Re: Scramble boards

[Kevin Walker <kwalker@xmission.com>]

David -

You argue convincingly that it would be difficult to implement 
graphical representations of all PBeM games in one fell swoop, but I 
don't think that's the issue.  It should be feasible to write modules 
for individual games in a piecemeal fashion.  A module should take as 
input the internal PBeM representation of the board, and emit a GIF 
or PNG representation of the board. For games that have a graphic 
option, players and subscribers could indicate whether they want to 
receive the graphic file attached to their email.  If some games 
never implement the graphics, that's not a problem.

Note that I'm not claiming that it would be worthwhile to provide the 
option for graphic boards -- I haven't really thought about that 
question.  I'm just saying that it's not necessary to treat all games 
the same.

>Mancala can have lots
>of stones in one bowl; transferring that game to graphics might be
>LESS easy to read than with the text representation, which lists the
>numbers of stones in each bowl.

This problem is easily solved -- see the Playsite implementation of Mancala.

>Possibly even worse than
>the initial programming, is satisfying all the humans who use the
>server, afterward. You know how people are- the more you give them,
>the more they want. There would be an endless series of requests:
>"I want to change my colors!" "I want a smaller/larger image!" "I want
>a drink of water!" :-)

That is certainly true, as I have learned from experience -- 
experience with you, among other people! :)  I'm happy to implement 
some of the feature requests I get.  Others I politely ignore.  (BTW, 
there's a chance I'll have time to implement the Twixt board 
appearance options you requested.)

Kevin


At 12:03 PM -0400 on 4/1/01, David J Bush wrote:

>Hello Lars, everyone,
>|
>| It'd be relatively simple to make a backend that creates a GIF/PNG
>| image and transmits this to the users in the emails...
>
>Uh... "relatively simple" ?? Compared to what? Where would all these
>images come from? Shogi, for example, traditionally uses Japanese
>ideograms for pieces. Some shogi players would prefer this, while
>others would probably want some sort of international set of images,
>and there would probably be much discussion about what that should be.
>
>Maybe the generic backend would be relatively simple to program, but
>implementing it on the server could lead to all sorts of problems.
>The image would have to have layers, at least one for the board and
>one for the pieces. There would need to be room for additional info
>besides what's on the board; shogi for example lists the captured pieces
>belonging to each player. There are probably all sorts of exceptions and
>special cases that would need to be considered. Mancala can have lots
>of stones in one bowl; transferring that game to graphics might be
>LESS easy to read than with the text representation, which lists the
>numbers of stones in each bowl.
>
>The official Y board is not a pure hexagonal grid; three of the interior
>cells have five neighbors. The grid looks like a flattened-out section
>of a geodesic dome. Try implementing that! MonsterQubic is a three-
>dimensional grid, 6x6x6. Are you going to show a perspective image of
>that? Terrace is another board with a 3-d aspect to it.
>
>I mention these examples just to show the magnitude of the task ahead
>of anyone who would contemplate doing this. Possibly even worse than
>the initial programming, is satisfying all the humans who use the
>server, afterward. You know how people are- the more you give them,
>the more they want. There would be an endless series of requests:
>"I want to change my colors!" "I want a smaller/larger image!" "I want
>a drink of water!" :-)
>
>David
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net with
>	unsubscribe pbmserv-users
>as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.