hi all... what's the view on the next feature that should be in development? Votes please :)

Unranked Games!

If not than I vote for a revamp of the review system.  We've had a recent discussion I can point you towards if you are interested.

"Token" territories. Described at length elsewhere, but, in short, territories that you can occupy, but don't count as owned by you. This would make it far easier to build 'switches' into the background of games without having to figure out a way to take them out of play for eliminations or having them count towards bonus/territory calculations.

I don't recall if Tom already killed this as unpossible or not.

Cramchakle wrote:

"Token" territories. Described at length elsewhere, but, in short, territories that you can occupy, but don't count as owned by you. This would make it far easier to build 'switches' into the background of games without having to figure out a way to take them out of play for eliminations or having them count towards bonus/territory calculations.

I don't recall if Tom already killed this as unpossible or not.

If token territories are possible, then that, but, if they are dead then non-allocated capitals would be a good halfway solution to get some of the same results.

Games starting automatically after some time for games that haven't "filled". This way those 16 player games that get stuck with 8 people joining would get going eventually. Then they won't clog up the games list and people won't be waiting around forever for games to start.

I think that for tournaments, it would be nice to have additional quick invite options. Some ideas:

• Invite everyone who you have played a tournament with in the past
• Invite everyone who has visited the site in the past 24 hours
• Invite everyone who is currently online

I feel like this might help fill tournaments, as I've noticed that it is very difficult to fill tournaments on non-risky boards.

This is turning into a brainstorm thread instead - but anyways love all the ideas so far. 

Never thought of Xray's suggestion before but starting games with less players rather than killing it certainly has merit.

I'd love a CP system for public team games and to be able to reserve/invite my teammates for public team games.  Also to send invitations to public games.

Token territories would open up design options tremendously.  Random capitals would also be super.

And anything to help tournaments go is a plus.  I'd add "invite anyone who has played x games on this map"

But, with all that I think a wholesale revamp of the ratings system would be my top vote.

...and inviting the top x ranked players on the board as an option too.

wasn't there a list of features that had been requested kicking around somewhere?

Not to dismiss token territories, but if Tom addresses my post in the support forums about auto-neutral vs. auto-capture factories, I think we don't need token territories or randomly assigned capitals to build switches, create "on/off board" territories, etc.

>Games starting automatically after some time for games that haven't "filled". This way those 16 player games that get stuck with 8 people joining would get going eventually. Then they won't clog up the games list and people won't be waiting around forever for games to start.

I believe Tom has addressed this in the past, stating that if a player wants to join a N seat game on a map, it wouldn't be fair for them to end up in a <N seat game.

>wasn't there a list of features that had been requested kicking around somewhere?

I think there was a google spreadsheet somewhere, but I couldn't find it.

Designer features:

1. Token Territories/Randomly Assigned Capitals/Auto-neutral factories working alpha-numerically with auto-capture

2. Factories increase to factory cap even if factory cap is greater than territory cap

3. Per border fog

4. Fractional attack cost (alternative to M57's Movement Count) attacks (and fortifies) can be set per border to use up an amount other than 1 from a limited number of attacks/fortifies (primarily for terrain type boards).

Player features:

1. Arrows shown between territories in board history like when you are actually making the attack

2. A search feature for the My Games list. Search results would match game name, board name, and player names.

3. The new CP system we got to preview here: http://www.wargear.net/forum/showthread/3817/Changing_CP_Consensus

4. A quick start button for finished private games. Starts a new private game with the same name and a (2) or (3) etc added to the end. Automatically invites the same players. (a running stat of who won how many of the series shown in the ranking message would be neat too)

Korrun wrote:

Designer features:

1. Token Territories/Randomly Assigned Capitals/Auto-neutral factories working alpha-numerically with auto-capture

2. Factories increase to factory cap even if factory cap is greater than territory cap

3. Per border fog multiple per border options

4. Fractional attack cost (alternative to M57's Movement Count) attacks (and fortifies) can be set per border to use up an amount other than 1 from a limited number of attacks/fortifies (primarily for terrain type boards).

