This is awesome in theory... but doesn't really do anything in practice.

In my opinion, any time a board has a game started on it, the current version should automatically lock. Now that I've looked at the board designer a little more I can see that I was right earlier in surmising that there was an issue here. You know I've been talking about Newfie's "The World v 0.1" board and how confusing I find what's going on with the REV games... I think this is why. At this point it seems like your board is v 0.1 at least until it's submitted. I think this should be changed.

So, my idea is, the version number locks automatically anytime you create a DEV or REV game. Next time you access the designer, the version number increments once, until the next time you create a game, at which point it locks again. That way, not only will reviewers/developers be aware when a board is being worked on, but the board-review game list will make a TON more sense! (I'd suggest you also make the game name for DEV games auto-populate and lock. If people want to send personal messages they can use the email notifier or the in-game chat).

The version management is really there to manage transitions between Dev - Live - Retired and to allow designers to have multiple versions of the same board. It's also so players can tell that a Live game that they are playing is on an older or newer version of a particular board.

A problem I see with your suggestion is that designers can update Dev and Submitted boards while games are actually running on them so it would be counter intuitive to increment the version number of the board in the middle of an active game.

I agree, I've been kind of wondering why boards weren't versioning when I played a dev game and then made changes. I also think that if you play a dev or rev game, and then make a saved change in the designer, it should update the version increment.

EDIT: I retract my statement in light of Tom's post that went up while i was writing this one.

ps this is not to say I'm against the idea of changing the way versioning works, it just needs to take into account that dev/rev boards can be changed in the middle of active games.

I see what you mean Tom, but what's the point of auto-versioning, or versioning at all really, if it's just 0.1, 1.0, or nothing?

At least let me change the version numbers on my own boards so I can keep track of those even if no one else's.

EDIT: You caught me with that post, too. Okay, let me think more about how that would work.

Please keep it the way it is now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am in love with the versioning system so much that I just went shopping Online and bought it something skimpy to wear for our next "Design" session.

The versions (.01, 1.1, 6.66) should be used for the purposes of modding or if you really want you can copy your map and the version number changes.
Please, I beg of you, don't take away the ability to change things in mid stream. Don't rid us of the AWESOME restart tool and don't let people NC????? up your site!!

Wait a minute Risky, we're on the same side. That's exactly what I'm talking about. And I would never have Tom get rid of the ability to make changes/fixes in the middle of DEV games.

what about if you submit a board for review then you blocked from resubmitting the same version.

Why when you can change that version? What am I missing here.....I don't understand what the problem is.

I think a lot of this stems from the general confusion of the review page, is that right asm? In which case I've got an update in the works to help with that adding filters as you suggested - should be updated at the weekend.

It seems simple to me. You can make certain changes to a game in the middle of a DEV game, right? But you're going to either start a new DEV game to make sure everything's okay, or start a REV game in order for the board to go live, right?

So if you make a change, any subsequent games started have an incremented version. Isn't that easy?

Tom, I think that's definitely at least part of it. But I still think the versioning should mean something.

asm wrote: It seems simple to me. You can make certain changes to a game in the middle of a DEV game, right? But you're going to either start a new DEV game to make sure everything's okay, or start a REV game in order for the board to go live, right?

I wouldn't say that's always right.  Quick border fixes, continent changes, slight graphic changes, etc. aren't going to necessarily going to need a restart.  Even if it's in a REV game.

1. Do changes take effect within a REV game? I thought just DEV?

2. That's totally fine and beside my point. If they don't require a restart, it's basically the same version. However, if they DO require a restart, shouldn't the version increment? That's exactly what I'm driving at.

And I finally figured out what got me messed up about this in the first place.

Yes, Tom, it's partly to do with the map review list.

BUT. The guy submitted a board to REV, it didn't work at ALL, game was terminated, I thumbed-down the board. He made some changes so that the board was at least playable (tho still sucked), but I can't thumbs it down because as far as the database is concerned, it's the same board! I already thumbs-downed this board, and since the versioning didn't update, it's already thumbs-down.

asm FTW