<!-- MHonArc v2.4.4 -->
<!--X-Subject: [MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills -->
<!--X-From-R13: X Q Znjerapr <pynjNhaqre.rate.ftv.pbz> -->
<!--X-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:38:38 -0800 -->
<!--X-Message-Id: 199901160253.SAA50523#under,engr.sgi.com -->
<!--X-Content-Type: text/plain -->
<!--X-Reference: Marcel-1.46-0115221528-d07Ky&5#catling,demon.nl -->
<!--X-Head-End-->
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title>MUD-Dev message, [MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills</title>
<!-- meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow" -->
<link rev="made" href="mailto:claw#under,engr.sgi.com">
</head>
<body background="/backgrounds/paperback.gif" bgcolor="#ffffff"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" alink="#FF0000" vlink="#006000">
<font size="+4" color="#804040">
<strong><em>MUD-Dev<br>mailing list archive</em></strong>
</font>
<br>
[ <a href="../">Other Periods</a>
| <a href="../../">Other mailing lists</a>
| <a href="/search.php3">Search</a>
]
<br clear=all><hr>
<!--X-Body-Begin-->
<!--X-User-Header-->
<!--X-User-Header-End-->
<!--X-TopPNI-->
Date:
[ <a href="msg00199.html">Previous</a>
| <a href="msg00201.html">Next</a>
]
Thread:
[ <a href="msg00193.html">Previous</a>
| <a href="msg00148.html">Next</a>
]
Index:
[ <A HREF="author.html#00200">Author</A>
| <A HREF="#00200">Date</A>
| <A HREF="thread.html#00200">Thread</A>
]
<!--X-TopPNI-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-->
<!--X-Subject-Header-Begin-->
<H1>[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills</H1>
<HR>
<!--X-Subject-Header-End-->
<!--X-Head-of-Message-->
<UL>
<LI><em>To</em>: <A HREF="mailto:mud-dev#kanga,nu">mud-dev#kanga,nu</A></LI>
<LI><em>Subject</em>: [MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills </LI>
<LI><em>From</em>: J C Lawrence <<A HREF="mailto:claw#under,engr.sgi.com">claw#under,engr.sgi.com</A>></LI>
<LI><em>Date</em>: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 18:53:01 -0800</LI>
<LI><em>Reply-To</em>: <A HREF="mailto:mud-dev#kanga,nu">mud-dev#kanga,nu</A></LI>
</UL>
<!--X-Head-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-Begin-->
<HR>
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-End-->
<!--X-Body-of-Message-->
<PRE>
On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:15:28 +0000 (GMT)
Marian Griffith<gryphon#iaehv,nl> wrote:
> On Fri 15 Jan, J C Lawrence wrote:
>> Comments on zero-sum games etc are apt and welcome.
>> The problem with both of course is that they are demoralising.
>> There is no winning, you can only stand still or fall behind. We
>> can cover up this flaw in #1 by repainting it as "re-inventing"
>> or other cute terms. The principle remains the same however, the
>> game is regeared to put everybody back at ground zero -- just
>> without making them feel that they've lost in the process
>> (concentrate on the new race/game instead of what is lost).
> Do not most muds already do just this every time they add new
> features, races, classes, areas? They up the levels in some way
> by increasing the power level acheivable to players.
Yes, but its a finite solution for an infinite problem.
1) Consider a game X where Tiamat has a strength of 100.
2) Players play this game and initially are fleas before Tiamat's
might.
3) Later the same players are able to kill Tiamat with some ease.
Solution:
Change Tiamat's strength to 1,000.
Problem:
Sooner or later the cycle restarts from #3 and you need to rescale
Tiamat. This in turn forms and endless ratrace and all that really
changes is the fact that the numbers get bigger -- but the ratios
stay (mostly) the same.
>> The problem from a game design viewpoint is that #2 is horribly
>> expensive. It means that you can't just put a game on
>> maintenance, but you have to actually re-write and re-design and
>> re-do the whole damn thing with fair frequency,
> I am fairly sure I do not understand at all why this must be so.
