Difference between revisions of "Talk:Play by geohash"
From Geohashing
imported>Relet (→Battleship) |
imported>Aperfectring (That's true, but teamwork can sometimes lessen the fun!) |
||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Teams are pretty much necessary, otherwise it's simple to hide in the deep ocean or inaccessible mountain regions of your opponent's graticule. - Robyn | Teams are pretty much necessary, otherwise it's simple to hide in the deep ocean or inaccessible mountain regions of your opponent's graticule. - Robyn | ||
:But, but... that's what we've been doing all the time! ;) -- [[User:relet|relet]] 09:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC) | :But, but... that's what we've been doing all the time! ;) -- [[User:relet|relet]] 09:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
+ | :For some graticules (like Vancouver, BC), I definitely agree. However, in places like relet and I are playing, you CAN get to pretty much every centicule, but some will definitely be harder than others. Part of the challenge is picking the right places to place your ships. The other part is that you will likely have to go to the less accessible parts of your graticule in order to actually get a hit on your opponent's ship! It is all about encouraging geohashers to be MORE adventurous in their expedition selection. --[[User:Aperfectring|aperfectring]] 15:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Battleship algorithm == | == Battleship algorithm == |
Revision as of 15:32, 3 December 2010
Battleship
I like the idea of PBGH games. Battleship sound like a fun game for starting, I'll watch the pilot game with interest. But when playing battleship one vs one, taking a "shot" half a graticule away from one's home might be difficult for those with limited means (money/car vs walking/bad terrain like 49,-2). So I propose "multiplayer battleship" where every player shoots at all other boards and the last one swimming wins. - Danatar 18:46, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- I support being able to play against multiple opponents with the same shot, but if I'm understanding you correctly, if everybody is in the same "last man floating" game, how would you deal with people wanting to join the game late? I'd rather each game be 1 on 1, but one successful hash could shoot at everybody you're playing against, if it's your turn in each individual game. That way latecomers can start fresh with a new game, and not be either excluded or at an unfair advantage. If you're proposing this in addition to the 1 on 1 version, I fully support the idea. People could form multiplayer PBGH battleship groups at will. -Rhonda
- I agree that any hashpoint visited should count for all applicable games (even of differing types) the geohasher is currently playing. It will not count for games when it is not that geohasher's turn, or if they don't meet the requirements for it being a turn for that game. With the Battleship game, that would mean your visited hash would not count if you don't have a battleship "board" with the applicable move being made.
- As far as multiplayer. I already had thoughts of teams gathering to play against each other where each team selects their ship locations, and any of the geohashers moves on the team count as missle strikes against the opposing team. There could also be, as Danatar stated, a "free for all" type of game where many geohashers all select their boards at the same time and its a "last geohasher standing" type of game. In that case, once a person is eliminated (has no ships left) they can no longer take shots at other players.
- All in all, I see this as a definition of the basic framework for a PBGH battleship game. More specific things like number of players and such can be defined on a per-game basis. All that is really required is two or more people agreeing to the rules ahead of time! --aperfectring 22:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- 1) I just checked the centicule distribution of all the hashpoints I have visited so far, and even after >100 expeditions most of the Spanish Armada could be hidden in the unvisited parts, so 1 on 1 could become a lifetime occupation. Rhonda's remark about latecomers in a free-for-all game is true, so there should not be only one multiplayer game for everybody, but everybody could play in multiple games, 1 on 1 and multiplayer. Teams are a very good idea.
- 2) Misses should be blue on the board like the water at Trafalgar, not green like the fields of Bannockburn. - Danatar 19:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- 1) But there may be some more influence to visit previously unvisited centicules with this game. I agree, however, that this game could potentially take a very long time.
- 2) I had thought of that, but blue doesn't work so well with links... --aperfectring 20:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- but "lightblue" does - Danatar 20:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Teams are pretty much necessary, otherwise it's simple to hide in the deep ocean or inaccessible mountain regions of your opponent's graticule. - Robyn
- But, but... that's what we've been doing all the time! ;) -- relet 09:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
- For some graticules (like Vancouver, BC), I definitely agree. However, in places like relet and I are playing, you CAN get to pretty much every centicule, but some will definitely be harder than others. Part of the challenge is picking the right places to place your ships. The other part is that you will likely have to go to the less accessible parts of your graticule in order to actually get a hit on your opponent's ship! It is all about encouraging geohashers to be MORE adventurous in their expedition selection. --aperfectring 15:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Battleship algorithm
What happens if the visited geohash is a globalhash? :) --Vswe 18:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
- The algorithm should still work in that case. --aperfectring 18:32, 17 November 2010 (UTC)