Difference between revisions of "Game design"

From The Shartak Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 117: Line 117:
 
There are currently two more Villagers than Scouts. Settlers currently remain the lowest. --[[User:Lint|Lint]] 01:44, 8 May 2006 (BST)
 
There are currently two more Villagers than Scouts. Settlers currently remain the lowest. --[[User:Lint|Lint]] 01:44, 8 May 2006 (BST)
 
:The introduction of Scavenging makes the Villager and Settler extremely powerful. Currently the Scout and Explorer appear weakest (their higher max AP pool isn't noted on the character class page, and also they might have a lower chance of 'forgetting' without cartography...). --[[User:Tycho44|Tycho44]] 05:48, 8 May 2006 (BST)
 
:The introduction of Scavenging makes the Villager and Settler extremely powerful. Currently the Scout and Explorer appear weakest (their higher max AP pool isn't noted on the character class page, and also they might have a lower chance of 'forgetting' without cartography...). --[[User:Tycho44|Tycho44]] 05:48, 8 May 2006 (BST)
::That cartography-related ability is interesting. Never considered that. --[[User:Lint|Lint]] 07:15, 8 May 2006 (BST)
+
::That possible cartography-related ability is interesting. Never considered that. --[[User:Lint|Lint]] 07:15, 8 May 2006 (BST)
  
 
----
 
----

Revision as of 06:15, 8 May 2006

This an open forum to discuss game design. These are neither Bugs nor Suggestions (though they may lead to bug reports and game proposals), but points to consider for maintaining balance and consistency.

General

Persistent Shark Bites

As observed by Anothertwilight on the bugs page, shark bites that a character acquires when venturing in deep water will still exist after the character is resurrected. What purpose do persistent shark bites serve in the game? While they haven't affected my playing experience very much (I've killed my soldier twice by shark bite for "research"), I can't see a reason to really keep it ingame. --Lint 08:14, 17 March 2006 (GMT)


Combat-centric leveling

Combat appears to be the most efective way to earn XP. I believe that there must be a means to reward non-combatants more than what healing and chopping vegetation provides. --Lint 04:05, 15 March 2006 (GMT)

  • Shouldn't exploring be rewarded? Isn't that why statistics on exploration are kept? --One of many doctors 02:51, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
    • It is, but in a fairly limited manner - chance of getting 1XP for chopping into a d10 jungle block. Of course, what with all the intrepid explorers wandering around, there don't seem to be that many of those right now. --Simon 23:57, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
      • Even worse, the chance of getting the 1XP at all seems terrible. Chopping d10 Jungle is the Book-reading of Shartak. In my humble opinion, chopping max jungle should be closer to 33%-100% chance of 1XP, in order to result in at least as much XP as eating forbidden fruit (farming the poison berry / mango grove; about 4 XP per 12 AP). My XP comes from killing animals ... And a game-wide tally of XP earned would probably show similar overall results. --Tycho44 06:22, 12 April 2006 (BST)

And I suppose it's not just an issue of XP, but also recognizing other playing goals. In addition to kills, there should be a log for non-combat-oriented activities like healing, revival, chopping, searching, swimming. This would however require a great deal of variable recording and I'm not familiar with supporting an MMORPG to know what kind of stress that would put on the server. --Lint 20:34, 16 April 2006 (BST)


Slow Combat

Base accuracy for a weapon is higher than a fist, which is arguably unrealistic. One assumes that you would be less skilled with a weapon than your own hand. (I recall reading a similar comment to this, but I can't find it at the moment.) --Lint 22:52, 2 March 2006 (GMT)

  • All characters appear to have a 10% chance to deal 1 damage with punching.
  • Knives and Daggers appear to have a 20% chance to deal 1 damage.
maybe it is just the punch only has a ten percent chance to actually doing damage(the text does say missed however), I know if i fought somebody who has a knife(or dagger) in RL they would do more to me than me to them, even if niether of us have any training,ex. Fists are a strange weapon and to actually do any damage with a punch(mainly only at the strongest point in your swing) you have to have some good timing.-- Daylan 02:02, 3 March 2006 (GMT)
I see what you're saying... how about punch 50-70% with a 20-30% chance of inflicting 1 damage after a successful hit, 0 damage otherwise (making it 10-21% but with 3 different messages - miss, hit but don't do damage, hit and do damage). --Simon 10:56, 4 March 2006 (GMT)
Let me point out that this isn't really a problem. It's just something that a die-hard realist would try to press. On one hand, you can have Fists as the most accurate weapon until you get weapon skills (which will make the the first levels incredibly painful). On the other hand, you can have weapons as more accurate than fists (which allow new users to quickly become involved in the game). I don't know if I'd have the patience if it took me 70 AP to kill a parrot. --Lint 16:12, 4 March 2006 (GMT)

