Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
Moderator: MOD_EIA
Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
Bresh had an intriguing idea in the release notes thread. Rather than hijack that thread, I'll re-post and comment here:
His idea is basically to hide the combat rolls from people while taking their combat turn. I think the idea is to allow them only later to see what they rolled. This would have the effect of making turn reloads useless as a cheating tool.
The idea has some merit. I think it will cause more files to be exchanged, though, but perhaps that's worth it?
The typical order is:
Choose chit
(optional) Deal with Outflanks
View forces
Roll first die
Send file to other player
In order to hid the roll, the file send would have to be moved up one step. For the first player, this is a negligible change.
However, for the second player, other choices ensue:
Choose chit
(optional) deal with outflanks
view forces
roll first defender die
see results
see if outflanking force arrives
reinforce
send file to other player
In order to prevent defender from cheating, at least one and possibly two other files would have to be sent.
Is it worth it?
I think hiding the attacker's first roll from him would be good for security with no cost. But, after that, the price tag (in terms of time and file transfers) goes up significantly. I'm not sure later rounds are worth it.
Comments?
His idea is basically to hide the combat rolls from people while taking their combat turn. I think the idea is to allow them only later to see what they rolled. This would have the effect of making turn reloads useless as a cheating tool.
The idea has some merit. I think it will cause more files to be exchanged, though, but perhaps that's worth it?
The typical order is:
Choose chit
(optional) Deal with Outflanks
View forces
Roll first die
Send file to other player
In order to hid the roll, the file send would have to be moved up one step. For the first player, this is a negligible change.
However, for the second player, other choices ensue:
Choose chit
(optional) deal with outflanks
view forces
roll first defender die
see results
see if outflanking force arrives
reinforce
send file to other player
In order to prevent defender from cheating, at least one and possibly two other files would have to be sent.
Is it worth it?
I think hiding the attacker's first roll from him would be good for security with no cost. But, after that, the price tag (in terms of time and file transfers) goes up significantly. I'm not sure later rounds are worth it.
Comments?
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
Here are my pointers.
For siege battles one might note, that roll is shown first to attacker.
Typical land battle :
1. Attacker selects battle (in his battle-phase), selects chit (dont recall if he splits force in case of outflank), then sends the battlefile to the defender, think also he decides if he wanna try reinf+Gd commit.
2.A. Defender loads the battle, selects chit, gd commit/reinf.
2.B Defender selects done game rolls 1.round of battle, game shows all 1.round rolls to defender. (1. combat-round rolls executed).
3. Defender sends battlefile to attacker.
4. Attacker take casulties first, then he selects again if Reinf/gd.
5. Attacker sends battlefile to defender.
6.A Defender selects his casulties for 1.round, after he can chose reinf/gd-commit.
7.B Game shows results for all dice 2.round to defender.
8. defender sends battlefile to Attacker who selects caulties etc same as 4.
Etc.
XX. Winner selects if pursuit, and sees the roll.
XX. B. Winner sends battlefile to the other for casulties. (dont know if 0 pursuit still requires file exchange).
The "B"'s are not required its "extra". As far as i can think there is no reason to show them to the side where game rolls the dice, since its always the other player who needs to act on the roll.
The "B"s as far as i can tell dont require extra file-exchange, only difference to current is defender wont know the rolls till he takes his own casulties.
Regards
Bresh
For siege battles one might note, that roll is shown first to attacker.
Typical land battle :
1. Attacker selects battle (in his battle-phase), selects chit (dont recall if he splits force in case of outflank), then sends the battlefile to the defender, think also he decides if he wanna try reinf+Gd commit.
2.A. Defender loads the battle, selects chit, gd commit/reinf.
2.B Defender selects done game rolls 1.round of battle, game shows all 1.round rolls to defender. (1. combat-round rolls executed).
3. Defender sends battlefile to attacker.
4. Attacker take casulties first, then he selects again if Reinf/gd.
5. Attacker sends battlefile to defender.
6.A Defender selects his casulties for 1.round, after he can chose reinf/gd-commit.
7.B Game shows results for all dice 2.round to defender.
8. defender sends battlefile to Attacker who selects caulties etc same as 4.
Etc.
XX. Winner selects if pursuit, and sees the roll.
XX. B. Winner sends battlefile to the other for casulties. (dont know if 0 pursuit still requires file exchange).
The "B"'s are not required its "extra". As far as i can think there is no reason to show them to the side where game rolls the dice, since its always the other player who needs to act on the roll.
The "B"s as far as i can tell dont require extra file-exchange, only difference to current is defender wont know the rolls till he takes his own casulties.
Regards
Bresh
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
interesting
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
I think we're going to have to very carefully document the steps taken in combat before suggesting this idea move forward.
Marshall, can you give us pseudocode for the sequence of actions the game takes for battle? Start at the point where the battle has been chosen. While there is still the cheating method of changing combat-location ordering, this thread is only speaking to the actual battle sequence.
(Feel free to start with what Bresh has, but we're going to need to know ALL of the steps for maybe 2 rounds of combat. It repeats after that.)
Thanks.
