This coin would be so valuable, not just financially, if there were a simple game any person can play quickly, with no learning curve, no language barrier, no technical limiters.
Agreed. Simple game...Huntercoin had a "newbie area" in the past. Remember the rush out of the gates after disasters? It was possible to get loot from dead hunters, with some luck 100 coins from dead guys who wanted to carry loot from center to the bank strip in the corners. This wasn't trivial, and bots usually lost the first tempo while going through the gate. For 250 blocks, until different colored armies met, no one was killed, and players could stop playing at any time (i.e. all hunters nearer to own base than the enemy) I usually got >1000 coins on such a day (if by chance was aware and could play in this moment) The removal of name_new would have made this even more practical, but something bad happened. A hardfork removed all dropping of loot on disaster death, essentially handing over all spawning coins to the dominator (who camped the center and was unattackable by anyone without infinite time, and could now bank without risk) and the Dark Ages began. That was a long time ago. The real problem is the question how to decide such things and what is better for Huntercoin, absolute monarchy, or some kind of shareholder democracy (+ constitutional monarchy of course). Or something else? The simple game will not get made if there is no chance to get it into Huntercoin mainnet. That's why I made a voting system ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=435170.msg14541434#msg14541434) and everyone can call for votes. e.g hunter Bob on his way to bank sends chat msg like this: (max length is ~1000 chars) # This coin need to do exactly xy and z or will rot
etc etc
1 yea, kinda
2 no way
3 for the revolution of the world! and immediately after that, the last tx this wallet should send until block 1339975 (it's a bit late for 1329975, and perhaps using sendtoname for big numbers is like asking for a nasty typo) sendtoname Bob <big_number>.31339975 Try it out, you'll have my vote! |
|
|
|
i've made hunters, i figured out that the lighter colored squares are the bank
i managed to kill another hunter. i pressed destruct once and nothing happened. then he came on my square and i pressed it again and i won. could you explain this in more detail so that i know what i have to do? i see one of my hunters has 400 life
Use one of the 3 "alternative clients" that are linked in OP. If using BetterQt, just press middle mouse button to get un-blindfolded and see what's happening on the map. Btw, I've put large parts of the functionality that was previously only in the binary releases on Github yesterday, now it's viable to play Huntercoin with an open source client. (once again after a long long time really). Did a test run and it killed an ik while afk, so I give it a good to go  |
|
|
|
but i don't understand, didn't those changes need to be an hard fork?
Yes, this one is purely hypothetical. If the game rules are not set in stone at this point then we should do some brainstorming well in advance. |
|
|
|
Almost as a side effect, a player who want to stop playing, and has at least 1 hunter 3 tiles away from a bank, can be completely logged out with all hunters 7 blocks later. Oh, that is a neat side-effect... reinforcements means faster logout time. Kills 2 birds with one stone. I like this, actually, but maybe it would be good to limit its power somehow... for example, if you had an ability that costs gems or something which can temporarily disable another Hunter's reinforcements ability, that would be interesting. It would be easy to charge a fee in HUC depending on what is in the message field. The fees for new hunters and for destruct are calculated here https://github.com/chronokings/huntercoin/blob/master/src/gamestate.cpp#L527and "destruct" and "message" are both part of "Move". Example for a counter spell that prevents the enemy horde from attacking but not logout: If an hunter is found who said the right word ("negatur egressus"?) not too long ago (60 blocks?) in the message and is near that bank (perhaps adjacent tile only) all summoned are due for despawn+refund before they can move, attack or take damage again. Trivial to implement, everyone additionally get an "ch.stay_in_spawn_area = 2" The spell effect would move around (and die) with the hunter who casted it. The attacker must kill the "gate keeper" before getting in. Or cast it onto yourself to make logout even faster and safer. (it would be too late for an enemy near the bank to kill'em all) |
|
|
|
I think it would certainly change the way the game plays. If some players decide that they disagree with it, not incorporating it into the base protocol would be better for them and their ability to choose.
