Recent content by BiggJobag

  1. BiggJobag

    Creating a multiplayer strategy game that doesn't socially stratify

    Mousehold more or less voices my initial thoughts on the problem. If competition is held face-to-face, the chances of winning and losing creating "bad blood" between players is pretty minimal, especially if you're playing with friends. So in theory (oh how we love theories!) we could solve the...
  2. BiggJobag

    Importance of Transparent Rules

    Aren’t RNG and physics alike, in that they both operate under well-defined rules which are too complex to make manual calculations under? If physics works too chaotically in a game, then I agree it is useless for strategy. Pinball, for example, is effectively gambling. But some games use...
  3. BiggJobag

    Importance of Transparent Rules

    Miya, I agree that all the problems you listed should be a critical concern for a strategy game designer. Perhaps historically, designers have been influenced by games like Super Mario or Portal, where the rules are taught through play, but for the reasons you outline, this is absolutely...
  4. BiggJobag

    My Definition of Rules and Emergents, Two and Single Player Games

    Don’t you think it’s important that a player is one, actual human player? Would we necessarily gain the same valuable experience from swapping about with our friends in the middle of a one-player game, such as your imaginary 10-person Auro match? Can you accommodate these concerns within your...
  5. BiggJobag

    the case for rampant asymmetry

    Right, so popularity is a reason to look at a game and try to explain why it might be successful, in the hope that it contains some good design. That's very sound advice; we can't start from scratch just with abstract theory all the time! But let's not get into an in-depth discussion...
  6. BiggJobag

    the case for rampant asymmetry

    The fact that a game is popular is a very bad reason for assuming it's well-designed. It might be attractive because it's tactile, or addictive, or otherwise psychologically exploitative... I argue that some of the most popular games ever designed have major flaws, not because I'm ignorant of...
  7. BiggJobag

    the case for rampant asymmetry

    Don’t ask me for practical advice on balancing - I’m a philosopher, not a professional game designer! What I’m referring to is an argument I think Keith himself made a while ago, maybe in Clockwork Game Design, that I was pretty convinced by: that when you have decisions within decisions, or...
  8. BiggJobag

    the case for rampant asymmetry

    Whether the player is developing a strategy for their predetermined faction, or if they’re developing a strategy to develop their faction, there are ways of putting you down a more balanced track. Make sure each faction, or each development strategy, has different points in time when they are...
  9. BiggJobag

    the case for output randomness

    Please do!
  10. BiggJobag

    the case for output randomness

    Obviously I don’t know enough about your game, but something I would be looking out for is a way to hide information in such a way that the information is strategically guessable. In general, this could mean knowing the choices opponents faced without knowing what decision they eventually made...
  11. BiggJobag

    Don't switch to realtime (for ever) Keith!

    Real time has the advantage that the player has to decide how much time they can afford to spend on making decisions, adding more depth. However, they are in danger of becoming partial execution contests rather than strategy games. Meanwhile, turn based games eliminate issues of execution, but...
  12. BiggJobag

    The problem of win-chance debalancing in binary systems

    Sorry for the poor use of the word "expected", I confess I'm not a trained statistician. I agree that as the player learns, choices necessarily tend away from equilibrium. This is a general problem with games, remembering that it is a problem because, as choices tend away from equilibrium, the...
  13. BiggJobag

    The problem of win-chance debalancing in binary systems

    Firstly let me define “ambiguous”. It’s a term of Keith’s, whereby the more or less uncertain the player is about which is the best option in a given choice, the more or less ambiguous that choice is. Ambiguous choices are also called (interesting) decisions. Ambiguity is valuable without...
  14. BiggJobag

    The problem of win-chance debalancing in binary systems

    In order to be maximally ambiguous, each option in a choice must have an approximately equal expected value. (Of course, that’s not necessarily the only condition, but it is still a required condition.) If the expected value of an option is not constant - which follows if the rate of change of...
  15. BiggJobag

    The problem of win-chance debalancing in binary systems

    Following on from a discussion later on in this thread, wherein Hopenager claimed that systems with binary goals are bad because they require win-chance to remain at ½, but that this would make most of the game inconsequential. We had much more discussion following on from that, but regardless...