CORDIAL MINUET ENSEMBLE

??????

You are not logged in.

#26 Re: Main Forum » How to Avoid Jeopardy Alcohol » 2015-01-27 03:17:09

computermouth wrote:

When my software hits it big, I'll wrassle the title from you wink

That's right, pay it forward smile

#28 Re: Main Forum » How to Avoid Jeopardy Alcohol » 2015-01-17 21:18:09

Yeah I don't like this, why would we want to alienate the best players?  AnoHito, maybe you are joking but let's take your strategy to it's logical conclusion.  We use this strategy to push out the best players, until AnoHito is the best player and you are pushed out.  Not a great end game for anyone.

#29 Re: Main Forum » New rising ante » 2015-01-16 04:21:38

I also like the rising ante, but I am concerned more conservative players will just leave the game early. What if on quitting you automatically forfeit 2x the next round's ante. One thing I love about no limit sit and gos is people play their whole stack. If this was implemented it would always be in someone's best interest to look at the next round unless they legit have to go for some reason.

#30 Re: Main Forum » Testing 3-coin ante » 2015-01-12 03:14:58

Has the tribute gone up as a result?

Edit: I do think the net tribute has gone up.  In the old way if you folded on the first turn when both sides have only bet 1 chip, the game didn't take any tribute.  With the new ante, if one side folds with 3 and 3 bet, the game takes a tribute.  I am fine with the game taking tribute in this case, but I think it needs to be pointed out that the game now takes tribute on games that don't make it past the first betting round (not that any deception is taking place!).  Also, after playing a few games, I have come to the conclusion it's more than fair for the game to take a tribute in this case as the games are quite a bit shorter.  While, I was initially surprised by the increase - thinking, "my take after winning on an all in play is only 188, but that was a short game!".  The reality is my take is always somewhere in the 180s, so the result was exactly the same, just the game happened much much faster.  So my vote is a big yes for the 3 ante, it has made the game so much faster and more exciting in my opinion.

#32 Re: Main Forum » Any thought given to an Android port? » 2015-01-11 18:21:50

gmu3 wrote:

My guess is you're reading all the game's static stuff (fonts/images/settings/etc) directly from the apk, and those files are all compressed.  It takes a long time to load because it takes a long time to calculate the offsets, seek, and extract each file individually.

gmu3 is the guy who ported TCD (which uses the same framework as CM) to Android and iOS, so his theories are definitely worth considering.

#33 Re: Main Forum » Kotaku article » 2015-01-10 03:34:52

Nate wrote:

Yes, I think we both started feeling guilty and told him advice at the same time xD. He's really good now, although there might be some room for improvement from what I've seen.

When it comes to preying on unskilled players in this game, it's easy to see yourself become their demon...and I didn't enjoy that feeling!

Room for improvement, eh?  Put your (my old) money where your mouth is. I'll put up a $100 game in a few minutes.

#34 Re: Main Forum » A new test tournament » 2015-01-09 04:01:29

Hmm, I played one game and I won it.

#35 Re: Main Forum » A new test tournament » 2015-01-09 02:58:37

Where do we find the v12 version of the game.

* I figured it out, I needed to close and reopen the game.

#36 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-08 18:00:47

AnoHito wrote:

I honestly have no idea. I don't think there is any legal precedent that covers whether wagering money on a skill based game and playing randomly would be a game of chance. I would be interested to know if someone could cite one though.

There doesn't need to be.  As a game creator/designer you can only be held responsible for the rules and structure of the game, not for how people (or bots) play it.

#37 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-08 17:53:06

AnoHito wrote:

Okay, then what if the website's owner knew that someone was running a bot on the website that picked randomly? They could determine this based on statistical information regarding how the bot was picking. Would they then be responsible for shutting it down, or would laws regarding being a facilitator for gambling not apply? I'm not sure if there is a gambling version of the DMCA...

No they wouldn't because it's a chance player not a chance game.  Please respond to this point, if what you said was true, anyone could make any http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_skill-based_game like fantasy football illegal by writing a bot for it that plays randomly.

