

You may be interested to know that Niel Armstrong wasn't a big fan of the computer, He could often perform calculations using a slide rule fasted than the onboard computer!
If there was a difference between his result and the computer's he would say "I'll beleive half of it, not all of it!"

A person says they want a computer assist that doesn't require any user input. What They really want is PC game.

Um, most PC computer games don' play all by them selves, they do require input!

If none of that works for a person. It might be time for a new hobby. clearly they are very discontent with this one.

They already have a hobby, its called wargaming!

There are other problems with what you propose.

Copyright – if you are implimenting some one elses rules in your program then you may need their permission

Licence – is you assist going to be free?

How will you lock your database against unauthorised changes?
Computer asists are not transparent, it there is only one PC then the other side has no way of verifying the result.
(With paper rules often each side has a set or they can check the original used in the game)

In British wargaming the meets are often in Pubs of curch halls so someone has to lug a laptop as well as everything else!

Well there is Dark basic, that is non Microsoft and has been goimg since the Amiga days!

As for GUI have a look at PYGAME (That is PYTHON with extra game libraries)
pygame.org/tags/libraries
It has GUI ready to use
linking PYTHON to SQL
link
a lot of python links
link
You should be able to link PYTHON to a flat file rather than a databsae this may be easier for you?

I am glad you are enthusiastic, but you seem to be doing market research and then condemming the answers because you don't like then.

not it all. I am voicing frustration at unreasonable demands and criticism just for the sake criticizing. Some guys just enjoy knocking down other guys sand castles. I am not spceifying that its here on this thread. I have had lots of that sort of thing on different forums. I have been working on this on and off for a couple of years.

Um, most PC computer games don' play all by them selves, they do require input!

EXACTLY! so when somebody says I don't want to have to type anything in to the program they are asking for something unreasonable. IE "I want a manual transmission that shifts itself" It seems they are purposefully trying to get a designer to run in circles to accomplish something they know cant be done under the guise of interested potential customer. Very frustrating when you talk to people looking for feedback and then waste time getting to this point where you realize that the person isn't interested at all and is just jerking you around. It happened to me allot on all sorts of forums. And I just laugh when somebody claims its somehow something Ive said. I don't know the reasons for it I suspect some get a kick out of it. I think also when somebody doesn't want to see a trend in a direction they try to stifle it with negativity. But that's just my theory. Al I know for sure is it happens.

They already have a hobby, its called wargaming!

But some do NOTING but complain so clearly they need a new one as they are discontent with everything in wargaming.

How will you lock your database against unauthorized changes?

one of the questions i intended to ask developers of similar assists as I do not know. Reading about Access, Microsoft of course says theirs is secure, practically everyone else disagrees that it is.

As far as the legal side of things I have no problems with that. I have an attorney to advise me on that.

Now the last things. Transparency. Is cheating really that big an issue? If it is perhaps playing with some more trustworthy players is a more reasonable solution. Its something I never thought to be a problem and am frankly not inclined to address. I just am not convinced it is that big an issue. If it is, then wargaming is in real trouble.

Weight of a Laptop: less then 10 pounds. How much do your miniatures way? Some new laptops are 5 or less. I cant help anybody with that. If you cant lift 10 pounds, perhaps you can get some help? I don't want to be insensitive to any handicaps but I am sure there's a way to overcome that very minor obstacle. Even for the handicapped.

Not to mention mobile computing devices are capable of doing the same thing. That would be a project after I get more comfortable with programing. Ive seen assists on PDA's before. Somewhere here on TMP there's a thread about die rollers on a cell phones.

If weight really would be a factor for a healthy human then a reasonable conclusion is that person is really not interested in the idea anyway.

On to Python. I only know what I read and clearly it may be inaccurate information. But I didnt explore python much because of several articles claiming the "bootstraping" was issue for some and that it would require some repackaging for an update. *shrugs* I sorta know what they are talking about.

I don't know SQL but was told it was better then access with VB and I should learn it. I think it may be beyond my ability though. I did explore XML as a data source but when it came to hooking it up to VB.net I got lost.

a flat file? Like a text file or XML?

Thanks for all your help and all the links. Maybe I have been looking in the wrong direction as far as language to use.

