DUST Search - CCP Soundwave: Why Balancing Is Bad and Monkeys Are Good

EnglishSnake wrote:

J'Jor Da'Wg wrote:

I agree that making no gun better than another is boring, but I would also venture to say that EVE balance is going to be different than gun balance in an FPS, simply due to the fact the FPS relies more on "skill", as in, ability to recognize a target, acquire a sight picture, aim, and eliminate that target in the shortest amount of time possible.

Skill in EVE is there, to be sure. Its just a different skill, a "management" skill, that isn't based as much on twitch reflexes as it is on managing a group of variables to output the greatest possible amount of favorable percenteges, hence, "Spreadsheets Online" moniker EVE has.

In an FPS, the virtue of you having a "better" gun should not make you win by default. However, a worrying thing about DUST is that it does. It is harder to overcome a huge difference in stats between two players than it might be in EVE. Honestly I think the design philosophy behind the progression curve in DUST needs a looking at, possibly base gameplay fundamentals.

In my personal opinion, DUST would be better served by making the difference between proto and militia gear more of an EDGE than a ADVANTAGE. I think the whole EVE philosophy of bigger percentege differences (working with a lot more in an EVE ship than a DUST dropsuit), isn't good in DUST. Making mercenaries fragile and die a lot could be offset by lower costs for dropsuits, instead of dying 4 times, you would die 49 times, but it would br the same cost overall keeping inter-game price balance even between economies.

I am not calling for CoD fragility, but instead of taking 12 shots to die as a merc, taking 5-9 shots depending on suit you are using (basing numbers off of the Assault suit.)

Instead of the difference between a miitia and proto suit being 10 shots, the difference would be 3.

Thats kind of how I always envisioned DUST; medium damage, medium health, instead of the low damage high health model currently employed.