Contact Shaman

It is likely to be more efficient to die than to search for items and heal yourself. (Based on an observation was made by Leaf on the Suggestions page.) --Lint 22:52, 2 March 2006 (GMT)

I think this observation is based on the false perception that one needs to be fully healed at all times. There is no fundamental difference in performance when at less than ideal health. Remember, this game is set on an unexplored, remote island, not a heavily populated British suburb *coughUrbanDeadcough* its arguably more realistic to not be at peak health all the time, and for healing items to be somewhat scarce. --Jackel 00:12, 3 March 2006 (GMT)
I guess my problem is that death can be used as a tool rather than a game experience. Say you're at 2 HP. You can spend the next few days scrounging for enough recovery items to heal and continue on or you can get killed and begin playing with full HP the next day. Say you're 100 squares away from your hometown and want to get back, if you can get something to kill you (perhaps even kill yourself with poisonous berries), you will have potentially saved AP. I think we should be discouraged from taking advantage of death somehow. --Lint 18:20, 3 March 2006 (GMT)
This is a very good point.. what form of discouragement would be enough to make this less useful? Loss of AP and XP instead of 50AP (if so, what values for each)? Loss of a random skill? Loss of some of your inventory? Maybe you get summoned to the nearest (or random) camp of the same type rather than to your home camp? --Simon 10:56, 4 March 2006 (GMT)
I do see your point, Lint, and agree, Death should not be so much useful as it is annoying, nor should it be too annoying. One thought I had (aside from simply making it easier to stock healing items with refillable containers) was to make coming back from the dead progressively harder. I don't simply mean heaping onto the AP cost of getting ressurected, but maybe the shaman can send the dead on quests or punishments or something beyond simply waiting for your AP to recover?--Jackel 01:29, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
It's difficult to suggest something to dissuade death while not motivating griefing. I kind of like the camp idea and quests idea, but I'd need to get more familiar with the death experience before I can truly say anything. --Lint 16:12, 4 March 2006 (GMT)
Requiring that a dead person (spirit) must travel to a shaman to be 'resurrected' rather than just hitting the 'spend 50AP - go home' button would stop people using death as a teleporter. Making 'Town Shamans' have to recharge between resurrections (with the amount of time being tweaked depending on player numbers), potentially forcing a spirit to have to hang around and check in on a regular basis to see if the Shaman was ready, would make resurrection less of a sure thing. Another alternative to increase the uncertainty, and hence make death a gamble, not a strategy, would be to give the Town Shamans a %chance to resurrect and a set amount of AP. If too many people tap the Shaman looking for resurrections, they are 'asleep' 'til they recharge. Both would also increase the value of player shamans (whom I presume can also resurrect if they have the right skills). Anothertwilight 22:58, 5 March 2006 (GMT)
"Recharging" Shamens sounds like a reasonable idea.
I like the idea of the spirit having to find the shaman to ressurect him; in addition to the AP cost, they have to wander around the jungle, find their bearings, etc. It also segues nicely for the player shaman to have a skill allowing them to ressurect. Zerging risk here, having a player run a shaman and a "fighter", keeping them close so the shaman PC can quickly revive the fallen fighter. Also, this might create imbalance the two factions, as the PC shamen may not want to revive Outsiders.--Jackel 01:37, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
If you make Scientists able to revive people as well (they share most of the Shaman skills) would keep faction balance in. MorkaisChosen 12:24, 11 March 2006 (GMT)
I believe that the purpose behind "Contact Shaman" feature is so players that haven't a clue where the nearest village is (ie. ME) don't spend the rest of the game as a lost spirit. I think I'd just create a new character if I wasn't presented with the option to contact a Shaman. Another alternative that I've considered is perhaps the Town Shaman's power isn't as strong over long distances. If a spirit choose to contact a Shaman, they would respawn where they originally died, but with reduced HP. Perhaps a greater distance from the hometown results in less HP. This would put an end to teleportation and make taking advantage of death to gain full health slightly less advantageous (at least if the player is not within reasonable walking distance of a Town Shaman). However, I can see problems if some animal or PKer is camping the corpse, waiting to clobber them when they return. --Lint 02:32, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
A fair point, what if the player received a message from his "home shaman" if he was he was too far away, and needed to move xx squares in direction X, xx squares in direction Y to be "in range". That player could also choose to go to another shaman if he thought one was closer. --Jackel 02:39, 6 March 2006 (GMT)

After now experiencing multiple encounters with death, I feel that 50 AP is an acceptable cost and I am finding it hard to see how exactly this feature can be taken advantage of. --Lint 20:18, 6 April 2006 (BST)

Also, remember that anyone who scrounges healing items to get back up to full hit points is going to gain 50XP (or whatever) through the process of healing. --Tycho44 06:25, 12 April 2006 (BST)

Summary

To summarize: Contacting a Shaman can currently be taken advantage of to bypass Traveling and to bypass Recovery. Both are presumably essential experiences to how the game is played.

