??????
You are not logged in.
I had some trouble getting into any amulet games. I get the impression that when a game is created it shows up under 'Other Games', but isn't removed when its closed, which would explain why there are duplicate games. Several times I waited unsuccessfully for an amulet game while there appeared to be games open so I gave up and played a regular game. (At other times there were people opening games at $3, but I avoided them.) There's also a random delay before you join them, right? I guess it's also possible many of the people posting games for $0.10 didn't have at least $3 in their accounts.
I now have less than 80 points remaining. It looks like either playing a non-amulet game or waiting for an amulet game reset the timer. By the time I drop the amulet I'll have negative points again! Seems a bit unfair, but maybe it's a punishment for camping on an amulet? What I want to know is, if I later regain the amulet will I still have negative points? Surely my score should be reset to zero!
EDIT: turns out I dropped the amulet before reaching zero points. Also, I timed out while waiting for an amulet game (I didn't know until I cancelled and found I didn't have it anymore) but nothing bad seemed to happen.
Also, I notice that your score isn't updated when you hit the 'Refresh' button. It is however updated if you click 'New Game' and then cancel.
I like the idea too. It seems that an setting to disable all unnecessary sounds would be in order.
Oh! I didn't realise that I actually had negative points even though it showed 0. After winning a game I only have 163, so there's more pressure to act than I though.
Presumably during the actual launch of the game there will be more players, but right now it seems it would be good if trying to play an amulet game could also sometimes create games at random stakes that others could join. There are 6 amulets but unlikely to be many more than 6 players active at once. EDIT: right now, the amulet contest discourages people from joining other people's games as if I understand correctly they can only win an amulet either by hosting a game, or if it's distributed randomly. (EDIT: this is wrong.) There's someone repeatedly creating and closing a game for $3 every couple of minutes. I even saw two open games for $3.00 listed on the "other games" section at the same time. How is that even possible?
Rereading your post I see that you didn't actually say how many points you start with after initial amulet distribution; but it makes perfect sense to start at 0 points. I also looked at the thread discussing the rules, but it looks like you haven't talked about it since page 1, so I don't know what the current story is.
OK, emailing. But it sounds like there really isn't much to see here aside from a failed file download; it simply confused me.
I was wondering why there are so few amulets in play...
Huh... I just got a message, after winning a game where the other player timed out without ever moving: "Recieving amulet" followed a second later by "Failed to fetch amulet"!!
And now I see a 0 underneath the Deposit button. To stdout was printed:
Starting web request 154 [GET http://cordialminuet.com/gameServer/server.php?action=get_balance&sequence_number=42134&account_hmac=XXXX&user_id=XXXX (null)]
Frame rate = 60.024010 frames/second
Web result = XXXX
4
http://cordialminuet.com/testAmulets/gimel.tga
0
OK
Frame rate = 60.024010 frames/second
Frame rate = 60.024010 frames/second
Starting web request 155 [GET http://cordialminuet.com/testAmulets/gimel.tga (null)]
Frame rate = 60.060060 frames/second
Result size = -5249000
Only TGA files without colormaps can be read.
Frame rate = 59.988002 frames/second
Frame rate = 60.060060 frames/second
(etc)I quit and restarted and again got the "Recieving amulet" message, except this time it actually shows up; this time the log shows:
Starting web request 3 [GET http://cordialminuet.com/gameServer/server.php?action=get_balance&sequence_number=42140&account_hmac=XXXX&user_id=XXXX (null)]
Web result = XXXX
4
http://cordialminuet.com/testAmulets/gimel.tga
0
OK
Starting web request 4 [GET http://cordialminuet.com/testAmulets/gimel.tga (null)]
Result size = 12323I still have 0 points though! At least I assume that's the points I have, and that it should start at 200. It would be nice if it were explained.
You should only see that button if you're currently holding the amulet.
Otherwise, you just play any game for stakes of $3 or under, and you may randomly get pulled to challenge one of the amulet-holders.
Your description of the contest doesn't say that, in fact it gives the opposite impression: that both opponents need to click the "Amulet Game" button.
I also notice that quest ownership has 78 points with amulet 5. How is that possible? If they went 2 hours without playing an amulet game and dropped it, shouldn't they have 80 points left?
I assume chequers means editing the file within the .app bundle. Is the app meant to copy all its settings files out of the app bundle for easier editing?
How many digits long is the number? This wikipedia page lists a couple banks which issue cards without a Luhn check digit, but your bank wouldn't be one of them.
BTW Jason, you wouldn't happen to have a CC with TheFirst bank, would you?
Oh, I certainly wasn't suggesting you change anything. Cost vs benefit looks bad. I was just curious about your opinion based on your experience with designing protocols. So, thanks.
I also think the randomised stakes for amulet games is a great idea.
OK, with 36 completely distinguished amulets 36 separate scores makes far more sense. And as jere said, it gives worse players a better chance, which is the contrapositive of my complaint that it better players a worse chance.
But n/2, where N is the current number of active games, is also a hidden value (players don't know how many games are active), so it's essentially just a random number, right? But it's not ACTUALLY a random number.
Are you worried about gambling laws here? But all kinds of skill-based tournament have random seeding. OK I guess to want to take every available precaution though I would hope any judge would be competent enough to know there's no difference.
This is totally off topic (hey, Dan_Dan started it!)...