Perhaps we can really tweak this feature to everyone's liking. I did a prototype implementation, only using the message field. Source: (not compatible with mainnet or official testnet) https://github.com/wiggi/huntercoin/tree/summon-testTestnet-in-box: https://mega.nz/#!TIthjDKC!QjR1zRBDoGLOD7ocbnGFhPrmnie_xyr_pzXtZuVygFg It works indeed like this
I like your idea for calling reinforcements. It sounds relatively easy to implement in proportion to the breadth of strategic options it opens up. It could be done at the base protocol level
[...] hunter name (plus a '!' in this case) as watch-word so Bob and Caesar can confirm that Alice is really their buddy. Alice: "summon Bob and Caesar" Bob: "for Alice!" Caesar: "I'll stay on that bank, Alice!" and the hunter doing the summoning must be on a bank tile 2 blocks after the tx with the message confirms, then it actually happens. Only hunters who answered (3 blocks time to do this) get summoned, to the bank tile. Almost as a side effect, a player who want to stop playing, and has at least 1 hunter 3 tiles away from a bank, can be completely logged out with all hunters 7 blocks later. I also think the common criticism "this game sucks because you have to wait for next block to move" means something else: in battle for wesnoth, or chess, players have to wait too, but individual moves can be important and not only to the next adjacent coors. |
|
|
|
But could it backfire, by making a strong (or an annoyingly aggressive) player stronger (relatively to other players)?
That's true... ...or perhaps not true. Is there really a scenario or strategy where more mobility would help the numerically stronger player(s), all else equal? I think this is not the case. More mobility will always help regular players who aren't already everywhere and don't have infinite time to play at their disposal. |
|
|
|
I like your idea for calling reinforcements. It sounds relatively easy to implement in proportion to the breadth of strategic options it opens up. It could be done at the base protocol level
Currently testing...it doesn't need to use addresses at all (i.e. no disk access to fetch name address), just the message field and hunter name (plus a '!' in this case) as watch-word so Bob and Caesar can confirm that Alice is really their buddy. Alice: "summon Bob and Caesar" Bob: "for Alice!" Caesar: "I'll stay on that bank, Alice!" Very flexible, I think in practice clients would autorespond and perhaps add some flavor. But could it backfire, by making a strong (or an annoyingly aggressive) player stronger (relatively to other players)? |
|
|
|
with only minutes to go, this will be probably be the voting result: Votes (chronon 1299946, mainnet)
--------------------------------
hunter coins motion
storage vault key name gems (*1k) vote id-tag close
HGWJyadJjFnMaEjUaC645wcUKAtaZ6vyTU #Anonymous 0.00 69 #9 1299975 1299975
HGnVxAdPpMECmUPBr9kUDQouYdE7ZPHt2C #Anonymous 0.00 210 #8 1299975 1299975
HKKPtEh5sN8qz2fZMnWnJwgwekZti42m4R #Anonymous 0.00 158 #7 1299975 1299975
HVJWcbZ7yvkY61FfwmpouDTaf7bL6Ju2Q3 #Anonymous 0.00 33 #9 1299975 1299975
HVhyiJihnePkMxhBwobBXhMaddAJmfWUiq Tala 1.10 25 #7 1299975 1299975
Tala: "How fast should a hunter be able to bank + log out? (vote with coins)
#1...100 chronons
#2...60 chronons
#3...40 chronons
#4...30 chronons
#5...20 chronons
#6...15 chronons
#7...10 chronons
#8...7 chronons
#9...5 chronons
Details:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=435170.msg15515861#msg15515861"
Vote tally (chronon 1299975)
----------------------------
coins
vote gems (*1k)
#7 1.10 183
#8 0.00 210
#9 0.00 102
then start working on game/combat mechanics - maybe get wiggi to put something together?