Because every time around the loop yuo essentially have to redesign
your game. Just scaling the numbers bigger is a very temproary
bandaide. You have to add new features, new races, classes, spells,
etc etc etc, all of which require reblancing the game (very
non-trivial), active monitoring, and all the other aspects of game
redesign.
>> What's the key problem? The very concept of the advancement
>> scale. It just doesn't work over the long term. It is an
>> evolutionary dead end. Why? Because you can't maintain the
>> process that drives the advancement scale. No matter how hard
>> you try to make and keep the game open ended (which is really
>> what I am talking about), sooner or later, and likely far sooner
>> than later, burnout beckons. You *have* to divert to softer more
>> organic realms where non-deterministic development is more
>> important than direct comparison and ranking and linear genetalia
>> measuring is no longer your stock in trade.
>> Even then atrophy isn't really a solution. All it really does is
>> make the scale longer. Now, instead of being able to climb from
>> 1 to 100 in simple fashion, you're now walking uphill against
>> "atrophy".
> True, though if you manage to separate the power level from the
> player level it should be more manageable I think. Instead of
> concentrating on ways to make characters weaker you can concen-
> trate on handling the more socially oriented aspect of player
> levels.
Exactly. You have to get players off the power-is-everything kick
and into less direct interests before the scale runs out.
>> Expressive fertility seems like the real key here. Have a look
>> at the Walled City in Gibson's Idoru. Look at the general
>> handling of virtual reality in the same book. There's a *LOT* of
>> careful, detailed, highly imaginative and really really
>> engrossing (to the people who created those things) expresiveness
>> in there. Look at the construction and details of the shrine/hut
>> (I'm working on memory here) where she first meat the Japanese
>> fan club contingent.
> The problem of course is getting the players to go along with it,
> especially if there is a ready way for them to prove their worth
> through combat.
I'm going to go out on a limb here:
I suspect that the main problem with the combat model of most MUDs
is that it is survivable. What seems the real solution: Make combat
deadly and make combatants very short lived. Yup, there are people
who try and live/play by killing things. They don't live long (say
a few days RL time), but they make a lot of noise. There are also
more moderate players, active in a wide range of areas -- they tend
to live far longer due to the lower risk levels.
The next problem of course is that typically the non-fighters are
perfect and readily available prey for the wanna-be fighters, and
due to the nature of their non-combat lives, and so have no defence
against the fighters (cf you're wonderful Tailor scenario).
Possible address:
Defence, even against excellant and skilled attack, is easy and
cheap (as long as you are on your own territory), but you *can't*
attack while defending.
Attack is viciously effective, but only against other attackers.
The game tracks your attack/defence actions, much in the manner of
UO's reputation system, and players on the negative side can't
defend.
I'm not happy with this, but it seems a start. Need to think about
this some more.
>> Advancement scales are fun. That's great, but you have to get
>> people off that bandwagon and into more interesting and less
>> deterministic affairs before they realise that the ladder ends
>> and that there is nowhere to go from there.
>> How to do that? Make things other than advancement more and more
>> enticing. You don't want it (non-advancement) TOO enticing too
>> quickly, as the presence of the scale is important. It gets
>> people playing the game and knowledgable about the game and game
>> world.
> Not to certain this is possible, nor that it is at all important.
> You describe something of the average mush where combat mechanisms
> are absent or rudimentary at best. Players are interested in those
> games and the apparent lack of advancement does not seem to disap-
> point them in the least. If the game offers many other things to
> do then you should not be surprised that they actually go out and
> do them, nor should you feel that is somehow inferior. Combat and
> levels need not be the by all and end all of a game.
<nod> Understood. However in simple numbers combat MUDs are more
popular than MUSHes, and have a much lower barrier to entrance than
such MUShes (anybody can figure out Quake, many never did figure out
Myst). The trick I'm desribing is how to attempt to make a
low-barrier-to-entrence combat game that later, as the players
continue to play, mutates into a more MUSh-style game FOR THAT
PLAYER. The goal is player retention. Combat players burn out,
move on, get bored. Softer players last longer and make you more
$$$.
