[Standards-JIG] New version of chess game protocol
Michal vorner Vaner
michal.vaner at kdemail.net
Sun Oct 8 21:00:25 UTC 2006
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:10:31PM +0100, Richard Dobson wrote:
> >And maybe to have list of known referee bots and play bots as well.
> Play bots quite possibly, as I will detail below I dont think referee
> bots are really needed, and even if they are there there is no real
> reason to expose them to the clients of the game server.
> >>When you get to the level in the hierarchy of a particular game for
> >>example /board/chess you would get a list (in disco) of the games
> >>currently in progress e.g.
> >>chess4433 at games.jabber.org
> >>chess33422 at games.jabber.org
> >>chess34 at games.jabber.org
> >>chess45332 at games.jabber.org
> >Well, maybe, but maybe just different kind of addressing, since you need
> >to address somehow sub-group of the game as well (like only my team).
> Why would you want that??, the above JIDs are for currently active game
They do not look too much nice to me. And, when I want bots to live on
the component, then one JID means bot and other means game.
And, if I want to send messages in a game to:
a) Only selected player
b) Some set of players, lets say one team
c) All of them
Do I need to have more game JIDs, each for the team and other for all,
or is it possible to do otherwise?
> >I would suggest piping this trough some kind of referee so the component
> >itself does not need to understand all the games (the referee may of
> >course be part of the component, but it may be a bot on the server,
> >somewhere completely elsewhere or human as well) and the component would
> >know a list of public referees.
> >Anyone could choose a referee or leave it on the server to choose one
> >for the game, or choose none (or dummy one, which would allow anything).
> >However, a game with referee would be only if not simple 1<->1, as a
> >optional plugin of the component and resending process.
> As I will detail further below I dont think the referee bots are really
> necessary, but if you do want them then there is no real reason for the
> game server to expose them to the clients, they should be something
> internal to the implementation of the game server and automatically
> assigned when games are created without the clients even knowing they
> exist, otherwise it creates a completely unnecessary level of complexity.
> >>Similar to how the workgroups protocol works if a chat room
> >>is needed in a game the game server component will create the room and
> >>give its address to all the participants (i.e. chess34 at muc.jabber.org)
> >Well, if you have the game component, you can do the resending from
> >there, since (as I said before), muc is not well suited for games, it
> >can do only messages, it alters presence and is for text chats.
> That was the whole point, the muc room is just there for chat between
> the participants of the game nothing more, no game control messages go
> through it, they naturally go to the game component.
> >Yes, but I want to have the game components to know nothing of each
> >individual game and pick the referee, game master, whatever, from
> >different JIDs (which may be on the component directly, of course).
> >I will describe this idea once I get home, I'm in hurry now.
> Its an interesting idea but I think it makes things unnecessarily
> complex, its far better to have the game server understand the games
> itself, although if you really want a separate third party validating
> moves/game logic etc IMO that doesnt need to be part of this particular
> protocol and is more of an implementation issue as the clients of the
> game server shouldnt need to know that a third party is validating it
> all rather than the server itself, it should be completely transparent
> with the clients never knowing its even there.
Well, the idea about the referee bots was that:
1) If the client does not specify one, the component assigns you one.
2) If you want different referee, you can choose (if you want special
rules, or you want a real person to be a referee)
They are exposed for users so they can choose different one than the
default or bring their own if they need it.
And I do not think a game component which knows all the rules of all the
games is a good idea. If you have 100 games with each 10 variants, you
have quite big piece of code I would not like to debug personally. If
someone comes with a new variant, you need to replace the whole
component. Same comes if you find a bug in one game? Or when admin does
not want some particular game on his server (let's say there is a game
A, whose validation takes huge CPU time and so many people play it the
server becomes unusable)? This way, users can start their own referees,
if really forced to, but do not need to care (nor the clients do) under
This email was generated by a biological random generator.
If you want more random text, just respond to this email.
Michal "vorner" Vaner
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Standards