+- Ludii Forum (https://ludii.games/forums)
+-- Forum: Suggestions (https://ludii.games/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Forum: Ludii Features / Services (https://ludii.games/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Thread: games based on stacking balls? (/showthread.php?tid=228)
games based on stacking balls? - AlekErickson - 10-31-2020
would be nice to have boards where you can make pyramids of balls.
I think Margo , shibumi, and others use a square array of foundational balls.
I am interested in programming a game where a Hexagonal array of foundational balls is used, where balls get placed on top of this array, and connectivity is defined by sharing a foundational ball.
Do these class of boards exist in Ludii?
RE: games based on stacking balls? - cambolbro - 10-31-2020
We support square pyramidal stacking boards as per Shibumi games, see Spline.lud for an example. The syntax is:
(board (square 4 pyramidal:true) use:Vertex)
(piece "Ball" Each)
We don't support hexagonal pyramidal stacking boards due to phase problems. In a fully packed hex layer, two phases exist at the interstitial points where further balls can be stacked, and if these further stackings are not all made in the same phase then the subsequent packing is sparse and degenerate cases can occur. This is the reason that games like Lazo that involve a hexagonal pyramidal stacking use oddly shaped pieces to guarantee that all stackings are made in the same phase.
This figure summarises the problem: http://cambolbro.com/games/hex-stacking.png
Though you might have found a solution to the phase problem by defining connectivity through the foundational ball! But then what happens when the stacking builds up and the foundational ball is no longer visible? Maybe it's sufficient to require the foundational ball to be at least partially visible for it to allow connections.
Have you tested whether your game actually works in practice or is this just theoretical for now?
We'll look into this and might support hexagonal pyramidal stacking boards in future.
RE: games based on stacking balls? - Michael - 10-31-2020
Cameron, see here.
Alek, I have attached the beginnings of a different way of doing this. I don't know how to work with large pieces yet, so it's a bit of a mess. You have to choose the right move for the tile to be correct. If you only click on horizontal diamonds, you can pick the first in the list for placing a "upper" hex and the last in the list for a "lower" hex.
RE: games based on stacking balls? - cambolbro - 10-31-2020
Michal, nice idea!
Thinking about it more, I suspect that we can support hexagonal stacking boards but only the first two layers. Layer 0 (ground) is no problem (standard hexagonal arrangement) then layer 1 can become sparsely packed, depending on whether all balls are stacked in the same phase or not.
Layer 2 then becomes problematic if there's a mixture of phase 1 and 2 in layer 1, as this can result in layer 2 balls at different physical heights. Admittedly, only a few different heights, but when you then stack balls on the potentially sparse layer 2 packing the geometry gets complex.
We'll probably only support regular 3D arrangements, so therefore only two layers if the basis is hexagonal. But this might be enough for the Go variant suggested on the BGG page: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2531311/article/36158018#36158018
RE: games based on stacking balls? - Michael - 10-31-2020
(10-31-2020, 12:26 PM)cambolbro Wrote: Michal, nice idea!
Thinking about it more, I suspect that we can support hexagonal stacking boards but only to height 2. Layer 0 is no problem (standard hexagonal arrangement) then layer 1 can become sparsely packed, depending on whether all balls are stacked in the same phase or not.
Layer 2 then becomes problematic if there's a mixture of phase 1 and 2 in layer 1, as this can result in layer 2 balls at different physical heights. Admittedly, only a few different heights, but when you then stack balls on the potentially sparse layer 2 packing the geometry gets complex.
We'll probably only support regular 3D arrangements, so therefore only two layers if the basis is hexagonal. But this might be enough for the Go variant suggested on the BGG page: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2531311/article/36158018#36158018
Great to hear!
(Just in case there was confusion, I am not the Michał (MikeZapawa in these forums) who came up with that idea.)
RE: games based on stacking balls? - AlekErickson - 10-31-2020
But - the games i'm thinking of playing and designing only would need one layer on top of the foundational layer.
RE: games based on stacking balls? - Larearme1940 - 03-31-2024
Use multiple layers of a 2D board to represent the height of the pyramid.
Encode ball placement and connectivity through piece types or properties.
RE: games based on stacking balls? - bekeanloinse56 - 04-25-2024
(10-31-2020, 12:44 PM)Michael Wrote:Restricting the design to regular 3D arrangements with two layers on a hexagonal base can still offer interesting gameplay possibilities, especially for a Go variant as suggested on the BoardGameGeek page you mentioned. This limitation may actually enhance the strategic depth of the game by keeping the mechanics more straightforward while still allowing for engaging and dynamic gameplay.(10-31-2020, 12:26 PM)cambolbro Wrote: Michal, nice idea!
Thinking about it more, I suspect that we can support hexagonal stacking boards but only to height 2. Layer 0 is no problem (standard hexagonal arrangement) then layer 1 can become sparsely packed, depending on whether all balls are stacked in the same phase or not.
Layer 2 then becomes problematic if there's a mixture of phase 1 and 2 in layer 1, as this can result in layer 2 balls at different physical heights. Admittedly, only a few different heights, but when you then stack balls on the potentially sparse layer 2 packing the geometry gets complex.
We'll probably only support regular 3D arrangements, so therefore only two layers if the basis is hexagonal. But this might be enough for the Go variant suggested on the BGG infinite craft page: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2531311/article/36158018#36158018
Great to hear!
(Just in case there was confusion, I am not the Michał (MikeZapawa in these forums) who came up with that idea.)