Well, it didn't work out because there was no way to hide any of the game information. I think the general idea of being able to hide some or all of the game info is a feature worth exploring.

The Maze maps didn't work, they weren't fun. I wanted something like this before so I could make a C.S.I. style map using the Hidden X trick to give clues on where to go next. I tried doing it with what we have and got it to work but not to make it fun and it also relied on me begging people not to check borders, which is just silly.
Get me teams and BAO please.

Edward Nygma wrote:  Raptor is working on a bingo board where the borders from each territory are "random," but this is difficult to do, since there is only one version and you can see the border, which just makes it difficult.

Random is BLECH.  Here's a reminder: http://warfish.net/war/play/game?gid=70870285 Risky's mazes are another good example of it just not working, and I really don't think it's because you can get to the map details (if you couldn't it would probably be even more BLECH), so (I guess I should say IMO), Random is BLECH.

That's a terrible example... It could definitely be done effectively.

http://www.wargear.net/boards/designer/1139

There are 7 pokeballs that are the color of neutral territories. I would like to move them, hide them, and make only 4 of them connect to pokemon. So you never know what you'll find and what you can catch with it. It's just enough randomization to be interesting and still fun, but required me to be able to change the picture (move the pokeballs) change the borders (which ones attack to which pokemon) and change the continents. This all requires hiding the information and changing more than the scenario. It's much better than that ball of tangled nonsense. I didn't play risky's mazes, but I think this idea has merit. 5 versions of the pokemon map which randomize at the start would make for a decent game.

Yes I think that would be pretty cool - or you could make something like an RTS game where you have to mine resources and the resources are randomly distributed on the board.

Exactly, but I just like to see options, so release at your own discretion. You're doing an excellent job, tom.

I started work on the Simultaneous play code yesterday. So far so good, it feels good to be adding some new game and Player features again :)

tom wrote: I started work on the Simultaneous play code yesterday. So far so good, it feels good to be adding some new game and Player features again :)

Tom -- is this BAO? Turn based? M-Engine like? 

It will be familiar to those used to BAO. However there will be a number of enhancements to address BAO's shortcomings.

Once it's up and running I will look at implementing M-Engine or similar as an alternative game processing engine - I think this can just be a drop in replacement on the engine side so should be quite easy to do (in theory!).

I think this is the best solution. Create a buffet of engines, wait till they catch on, and let the designers have fun!

Mongrel wrote: I think this is the best solution. Create a buffet of engines, wait till they catch on, and let the designers have fun!

I agree.. and I think a turn-based engine like BAO will be easier to implement first, not to mention that it sounds like there are a few popular BAO boards that ready, waiting, and aching to be ported over.

Just an update on what I'm working on at the moment, I'm working through the list of bug fixes required and also making a number of performance enhancements. I'm particularly looking at improving the performance of the site during busy periods.

Two major recent changes have been enabling caching of the board images and board data in your browser. This means when the game loads the only data that is needed from the server is the game state information, the rest comes from your browser cache which is almost instantaneous.

I'm also looking at caching database information on the server side which I am expecting to show significant performance improvement.

tom wrote:

I'm also looking at caching database information on the server side which I am expecting to show significant performance improvement.

I had an ex-girlfriend who wanted me to do this

you can't remember STUFF either?

You may have noticed a slowdown in the frequency of updates recently - this is because I've started work on a pure JavaScript version of the player. This will allow WarGear to be played on practically any device with a web browser (esp. those which don't support Flash like iDevices).

I've made some good progress so far and I'll post future updates here. At some point I'll need volunteers to beta-test the player across as many devices as we can manage. Having said that I may have to use this as a good excuse to buy an iPad 

oh noes! JS = the devil!@?

Why do you say that? It's used extensively throughout the site. And it's the only way to get a single version of the Player to run on every device without custom iPhone / Android / Blackberry specific versions of the Player.

tom wrote:

At some point I'll need volunteers to beta-test the player across as many devices as we can manage. Having said that I may have to use this as a good excuse to buy an iPad 

Will you be purchasing devices for us as well?

Here's a potentially dumb question, are Flex and Flash similar?  Or how similar are they in regards to not working on iDevices?

I can test Android 2.3.4, IE (7,8,9), Mozilla, Chrome and Wii with my devices.  Count me in.

Flex is a framework which sits on top of Flash so it won't work on iDevices.