Yes a flat file is just text, the information is often delimited by a symbol. You may have heard of csv (comma separated values) Just think of a spreadsheet of data

Most wargame tables of data are small and just refered to by the programme

by the way Python has a module to use csv!

Here is a more in depth definition of flat file v relational databases
link

It is always hard to start on a new language, just find a short introductory tutorial and give it a try
Line By Line Chimp
link

Also look at Free Software it has lots of programmes in many languages
directory.fsf.org

you can download the programmes and examine them, some are well written and have explanations of what each section of the programme does

Don't just look at games think of other things that hold data such as record collection software and recipie software

They will all contain examples that may be of use to you

Transparency. Is cheating really that big an issue?

As soon as a computer game comes out sme one will have found a way to get past the hard bits with a cheat!

Wargamers are no different! You game aid may do way with rule lawyers and sneaky dice roles but if there is a wat to gain an edge someone will try it

They will not call it a cheat, just "house rules" or "making it more accurate"!

But some do NOTING but complain so clearly they need a new one as they are discontent with everything in wargaming.

No, thats just wargamers! Everyone thinks he is an expert and knows better than the rule wrier. That is why ther are so many sets of house rules!

EXACTLY! so when somebody says I don't want to have to type anything in to the program they are asking for something unreasonable.

Not if they are content with their paper based rules!

Back in the 1980's someone invented an electronic dice
You presssed a button and it contained a random number generator that then lit up an LED to show the dice roll

No chace to cheat or "influence the dice roll"

It sold like a lead balloon!

Wargaming is a tactile hobby we paint and move arround figures
we roll dice
we flick through rule books
we measure range
that is all part of the hobby

As soon as a computer game comes out sme one will have found a way to get past the hard bits with a cheat!

well again if you play with cheaters find new players

No, thats just wargamers! Everyone thinks he is an expert and knows better than the rule wrier. That is why ther are so many sets of house rules!

No, its the guys ripping on everything from terrain to figures, anything. Nothing is ever right. TO me he the logical choice is to get a new hobby at that point

Not if they are content with their paper based rules!

If they are content, then they aren't in the market for a computer assist. So there is no reason to act like they are.

I see an extremely distinct difference between a PC wargame and a Miniatures wargame with a computer assist. It seem for others the line is blurred.

I remember the electronic dice. The difference between electronic dice and computer assists is the unit just replaced dice. a computer assist helps to alleviate the CONSTANT complaints about charts and play time that go with 99 of not 100 EVERY discussion on rules on every thread in every forum on wargaming net sites.

Why the hell would all these people complain about something the really secretly enjoy? I get the roll bones thing that's why an option to input the dice result would be added. but thennnn.. you get people complaining about that. That's when you just do it anyway and disregard certain complaints. No product will be for everyone but many like the idea.

The Black Tower wrote:

You should be able to link PYTHON to a flat file rather than a databsae this may be easier for you?

Rather than muck about getting into writing SQL queries, if you are using Python I would strongly suggest reading the documentation for the pickle() and shelve() packages, which are in the standard libraries. As long as you are dealing with the right kind of objects (pure Python objects without generators -- so not TkInter graphics, unfortunately) you can serialize or recover anything as plain text in a one-line call with pickle(), and write it to or recover it from a database with shelve(). The biggest difficulty I had in learning it lay in realising just how little you had to write to achieve this.

Then again, if for any reason you really think you need to get into SQL, there is a marvellous SQL parser called Beautiful Soup, again written in Python and given away free.

I know people enjoy all sorts of different things, and a lot of people seem to enjoy the, aaah, challenge of getting Microsoft database software to do something useful. But there really is no need to do it if you don't want to.

All the best,

John.

SuperGrover wrote:

FACT: They are a sensible and usable solution to certain problems with wargaming.

Well, that seems to me to be an odd way of spelling "OPINION"; but do tell us, what exactly are the problems you think GAPs can solve? Good programming usually starts with a clear explanation of the problem the program is intended to tackle -- so let's have it. Once the problem is clearly defined, the programming should be relatively straightforward.