--
J C Lawrence Internet: claw#kanga,nu
(Contractor) Internet: coder#kanga,nu
---------(*) Internet: claw#under,engr.sgi.com
...Honorary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...
</PRE>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<HR>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<UL><LI><STRONG>References</STRONG>:
<UL>
<LI><STRONG><A NAME="00193" HREF="msg00193.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills</A></STRONG>
<UL><LI><EM>From:</EM> Marian Griffith <gryphon#iaehv,nl></LI></UL></LI>
</UL></LI></UL>
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<UL>
<LI>Prev by Date:
<STRONG><A HREF="msg00199.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills</A></STRONG>
</LI>
<LI>Next by Date:
<STRONG><A HREF="msg00201.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></STRONG>
</LI>
<LI>Prev by thread:
<STRONG><A HREF="msg00193.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills</A></STRONG>
</LI>
<LI>Next by thread:
<STRONG><A HREF="msg00148.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></STRONG>
</LI>
<LI>Index(es):
<UL>
<LI><A HREF="index.html#00200"><STRONG>Date</STRONG></A></LI>
<LI><A HREF="thread.html#00200"><STRONG>Thread</STRONG></A></LI>
</UL>
</LI>
</UL>
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
<ul><li>Thread context:
<BLOCKQUOTE><UL>
<LI><STRONG>[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</STRONG>, <EM>(continued)</EM>
<ul compact>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00142" HREF="msg00142.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></strong>,
Caliban Tiresias Darklock <a href="mailto:caliban#darklock,com">caliban#darklock,com</a>, Wed 13 Jan 1999, 22:54 GMT
</LI>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00147" HREF="msg00147.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></strong>,
Koster, Raph <a href="mailto:rkoster#origin,ea.com">rkoster#origin,ea.com</a>, Wed 13 Jan 1999, 23:37 GMT
<UL>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00179" HREF="msg00179.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></strong>,
J C Lawrence <a href="mailto:claw#under,engr.sgi.com">claw#under,engr.sgi.com</a>, Fri 15 Jan 1999, 02:07 GMT
<UL>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00193" HREF="msg00193.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills</A></strong>,
Marian Griffith <a href="mailto:gryphon#iaehv,nl">gryphon#iaehv,nl</a>, Fri 15 Jan 1999, 21:34 GMT
<UL>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00200" HREF="msg00200.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills</A></strong>,
J C Lawrence <a href="mailto:claw#under,engr.sgi.com">claw#under,engr.sgi.com</a>, Sat 16 Jan 1999, 03:38 GMT
</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00148" HREF="msg00148.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></strong>,
Koster, Raph <a href="mailto:rkoster#origin,ea.com">rkoster#origin,ea.com</a>, Wed 13 Jan 1999, 23:39 GMT
<UL>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00155" HREF="msg00155.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></strong>,
Adam Wiggins <a href="mailto:adam#angel,com">adam#angel,com</a>, Thu 14 Jan 1999, 01:25 GMT
</LI>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00156" HREF="msg00156.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></strong>,
J C Lawrence <a href="mailto:claw#under,engr.sgi.com">claw#under,engr.sgi.com</a>, Thu 14 Jan 1999, 01:31 GMT
<UL>
<LI><strong><A NAME="00164" HREF="msg00164.html">[MUD-Dev] Re: Levels versus Skills, who uses them and when.</A></strong>,
Holly Sommer <a href="mailto:hsommer#micro,ti.com">hsommer#micro,ti.com</a>, Thu 14 Jan 1999, 19:03 GMT
</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
</UL>
</LI>
</ul>
</LI>
</UL></BLOCKQUOTE>
</ul>
<hr>
<center>
[ <a href="../">Other Periods</a>
| <a href="../../">Other mailing lists</a>
| <a href="/search.php3">Search</a>
]
</center>
<hr>
</body>
</html>