"Geoffrey Summerhayes" <sumrnot@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:0dd22911-c0fa-4762-a012-bf1f85d5941f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Ok, here's an example of a damage model that uses a lot of stats
> average damage=
> (max 0,
> ((max((minimum chance to hit),
> min((maximum chance to hit),
> (base % to hit for class and level)+
> (agility bonus)+
> (equipment hit bonus))))*
> ((average weapon damage)+
> (strength bonus)+
> (equipment damage bonus)+
> ((critical %)*
> (average critical damage)))*
> (100% -
> (****eld block %)+
> (enemy agility bonus)+
> (enemy equipment block bonus)))-
> ((enemy armour absorption)+
> (enemy constitution bonus)))
This example displays a firm grasp of what these values are generally used
for. I just want to make it clear that I'm not implying anything less. But
the general use pattern -- not the designer -- has a problem.
The problem is that the full range is obfiscated. It is no longer clear
what
the maximum 'average damage' is, even though of course there is one.
That problem leads to putting pegs in place to confine the range. The
result
is quite often that the number just sits on one or the other peg, shooting
between them when it reaches critical mass.
>> 2). "That all stats are equally im****tant"
>> This is the primary reason for using a range that goes from 0 to 1. It
>> can
>> be easily scaled to any desired range, and may be scaled differently
for
>> each variable. The result is still the same: All that has happened is
>> that
>> the box is stretched/squished along one or more dimensions. The shape
and
>> pro****tions remain intact, relative to the newly distorted box. I
should
>> probably illustrate this point, because it's not obvious.
> Bull. This simplification merely serves to make your
> argument appear valid.
Yep, definitely going to have to illustrate this point. Ok, here we go:
Ladies and gentlement, please take note that at no time does her nose
leave
her face:
http://home.comcast.net/~anglewyrm/img/face.png
Her nose is always between her eyes, and about the same distance to each
eye. And that applies directly to making mosters that go from 1hp to 100hp
through the game, or making them go from 1hp to 10000hp. Just stretching a
range.
It seems that 0% to 100% is easier to get than 0 to 1, so I'll have to
make
some edits. All I've done is make the ranges from 0% of whatever the best
value is up to 100%. Which is by definition the best value. If there were
something better, it would be the best value instead, and we'd be taking
0%
to 100% of that.
> So, Ok, over the course of the month to two years
> that pass in the typical adventure game, I suppose
> I could suddenly forget how to use an axe in order
> to become a better negotiator.
If axe skill is a true/false thing then "suddenly" applies, just as it did
when the skill was acquired. But if it has several levels of expertise,
then
maybe let the player choose to transfer some skill at level-up. That way
the
player can become rusty at that axe skill (by choice, not imposition) in
order to excel in another area.
|
