Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start

From: gilette@obsidian.unice.fr (Gilette Serge)

Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1993 09:04:28 +0000

In article <gym.741614461@dcs.ed.ac.uk>, gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews) writes:

|> Assumptions :-
|>
|> a) we are talking about simulation games.
|> b) the type of game could be anything (eg: boardgame, PBM, ...)
|>
|> a) it adds to the realism of the game. In the real world people
|> don't know exact equations for things and yet seem to do ok.
|> A simulation should therefore capture this imprecision - if it does
|> not, then it is not a good simulation.(even the formulas themselves
|> are only approximations to the reality!).

Exactly, talking about wargames, you know that calvalry attaking
phalanx with long long spear would experience some problems, that is
common sense, or it will become experience when you made the mistake
once. But you don't have to know that if 40 cavalry attack 20 spear
weilder, you have a 25% chance of loosing half you cavalry and so on.
Having such a knowledge is completly ridiculous for it's supposed
to be a simulation game, so simulating the "real world" and in the real
world you have No idea of what the result will exactly be, just some
kind of rough idea.

Knowing with 100% precision what a result could be -> it's not a simulation game

With boardgame you're obliged to know the rules because, you don't
have a referee that will do all the computing for you, but when you
have the chance of having a computer to hide this work and to give
you a nice 'reality' feeling you should be happy about that and
that you're not to bother learning rules.

|> Now there are caveats in this position, namely the caveats of :-
|>
|> a) experience. The more players play the more experienced they get
|> and hence the better they get. This is inevitable - publishing
|> the formulas would not solve this problem because the non math
|> people would not be helped by knowing the formulas for example.
|> The only way to counter this is to let the players treat experience
|> equitably by helping newbies or by playing with people of the same
|> experience.

True, in no games a beginner will be the equal to an experienced
player, simply because there are some tactics and strategy that you
devellop by experience only.

|> b) statistical analysis. Again there does not seem to be all that
|> much that can be done about this. Sure lots of statistical analysis
|> will help you gain approximations to the formulas that are being used.

About that, you have to remember that the 'real world' depends on a lots
of parameters that we cannot take into account in the game, hence the
random bit, but we still can take into account a good number of parameters.
let's take a simple example :

A wargame as 2 type of units : infantry and cavalry, which can be either
regular or elite, and we want to statistically know what are the formulas.
we'll have to experience in the game at least 1000 x 4 x 4 combats
to have an idea of what the formulas are, which is completly impossible
in a game, as it's in real-life.

So i doubt it's possible to made such a study during a game, as it's in
real-life (as circumstances aren't ever the same twice), and hence i'm
against showing the formulas, (for you're not able to find them by
experience). That might be a bit unclear :)

Serge Gilette  | University of Nice |There's no difference between theory
------------------------------------|and practice in theory, but often a
phone: 92.94.26.41                  |great deal of difference between
email: gilette@obsidian.unice.fr    |theory and practice in practice!

References

Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Mon, 28 Jun 1993 20:30:42 +0000
PBM design and formulae - a summary
rob@ccc.govt.nz (Rob McNeur)
Mon, 28 Jun 1993 09:53:02 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 29 Jun 1993 11:55:07 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Tue, 29 Jun 1993 21:24:09 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Wed, 30 Jun 1993 10:33:28 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
rwallace@cs.tcd.ie (Russell Wallace)
Wed, 30 Jun 1993 23:25:42 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Thu, 01 Jul 1993 11:40:27 +0000
PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Fri, 02 Jul 1993 12:01:01 +0000

Referenced By

Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Mon, 28 Jun 1993 20:30:42 +0000
PBM design and formulae - a summary
rob@ccc.govt.nz (Rob McNeur)
Mon, 28 Jun 1993 09:53:02 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 29 Jun 1993 11:55:07 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Tue, 29 Jun 1993 21:24:09 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Wed, 30 Jun 1993 10:33:28 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
rwallace@cs.tcd.ie (Russell Wallace)
Wed, 30 Jun 1993 23:25:42 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Thu, 01 Jul 1993 11:40:27 +0000
PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Fri, 02 Jul 1993 12:01:01 +0000