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

From: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)

Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 19:53:26 +0000

From article <20a8j2INNj8t@bredbeddle.cs.purdue.edu>, by sjc@cs.purdue.edu (Steve Chapin):
] }} In article <20a6s1INN7vl@uwm.edu> bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III) writes:
] }}
] }} The fun in the game should come from discovering reasonable things
] }} about the world, building up your characters/empire, making friends
] }} and enemies, helping your friends and defeating your enemies.
] }} Knowing the rules does nothing to take away from this.
] }}
] }} Knowing all of the rules does not mean knowing everything about a single
] }} instance of a game. There can be much to discover within a known framework
] }} of rules.
]
] The question wasn't "knowing the rules," it was "knowing the formulae."
]

The formulae ARE part of the rules.
If you just give a vague description of what is going on, the game has
"hidden" rules.

] For example, if the following appears in the startup packet ("the
] rules"):
]
]     Combat is a dangerous and deadly activity, best undertaken by
]     those who are practiced in the arts of battle, and who are well
]     equipped with high-quality weapons.  While one can eventually
]     subdue an oppenent bare-handed, an expert swordsman can hold his
]     own against a mob of untrained peasants.
]
] Do you really need to see:
]
]     damage = c1 + (c2 * weapon_value) + (c3 * skill_value) +
] 	     (c4 * weapon_value * skill_value)
]

YES!

] Properly explained rules tell you what you want to know:  that skilled
] people with weapons kick the living daylights out of the average mug.
] Players know that as they buy better weapons and train their troops,
] they will be better fighters.
]
] 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.

I agree here in general; there should be options when playing or the game
will be dull. A good game will not have just ONE obvious way to invest
resources. However all ways to invest resources need not be equally good
in any specific situation.

Olympia referenced removed.

]
] 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).
]
] 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).
]

Just because you know the formulae doesn't mean there will be one best way
to play. If the game is well designed there is no "always the best way to do
everything".

] Present the players with a consistent, fair underlying mechanism, and
] let them choose a style of play.  I'm sure this is what Scott meant by
] a sense of wonder.  Don't force them into a predetermined style of
] play.

Knowing the formulae used for the game should not force people into one style
of play. If it does the game is poorly designed.

]
] sjc@cs.purdue.edu                 Steve Chapin                 ...!purdue!sjc
]                             Aye, I like her eyes!
]
]       "But Doctor...I *am* Pagliacci..." (The Comedian, in "Watchmen")

References

Re: PBM design: give away the formulas? (*FORMULAE !)
sjc@cs.purdue.edu (Steve Chapin)
Wed, 23 Jun 1993 18:49:06 +0000