We need a systematic approach, but I keep thinking about this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=435170.msg14230603;topicseen#msg14230603If Huntercoin is more complex with groups of hunters, what if your hunter buddies can be summoned under specific circumstances. Example : stand still next to a bank, then next block up to 7 hunters stand on the 7 tiles adjacent to the same bank. Buddies are defined as hunters that point with their reward address to your (the summoning hunter's) name address, to proof edit: Hunter buddies must post (e.g. as message) where they want to go, to proof they *are* yours and to allow easy implementation with the normal gamestate variables. You could quickly attack any location, just need 1 hunter + 1 bank nearby. Opposing force can call in reinforcements. Or they can easily flee using the same method. And of course very fast logout if you camp at least 1 bank, somewhere. Instant strategic depth? |
|
|
|
i've added a statistic module to my client (wip) and i see that in the past 23 days i spent ~8700 huc as fee to gamefunds, that's insane
from a quick look at the transactions page (not exact values) made 70 hunters (-350 HUC due to 5 HUC fee) coins harvested (+1200) 35 * destructed (-700) 6 kills (+1200) 3 hunters died (-600) rather brutal game if you don't have a time zone for yourself I tested the "betterQt release for block 1300000" (50h+ online), and there are some new things (Currently all but the last is only in the precompiled binaries, but I'll put as much as possible on github): Floating arrows to show waypoints of "unknown" hunters (configurable). Not really sure what/when/how to display without cluttering the screen, but the arrows are "player sprites" so they can have a direction, text and icons like players.  The Hit+Run point system has been fixed so they can always be set while in combat/while destructing. (they can be set with normal mouse click or control-click) If Hit+Run action is executed (i.e. automatic destruct sent) the Hit+Run point now moves randomly (1 tile) and stays active. If bored and no enemy is nearby but some coins, hunters will harvest them. This looks pretty neat and (somtimes) almost passes the turing test. Almost. The last point is the most important Imho -- a built in payment server A NPC or other game entity can now pay any player (any owner of a Huntercoin address) *in HUC* It will do so by auctioning off as many of its own gems as necessary, until the proceeds meet the amount of coins it owes to the player. This implementation ( https://github.com/wiggi/huntercoin/commit/b64600038a1f6f46b10b7738660f69d06c0e1847) allows the game to always (updated each block, 24/7) make an offer to convert gems to Huc at a fixed rate. It's the first test on mainnet, and may still be buggy. If it works, something similar would be "hunter sharing". I.e. Alice puts a "desired logout time" on record with the name address of her hunters, and if Bob's 1 hunter want 10 buddies, Bob will get them, plus an invoice. If Bob doesn't pay then his gems are forfeit, and given to Alice as compensation. (self-enforcing contracts are possible with gems but not with coins) This would allow faster logout, quick access to the harvest areas, and bypass the 5 Huc fee per hunter. No fork (of Huntercoin itself) needed. |
|
|
|
do you know if increasing the outgoing connections is safe? i'll try to look to see if there is a reason for bitcoin and others using 8 as max outgoings.
I think the stated reason translates to "thus who don't contribute (enough) to the network by not being a server shall have only 8 connections". If you try a new coin and see the green bar (without being a server) that's a brownie point. |
|
|
|
it's possible that when f2pool were mining blocks (sha256 and scrypt - both on the same daemon using a mod they did after some time), most people had their IP/nodes connected to f2pool node(s) and saved in addr.dat.
it's possible you are not directly connected to the current miners node or the other players node (limited by 8 connections?) - could be the tx had not yet been received by you but had been received by the miner (tx needs to get relayed and propagate through the network - people receive txs at different times)
maybe solution would be to open the port 8988 (i think it's that port, will chekc later if not) and forward port to your daemon/PC, or if upnp is enabled and working properly (on daemon and router) it should open up itself.
This should then increase your maximum of 8 connections and you will maybe get a direct connection to the miner and player - the more connections you have the faster you will receive txs
I was once on the receiving end of this too, and kicked the limit out: https://github.com/wiggi/huntercoin/blob/betterQt-with-storage/src/net.cpp#L36Must also start the node at least once with because the old setting of 8 is stored hidden from the user (on windows in the registry iirc) |
|
|
|
in past days i lost more than 10 fights because my transaction just got ignored respect others, even if i send it 30 seconds before enemy
this lead me to think that current miner is cheating, ignoring the transaction of players he wants, so i can't relay on the game now
If this isn't cheating, then is even worse because i can't imagine why my destruct didn't goes in at the same time of another one that send the same transaction with same fees, but 30 seconds later!
