magarena
Differentiate between "win the game" effects and "Iose the game" effects
This might not be a very big issue since it affects only 2 cards. Card effects that replace game loss, Lich's Mirror and Exquisite Archangel, will not apply for effects stating that their opponent wins the game. But as far as I can tell, there is no way to differentiate them from effects that make those cards' controller lose the game.
Effects which replace your game loss, don't prevent an opponent from winning. Although you do technically lose, it's not a "target player loses the game", or getting 10 poison counters type of effect; your opponent is winning the game instead. (That's why Abyssal Persecutor makes sure you can't 'accidentally' win by your opponent losing) Lich's Mirror won't trigger when Barren Glory triggers, for example, but will protect against Phage the Untouchable
Sorry, I wasn't clear enough.
What you said is how it works in the real game. However, in Magarena, cards that say its controller wins the game do a LoseGameAction on their opponent as seen in the scripts of Battle of Wits, Coalition Victory, Mechanized Production, and Near-Death Experience, which will trigger Lich's Mirror and Exquisite Archangel.
I also tested Lich's Mirror with Barren Glory and it did trigger. gameplay-report.zip
Ahh, I see what you mean now. Sorry - Yes, you're right. I've never really liked the LoseGameAction for win conditions. You winning and your opponent losing are two separate although related events. If I remember rightly, last time I had a look at this, the issue is with how it all fits in with the AI (Which is more @melvinzhang's area). In reality there should be a WinGameAction as well.
Should be fine to have a WinGameAction as well so that we can move the direct wins to this so it doesn't trigger lose game replacements.
What it does, would be analogous to the current LoseGameAction, i.e. it would be to set the losing player as the opponent. i.e. WinGameAction(p) = set losing player as p's opponent.
The MagicGame.getWinner() should be able to prioritise a player set as a winner over a player set as a loser. I think it would be best to have two end game results: A player winning or a player losing.
It wouldn't be possible to set both, since actions are performed serially.
What happens is the last action before the isFinished check takes place would be the result. Assuming somehow in a single event, A wins and B wins. Then the result is B wins.
I was thinking more that there should be a way of setting a player as a Winner, instead of setting the opponent as a Loser. So if A 'Wins' by a trigger, B isn't set as a loser unless they also 'Lose' by a trigger
Recording the loser is the current representation of the result, it does't mean B lost due to a game effect. The later is only when LoseGameAction was applied on B.
Yes, I'm just saying that we should be recording a winner as well, where it is separate from an opponent losing. A game would therefore have 4 different finishing states:
- Player A Wins
- Player B Wins
- Player A Loses
- Player B Loses
Why differentiate the end state where "A won the game" from "B lost the game"? Note that as discussed, we should differentiate an effect which make A win, from an effect which makes B lose.
MagicGame.getWinner() is only checking for losers and determining the opponent as the winner. If there were a getWinningPlayer() and setWinningPlayer() separately from LosingPlayer versions it would better reflect the variety of ways that players can win or lose a game. As currently there's only an emphasis on the loser, and losing states. However winning states should really be attached to the winning player.
I also don't think it's necessary to differentiate the end state unless we're going to support draw, which I imagine would complicate the AI.