For myself, based on some of the remarks by the Monstrous Jake, I can now begin to see that something GAP-like might be useful to provide an automated opponent for solitaire play of air or naval games. Whereas your typical terrestrial game has a large number of low-value units wandering around a difficult, crinkly terrain, aeronaval games tend to involve small numbers of high-value platforms, with no terrain to speak of. This makes the question of transferring the representation of the world between machine and tabletop a good deal more tractable. However, the level of AI programming skill needed by implication to program a worthwhile silicon opponent is, I would suggest, well beyond the coding skills of most amateur programmers.

SuperGrover also wrote:

even with not knowing that much programing. I know enough about technological development in general that overcoming any reasonable demand or complaint is possible with programing a computer.

As long as your definition of "reasonable demand" is restricted to mean calculating computable functions, ideally ones that are not np-complete. That's a pretty narrow definition; I class "make me a lasagne", "tell me what you think of this Medoc" and "paint up a company of 1944 Fallschirmjager for me" as reasonable demands, but I don't think programming is ever going to help a whole lot with any of them.

I remember when I bought my first Pentium machine and there was a article that personal PC's of the time had exceeded the computing power that was used to control the trip to the moon.

I still have my first Pentium computer, having retired my 486/66 to the upstairs room in 2000 or so. The 486/66 runs my copy of computer "Risk" faster than the Pentium, by the way. Increases in chip performance stopped corresponding to any worthwhile gain in software performance for most purposes some years ago; now those extra CPU cycles are just used running baggier and baggier bloatware. Fashion victims buy new and worse OSes every couple of years, justifying the new OS by the faster chip and the faster chip by the new OS. Actual progress in software has been depressingly slow over the last couple of decades. I recently read Stockfisch's paper from 1975 (available as a freebie at the RAND site), and it's quite dismaying to see how little we have progressed in the computer modelling of weapons effects since then. Nor have we seen any great advances in program correctness, rapid software development, GUI design, or anything else, much (I might make an exception for multi-agent systems). It's just that all our computers are turning into telephones. More and more communication is being conducted with less and less content. Eventually we will reach the telephone event horizon, when it will be impossible to make, sell or buy anything that is not a telephone, and civilization will collapse in a final chatterclysm.

All the best,

John.

It goes without saying that even those not that familiar with COMPuters would understand that they would be of no assistance in hand painting their miniatures and understand that when talking comptuers assists we are talking about COMPutational problems and handling information like those on wargame CRT's

I was looking for some help and an exchange of ideas on how to produce a assists not a debate on why some feel they don't work.

Making a Assist to be opponent is just steps away from making a computer game. In another forum I have had people enthusiastic about the idea of assists they were a refreshingly positive island in the sea of the usual wargamer negativity. Its always funny to say that, because I was considered so critical and negative by some other gaming folks I played with. I always chuckled and told them "you have no idea, till you get on the internet wargame forums".

Anyway these particular guys were really excited and piled on ideas for AI opponents and graphics and even one guy that wanted to hook some sort of scanner up and barcode tanks to store info. It became obvious quickly that these guys complained about everything in the hobby and really should have just gone straight to the PC. Assists have come up time to time on that forum and every time these same guys throw out suggestions that quickly amount to a PC wargame and nothing to do with an assist with a miniatures table game.

I think many are in those categories. They simply looking in the wrong place for what they want. When talking "paper" game design you hear the same sort of thing. The "I want the game to be a movie" crowd for example. They would be better served by an RPG game.

Why people respond to a request to talk about development of a product they don't want is beyond me. It not like they are forced to use it. Sifting through that can be frustrating.

Thanks for the Python help guys. I will start looking into Python programing books. Seems I was looking in the wrong place when using Vb.net.

Making a Assist to be opponent is just steps away from making a computer game.

Think of what IBM needed to beat a world chess champion a special programme and the worlds biggest computer.

Chess is easy compared with a wargames
Each piece has a fixed patten of moves
The board is small in size

Wargames will have a board in variable size
troops may use hand to hand and ranged weapons
Weather may limit line of sight
troops have morale
They change formation
the terrain is not level…..
I could go on

Computer games often allow the user to wander around but it you want to get to the next level then you are funneled to predetermined areas where the game designer will have predicted the likely success.

If you want pc games great. I cant stand them im not intrested in them at all. What I am doing is making a programs for people who want to play miniatures and not PC games, handling the to hits and damage calculating so that people can stop complaing about CRTs and charts. AI, and all that junk is for PC game.