Is there a way to know if current generated blocks are from the same source?
The element of chance is now much larger than before. No more neat rules like "if tx is 60 seconds old and a block comes out it will not be in, but after 65 seconds it will". But it seems to affect everyone evenly matched. Need to check what happened when f2p scrypt blocks (i.e. HPDTLRqahPPoVx4Vt2HowVGnXEBFp8Ne1m) stopped. |
|
|
|
I think I just invalidated my vote by creating a hunter :/ Didn't look like shortest time was gonna win anyway...
I'd say you never deleted it. And #9 is only 108k behind #8. But this is a problem, without using a specific client there's no feedback of whether the vote was recognized, or deleted or not.
It hung a couple times during sync, but I just assumed for whatever reason that once it was synced it wouldn't hang anymore. Clearly not the case.
Depends. With betterQt on Windows (7, don't know about 10), the risk of hanging goes way down the moment you press middle mouse button in game tab for the first time. But it's never zero, so I prefer to play in a Linux VM.
I guess if you are trying to program a bot or something, you have to balance giving away your future movement with paying tx fees for each movement. I mean, ideally you would move one square at a time and not let anyone know where you're going, but that will start to add up in terms of tx fees I guess to some extent.
The future movement given away can also be a feint. But mostly it's just like calling dibs, if you have a hunter walk to some low tier harvest area, rational opponents may avoid it, if you have 4 hunters walk to a crescent shaped harvest area, rational opponents (especially if only one) may retreat. |
|
|
|
Edit: Man, blocks are coming in super slow, only like two confirms in 20 min or so.
Edit2: 70 min and still only 2 confirms. I guess game isn't really playable atm?
stuck client. https://www.huntercoin.info/blockExplorer shows 20 blocks/40 minutes relatively constant. I use Mint/Mate in VirtualBox to play, it never hangs. Really not even once in almost a year. |
|
|
|
Voted - 9ee879a7cb66c5be7a57ef171ee37ec844df2c6deafa3a2fcfbd627d0a6a9ad8
And it's counted (and line feed chars do make it into the blockchain, only the client's chat window and the chat view in https://www.huntercoin.info/blockExplorer ignore them) adv_motion.txt
Votes (chronon 1296505, mainnet)
--------------------------------
hunter coins motion
storage vault key name gems (*1k) vote id-tag close
HGnVxAdPpMECmUPBr9kUDQouYdE7ZPHt2C #Anonymous 0.00 210 #8 1299975 1299975
HKKPtEh5sN8qz2fZMnWnJwgwekZti42m4R #Anonymous 0.00 158 #7 1299975 1299975
HVJWcbZ7yvkY61FfwmpouDTaf7bL6Ju2Q3 #Anonymous 0.00 33 #9 1299975 1299975
HVhyiJihnePkMxhBwobBXhMaddAJmfWUiq Tala 1.10 25 #7 1299975 1299975
Tala: "How fast should a hunter be able to bank + log out? (vote with coins)
#1...100 chronons
#2...60 chronons
#3...40 chronons
#4...30 chronons
#5...20 chronons
#6...15 chronons
#7...10 chronons
#8...7 chronons
#9...5 chronons
Details:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=435170.msg15515861#msg15515861"
Vote tally (chronon 1299975)
----------------------------
coins
vote gems (*1k)
#7 1.10 183
#8 0.00 210
#9 0.00 33
|
|
|
|
I don't have too many coins, and sync is going really slow, but I vote for the fastest time to logout. I'll try to get synced and make it official.
This would be cool, every extra bit can make the difference between voting being a dud and other voting rounds coming with more and more coins participating and actual influence. |
|
|
|
You could interpret this to argue that we need to to update the protocol to give less newly-mined coins to miners and more to the game, but I think that would be kind of manipulative.
if we're going to do it, we need to do it along with a lot of other things at the same time. That will take time and planning.
