Skip to Content
 

What if you have a paradox

8 replies [Last post]
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013

Ok, I am not going into details.

But I think I have discovered a paradox in my game design.
If I want to add something. The whole balance seems to collapse.

Now, what is the best thing to do?
- Not add the new idea at all?
- Cut out the new idea and everything that would have collapsed? (1/3th of the game will be gone, and 1/2 of the fun)
- Or accepting that the new basis is placed at a completely different level?

Or how do you guys deal with a paradox?

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I think ... from what I understand...

is that it depends on how "important" the thing that you want to ADD is. I think "theorizing" about games is good... But also MAKING the games is equally important. And that means at least a playable prototype. So if it's something that will break the game, I would not add it ... even if the end result is doing more research into how to remedy the situation.

But like I said, it depends on how "important" that addition is...!

From my experience there is usually a compromise that can be made allowing you to both preserve most of what you have and adding a "Feature" or "Functionality" that you feel is important to improve the game.

If it's too abstract, I would say "forget it". If it's something pretty BASIC and understandable, well then I would TRY to work with the idea and see HOW you can add it, without too much impact.

In other words, come to some kind of "compromise" between what you have and what you want to ADD... Maybe in a limited form or a very specific type of change that may impact a very local aspect of the game, etc.

Best!

Note #1: Like if you are trying to a HIT-PERCENTILE to your DAMAGE rolls, well that sounds like something logical. Even if it may be HARD to ADD, it is pretty BASIC and understandable to all. That's what I mean... You did not explain in the least so I don't know what it is that you want to ADD.

But instead if it's like a MOTION/MOVEMENT PENALTY to certain units like Marines or Soldiers that is affected when fighting against TANKS or other vehicular units (starting to get too complicated) well then I would probably NOT add such a feature because it's too remotely specific an NOT BASIC enough.

gamesomuch
gamesomuch's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/01/2022
isolate the problem and solve

Sounds like with this particular problem you know exactly what it is that breaks the game which should make solving that problem much easier. I mean, if the game works fine without this thing and then it breaks once it's added, then you can analyze the exact effects that it has on the rest of the game.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
X3M wrote: - Or accepting

X3M wrote:

- Or accepting that the new basis is placed at a completely different level?

Well.
I have one more option, seeing all the responses.
I make note of all the mechanics that are linked.
Scrap them all.
And add them in a new way.

Leaving the mechanics that started perfect but are now broken, for last.

If that doesn't work.
I have to scrap 2 new idea's.
Because that is the only way to keep the fun part of action chaos in my game.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Succes?

It was a close call.

But I managed by accepting the new defaults.
I partly cut out a mechanic and turned it into a clean yes/no roll.

I mentioned 2 new idea's....
The only new idea that I can remember, was to have the Attribute Assault and all the effects on the Actions.
What was the other new idea??

But the best part in all of this is. That the improved mechanics make the game simpler, easier, faster and....wait for it....100% compatible with my public version.

This latter made me fill with joy.

***

(What was that other idea? Did I mistype there? Should I cut back on my alcohol consumption? This is my WTF moment)

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Glad to hear it all worked out... Or most of it anyhow!

Usually nothing is set in stone, unless it is one of the Design's Fundamental Rules. What are those, you ask? Well usually when I am designing a game, I come up with RULES that must never be broken. The first Rule (#1) is the MOST important rule in the game's design. What does that mean, you ask??

It means for example on "Plains of Aria" (POA), the First Design Rule is:

Quote:
#1: The game needs to separate what is yours and mine. Meaning it needs to preserve ownership boundaries.

This is the fundamental rule and is probably one of the FEW rules that must never be broken. In this particular case, the rule is about ensuring that there is a clear boundary between your game pieces and another player's game pieces.

That's usually how I start a design, figuring out the Rules that should always be obeyed in terms of the design.

***

Everyone should cut back on their alcohol consumption...! But a beer here or there during the summer is reasonable. Or a cocktail like a Martini or a Sangria ... No harm in a couple of glasses of those too... It's summer, so you might as well enjoy the weather and some cool drinks too.

***

I'm also glad that you "improved" upon you design making it more compatible to an earlier version (your public version). That too is great! Congrats.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
You got that right

First I started to spiral out of control with the new mechanics.
Then I felt going into circles.
Eventually it collapsed in a back and forth checking.
Finally I got back on point.

I have to say, when choices are involved. It is still very important to see if another player can make a decision for the main player as well.
Somehow that one eluded me for a long time.

So, do you think that I could try to see if I can get a bit more complexity? While maintaining this new basis as a safeguard?

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Forgot about this video then I was reminded about it...

Here is the Link/URL to the David Guetta video "Dangerous".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVr__5Addjw

Love this video... It's so cool! And you literally don't know WHERE to LOOK!

Cheers all...

Note #1: BTW to answer your question... Sure I would see if you could add more and see if it "breaks" things or not. If it DOES, well then you may want to see if you can SIMPLIFY what you want to ADD. If not, well then you can think about seeing HOW you can add it without breaking anything... And usually this has got to do with simplification. Cheers @Ramon!

Note #2: Do you think you can get this kind of crew to help with your Design they look like they would be good with MATH??? :-P Hahaha!

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
What I refer to

What I am referring to, is to see if the rules of the mechanic can be slightly more complex.
For example, trying to hit an opponent that moves is one thing. Trying to hit an opponent that can move slow or fast is another thing. I think it is better to continue that in the other topic tbh.
Which reminds me. The "conclusion" that I made. It must be simple enough game rule, for anyone to understand, right?

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut