Sounds difficult i mean i'm having trouble understanding almost everything

Bourse? is that even a word?
Zloty? is that even a word?

i mean i really don't get these words

in b4 bringing out the diconary

Bourse is basically a fancy word for Stock Exchange.
The złoty is the currency of Poland.

So yes, they are words, but maybe they should change:

Warshare (instead of warfare... geddit?)
₩ (for whatever fictitious currency we may conceive)

I support the Weuro!
Well, I think Warling is the best idea posted for so far, it doesn't directly relate to sterling, but zloty is something nobody has ever heard of except for the Polish.

Thanks for all the comments!


|>I do think you might want to change rule 6, because it'd make making profit far too easy.
If I see that a team's income on turn 3 is already 36 and I can still buy a share for 15 złoty, something weird would have to happen for me not to make profit.
Therefore, if I buy a share on turn 3, it'd be better if you used turn 5 prices, i.e. I "order" a share that I get on turn 5 for the turn 5 price.

I can see your point: I'd like to use more regular intervals, but the calculations and keeping track of the turn timings would be horrendous. Ordering in advance would be interesting, but could get intricate given different games will move at different speeds: you'd probably have to be able to sell on the spot still, and only order "buys". I'll have to get my head round that one!


|>By the way, if we're using złoty as a currency, then I suppose the map will be Poland.

Nooo...don't like Poland, might do AD1600. Which does have Poland in it...I just like the sound of Zloty. Warlight Ducats also has a ring to it.


|>You'd have to tailor the map and total map income such that 100 currency could actually purchase a team with a non-winning income. In the Poland map, for instance, 3v3 could easily be 200 income verses 200 income. A very fair fight, but impossible for someone to buy into.

Good point, I'll have to check that out...might be that increasing the start money is the best way.


|>Bourse? is that even a word?

Yes. Way back when turn-based games were young, in the 1980's, this sort of game was called a bourse, so I'll stick with that. And it might bring Warlight a bit of sophistication :-)

Well, złoty is a specifically Polish currency, which did exist in AD 1600, but would more likely be called florin or guilder in English.
Plus if we use złoty as a currency, some people may think we're using real money.
The won is less common, plus the link between ₩ (or Wl.) and Warlight is more obvious.
And even with no actual name, I think ₩ is a pretty suitable currency sign.

As for rule 6, I agree keeping track of all timings would be a horrendous jobs. I think this would count for sales just as well as buys.
Then again, I agree that you should be able to sell on the spot and, if that's possible, you should be able to buy on the spot, too.
Could we perhaps ask the the game's contenders to post the incomes after every turn?

Otherwise, you could consider having only one share for each team, effectively meaning you *buy a team*. That could make things simpler, but it should be a last resort.

As for the start money, incomes will only go up in the early turns. Soon, people will have at least ₩ 1,000 at their disposal, so that should be enough to buy into a lucrative match.

Will the tournament be a Round Robin and how many teams will be in it?

I think the WL API could be used to get an overview of income in each turn. BUT...:

- You'll need a member to run the it: `<error>This API may only be used by members</error>`
- It doesn't tell you what the incomes for each player are, the analyzer will have to calculate that on its own. (Note: do NOT take a shortcut and sum the reinforcements placed at the beginning of each turn, because those also include card effects (Reinforcement Cards and Sanctions Cards).
- The wiki doesn't specifically mention whether the API gives you time stamps for each turn, so you might have to add those manually.

No matter which way you keep track of what happens in the game, you'll need to agree on a (very strictly defined!) format for posting purchasing / selling orders in the forum, so that those can be parsed automatically as well.

Before the summer holidays I definitely won't have time to write code for a just-for-fun project like this (and maybe not even until quite a bit later), so all I can do is give advice, I can't write the actual program.

Im in, this sounds fun.

Would it not be possible to fix games?
will players involved in the money side be able to play in games?

|> Would it not be possible to fix games?
will players involved in the money side be able to play in games?

|> 9. Conflict of interest: this is a free market, conflict of interest is permitted. Conflict of interest may indeed even be an advantage.

Buying stock in an opponent you just (secretly) truced with, buying stock in yourself when you know you're about to gain a lot of bonuses next turn, selling stock in yourself when you have a feeling you're gonna be overrun next turn, selling stock in an opponent you are about to decimate, all perfectly legal.
Selling stock in yourself when you're deliberately (and unnecessarily) going to suicide, well, I guess it's legal... :( On the plus side, each person can only do this once, then they're out of the tournament (but not out of the meta-game).

