Re: PBM design: give away the formulas? (*FORMULAE !)

From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)

Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 19:08:28 +0000

Steve Chapin <sjc@cs.purdue.edu> writes:
> A well-designed game will follow two of Lindahl's Laws: the principle
> of least surprise, and equal investment yields equal return.  The PoLS
> means that more expensive weapons should be more deadly.  The EIYER
> means that if I invest the same amount of time and money on a mob of
> rabble or a few highly-skilled, well-equipped swordmasters, they
> should be equally deadly.

This seems silly.  If all strategies yield equally good results, then
there isn't any strategy to the game at all.  I guess this could appeal
to pure role players, but anyone who is even the least bit interested in
strategy wants to have different options which have different
consequences, not exactly the same consequences.

> I claim that informative textual descriptions and well-designed
> mechanisms obviate the need for publishing formulae.  It's easier to
> just make up a formula and publish it, than to work and get it right.
> Any formula that *can* be optimized violates EIYER (which can also
> paraphrased as: there shall not be One True Way to play the game).

Now this is wrong.  The two are not at all equivalent.  The point is, or
should be, that different strategies have different advantages and
disadvantages.  A swordsman should not be exactly the same as a mob of
rabble that costs the same, rather the former should be better in some
situations and the latter in others.  Finding the best choices and
compromises for the situations in which you find yourself is what
strategic games are all about.

> If you're going to publish optimizable formulas, why even bother to
> provide the players with options?  Have One Weapon, One Armor, and One
> True Way of Doing Things.  That's the one that everyone will adopt,
> anyway.  As an example balanced choices, the weapon and armor ratings
> from Oly are carefully balanced in terms of weight, protection or
> deadliness, and cost.  There is no single "best" weapon or armor for
> all three parameters (to paraphrase a friend's law of CS: light,
> cheap, effective: choose two).

Doesn't this disprove your own point?  The Oly formulas exist, but they
are constructed so that different choices have different advantages.  So
how does this support your argument that the formulas should be secret?

David desJardins

References

Re: PBM design: give away the formulas? (*FORMULAE !)
srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner)
Wed, 23 Jun 1993 17:09:10 +0000
Re: PBM design: give away the formulas? (*FORMULAE !)
bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)
Wed, 23 Jun 1993 18:19:45 +0000
Re: PBM design: give away the formulas? (*FORMULAE !)
sjc@cs.purdue.edu (Steve Chapin)
Wed, 23 Jun 1993 18:49:06 +0000

Referenced By

Re: PBM design: give away the formulas? (*FORMULAE !)
srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner)
Wed, 23 Jun 1993 17:09:10 +0000
Re: PBM design: give away the formulas? (*FORMULAE !)
bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)
Wed, 23 Jun 1993 18:19:45 +0000
Re: PBM design: give away the formulas? (*FORMULAE !)
sjc@cs.purdue.edu (Steve Chapin)
Wed, 23 Jun 1993 18:49:06 +0000