| Author |
Message |
Shane Freeman (Thegreathabudabi)
New member
Username: Thegreathabudabi
Post Number: 29
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 - 2:14 pm: | |
Is there a way to set a group of arguments that are placed with the move macros and then define "symetries" such that each argument will be replaced with a different argument for each player?
For Ex:
(PAWN_MOVE n P1?) Where n is always going to be n no matter what player, but P1? will change depending on what player is moving the Pawn.
I tried to use the basic (symmetry P2 (P1? P2?)) for this, but P1? isn't a direction, so it wouldn't let me do it.
Or even if I could use:
(PAWN_MOVE n $1) and then somehow pass in the argument for $1 from each player.
I have an idea where I use piece attributes to determine the $1 within the move sequence, but am hoping there is a more simple solution.
- Shane |
Shane Freeman (Thegreathabudabi)
New member
Username: Thegreathabudabi
Post Number: 30
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2008 - 4:45 pm: | |
Well Peeps, I fooled around with this idea for an hour or so, and this is what I ended up with.
I was trying to use a piece attribute (P1?) in my move arguments, and then use symmetries for my other 7 players to change that attribute to: P2? for player 2, P3? for player 3.... P8? for player 8.
ZoG wouldn't allow it because those arguments were not directional moves.
So I defined 8 new moves, P1? - P8?, and identified them all as (Pn? 0 0)
ZoG now allows me to do the symmetries, and the conditions under which those arguments are substituted make ZoG view the arguments as <attributes> rather than a direction.
Due to this rather ingeneous workaround, if I may say so myself, I have reduced the expanded code of my program by about 85%. It used to take around 10 minutes for my 8 player variant just to load. Now it takes 40 seconds.
I also took this and applied it to my 4 player variant. I think it made the AI dumber, not sure why, but again I reduced my overhead by about 50%.
Greg - The version of my 4 player variant I sent you, the code was just under 600k. My current revision is at 98k, and I haven't lost any of game aspects. You said before that it was taking too long for the AI to make moves, so you hadn't played an entire game. If you want to give it a try now, I can send you a copy of the newest rev. For that matter, if anyone wants to give it a try I can provide.
- Shane |
Greg Schmidt (Gschmidt2)
New member
Username: Gschmidt2
Post Number: 74
Registered: 1-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, August 17, 2008 - 1:58 pm: | |
Shane - Glad to hear you that you found an effective way round the symmetry issue. You can send the revised version to gchmidt958@yahoo.com
-- Greg |
M Winther (Kalroten)
New member
Username: Kalroten
Post Number: 95
Registered: 1-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, August 17, 2008 - 11:53 pm: | |
You are going to publish on the Zillions site, I hope? A thumbnail image must be created, and an exact image of the board, a short presentation (to the thumbnail), a long presentation, number of variants, game type (checkmate etc.), and number of players. Together with the zip-file it is sent to Ed at submissions(a)zillions-of-games.com
Don't forget to comment the game properly, as you introduce so many new ideas.
/Mats |
Shane Freeman (Thegreathabudabi)
New member
Username: Thegreathabudabi
Post Number: 31
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2008 - 8:27 pm: | |
The 1st revision of Prince Chess has just been submitted to submissions@zillions-of-games.com
Most of the syntax is divided into libraries so that editing the code is simpler. Mats, as far as commenting goes, it was sufficient for myself, but if you find that it is insufficient, let me know.
- Shane |
Shane Freeman (Thegreathabudabi)
New member
Username: Thegreathabudabi
Post Number: 32
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, August 23, 2008 - 4:08 pm: | |
Prince Chess is now available on the website under the name, Prince Chess. |
M Winther (Kalroten)
New member
Username: Kalroten
Post Number: 99
Registered: 1-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 23, 2008 - 11:12 pm: | |
I posted this in another thread, in case you've missed it: Initial remarks: one really needs a 17'' display to play this game. I see no point in these "dungeon" areas. Please remove them. Of course, the external positions will be there anyway, but the board will fit inside a standard 15'' display. I think the head of the pawns should point in the direction they are moving.
/Mats |
|