IF you want PC games, fine. I can understand this section on the Miniatures page entitles Computer moderated Rules. Steel Panthers and Empire Total war aren't that. Some seem to blur the distinction. Although I personally, wold not see the relevance. Perhaps the editor should make a PC wargame section. That way people that want PC wargames wont be intermingled with those that want to use a PC to help with a miniatures game. But not by tossing out the miniatures.

But I want to make, and know others want to see, a program that helps with certain aspects of the miniature games. Not an AI or a graphical representation of miniatures on a computer.

In another forum I have had people enthusiastic about the idea of assists they were a refreshingly positive island in the sea of the usual wargamer negativity.

I think you have discovered that this board is full of old fashioned wargamers

You think they are being negative, but they have given their own honest opinion, trying to convert them to use something the don't want is just wasting your time

As for the board full of enthusiasts I think that the many ideas the have proposed like bar coded tanks will be hard to impliment and they will think an asist that lacks their bells and whistles rather basic!

I'm not being negative either, I'm just relating my own experiences.

I wrote a number of projects that did exactly what SuperGrover is describing, have been writing them since 1982 and will probably continue writing them because I enjoy it.

I've produced and sold one such title commercially (a naval miniatures ruleset for 1895-1945 called Shipbase III), sold about 330 copies of it before I sold the title to another company in 1998. I don't know how many copies of the game have sold since then but it's still on the market.

I have no idea how many copies Carnage & Glory or the other computer-assist wargame rules have sold, but after chatting with some of the other authors I got the impression my sales figures were about average. There are quite a few people who have written computer-assist wargame rules, but only a handful of us who have published them commercially. I'm pretty sure all of us still have our day jobs.

Shipbase III didn't change the world, it didn't revolutionize wargaming, and I certainly didn't make a fortune on it, although I did walk away with slightly more money than I'd put into it. Certainly it didn't come close to paying for all that programming and research time.

However, based on those sales and based on the feedback I've gotten on SB3 since 1993, I can confidently say that at least 330 gamers out there wanted a computer-assist naval wargame ruleset to plunk down $40 USD for it, and most of them seemed pretty happy with what they got.

So, my advice to anyone wanting to create one of these is this: go for it. Do it for the fun, do it for the experience. It's a great training exercise, regardless of what programming technology you use.

But don't do it for the money. Trust me on this one.

Since this thread keeps on going, I'll throw in my answers to a couple of the questions posed upstream:

First point: database security: my advice, after many different projects over many years, is to not worry about it. I used various techniques to "lock down" the data in some of my earliest projects, primarily because one of the members of my game group at the time was notorious for "adjusting the data" (cheating).

Again learning from my experience selling Shipbase III, there are a few gamers who are concerned about the security of the data and want the data "locked down" so that nobody can adjust it, but they are far, far outnumbered by the gamers who want to be able adjust every value imaginable. Quite a few people have said they "don't trust the data" if it's in a sealed black box, and I think that's a valid viewpoint.

My philosophy is to make everything adjustable that's practical, and let the gamers and referees worry about keeping it secure if they want to. It's not my job as the game designer to make sure that all players are honest.

Chances are any given player will not adjust a lot of different values; they're likely to settle on one or two things they want to change across the board, but they want the flexibility to be able to adjust whatever they feel needs adjusting.

Second point: using an external database system: any database you're going to design and use for a computer-assist wargame project is going to be fairly specialized, but fairly simple as far as databases go. Using something like SQL is way, way overkill. You don't need anywhere near that kind of computing muscle.

If you want to use it, fine, especially if you're already familiar with using SQL (or whatever) or you want to use the project to learn how to work with SQL (which is actually a good idea). You don't have to go through all that work if you don't want to though.

Back when I took computer science classes in college, back in the 18th century, they taught us there were three basic functions involved in database work: creating new data, changing existing data, and deleting data. (You also need to sort, search, and lookup data, but play along with me here.) Everything is a pretty much a variation of those three functions.

I don't know what they teach these days, but that still applies to writing computer-assist wargame software. You need some means to input data (and believe me, if you've got a lot of data, you need a good, smooth, easy-to-use, quick, non-frustrating user interface), some means to change the data, and some quick routines to delete stuff. You don't really need SQL to do that.

