u/wartableapp

been wrestling with this for a bit so figured id ask the people who actually ship on apple.

im building a little iphone app solo (swiftui, ios 26, dark mode only) where 5 different AI models debate a question and then get synthesized into one answer. the fun architectural problem was the fan-out — 5 model calls that all have to come back and feel live, not like youre staring at a spinner for 30 seconds.

what i landed on: supabase deno edge functions routing all 5 calls through openrouter, streaming partials back as each model responds so the ui fills in progressively instead of waiting on the slowest one. keeps it around 5 cents a debate too.

curious how other solo devs handle long-running multi-call stuff in swiftui — proper async streams, polling, websockets? the app is war table (https://wartable.co) if the context helps, but mostly i just wanna hear how youd structure the concurrency. whats worked for you?

ok ive been going back and forth on whether to even post this for like two weeks — its my own thing so it feels a little weird. but whatever!

ive been building this for about 6 months, nights and weekends, im 16 and its just me. the whole reason it exists: every time i asked a single AI for advice it just agreed with whatever i was already leaning toward. a total yes-man.

so i made war table — you ask it a question and 5 models (claude, gpt-5, gemini, grok, qwen) actually debate it. they take opposite sides and poke holes in each other, then a hidden chairman reads the whole argument and gives you one verdict. five AIs, one verdict.

its free to try, 3 debates, no account gymnastics: https://wartable.co

its still rough in spots but the debate part genuinely changed how i think through stuff — the disagreement is the useful part, not the tidy answer. whats a decision you would never trust a single AI on? :)

been building in the quiet for a while so figured id actually post something. im 16, solo, about 6 months of nights and weekends into this.

the app is war table — you ask a hard question and 5 ais (claude, gpt-5, gemini, grok, qwen) debate it, take opposite sides, then a chairman model reads the whole debate and hands you one verdict. i built it because a single ai always just agreed with me and i wanted something that actually pushed back.

where its at rn: submitted to the app store june 24, been back and forth in review. waitlist is around 160 on kit. backend costs me about 5c a debate. free to try, 3 debates then a pro tier.

site if you wanna see it: wartable.co

the thing im stuggling with: do i wait for app store approval before pushing the waitlist hard, or start driving people now while its still in review? what would you do!

ok so this whole thing started because i kept asking chatgpt stuff and realising it just agreed with whatever i already wanted to do. like id ask should i do X or Y and it would basically back my lean every time. felt like a yes-man, not a second opinion.

so i built the thing i actually wanted — war table. you ask a question and 5 models (claude, gpt-5, gemini, grok, qwen) actually debate it across a few rounds, take opposite sides and poke holes in each others reasoning. then a hidden chairman reads the whole thing and gives you one verdict. five ais, one verdict basically.

im 16 and ive been building it solo on nights and weekends for about 6 months. its an iphone app, free to try. its meant to be a thinking aid not a fortune teller — it helps you see the disagreement, doesnt predict the future.

its here if you wanna poke at it: wartable.co

the thing im actually stuck on: is one verdict at the end the right call, or would you rather just read the raw argument and decide yourself? genuinely torn on this one!!

so i had this whole thing last week where i couldnt decide between two paths and i kept asking chatgpt about it. and every time it just kind of agreed with whatever way i phrased the question. ask it leaning one way, it backs that way. ask it leaning the other, it flips. felt like talking to a mirror.

that bugged me enough that i spent the last 6 months building a little thing on the side (im 16, solo, nights and weekends) where instead of one model you get five of them arguing it out. claude, gpt-5, gemini, grok and qwen actually take opposing sides and poke holes in each other, then a separate one reads the whole fight and writes a single verdict. its at https://wartable.co if youre curious.

the part that surprised me is the disagreement is the useful bit. when two of them go back and forth you see the tradeoff you were glossing over. still not sure whats the cleanest way to show five arguments without overwhelming people though.

how do you all handle the yes-man thing with a single model? do you just prompt it to argue against itself or does that not really work?

ok this might be a dumb question but ive been going back and forth on it for weeks and cant land on a clean answer.

im 16 and ive been building an iphone app solo for about 6 months, nights and weekends. its called war table (https://wartable.co) — you ask it a question and 5 ai models stream their answers at once and argue with each other. so one screen has 5 live token streams updating at the same time.

the problem is keeping swiftui smooth while all 5 stream. my first version appended to 5 @Published strings on every token and the whole view hitched constantly. i moved to batching tokens and flushing on an ~80ms timer with a single objectWillChange and it got way better, but it still feels hacky.

stuff im stuck on: is TimelineView or a manual CADisplayLink flush the more correct pattern, or am i overthinking it? for 5 concurrent URLSession byte streams, is one TaskGroup right or should each stream own its own actor? and has anyone found a clean way to animate streaming text without re-laying-out the whole block every frame?

not looking for a magic fix, just curious how people whove actually shipped chat-style streaming apps structure this. what worked for youu?

ok so this started because i had this habit of asking one ai every time i had a hard call and it would just agree with whatever i already wanted. felt like i was paying for a yes-man lol.

im 16 and ive been building this nights and weekends for about 6 months. its an iphone app called war table — https://wartable.co. you ask it a question and 5 models — claude, gpt-5, gemini, grok, qwen — actually debate it over a few rounds. they take opposite sides, poke holes in each others reasoning, and you get to watch where they disagree instead of getting one confident answer.

the part i didnt expect is that the disagreement is the useful bit. when 4 of them lean one way and one really digs in against it, thats usually the exact spot i hadnt thought throughh.

