Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.

From: yangboy@math.ntu.edu.tw (Queen Hel)

Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1993 16:40:14 +0000

[Rich Skrenta:]
>desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:

>> why a player who plays _skillfully_ merits such a reward [enjoying the
>> play through achievement of reasonable goal... Hel], if it is one, and
>> the player who does not play skillfully does not. ...?

>You can't seriously be suggesting that the player who carefully reads
>the rules, plots his strategy, and coordinates well with other players,
>should have the same probability of doing well as one who submits
>random commands to the server?

No, I don't think David is suggesting anything like that, and I think your
question is a cheap shot.  What David said is that there is no reason
someone who isn't playing well can't enjoy the _competition_.

>> I think it sounds a little sick to play games to have *power* over others.
>....  The whole point of empire building games is to model
>economic, military and political power.  If you can't influence other
>players, what's the point?  ... However, for many players, being able to
>hurt other players is important -- it's what gives the game meaning.

Remind me never to play in the same game with this sadist.  I have no idea
with _beating_ other people out for the win, nor with wiping out other
people's positions in the process of winning-- but to hurt someone's
position for the sake of itself and NOT as a means to win the game (e.g. a
vindictive retaliation instead of guarding own position after being
betrayed or outfoxed) is unethical in my book, and to hurt other _PEOPLE_
is something that I try to avoid, and hope I will never have the chance to
experience. ....

>> > I believe that Carl is talking about epic, open ended PBM games, where a
>> > strong position built up over a long time _is_ valued by the player.
>> Obviously "_is_" is too strong.  I think that "may be" valued is more
>> accurate.  Personally, I find such games a lot more fun in the early

Note, if I am to play one of those games I would hope that this game will
be equally fun for archmage and for private soldier, for dragontamer and for
poor minstrel.... if they are all player characters.  Certainly having more
stuff to manage is a headache at times.

>This isn't what I found running Olympia.  Players, after investing 5-10
>hours/week developing their positions, tended to get *very* upset when
>bad things happened to them.  Not just the sore losers, either.  ...

In most games the sore losers account for most of the whining.

>So let's sketch the ideal David DesJardins game:
>
>	Each turn, each player has an equal probability for
>	success, regardless of what he does (or perhaps, what
>	the other players do.)

Each player has an equal probability for achievement of reasonable target,
and enjoyment derived through that, regardless of previous history.

>	Players have little influence over one another's positions.
>	Investment in positions is minimal, so players feel
>	little loss simply walking away from the game.

Notice the inconsistency (why am I not surprised) of taking a potshot at
David on something said (correctly) in reference to an epic, ongoing kind
of game by trying to make it sound as if David was talking about a conquest
game or wargame.  Cheapo attacks at the worst.

I can assure you that David like any human being will feel disappointment
when his position is damaged by uncontrollable factors, but that is a
CONQUEST game, not any sort of epic game.

[Note how the word "positions" conveniently pops up out of nowhere!]

>	The expert has little advantage over the new player.

The _experienced_ player has little advantage over the newbie, per se...
you win with better analysis and strategy, and (to some extent) luck.

>What fits?  Rolling dice against one another?

References

Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Fri, 09 Jul 1993 03:35:06 +0000
Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.
skrenta@usl.com (Rich Skrenta)
Fri, 09 Jul 1993 12:30:28 +0000

Referenced By

Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Fri, 09 Jul 1993 03:35:06 +0000
Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.
skrenta@usl.com (Rich Skrenta)
Fri, 09 Jul 1993 12:30:28 +0000