@ Tacticus in my opinion thats all in the fun of the game. besides you have to permit conflict of interest because there is no real way to police it




|> Selling stock in yourself when you're deliberately (and unnecessarily) going to suicide, well, I guess it's legal... :( On the plus side, each person can only do this once, then they're out of the tournament (but not out of the meta-game).

the good thing about this is that you cant make money from doing this only lose it for others

oh...unless you of course bet on the person you know who is killing you.

personnaly i think its all in the fun of the game but if you did want to stop this you could just stop people from betting on games that they are playing in

i cant wait to get this started now :D

Why not add a rule you can't bet on any player in a game you are playing in?

Alternative accounts. Plus if you would be able to enforce it you'd give the best player a pretty big disadvantage.

Well, then lets only open the bourse and meta-games for players who have played over 150 or more games? It it easy to make a dozen accounts, but it's a lot harder to play 150 games on each. And it keeps the newbies out who don't even know what a territory is.

|> Why not add a rule you can't bet on any player in a game you are playing in?

That question made me wonder, will players be in multiple games at the same time? That would greatly change the way the system works. If you use a "standard" tournament, everyone plays a match, loser is out, winner continues to the next round, this is not a problem of course, but I can't find a post stating the kind of tournament.

Besides, you don't want to have to prohibit people from talking about their matches with others, so (if people can't buy stock in their own match anyway), you should expect quite a lot of "secret" information to leak to friends of the players. Unless you want to create a committee which can investigate reports of illegal trading (hint: you don't want to), I think it's a lot easier to just declare all trading legal and solve the problem that way.

---

|> the good thing about this is that you cant make money from doing this only lose it for others
|>
|> oh...unless you of course bet on the person you know who is killing you.

Wait, so we're not going to have options, short selling and complicated tricks even bankers themselves don't fully understand? :( But that's boring, then it will (largely) make sense and reward good judgement instead of rewarding insanely complex tricks with millions of dollars which may or may not have been yours to begin with.
*Oh boy, I really hope we don't have too many bankers on this forum! :p*

Yup, since the crisis all the former bankers have gone on the internet...

|> Well, then lets only open the bourse and meta-games for players who have played over 150 or more games? It it easy to make a dozen accounts, but it's a lot harder to play 150 games on each. And it keeps the newbies out who don't even know what a territory is.

Seconded =)

In fact, Not-Spartacus already declared all trade legal and said you couldn't buy shares you can't afford.
Somehow a round robin tournament seems most suitable to me. I can't find any good reasons, but hey, it's a bourse, so who needs reason?

I will try to see if this can be fit into my schedule. :)

|>I think the WL API could be used to get an overview of income in each turn.

I think you're right, but given it doesn't show income (bit of an omission that!) it would be way too complex for me to use.

|>Well, then lets only open the bourse and meta-games for players who have played over 150 or more games? It it easy to make a dozen accounts, but it's a lot harder to play 150 games on each. And it keeps the newbies out who don't even know what a territory is.

I'll put a threshold on the tournament: maybe not as high as 150 but high enough

|>Somehow a round robin tournament seems most suitable to me. I can't find any good reasons, but hey, it's a bourse, so who needs reason?

I hadn't thought of a round robin, but possibly that might be an idea.

----
Beginning to wonder what I've let myself in for here :-)

|> I think you're right, but given it doesn't show income (bit of an omission that!) it would be way too complex for me to use.

Then what are you planning to do? Manually figuring everything out? That's ludicrous! :o

I'll make you a deal.

- You decide on which map the tournament is going to take place.
- You find a game on that map (preferably with some "special" things happening, such as people surrendering and getting booted and stuff, so it will be a realistic sample).
- You send me the XML file returned by http://warlight.net/API/GameFeed.aspx?GameID=123456 (with of course the correct game ID substituted). Since I'm not a member, I've never actually seen what it returns.
- Give me two weeks (no promise! just an estimate) and I'll send you a program to parse such an XML file into a turn-by-turn overview of incomes.

The format I currently have in mind would be:

Game ID: 123456
--------------------------------------------------------
Player:
Turn: Timestamp: not_sp. RvW PlayerC PlayerD
1 20120303@125842 5 5 5 5
2 20120303@125937 5 5 5 5
3 20120303@125959 8 8 5 7
(...)
## 20120303@133742 0 123 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------
Reason game ended: Victory of RvW

Those timestamps and the last line will only be there if it's very easy to determine! Let me know if it would be a big help to have per-team totals as well (in that case, make sure the sample game log you send me has teams too).

Then whenever a game ends, you can get the XML, run it through the program and update everyone's value. You'll have to do that by hand, or find someone else to write a program to do that automatically though. It's just that this part is relatively easy to do and will save you lots of time (especially if the timestamp can be automatically determined).

The API also gives you an easy way to [find all the game IDs for a given tournament](http://wiki.warlight.net/index.php/Game_ID_feed_API).