I couldn't agree more, the amount coins to game/coins to miners should stay the same, and if a hardfork is eventually unavoidable, we should put some thought into it. It's a bit risky to try asking the coin holders (perhaps this reveals them to be unaware or apathetic), but I'd like to start and ask "How fast should players be able to log out and leave the map". Even under normal circumstances (1 minute block time) having assets at risk for hours in an all out pvp killing field may (or may not) be the main reason to drive new players away. So... Call for votes: What should be the top-level design goal?#1 average time to logout 100 chronons, for each hunter, on average. This is about the status quo. No one can play without an advanced client and without being online for several hours. #2 average time to logout 60 chronons. This could be achieved by increasing the number of banks. #3 average time to logout 40 chronons. #4 average time to logout 30 chronons. Now most hunters do have a bank to go and despawn that won't disappear before they can reach it. #5 average time to logout 20 chronons. Could be achieved through a combination of more banks + logout if standing still for X chronons. This would keep the bank function and not dumb down the game. #6 average time to logout 15 chronons. #7 average time to logout 10 chronons. Below that if may become impractical, with accidental auto-logouts, or bank spam #8 average time to logout 7 chronons. #9 average time to logout 5 chronons. As a design goal (it's supposed to be playable on mobile) How to vote, long version: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=435170.msg14541434#msg14541434Short version #1 send XX000.11299975 coins to yourself #2 send XX000.21299975 coins to yourself ... #7 send XX000.71299975 coins to yourself #8 send XX000.81299975 coins to yourself (XX >= 25, the more the better) Any client or daemon can be used. Moving these coins (or the change, if any) again will delete the vote. Votes are counted at block 1299975. I'll post results here (betterQt makes an up-to-date result list for each block)
We really need to shake up this coin.
(I've other ideas about gameplay changes but don't want to talk about too much topics atm)
Yes, one-by-one, the fee structure is for next week... |
|
|
|
the difficulty for sha256 won't adjust until a block is mined.
it uses PPC's original smooth re targeting algo, so re-targets every block.
for sha256 we would need someone to mine one block or merge mine it - to lower the difficulty - the issue with it is that once it's lowered it's more open to abuse i think
Yes, as long as no sha256 blocks are produced the security hole of a low sha256 difficulty is plugged. Perhaps the "surprise halving" also initiated the recent uptrend. Personally - i'd vote at changing the sha256 algo to something else anyway
If sha256 would be replaced with some kind of Pos, I certainly would have it sit on my desktop all day. It's the only coin with a world to watch from above in its wallet  However, lowering the share of coins for the game at this point would be like ripping the soul out of Huntercoin. |
|
|
|
If you compare the difficulty and price per coin of Huntercoin vs Litecoin then all scrypt blocks currently produced are merge-mined, but they don't look like f2p blocks... |
|
|
|
playing with a clean new Mint18, 64bit, in virtualbox. I like this one, it doesn't feel like secretly coded in java (17 did) In the dependencies as stated in http://huntercoin.org/downloads/compile-guide/libdb++-dev has to replace libdb5.1++-dev so: sudo apt-get install libboost-chrono-dev libboost-date-time-dev libboost-filesystem-dev libboost-program-options-dev libboost-serialization-dev libboost-system-dev libboost-thread-dev
sudo apt-get install libboost-dev git qt4-qmake libqt4-dev build-essential qt4-linguist-tools libssl-dev
sudo apt-get install libdb++-dev The install order is important (otherwise can't build from Qt Creator menu). First full update with the console (sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade) Then Qt Creator (search "qt" in Software Manager), and then the dependencies. git clone https://github.com/wiggi/huntercoin.gitThis huntercoin-qt.pro file will also allow to load the old v1.3 release ( https://github.com/chronokings/huntercoin) in Qt Creator. Perhaps it makes still sense to create wallets with it. It was rather difficult to get it to load the blockchain (copied from a 32bit mint17.3) for the first time. iirc deleting "database" folder + starting with an empty wallet (but not with no wallet) finally made the difference between "EXCEPTION: 11DbException Db::open: Invalid argument huntercoin in Runaway exception" and no complaints at all -- need to test this with chain.huntercoin.org too. A non-safemode build with some extra features for 64bit Mint18/Ubuntu 16.04 will be in the next binary release (for block 1300000). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