Marshall, can you give us pseudocode for the sequence of actions the game takes for battle? Start at the point where the battle has been chosen. While there is still the cheating method of changing combat-location ordering, this thread is only speaking to the actual battle sequence.
(Feel free to start with what Bresh has, but we're going to need to know ALL of the steps for maybe 2 rounds of combat. It repeats after that.)
Thanks.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
More files exchanged is never worth it, too many files now.
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
ORIGINAL: NeverMan
More files exchanged is never worth it, too many files now.
I dont, agree.
I rather have extra file-exchange, for battles "including the Single-corps" and naval encounters.
First of, the 1 Cps-defend(autochit/prechit) is unbalancing, moving the game away from EIA.
Naval-retreat is more random, than deliberate.
Current battle-system is also not very strong, on the security part.
I did some tests had a theory, and it does not appear as strong as it looked, when introduced.
If I am to spend alot of time on a game, I dont want to need to question someones "extreme" luck.
Offcourse i have no idea if "extra-file exchanges is needed", depends on how its designed currently.
What I did, was write a list of how I think its working now.
And what I imply does not need extra file-exchange,compared to now, if designed right.
Maybe its split as usual between 50% want better security and playablity, while 50% might want to sacrifice some for faster gameplay.
Regards
Bresh
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
bresh,
Sorry, let me clarify... I think:
1. Trivial battles should be resolved with trivial combat rules.
2. All other battles should take place regularly, the AI sucks at picking chits and setting chits doesn't always work out either.
3. I'm not overly concerned with security, personally, if I think someone's cheating I simply won't play with them anymore, which I've already decided in one of the games I've been in... it's easily resolved.
Sorry, let me clarify... I think:
1. Trivial battles should be resolved with trivial combat rules.
2. All other battles should take place regularly, the AI sucks at picking chits and setting chits doesn't always work out either.
3. I'm not overly concerned with security, personally, if I think someone's cheating I simply won't play with them anymore, which I've already decided in one of the games I've been in... it's easily resolved.
-
- Posts: 1003
- Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:16 pm
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
I'd love to see trival battles brought in (for small field combats and seige battles). There are no chit choices, so the existing die roll reload warning is sufficient security for trival battles. I'd place this high on the priority list of enhancements.
Likewise, I'd like to see chit choices for all non-trival battles. Since this can not be that hard to include as an option, I would like to this a relatively high priority item (combined with trival battles).
As to the anti-cheating. I have not tried 1.06 to see how it works. It sounds ok to list reloads, but is the concern that the reload function only pops up after the die roll, so someone could see the chit choice and the other players not see a relaod warning?
I agree that it can be made secure by adding an extra file exchange, but this seems like it will be a while in development. I'd like to see it, but maybe later, after I have tried the latest version (when ever that comes out as a official release). If 1.06 does not provide adequate security for this, then I would like to see it sooner rather than later.
Likewise, I'd like to see chit choices for all non-trival battles. Since this can not be that hard to include as an option, I would like to this a relatively high priority item (combined with trival battles).
As to the anti-cheating. I have not tried 1.06 to see how it works. It sounds ok to list reloads, but is the concern that the reload function only pops up after the die roll, so someone could see the chit choice and the other players not see a relaod warning?
I agree that it can be made secure by adding an extra file exchange, but this seems like it will be a while in development. I'd like to see it, but maybe later, after I have tried the latest version (when ever that comes out as a official release). If 1.06 does not provide adequate security for this, then I would like to see it sooner rather than later.
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
What about sending a pre-determined array of die rolls at the time the attacker picks his chit? Have the battle pre-destined which would eliminate the fear of someone reloading files and re-rolling dice. It would need to be a bit more complex and involve some algorithm for masking the die rolls in the battle file, and it would be more secure than rolling the die at the instant of the event.
More files? Anything to prevent more file exchanges.
More files? Anything to prevent more file exchanges.
Mr. Godó
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
The concept is great. Removes any temptation to cheat.
"Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant" -- James Madison
"Yes, you will win most battles, but if you loose to me you will loose oh so badly that it causes me pain (chortle) just to think of it" - P. Khan
"Yes, you will win most battles, but if you loose to me you will loose oh so badly that it causes me pain (chortle) just to think of it" - P. Khan
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
ORIGINAL: mr.godo
What about sending a pre-determined array of die rolls at the time the attacker picks his chit? Have the battle pre-destined which would eliminate the fear of someone reloading files and re-rolling dice. It would need to be a bit more complex and involve some algorithm for masking the die rolls in the battle file, and it would be more secure than rolling the die at the instant of the event.
More files? Anything to prevent more file exchanges.
We've talked about this a bit but I have not really looked into this???
You're really only talking about 6 std rolls, 1 withdraw & 1 pursuit. The reinf rolls are where it gets a little confusing??? If no leader is in the area then each corps rolls BUT would it really be that important to preroll the reinf?
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis
ORIGINAL: mr.godo
What about sending a pre-determined array of die rolls at the time the attacker picks his chit? Have the battle pre-destined which would eliminate the fear of someone reloading files and re-rolling dice. It would need to be a bit more complex and involve some algorithm for masking the die rolls in the battle file, and it would be more secure than rolling the die at the instant of the event.