In hindsight, would you have designed the protocols differently? It seems like a pain to work backwards from the game state to the coin movements and actions that took place, and there have been quite a number of bugs resulting in crazy animations. And even the way that the reveal step is transmitted to the client is really weird.
I haven't been reading the other thread because it's too long.
Th only part of this that 'worries' me is that you have a separate score for each of the 36 amulets. Are the amulets distinguishable in-game? Can you see how many points you have on each amulet, and which one you're holding? Can you see which amulet your opponent has? Can you even see whether they have an amulet when you're in game, or when you see the game in the lobby? Overall I don't see the point in having 36 separate scores; seems like it will confuse as well as hinder finding the best players (you're unlikely to find the same amulet back to accumulate more points)
I don't follow. You know your own balance, but you don't know your profit, profit ratio, Elo rating, or anything else, so can't see where you stand if names aren't unique. However if there's more than a thousand users or so then it becomes rather tedious to look yourself up anyway
This thread has no context and I have no idea what it's about.
Custom interfaces? I'm not aware of anyone modifying the source code for any purpose like that, other than possibly ClockForm (the person, not the bot) might have added an API for their bot.
I've spent a little while poking around the TCD and CM sources. But I can't think of much useful I could say that you wouldn't learn in 20 min of looking around for yourself. Basically, each *Page class represents a different activity/module of the program (such as the deposit money screen). Pages contain their own logic most of the time, but never talk to each other, instead, switching between pages and transferring data between them is handled by the drawFrame function in game.cpp.
Also, be aware that minorGems isn't just a set of low level libraries; it also handles things like parsing all the files in settings/ and handling some keyboard input (eg typing on the screen that pops up when you try to quit). Finally, most of minorGems (e.g. all the UI code) isn't used.
That football idea sounds pretty fun, in fact, maybe you could even have a system like that running all the time (but without large prizes). Holding the football becomes like an in-game achievement, similar to "I just beat judge doorman".
Maybe you only hold it for 24 hours max. If you lose during that time, you lose it, if you hold it until the end, it's given to another random player. But a top player can't hold it all week that way...
That shouldn't be necessary if you're required to keep playing games to keep it. You'll lose it soon enough.
Obviously, you need to be careful with requirements such as "you can only win it once you take at least 75 chips" which could be exploited by leaving, though requiring a significant victory definitely sounds good. At least if the person holding the trophy leaves the game, the game shouldn't count towards the the games they have to play to hold onto it. Of course anything they lose should still count towards their tally, so the regular leaving penalty might be enough?
Minimax doesn't seem very relevant when either player acts randomly; what you should use to pick a move against an opponent that doesn't look ahead is expectimax. You do opponent modelling and predict how the opponent will act on each turn, e.g. pick uniformly at random. But if your opponent is actually trying to outwit you then they'll also consider how you might act, and the name of the game is completely different; you're searching for Nash equilibria.
the more math I do on static boards the more handicapped I feel playing the game in real time.
Haha, I felt the same way! Had to remind myself that I was playing for fun, not just to win.
Yes, the median is only a proxy for the actual useful information there: knowing that 50% of the numbers in a row/column are above/below some value.
I had a look at the server source code and I think I can confirm that there is a bug (steps 1-4 is speculation):
1. Players finish betting after round 3
2. Player 1 is using the official client, and is waiting for coins to move
3. Player 2 is a bot, and acts immediately, sending reveal to server, either not waiting for the animation or playing it more quickly than Player 1
4. Player 1 finally calls get_game_state after the animation is done
5. Server cm_printGameState:
5.1 line 5913: if( $inHideOpponentSecretMoves && ! $reveal ) { is true, so server will try to hide certain opponent moves
5.2 line 5917: $theirReveal gets set to row they revealed
5.3 line 5928: $theirReveal != $moves[$i] prevents the server from hiding their move for the revealed row
Ah ha!
If I ever put my bot up, I was planning on having it avoid certain publicly announced stakes including games < ~5c, since those are likely to be new players, and they're probably better off learning how humans play. Maybe it would also hold back on joining a game until it's been open for at least a minute or two, so humans get preference.
That's a very unusual sample magic square.
You can extract the magic square from the log saved to recordedGames/, just need to pull it out with a regex.
There were tons of third party tools made for The Castle Doctrine!
Off topic, but I'd never heard of any and am curious. I only know about castledraft and the two (?) drafting sites that were made before it.
Jason has also said more directly that he wouldn't consider doing that. The quote you gave was about building more capabilities into the client, such as a 'random pick' button.
Cool! Nice detective work.
It's not my bot. I did some game-theoretic investigations and started work on a bot but haven't touched it since last year. It would play better than that : ) I was also doing it just for the challenge.
Well, when you think about it, right now the cost of training a bot pales in comparison to what you might make with a bot that wins 51% of it's games.
Right now? Regardless of when you're running the bot, you can train it for peanuts on 1 cent games. But potential for profit will go up as more players join the game and number of higher stake games increase.
I don't think it has been released, but it will be soon. I guess you mean that you can now get in by putting in the right anagram.
Both computermouth and Pox were interested in either porting the game to the web or creating a web-based client for it, see here. And I got an android port working for fun, but haven't gotten around to cleaning up and releasing the code back, and it needs some work to be playable (most significantly the buttons are too small to hit).