 

Player features:

1. Arrows shown between territories in board history like when you are actually making the attack

2. A search feature for the My Games list. Search results would match game name, board name, and player names.

3. The new CP system we got to preview here: http://www.wargear.net/forum/showthread/3817/Changing_CP_Consensus

4. A quick start button for finished private games. Starts a new private game with the same name and a (2) or (3) etc added to the end. Automatically invites the same players. (a running stat of who won how many of the series shown in the ranking message would be neat too)

Ozyman wrote:

Not to dismiss token territories, but if Tom addresses my post in the support forums about auto-neutral vs. auto-capture factories, I think we don't need token territories or randomly assigned capitals to build switches, create "on/off board" territories, etc.

 

I don't understand how you think auto-neutral vs. auto-capture factories could replace token territories, and even if they could somehow, wouldn't that be a heck of a lot of factories (and work) to achieve something that should just be a simple territory designation in the designer?

berickf wrote:

Ozyman wrote:

Not to dismiss token territories, but if Tom addresses my post in the support forums about auto-neutral vs. auto-capture factories, I think we don't need token territories or randomly assigned capitals to build switches, create "on/off board" territories, etc.

I don't understand how you think auto-neutral vs. auto-capture factories could replace token territories, and even if they could somehow, wouldn't that be a heck of a lot of factories (and work) to achieve something that should just be a simple territory designation in the designer?

..not to mention that they would count towards the per/territory bonus, which can be a huge problem for some boards.

Ozyman wrote:

>Games starting automatically after some time for games that haven't "filled". This way those 16 player games that get stuck with 8 people joining would get going eventually. Then they won't clog up the games list and people won't be waiting around forever for games to start.

I believe Tom has addressed this in the past, stating that if a player wants to join a N seat game on a map, it wouldn't be fair for them to end up in a

I do remember that but, not to hijack this thread, how about being able to set a minimum and a maximum # of players?  "run with at least 10 and at most 16"

+1 to Korrun's lists also.  Searching someone's"games played" is a PITA.  I'd like to be able to go to "player stat's" and have a link next to each board that calls up the games for that player on that board.  Similar to the blue arrow in the "opponents" "played" column.

I love what you guys do here but I feel strongly that the next upgrade should be on the player/interface side and not the designer side. I know you designers have dreams and plans and machinations for the Next Big Thing but I think it's important that Tom stay focused on what attracts and keeps players at the site, and that's not that.

asm wrote:

I love what you guys do here but I feel strongly that the next upgrade should be on the player/interface side and not the designer side. I know you designers have dreams and plans and machinations for the Next Big Thing but I think it's important that Tom stay focused on what attracts and keeps players at the site, and that's not that.

That last major upgrade (the achievement system) was of the player/interface side, so, I think that's why he put this one in the designer chat to do one on the other side... Plus, don't new boards attract and keep players on the site too!!!!!!!

asm wrote:

I love what you guys do here but I feel strongly that the next upgrade should be on the player/interface side and not the designer side. I know you designers have dreams and plans and machinations for the Next Big Thing but I think it's important that Tom stay focused on what attracts and keeps players at the site, and that's not that.

On the designer side, some of these requests are much easier than others.  Tom has indicated that certain features (such as Token Territories) are not as easy as others. A likely candidate for an easier fix/upgrade is to make factories a little more controllable re the order in which they fire, and there are some current threads that cover the topic.  I would vote for something like that but really, the ultimate prize there would be 'real-time' factories. I would just assume that while he does one, he does the other.

As for what I would want on the designer side, the list is long and sometimes gets wild (as you might guess), but I would LOVE to see some kind of Movement Count or Movement Factor system.

On the Non-Designer side, I would love to see top to bottom overhaul of the point system. Many threads cover this.

Forgot about real-time factories. That would be awesome.

btw, asm. Your points are well-taken.  Designers are the minority, but we tend to be more active in the forums. I'm thinking it's a wash.  Bottom line is the money that ends up in Tom's pocket. I'm rooting for him.

My error in one respect - I didn't notice that this was in Designer's Chat. Forum traffic is manageable enough that I read everything from 'recent threads.'

So that would seem to indicate that Tom has already decided to focus some energies on new features for designers, which is great! Go nuts.

But one point:

Plus, don't new boards attract and keep players on the site too!!!!!!!

To be blunt, no. Almost not at all, would be my guess. As M57 rightly points out, active forum members represent a very vocal but extreme minority - and board designers a still smaller subset of those.

I do want to make clear that I'm not trying to throw your toys out of the pram. Just a bit of a fan of being a dissenting voice, I suppose - but again, to bring this comment full circle, since/if Tom has decided to direct his efforts in this direction, I think that's great.