More files? Anything to prevent more file exchanges.
We've talked about this a bit but I have not really looked into this???
You're really only talking about 6 std rolls, 1 withdraw & 1 pursuit. The reinf rolls are where it gets a little confusing??? If no leader is in the area then each corps rolls BUT would it really be that important to preroll the reinf?
Marshall, basicly there are 2 ways to add this, redesign introducing arrays etc.
But could you go through how the combat executes now ?
Maybe there is a easier way to make a change, using the current design.
That is what i based my suggestion on, to remove some boxes(or hide the text) when, the phasing player is done taking looses(or is not).
I dont recall when reinf rolls show, nor guard commit(including 1.round), nor withdraw roll, picking outflank, .
I think Jimmer asked for a step by step of how it runs now.
Regards
Bresh
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
Hey guys:
I've been studying the code a bit and it looks like I "might" be able to preroll as the battle is created so the reloading is a non issue.
The only issue might be that it will change the battle file format a bit SO you should not upgrade to 1.07 in the middle of a combat phase or move phase. Does this sound reasonable?
I've been studying the code a bit and it looks like I "might" be able to preroll as the battle is created so the reloading is a non issue.
The only issue might be that it will change the battle file format a bit SO you should not upgrade to 1.07 in the middle of a combat phase or move phase. Does this sound reasonable?
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
No, that doesn't help (well, not with THIS issue). The key to what Bresh's solution solves is that people can re-roll. If you roll in advance, all they have to do is change the order in which they create the battles, thus getting different sets of pre-rolled rolls in a different order. But, if they never get to see their roll until after the first battle file is sent off, they can't know whether cheating is profitable or not, so they won't do it.
So, your response should definitely be implemented, but it's not a complete solution. If you hide the first set of battle rolls (Bresh's idea) in ADDITION to your solution, I think the security package could be called complete (for the first round of combat, anyhow).
NOTE: ALL of the rolls have to be hidden. I believe this includes:
Combat roll
Guard commitment roll
Artillery roll
However, the combat one is the most important, IMO.
So, your response should definitely be implemented, but it's not a complete solution. If you hide the first set of battle rolls (Bresh's idea) in ADDITION to your solution, I think the security package could be called complete (for the first round of combat, anyhow).
NOTE: ALL of the rolls have to be hidden. I believe this includes:
Combat roll
Guard commitment roll
Artillery roll
However, the combat one is the most important, IMO.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
So the attacker cannot see his 1st round roll and preroll?
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
Not until after the defender sees them. Techically, not until after he sends the battle file to the defender, but it's probably not valid to show them then. So, I suspect the first he will see of them is after the defender sends the second battle file of that round's pair of battle files.
NOTE: If Guard and Artillery are harder to hide, they don't have to be done this way. But, if it's a simple matter of:
If round = 1 then
dieroll.show=false
else
dieroll.show=true
endif
then they would be trivial to add. All you really have to do is not paint the screen with the numbers.
However, please note that if you first paint the numbers and then over-paint them with a different graphic, it WILL be possible to intercept the code between those two steps, thus showing the results early. I actually have a tool that does just that with over-typed passwords, but it's really simple to write such a thing (simply force a re-paint and then capture all of the changes that occur, then strip off the last one(s)). So, you really have to fail to show them altogether, not just "hide" rolls that are already showing.
NOTE: If Guard and Artillery are harder to hide, they don't have to be done this way. But, if it's a simple matter of:
If round = 1 then
dieroll.show=false
else
dieroll.show=true
endif
then they would be trivial to add. All you really have to do is not paint the screen with the numbers.
However, please note that if you first paint the numbers and then over-paint them with a different graphic, it WILL be possible to intercept the code between those two steps, thus showing the results early. I actually have a tool that does just that with over-typed passwords, but it's really simple to write such a thing (simply force a re-paint and then capture all of the changes that occur, then strip off the last one(s)). So, you really have to fail to show them altogether, not just "hide" rolls that are already showing.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
Along with the die rolls the defender should not see the attackers chit pick before returning the battle file.
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
OK guys let me look at this for a bit...
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
I agree with Trax.... if the defender can still see the chit pick then it's all bogus and we will still have to be sending our chit picks to an "ally" (which itself is having faith in someone not to cheat).
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Intriguing idea: Hiding the rolls
ORIGINAL: NeverMan
I agree with Trax.... if the defender can still see the chit pick then it's all bogus and we will still have to be sending our chit picks to an "ally" (which itself is having faith in someone not to cheat).
I agree that the chit as well as the roll should be hidden until the attacker is removing casualties.
So... this is how it would work:
Attacker picks chit (All rolls generated)
<send file to defender>
Defender picks chit (Cannot see attacker chit or roll)
<send file to attacker>
Attacker picks casualties (Attacker can now see chits and rolls).
<send file to defender>
Defender picks casualties (Defender can now see chits and rolls).
<NEXT ROUND>
Does this work?