Nice new option. I look forward to trying it out.

This doesn't change the existing "no in-game messaging" option does it? Sometimes a little extra time is nice during builds in gunboat games to think about strategy.

I like this, well done. I would add to those calling for this to be the default option.

I am indifferent to if this becomes the default. However, if it does become default the change should be matched with a month long banner message for all players who dont use the forum and won't be aware.

They would find out as soon as they played a game ;-)

Nice feature ATC!
I'll definitely have to try it out. I've only played one F2F game, and that was ages ago, so I'm looking forward to trying it out again.
I would support being able to set different lengths for Builds/Retreats/Diplomacy phases, like what playdip has.

Ok then, who wants to give it a try?

gameID=173605

Let's see how this affects a two-day game!

Firstus, thanks so much to the excellent development team for this awesome feature as well as many other recently-implemented sweet changes.

Secondus, I want to put in a plug for at least having the option to keep the separate save and ready buttons on build/retreat phases in a rulebook press game. There are lots of reasons one might not be quite "ready" for the turn to run - outside of waiting for press - but still wanting to get in his/her orders. Not sure if this is an easy or hard change, and I understand there is an impetus to avoid "choice proliferation," but just wanted to put in a plug for my own preferred approach.

Actually, I think the ideal set up would be rulebook press with separate save/ready buttons for all phases AND an option to set a different time frame for retreat/build phases (eg, 48 hours for moves, 12 hours for retreats/builds) but I imagine that return on development time for adding that option would not be high compared to some of the other things you all are working on...

Thanks again!

Here's a live game with rulebook press starting soon in case anyone wanted to play:
gameID=173621

I just finished a live game of RB Press, and I agree with CNote. The lack of a Save button was annoying, and I believe, unnecessary. The only reasoning behind removing it that I can see is that there's no press to wait for, and thus change your moves about. However, there are other reasons behind the save button. Especially in Live games, being able to control the length of the phase is useful. Such as when you need to use the washroom... I'm sure even with the save button, retreat and build phases still will progress faster, from the lack of press.
Also, you still can save, and not ready your retreats/builds, if you Ready, then Not Ready. Only works if the other's haven't readied yet, though.

Just adding agreement to:

1) I don't care either way about Press/No Press during retreats and builds, but would tend to want longer diplomacy phases if there is no press.
2) Please keep the save button. For those that like to use the "Preview" feature, and double-check that they like the way things look before submitting, this would become more difficult if you are worried about the game advancing after you 'Ready' your moves.

The save button is only unavailable in retreats and builds - are you previewing your retreats and builds?

I do. Who wants to accidently retreat two units to the same place for example.

Hm. We'll have to have a think about how to make preview work with auto-ready.

Maybe we can add a second button that *collects* a moveset to *keep* it, but doesn't Ready, just *conserves*, or, one might say, *reserves* the moves and commits to them IFF the phase deadline is hit.

I think this would save a lot of trouble. Thoughts?

Lol Valis +1.

And yes, ATC, I was talking about Retreats/builds. I semi-neurotically double-check everything before ever Readying on any phase.

Great idea Valis. Why don't we do that, ATC? :P

I do preview my builds and retreats. Unsurprisingly, I've made mistakes in them before.

I'm not sure I understand why removing the Save button is necessary.

It was intended to improve live games by speeding them up (and having the site support a game mode that people are regularly playing by agreement anyway). Other sites that do rulebook press also do it this way.

The loss of preview is a shame. It'd be good to keep preview and have auto ready, but preview is currently tied to saving. More thinking is required, I think.

maybe we could move the save and ready buttons further apart.

Has anyone here ever played by mail/email? What are the rules for retreat and builds their usually? Is it no communication or is communication usually allowed.

I always assumed that sole reason for not allowing communication during these phases in face to face game was to save time (Diplomacy games being so long). But with online games (especially long phase games) time is not an issue.

I like save and ready regardless of the phase. You need that buffer because sometimes ones orders do not go through the way you expect.

I guess there can be advantages to no press retreats and builds. No need to explain your choices to your ally...

My impression is more that it's impractical to restrict press in a play by mail game - and that this relaxing of rules was brought over to email and then online play, since each was a successor of the previous.

Regardless of why the restriction was relaxed in the past, it's an attractive method of play for those who want to follow the rulebook, or those who want to practice for FTF tournaments.

Great news! The ability to block diplomacy during retreat and disbanding phases has been something that I have asked for since August 2009 (threadID=463373). I would love to see 'per rulebook' public press too.

A_Tin_Can: How about fixing this for your next project?
https://web.archive.org/web/20100620133802/http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?threadID=494283
Doesn't look easy, but do you think it can be done?

Ahhh... thanks JECE, I wondered where all the old threads had gone. Good to know they can still be accessed.

So once you Save build orders, are you locked in? What if you missed an order? Will it be skipped/deferred?

Most weren't archived by the Internet Archive. I suspect that Kestas or zultar has an archive somewhere since most users' Threads and Replies pages still show all the old messages. Those Threads and Replies pages are still live even though they haven't been updated in a year and are no longer linked to in users' Profile pages.


Anyway, anyone ready for a semicolon? threadID=1060000

lol. That is funny JECE. You have a good memory if you can remember that thread :)

JECE: we've spoken about the cross issue before, I think. It's cosmetic only, and doesn't affect order resolution or the text list of orders. Fixing it would require rewriting the adjudicator, which is something we're obviously not keen to do.

However, I'm working on a new version of the map, which will include the ability to mouseover unts and see what they were ordered. That might reduce the need for the large map to find out what exactly happened.

The semicolon is an easy fix, and I'll do it later tonight if I remember.