still very much a solo thing and im adding to it constantly!! what would you want to see it argue about? genuinely curious :)

genuine question for people who use these models for real decisions and not just code. ive noticed that when im torn on something and i ask gpt, it kind of senses which way im leaning and reinforces it. ask it leading and you get the exact answer you fished for.

the thing that finally helped me was asking the same question to a few different models and reading where they disagree — the disagreement is the part that actually made me think. one model on its own almost never tells me im wrong.

i liked that enough that i ended up building a little thing for myself where 5 models argue it out and a separate one settles it (wartable.co, if youre curious), but honestly even just pasting your question into 2-3 chats and comparing does most of the work\!

so my real question: do you do anything to stop a single model from being a yes-man? prompt tricks, multiple models, system prompts, something else? curious what actually works for you.

genuine question for people who use these models for real decisions and not just code. ive noticed that when im torn on something and i ask gpt, it kind of senses which way im leaning and reinforces it. ask it leading and you get the exact answer you fished for.

the thing that finally helped me was asking the same question to a few different models and reading where they disagree — the disagreement is the part that actually made me think. one model on its own almost never tells me im wrong.

i liked that enough that i ended up building a little thing for myself where 5 models argue it out and a separate one settles it (war table, if youre curious), but honestly even just pasting your question into 2-3 chats and comparing does most of the work!

so my real question: do you do anything to stop a single model from being a yes-man? prompt tricks, multiple models, system prompts, something else? curious what actually works for you.

submitted my first app for review five days ago and it's still in review, which is past what i expected from everything i'd read (most people say a day or two). trying to figure out if i should be worried or just patient. my actual question for people who've shipped more than i have: does a first submission from a brand-new account just take longer by default? and would an app like mine get extra scrutiny, it takes user-entered text, sends it to third-party AI model APIs, and has subscriptions, so i wondered if the data handling or the IAP setup makes review slower. for context it's War Table, five models debate your decision into one verdict. genuinely just trying to learn what's normal here, did your first app or your data-heavy ones take longer to clear?

solo dev, my first app is in testflight and i'm trying to get real feedback before it goes live. it's called War Table, you give it one hard decision and five AI models debate it from different angles, then you get one verdict. to try it: go to wartable.co, drop your email, and the testflight invite link gets sent to you instantly (you'll need the testflight app installed to open it). genuinely just want people to run a real decision through it and tell me what feels off. happy to answer anything.

solo, first app, hit submit today and i'm equal parts proud and quietly terrified. the thing that surprised me: the build was the easy part. the genuinely hard part was the last stretch of putting it in front of real people and watching them not do what i assumed. they ignored features i loved, told me the value wasn't obvious, and caught that you couldn't even save the output the app produces. fixed all of it before submitting, but it was humbling. it's War Table, five AIs debate your decision into one verdict (war table, live in about a week HOPEFULLY). for those who've launched, did the fear ever actually go away, or do you just learn to hit submit anyway?

built it over a few months in swiftui with claude code, finally hit submit today. funny thing: the last change before submitting wasn't on my roadmap at all. a tester pointed out you couldn't copy or save the verdict the app gives you, which meant people couldn't keep the thing they came for. obvious in hindsight, invisible to me because i'd stared at it too long. added copy/share for the verdict and each model's response, and it immediately felt more finished. it's War Table, five models debate your decision into one verdict (wartable.co, on testflight). curious for other devs, what's the feature you almost shipped without that a tester caught at the last second?

solo, been building for months. it's an ios app where five AI models debate your hardest decision and hand you one verdict with the disagreements kept visible. about a week out from app store launch, ~400 people on the waitlist, and honestly more nervous than excited.

my real question for people who've launched: what's the thing you wish you'd done in the 48 hours around launch day that you didn't? i keep reading "just ship it" but i want to actually make the moment count instead of quietly going live and hoping.

(wartable.co if you want the beta, link's instant. but mostly here for the launch advice.)

solo, built it over a few months in SwiftUI with claude code. it's five AI models debating one hard decision into a verdict. on testflight now, free, no account to try. i mostly want devs to break it and tell me what feels janky before the App Store sees it. wartable.co sends the link instantly, or comment and i'll send it over.

solo, 16, built this over a few months. it's five AI models debating your hardest decision into one verdict. on testflight now, free, no account to try. mostly i just want people to throw a real decision at it and tell me where the verdict falls flat.

ive been working head down for months on my app and slowly building a small audience. last week testflight went live and i got a limited number of users. ive learned a lot form the users i have but now another fear is dawning on me. what if i launch to literally zero downloads? this fear has been rolling around my brain for so long that i think at this point im delaying launch to try to gain more of a promising audience before the official launch. im not really sure what to do here and would love help! has anyone else launch an app and dealt with this same mental block? what helped you get through it? encouraging words welcome. if you have time it would be great for you to check out the app yourself and tell me if you think i should wait to launch for my app specifically. thanks!

solo founder, first app on testflight. quick honest log of what this week taught me:

• the people who give you the best feedback are often the ones who'd never actually use your product
• "great idea!" means nothing; watching someone quit before reaching the core feature means everything
• a fake-looking detail (i had a manually-updated counter) will get caught instantly and cost you trust, fix the small honest things
• getting the install is a totally different fight than getting the first real use

none of this was in the building. it was all in the watching-real-people part. building was the easy 80%.

what's the lesson that hit you hardest after you shipped?