#38 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-08 17:47:03

AnoHito wrote:
cullman wrote:

Again, if what you said was true, I could make for money fantasy football illegal by making a random bot that plays it.

Well, you said that creating a website that acts as a bot for playing Rock Paper Scissors randomly for money would be a game of chance, so yes? I don't know, I'm not intentionally trying to be difficult, but I really don't understand how the law works in this situation. Why is it that playing a game where you know the outcome is dictated by chance would be made illegal or not illegal based on the circumstances under which it is played? The law says that a game is a game of chance if "the character of the game rather than a particular player's skill or lack of it" determines the outcome of the game. So if the outcome of Rock Paper Scissors is really determined by the player and not the game, why is it that when you make the player a computer that picks randomly and not a human, all of a sudden the game is a game of chance, even if none of the game's rules were changed in any way? Aren't you just making an arbitrary distinction if you can make the game illegal or not depending on who or what is playing it? This just doesn't make any sense to me.

Because in your website example the chance based bot is built into the game, by definition it's a game of chance.  If you created a RPS website for 2 humans to play, and even if someone wrote a random bot to play one side of that, that would be a game of skill.  Now if the website only allowed one human and one external random bot to play, it would be a game of chance.  Because the game/website is not putting the chance in, some external player/bot is.  It comes purely down to is the element chance happening within the confines of the game or the player.

#39 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-08 17:24:45

Ugh, this is exhausting....No because you have written a client, you aren't the author of the game and it's rules.  Again, if what you said was true, I could make for money fantasy football illegal by making a random bot that plays it.  Jere's definition makes it very clear that it's the game not the player that determines chance vs skill.  You have made a chance player not a chance game.  I don't know how else to explain it, but I am sure this is not an issue.

#40 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-08 17:15:08

AnoHito wrote:

Hmm... so would you say then that that paragraph could be interpreted to mean the my example Rock Paper Scissors website would not be considered a game of chance?

No because your example is not an implementation of a game of RPS in the classic two human player sense.  Yours is a game like RPS where the computer side always plays randomly, making it not just RPS but RPS with a built in random playing strategy.

#41 Re: Main Forum » Any thought given to an Android port? » 2015-01-08 16:30:13

computermouth wrote:

Well, jason's basically written the code and makefiles to choose platform specific libraries at compile time. OpenGL does the draws and dumps them into SDL 1.2. With the included macro to use GL-ES(which is supported by android), I'd just have to convert the SDL 1.2 code to SDL2, then take care of little quirky things.

I didn't do the work myself, but yeah I am pretty sure we had to tweak few things to go from OpenGL to OpenGL-ES.  It really wasn't that big of a deal, a few weeks of work, and I am pretty sure that Jason basically uses the same framework for CM that he did for TCD.  I am in agreement with people that a HTML5 version if the way to go, especially since you can't put a gambling game in the apple or google store.

#42 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-08 16:26:28

AnoHito wrote:
cullman wrote:

I am certain that whether or not a game is a game of skill or chance is defined by the rules of the game rather than instances of its play. Your example could be applied to other existing real money skill games that have not had legal issues.


I'm not sure, I think it doesn't come up a lot because in most skill based games playing randomly wouldn't be effective, so no one would ever play randomly on purpose. In a game like Cordial Minuet where random play can be effective, though not necessarily more effective than deliberate play, it may actually cause legal issues. Say you were to start a website where you could Rock Paper Scissors for money against a computer programmed to play randomly. Rock Paper Scissors is technically classified as a skill based game, but in this case the implementation is practically the same as a website that let you bet on a coin flip for money. But a website where you bet on a coin flip would almost certainly be classified as a game of chance, so shouldn't the Rock Paper Scissors site be classified the same way?

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree.  Your example is not the equivalent of CM as the implementation of the game has a random play, and the person implementing the game and it's rules has made it a game of chance.  I will try to explain my side one more time.  If what you said was true, I could make playing fantasy football for money illegal just by writing a single bot that drafts and plays a fantasy football team completely randomly.