  • We can prevent the teleportation element by removing the option to contact a Shaman altogether.
    • However, to provide a user-friendly game experience it probably needs to be kept in place.
      • We can reduce our dependency for this option by increasing the number of available respawn locations.
        • Reduces the established punishment of having to cover lost ground.
  • Rather than the Hometown Shaman, players contact the nearest Town Shaman.
    • This will reduce excessive teleportation, but does not eliminate it.
  • Allow the Shaman to be contacted but the player respawns where it was rather than hometown.
    • Reduces teleportation, but also reduces the established punishment of having to cover lost ground.
  • We can artificially represent the act of Traveling and Recovery by extending the time and/or AP spent before resurrection can occur.
    • Increasing AP cost
    • Quests
    • Queues
    • Chance
  • Or apply penalties after resurrection.
    • Reduced HP
    • Temporarily Reduced Actions (only movement and inventory; no combat, speech, writing)
      • Temporarily Reduced Accuracy
  • Or apply penalties to discourage dying in general.
    • Loss of XP
    • Loss of Skill
    • Loss of Item

Outsider/Native Balance

Axiom: Outsiders and Natives should not have a complete advantage over the other.
Axiom: Different, but equal.

Population

Natives are currently outnumbered by Outsiders. --04:05, 15 March 2006 (GMT)

  • The introduction of Pirates as an Outsider character class may further tip the population imbalance without a Native counterpart. --Lint 02:49, 20 March 2006 (GMT)

Pirates currently account for 199 active players. There are 394 active outsiders (not including pirates) and 308 active natives. --Lint 01:44, 8 May 2006 (BST)


Actions

Actions that Natives by default can do, that Outsiders by default cannot:

  • Can determine the difference between "Tasty" and "Poisonous" berries.
  • Can use Blowdarts
  • Can use Medical Herbs
  • Can understand other Natives

Actions that Outsiders by default can do, that Natives by default cannot:

  • Can use a GPS unit.
  • Can use Rifles
  • Can use First Aid Kits
  • Can understand other Outsiders

Class Balance

Axiom: No class should have a complete advantage over the other.

Soldiers and Warriors

According to the chart, Soldiers have a slight advantage over other classes in regards to skills. Add to that their high HP, gives them even more of an edge. The only disadvantage they face is the process of searching and reloading ammunition. --Lint 22:52, 2 March 2006 (GMT)

Assuming that chart is accurate, the soldier isn't even the most advantageous class among his own group! The scientist has more total skills available then a soldier, and if you give more preference to being able to shoot a gun, then it is important to note how low search rates are, and that ammunition is even more rare. --Jackel 00:27, 3 March 2006 (GMT)
The chart isn't complete. I did make some assumptions in possible skills based on what we know about the skill trees, but I don't think that it was wholly inaccurate to do so. --Lint 00:40, 3 March 2006 (GMT)

Shamans

Shamans supposedly don't start with any items and have the lowest HP.

  • Counterpoint: Shamans and their outsider counterpart, Scientists, are among some of the highest ranking characters at the moment. Something is obviously working. --Lint 22:52, 2 March 2006 (GMT)
What shamen may lack in starting inventory they more than make up for in overall skill potential (seemingly the most of any class). What good is starting with a banana or a few extra bullets by comparison? --Jackel 00:27, 3 March 2006 (GMT)

Low-population classes

According to the statistics, there is a lack of interest in Villagers and Settlers. --Lint 22:52, 2 March 2006 (GMT)

I agree, at this point there doesn't seem to be any overiding appeal for these classes, which logically should be the most abundant, at least with regards to villagers. --Jackel 00:27, 3 March 2006 (GMT)

There are currently two more Villagers than Scouts. Settlers currently remain the lowest. --Lint 01:44, 8 May 2006 (BST)

The introduction of Scavenging makes the Villager and Settler extremely powerful. Currently the Scout and Explorer appear weakest (their higher max AP pool isn't noted on the character class page, and also they might have a lower chance of 'forgetting' without cartography...). --Tycho44 05:48, 8 May 2006 (BST)
That possible cartography-related ability is interesting. Never considered that. --Lint 07:15, 8 May 2006 (BST)

Mechanics

Are there any game mechanics (besides HP, starting inventory, and available skills) that are influenced by your character class? Should there be? --Lint 22:52, 2 March 2006 (GMT)

  • Inventory size
  • Base accuracy
  • Base damage
  • Search odds
  • AP limit
  • I have 3 characters and i have more higher search odds with the scientist (3 heavy swords) than the others .. i don't know if it's only a matter of luck or not..--JonesDye 10:08, 7 March 2006 (GMT)

It has since been revealed that Scouts may possess more AP than the other classes. (See Requests for Information for more) --Lint 01:44, 8 May 2006 (BST)