Currently Online

Latest Posts

Topic: Some Details in Balancing

the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 674
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Posted at: 2020-10-28, 14:48

Of course, but there must be a method with which we can achieve a reliable result. Mathematical Analysis makes sence for the whole game from minute 0 to 1 hour 20. If we devide it and have 100% analyzed and optimized part its good ; -) but we also see the problem, the key is that the whole gameexperience is balanced.

We have many parts that are well working : -)


Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1607
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-10-28, 14:52

the-x wrote:

Of course, but there must be a method with which we can achieve a reliable result.

Feel free to propose a mathematical method of analysis to do so.


Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 674
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Posted at: 2020-10-29, 01:29

What I was favoring very much was that circles that regulate themselves. You can set them by the basics that upgrade cost rises, for example exponentially or a little bit less. Since there are many different strategies zu chose and they work out differently what the other player does - like winning against the three 3-0-0-0 i can with 3 3-1-0-0 or with 6 0-0-0-2 so its self regulating, as well as players choosing different Ideas on how to win this game. What I am specifically interested in, if anyone sees cons in this please let me know?


Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1607
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-10-29, 10:07

the-x wrote:

What I was favoring very much was that circles that regulate themselves. You can set them by the basics that upgrade cost rises, for example exponentially or a little bit less. Since there are many different strategies zu chose and they work out differently what the other player does - like winning against the three 3-0-0-0 i can with 3 3-1-0-0 or with 6 0-0-0-2 so its self regulating, as well as players choosing different Ideas on how to win this game. What I am specifically interested in, if anyone sees cons in this please let me know?

Again this is Off topic. This thread according to the title is about balancing which means levelling the abilites of the tribes in the current game design. You are proposing a design change.
It is really annoying that you can't stay to the topic. By this you generate 2 impressions to me:
1. your proposal can't be substantiated with any evidence other then your personal feelings.
2. You don't care about wasting my time in fruitless discussions.

Neither of the 2 feelings I get from this is very nice.

But to answer your question. The biggest con is that this is a big design change and it changes the nature of the game and it is even more difficult to balance then the current upgrade and fighting system. Furthermore you keep proposing this whuilst it hasn't get any consensus in the past, which leaves me back again with impression No. 2 from above. It really feels like being trolled from my side.


Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 674
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Posted at: 2020-10-29, 10:45

Yes but hessenfarmner, this was not the question. Forum is exactly for discussing other Ideas and whats better than a real lot of Ideas? The point is not to troll the person coming with these Ideas - but to argument with facts. I need that kind of understanding for this question and dont want to open a new thread. "it is even more difficult to balance then the current upgrade and fighting system" Well, have you tried it yet? I guess no, cause it indeed is from the point of players testet, easier to balance & beeing a very interesting alternative/addon. Nevertheless if you tested it and give me an answer to this point i promise i will never come up with this Idea again


Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1607
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-10-29, 11:27

@the-x: a discussion is only fruitful if it sticks to the topic. Changing the topic before the original topic is finally discussed won't lead to any results, so it is just a waste of time.

I really tried to stay on topic, and I argumented that I need to see some reason based on calculations to see the point of a change in the legacy tribes that leads to a more balanced overall chance.
I also explained that personal testing isn't a valid method to determine any values as it is too much biased with personal gameplay, so there is no reason to try any of your changes.
Furthermore the design change you keep proposing is more difficult to balance as it would require a balance between every permutation of the upgrades possible for every of the 5 tribes. This is not possible with the current implementation of the fighting system. The only way where this would be possible is with unifying the tribes so they only have different graphics and are technically all the same. That is no viable solution imho, so again any testing would be a waste of my time.

The problem is that obviously you have a different definition of balancing than I have, So it seems as we can't agree on the definitions there is little sense in discussing from my side.


Top Quote