Re: PBM design and formulae - another fresh start

From: gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)

Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1993 16:23:42 +0000

Gilette Serge <gilette@obsidian.unice.fr> writes:
> >a) say for example you playing a game of galactic warfare, and that
> >   you're researching a new weapon. As long as that weapon haven't been
> >   field test, or at least as long as it haven't been finished, you
> >   *shoudn't* know what it's capabilities are. So you *shouldn't* have
> >   the formulas before starting researching/developing.
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
> No, there are a lot of other ways to handle this.  Most likely, the
> capabilities of the weapon should be determined at random by the game
> system.  That way you will not know what they are until you actually
> finish and experiment with it.

Are you suggesting that you do all this research into a weapons system
and then the game just randomly choses what that weapons system is?
Surely you are not suggesting this as only a few articles back (or was
it by email to me ...) that you said that the game chosing random formulas
for things to counter the experience factor made the game unplayable. Now
if you are suggesting that the computer choses the weapons capability at
random then you are going back on your previous statement.

Or perhaps you mean something else here?

Gilette Serge <gilette@obsidian.unice.fr> writes:
> >b) someone said games are unbalanced because new players don't know the
> >   rules as well as old ones and therefore wants all the formulas shown
> >   to 'equilibrate'. I can tell that when you're a new player the rules
> >   are usually long enough, not to have moreover some code to read. I
> >   played GB and didn't want at all to read that messy code just to be
> >   a better player. Hence you're at a more disavantages than the old
> >   players that know well both the rules and the formulas.
> >   You should be able to play only with the standart rules.
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
> That's right.  That's why the formulas should be in the rules, not in
> the source code.

Replace "source code" with "formulas" and then try re-answering. ie: the
number of factors in the game is already complex enough without having
to read and understand all these formulas ...

Gilette Serge <gilette@obsidian.unice.fr> writes:
> >c) for the smart brains who think that one should show the formulas for
> >   they can be induce 'obviously' with a farily simple number of
> >   experience here is a challenge :
> >
> >   The setting is a galactic game, with hyperdrive of different technology
> >   level (1 to 5 for being nice), and where distance are measured in a
> >   given unit : p. The formula give the fuel comsumption for an hyperdrive
> >   jump.
> >
> >   send me distance numbers and tech level and i'll send you back the fuel
> >   and we'll see how many tries you need to have an idea of the formula.
>
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
> This is silly because you can make the formula ridiculously complicated,
> because you know that it isn't being used in a real game.  If you were
> designing a real game, and doing a good job, the formula would have to
> be reasonably simple or people would not be able to play the game.

BULL!

I can use relatively simple chaotic equations and get a *very* realistic
and playable game (cf: population growth equations), and of course the equations
are not going to be easy to approximate (remember that horrible slogan "initial
condition sensitive!).

This line that you have to  use simple formulas to make the game playable is complete
balderdash! People live  life fairly well and some of us even enjoy it, yet none of
the "formulas of life" are simple. The variation and complexity is half the fun!

desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
> The right question is: with several experiments, will I know a lot
> _more_ about fuel consumption than I do now.  The answer is obviously
> yes.  Right now I don't know whether traveling 1 distance with level 1
> would require 1 milligram or 1 million tons of fuel; surely a single
> experiment will narrow it down a lot more than that.
>
> For that reason, a player with a moderate amount of experience will play
> much better than one who is just getting started with no information.
> This is the whole point.

Lets say I told you in the *RULES* that fuel consumption went up exponentially
over time. Now without knowing the *EXACT FORMULA* you have narrowed things down
a lot haven't you. This line that if you don't know the formula you have
no information to start with is again balderdash!

graham

References

Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 06 Jul 1993 11:55:13 +0000
PBM design and formulae - another fresh start
gilette@obsidian.unice.fr (Gilette Serge)
Tue, 06 Jul 1993 12:52:08 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - another fresh start
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Tue, 06 Jul 1993 14:42:20 +0000

Referenced By

Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 06 Jul 1993 11:55:13 +0000
PBM design and formulae - another fresh start
gilette@obsidian.unice.fr (Gilette Serge)
Tue, 06 Jul 1993 12:52:08 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - another fresh start
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Tue, 06 Jul 1993 14:42:20 +0000