In my case, I find it easiest just to write my own simple routines and build a simple database structure using flat files. Several people have suggesting using Excel as a front-end for the data, but even that seems like overkill to me. Since the data structures I design for my various projects tend to have a lot in common, I can use the same sections of code across a number of different programs.

Oh yeah, one more piece of advice to anyone wanting to write one of these things:

Spend a lot of time up-front designing your data structure.

You'll save yourself a lot of time and confusion downstream if you invest the time to plan out what you're doing and why you're doing it. Ironing out your data structure will also help you lay out your project plan and outline for the whole program. I like outlines. Outlines are good.

You think they are being negative, but they have given their own honest opinion, trying to convert them to use something the don't want is just wasting your time

They are being negative. Why would somebody that doeesnt want comptuer assists comment about the design of one. I dont play nor want plan to own a Napoleonic game. I wouldn't start on about a new set of those rules.

Plus there is CONSTANT talk about games taking to long, rules to complex. Not what I call the old fashion type of wargamer. The catch is as I've I found, is to find those really interested in rectifying the problems and those that just want to endlessly complain about them and and solutions proposed to fix them.

I am not trying to convert anybody. I cant see how anybody could yield that from my comments. What is frustration is people that don't want them commenting on how to design them. I certainly am not discouraged by such things it just makes it harder to get to the details of the original question.

Flat file? Text? I couldn't connect any database with anything without learning more about it.

On user interface. No matter what is done somebody will complain about it. The best I can do is create one that makes sense to me. I cant do more tail chasing on all the demands that would come from that.

The "enthusiastic" guys were enthused about PC games not wargame assists. They were in the wrong hobby, I think many are. The only thing that excited them was the idea of converting a non PC game to a PC game. Not what a assist does. The point was that the stuff some ultimately watned was unreasonable. To be fair to some, it was just good imagination without the knowledge to realize how difficult there ideas would be.

SuperGrover wrote:

Flat file? Text? I couldn't connect any database with anything without learning more about it.

If you use Python shelve(), there really isn't much to learn.

As a result of this discussion, a couple of nights ago I wrote a dice-rolling program, which can handle any number of any sidedness of dice and give you a list of the individual results of a throw, or the sum, or the top or bottom n results. I have just spent a few minutes modifying it to use shelve() to load a dice cup (a class I use to hold dice in, amazingly) into a database, take it out again, and prove that it still works. Because my machine has no particular db capabilities, shelve() in this case uses DumbDB, but why should the programmer care what it uses? It works. The whole program is under 120 lines, and only 64 lines are not blanks or comments.

It isn't going to be terribly readable without a monospaced font, but even if you've never read a word of Python in your life, if you're accustomed to modern (i.e., not line-numbered) Basics, it shouldn't be too hard to follow what's going on.

Unfortunately I don't know how to include it here without tab damage rendering it unreadable, but if anyone wants a copy, e-mail me at jdsalt@gotadsl.co.uk.

All the best,

John.

I appreciate it but I don't know that I could read it. I barely scratched through a dice program for VB.net. I only know COLOR Basic well.

Let me see if I have got this right:

You have people who DON'T play miniature figure based wargames telling you how great computer assisted wargames would be.

But you have people that actively play play miniature figure based wargames telling you that they do not need them for the many reasons they have mentioned

And you prefer to believe the folk that don't play wargames!!!!

SuperGrover wrote:

I only know COLOR Basic well.

Time to learn another programming language, then.

People who can only program in one language are hardly programmers, especially when that language is one of the Basics. Getting the program to do what you want in Befunge might be harder than in Basic, but I can't imagine that there has ever been a single person whose only programming language was Befunge.

All the best,

John.

You have people who DON'T play miniature figure based wargames telling you how great computer assisted wargames would be.

No, I have people that don't want a assist program telling me how to make one. I have to sift through that noise. TO be blunt. I don't care about who doesn't want them. many people do want them. You can see those that use them and are looking for them here on TMP and other forums.

Now when people say they want a assist that plays an opponent for me and moves that figures for me. They want a PC game. Add an AI opponent its a PC game not a assist anymore.

Again I was looking for some help from those have made assists not on some debate on why they are good idea or not.