#43 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-08 16:00:25

AnoHito wrote:
cullman wrote:

I completely disagree with this.  I could write a program that makes random but legal chess moves for me, and play chess using that program.  That doesn't add an element of chance to the game of chess, just to the way I am playing it.

True, but the question is, if you know the moves the other player is using are not their own, but rather moves generated randomly by a computer, is it legal by the letter of the law to bet money on the outcome? That is a tricky question that I'm not sure has ever really been answered.

I am certain that whether or not a game is a game of skill or chance is defined by the rules of the game rather than instances of its play. Your example could be applied to other existing real money skill games that have not had legal issues.

One alternative idea, though, I'm not sure I would like this in practice is you could give both sides a veto button to allow them to skip a given matrix of numbers before column selection and betting.  If neither player presses the veto button, then it could be said that both sides agree it's a balanced board.  In reality, I can't think of many boards I would get that I would veto.

#44 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-08 01:07:38

AnoHito wrote:

But actually, if I were a lawyer, I would focus on Cordial Minuet's betting as the primary element of chance. Because betting involves valuing your current position at the point when you have to bet, and most of the time you don't know for certain how the strength of your position compares to that of the other player, you could argue that you are placing a wager based on an element that is controlled by chance. Because of the shared uncertainty both players have regarding how their column picks affect the score they will get, neither player is truly in control of the outcome of picking. And therefore, it would be fair in a sense to say, that there is an element of randomness in the score you get, even though the score was technically generated by a decision shared by both players. Can you honestly claim that there is no element of luck in the score you get when it is influenced by elements neither player controls completely? And what happens if one of the players uses a random number generator to pick their columns? Surely that would have to count as an element of chance, right? Even if you as the designer can't control how columns are picked, the mere fact that they can be picked randomly could be interpreted as an element of chance.

I completely disagree with this.  I could write a program that makes random but legal chess moves for me, and play chess using that program.  That doesn't add an element of chance to the game of chess, just to the way I am playing it.

To me the test is this, when I was first starting out I won ZERO games against a good player, that to me says that it is a game of skill.  In fact, in my first 20 games I don't think I even won a round of the game - surely if luck was a big factor I would have won one even by accident.  As a beginning poker player I won many sit and go tournaments just purely based on the strength of my cards.

#45 Re: Main Forum » Any thought given to an Android port? » 2015-01-07 20:36:06

I'm working on a reboot of The Castle Doctrine that works on mobile, both Android and iOS.  We were able to port the code over fairly easily by moving the code base from SDL 1.2 to SDL 2.0 and using the Android NDK.  If you want I can put you in touch with the developer that did this for TCD to give you some tips.

#46 Re: Main Forum » The Tragedy of Judge Doorman » 2015-01-07 16:43:27

Nate wrote:

I have decided to announce that I am going to donate $1,666.66 of my winnings to Jason Rohrer. He's an amazing artist and I truly wish him and his family the best.
You can support his work here: http://hcsoftware.sourceforge.net/jason … MyWork.php

That is excellent, Nate!

#47 Re: Main Forum » How to Fix Cordial Minuet » 2015-01-07 02:34:59

I'd be in favor of a 3 chip ante if we think 5 chips is too much.  Failing that "we" could implement a big/small blind type of structure where it alternates between making one player front 3 chips and the other front 1 chip like poker.

#48 Re: Main Forum » No one playing more than $1 today? » 2015-01-07 02:32:53

Anyone want to play $10+?  A fool and his money want to be parted.

#49 Re: Main Forum » Eliminating all random elements » 2015-01-07 02:31:06

I agree with jere and Jason, in that I prefer the 1 to 36 vs 1 to 6.

#50 Re: Main Forum » How to Fix Cordial Minuet » 2015-01-05 23:43:17

I am +1 for a 5 chip ante.  I think that would definitely make the game a lot less of a grind.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB