Role Selection: not sure which way to go

[slimy]

I just got permission to work on a module for Westphalia. This has an interesting problem: Which player plays which role is decided by negotiation during the course of the game. I can see some relevant threads: Player sides - Request, Sides in Vassal 4. However I can see two possible approaches for tackling this in VASSAL 3 and I think I should consider carefully before picking an approach.

In the game role selection works as follows: There is a deck of 6 role cards which are dealt out to the players: Austria, Sweden, Spain, France, Dutch republic and Bavaria. Then each player can negotiate to get a different role:

Shuffle the six Powers cards and deal one to each player. Players may at this time trade these cards (and thus what Power they will play), and may utilize anything that would be controlled at the start of the game by their desired Power to facilitate these trades. (For example, if Tom is dealt Sweden but wants to play Austria, he can offer to give Sweden possession of one of Austria’s territories.) Once these negotiations have concluded, the players take the starting Units, Debts, and Prestige as indicated on their cards, as well as the wooden pieces associated with that Power and an Arrears card. One disc from each player is set aside as an Initiative Marker

So once role selection is complete the roles are fixed and cannot be changed.

The only super-duper secret bit of the game is the Austrian goal card. There is a deck of 6. The Austria player deals 3 and chooses 1. The other 5 cards are removed from the game.

I have two alternative implementation ideas: The Convener and Greek to Side mapping.

There are some commonalities between the two implementations which I will state first.

There is a Role Selection window with the 6 role cards as a deck. There are 6 plaques with the players’ names defined on them (like how the Pax Renaissance module does it). The person setting up the game (Convener or Alpha depending on implementation), deals out these cards to the plaques. They announce it to the players who can negotiate. Once these negotiations are complete the deals are implemented and a button is pressed locking the cards into place. (See page 59 in the designer’s guide).

Each of the 6 game sides has a window (Map Window or Private Hand depending on implementation). The Austrian window has a deck of 6 Austrian goal cards. However only “Austria” can see the face up side of an Austrian goal card. There is a command to deal 3 Austrian goals cards and this also removes the other 3 cards from the game. Each card also has a key/menu command which selects one and removes the others from the game. Only “Austria” can see this command. Of course what “Austria” means depends on the implementation.

Implentation plan 1: The convener

There are 7 sides: The Convener, Austria, Bavaria, Sweden, France, Dutch, Spain. The Convener side is only used during the preliminary negotiations. All the other sides have a private window which is owned by them and the Convener. In fact the Convener jointly owns everything except for the Austrian goal cards. All private windows are publicly visible.

The way this works in practice is that the Convener sets up the game. The other players log on as observers (not especially crucial if playing PBEM as the convener could just send out a picture of the Role-Selection window.) Only the Convener can press the “role selection lock” button. Once this button is pressed the players log on as their respective sides.

Implentation plan 2: Greek to Side mapping

There are 6 sides: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, Zeta. Alpha has control of the “role selection lock” button and also the turn counter apparatus. There are number of global properties that map the Greek side name to the “in-game” side name. These properties are set by the role-selection lock process. There is a calculated property that says what the current “in-game” side name is.

In this implementation the only way I can mask the Austrian goal cards is using layers though I believe that is doable. I cannot restrict access to most objects though I do not see that as a fatal issue.

The way this works in practice is that the Alpha player sets up the game. Other players log on as the other greeks. Any player can implement the preliminary negotiation deals, but Alpha is responsible for checking that everyone has had their say and that the deals have been implemented correctly. When Alpha is satisfied they press the “role selection lock” button and the game begins in practice.

So help me, please?

Can anyone see any issues with either plan? In particular I only play PBEM so there may be issues in real-time play I have not thought of. The biggest issue in the Convener implementation I can see is someone logging on prematurely as a normal side but I cannot see that they can do any real damage. The biggest issue I can see with the Greek implementation is that someone might deal the Austrian goal cards prematurely but that can simply be undone.

[shilinski]

A couple questions before I chime in.
Why do you need a “role selection lock” button? What purpose does it serve?
Why do you need private windows?

[slimy]

@shilinski

A couple questions before I chime in.
Why do you need a “role selection lock” button? What purpose does it serve?

Well the roles are not tradeable once that phase of negotiations are concluded. I think it is worth locking it down. I admit it would not necessarily be against the spirit of VASSAL to leave it unlocked, but I think it is worth it. Especially when you consider that the role determines access to the Austrian Goal card and that is somewhat more important.

@shilinski

Why do you need private windows?

Much less important. And certainly they need to be visible to all players. (Only the Austrian goal cards need to be secret.) But the pieces in those windows are owned by the relevant players and I think it is a valid approach to say that only the owner can move those resources.

[shilinski]

Then a reminder. When you take anything like a card and mask it, you own it. You can configure a mask so that only the owner sees what’s on the face side and everyone else sees only the back. This means when the Austrian player takes the Austrian cards and puts them facedown (when can happen automatically if he draws from a deck), only the Austrian player can examine those cards. This fact can be a simple solution to (some of / all of) your problem.

If it were me, I would designate the player sides as colors. When each player takes control of a nation, they would mask anything they now own that is maskable, and they would see only their masked pieces (if you implement mask as I said).

Why colors? Because I would add generic colored pieces to the game to help playing it online. For example, in a face to face game, You would point to Bavaria with your big fat finger and say “I’m attacking here with those and those pieces, so start your whining now.” You can’t do that in an online game. Your only recourse is to type it all out in the chat window. Unless, you have an arrow piece to substitute for your finger. I have colored arrows in all my games just for that purpose. And hit point markers too. I did the last version of Pax Renaissance, and there are arrows in that too!

[slimy]

@shilinski

Then a reminder. When you take anything like a card and mask it, you own it. You can configure a mask so that only the owner sees what’s on the face side and everyone else sees only the back. This means when the Austrian player takes the Austrian cards and puts them facedown (when can happen automatically if he draws from a deck), only the Austrian player can examine those cards. This fact can be a simple solution to (some of / all of) your problem.

That’s an interesting point. Thank you.

@shilinski

If it were me, I would designate the player sides as colors. When each player takes control of a nation, they would mask anything they now own that is maskable, and they would see only their masked pieces (if you implement mask as I said).

Colours won’t work because the sides already have colours. Austria is black for example.

@shilinski

Why colors? Because I would add generic colored pieces to the game to help playing it online. For example, in a face to face game, You would point to Bavaria with your big fat finger and say “I’m attacking here with those and those pieces, so start your whining now.” You can’t do that in an online game. Your only recourse is to type it all out in the chat window. Unless, you have an arrow piece to substitute for your finger. I have colored arrows in all my games just for that purpose. And hit point markers too. I did the last version of Pax Renaissance, and there are arrows in that too!

I am familiar with Pax Renaissance. Thanks for your work on it. I think Westphalia needs arrows and probably things like post-it notes to remind people of deals etc. I think I could also make the arrows look like hands, be rotatable and have editable labels. There are different play styles obviously but as a negotiation game I think the ability to label the board is very necessary.

Actually when you attack in Westphalia the opponents sides have options other than whining.

[msoong]

I am happy you are working on this game. Sounds interesting and our group of 6 (who plays on VASSAL exclusively now in these time of social distancing) thank you…