If you cant aim you wont kill

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Stupid Drunk1 Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 96	Posted - 2012.08.12 20:25:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Soundwave: GÇ£Why balancing is bad, monkeys are good, and how to design games with that in mind.GÇ¥ Is it really about monkeys? Yes! TheyGÇÖre cute. But itGÇÖs also because we test things on monkeys before we try it on humans. WeGÇÖll also be talking about rats and other test animals. We can learn a lot about game design from them. Soundwave is now a big fan of imbalance GÇô itGÇÖs not universally good but it can be a powerful tool to generate gameplay. Supercaps are a good example of GÇ£badGÇ¥ imbalance. You have to handle imbalancing with care. Imbalances have to be small and careful. If done right it keeps the game experience fresh, to shake things up and encourage people to play the game in new ways. Tweaking ships and changing their roles is a cheaper and faster way to introduce these tweaks to the game GÇô itGÇÖs much simpler and more controllable than introducing whole new ships. Soundwave is talking about his love affair with the Arbitrator, and learning to solo in the Pilgrim. He had a ton of fun, and then CCP nerfed them. (FFFFUUUUU) But then his perspective shifted. Once the Pilgrim was nerfed, people started using the Rapier and loving that. Soundwave had the same great time with that, and then CCP nerfed it. Then he played with the Vagabond, and CCP nerfed it! What people overlook is that this was his first goal-oriented path of the game. It came from his perceived view of power and success in the game, and the imbalance is what led him along it. The imbalance created a game experience which was entertaining, because you felt powerful. This means chasing GÇ£the next thingGÇ¥ is an incredibly powerful goalsetting mechanism. Adjusting to changes in GÇ£whatGÇÖs bestGÇ¥ drives peoplesGÇÖ goals and keeps them dynamic. If all ships were the same, weGÇÖd be bored to death. This is where the monkeys come in: power and novelty are primitive desires that give us a lot of satisfaction. Knowing and predicting the world is a natural drive, and a very powerful one. The more we knew, back in the monkey days, the greater our chances of survival GÇô the same is true today, and the goal is to make it especially true in EVE. Today, Soundwave jumps from ship to ship like a monkey between the trees. Discovering the unknown and learning about it is a powerful trigger for dopamine, a neurotransmitter that gives us a pleasurable feeling. ThatGÇÖs one of the reasons why games are so popular GÇô it presses the dopamine trigger button. Rules for Imbalance One of the keys is to give players equal access to all the same imbalanced items. ThatGÇÖs why Soundwave is more worried about supercap balancing than Dramiel balancing GÇô itGÇÖs easy for people to get in Dramiels and fly them, not so much with supercaps. Another is to make the imbalance slight, or if possible, only perceived (supercaps really didnGÇÖt meet this criteria). Yet another is to continually rotate the imbalance. (Hence why when Gallente come around again, something else will be considered less-good). Also: People die. ThatGÇÖs good. EVE is a game of loss GÇô you try to fly the most efficient ships, balancing risk/reward. Stroking Stroking is a unit of recognition. A stroke can be another player entering your belt, saying hi (positive stroke) or a player blowing you up (negative stroke). Describing an experiment in which a scientist built a bunch of boxes rats were kept in; some received positive input, some none, some received electric shocks. The suprising discovery was that the rats developed better if they received negative stimuli than they did if they received no stimuli whatsoever. That maps to EVE in the form of losing ships. YouGÇÖll go from having one person get ganked, escalate to forming defense gangs. If this happens often, it becomes default social behavior. In the end, weGÇÖre a lot like rats, weGÇÖll use both negative and positive strokes to satisfy the hunger for stimulation. GÇ£If thereGÇÖs anything I wish itGÇÖs that we had bigger grids so that people could interact more directly in a wider area. IGÇÖd rather have one big superbelt where people could rat instead of being all in one box. That way you can always see another player and have a chance to interact. A lot of eve is very isolated.GÇ¥ Conflict is good In a game where loss discourages risktaking, you can use other things to encourage them, such as giving an advantage (good ships), giving them a reason to take risks (such as imbalanced rewards, like moons). The practical implementation of moons is awful, but the idea of such an imbalanced reward is good. If thereGÇÖs no advantage or reward, gameplay is boring. You donGÇÖt build huge amounts of man hours and organization to deal with it. Q & A by CCP Devs Read further
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2012.08.12 20:42:00 - [2] - Quote That was last year, CCP Soundwave is not in charge of balancing anymore.(if i am not mistaken hes in charge of eve now.) CCP Yitterbim is currenlty in charge and his thoery is this. Data pull from eve all the ships not being flown. Find out why they're not being flown. Then buff those thus this creasion optionalization increasig the number of possible ways to deal with 'alpha champion' Start with Tech 1 Frigates work your way up. Rinse repeat. Still doesnt change the fact that perfect balance is boring as hell. To support this point video http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/perfect-imbalance
J'Jor Da'Wg KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 648	Posted - 2012.08.12 21:02:00 - [3] - Quote I agree that making no gun better than another is boring, but I would also venture to say that EVE balance is going to be different than gun balance in an FPS, simply due to the fact the FPS relies more on "skill", as in, ability to recognize a target, acquire a sight picture, aim, and eliminate that target in the shortest amount of time possible. Skill in EVE is there, to be sure. Its just a different skill, a "management" skill, that isn't based as much on twitch reflexes as it is on managing a group of variables to output the greatest possible amount of favorable percenteges, hence, "Spreadsheets Online" moniker EVE has. In an FPS, the virtue of you having a "better" gun should not make you win by default. However, a worrying thing about DUST is that it does. It is harder to overcome a huge difference in stats between two players than it might be in EVE. Honestly I think the design philosophy behind the progression curve in DUST needs a looking at, possibly base gameplay fundamentals. In my personal opinion, DUST would be better served by making the difference between proto and militia gear more of an EDGE than a ADVANTAGE. I think the whole EVE philosophy of bigger percentege differences (working with a lot more in an EVE ship than a DUST dropsuit), isn't good in DUST. Making mercenaries fragile and die a lot could be offset by lower costs for dropsuits, instead of dying 4 times, you would die 49 times, but it would br the same cost overall keeping inter-game price balance even between economies. I am not calling for CoD fragility, but instead of taking 12 shots to die as a merc, taking 5-9 shots depending on suit you are using (basing numbers off of the Assault suit.) Instead of the difference between a miitia and proto suit being 10 shots, the difference would be 3. Thats kind of how I always envisioned DUST; medium damage, medium health, instead of the low damage high health model currently employed.
Stupid Drunk1 Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 96	Posted - 2012.08.12 21:06:00 - [4] - Quote I would already say with 7 years of skills, EvE Dust 514 could be called spreadsheats fodder, to each his own, nice post Jor Dawg, but we will see what CCP does, and do not even attemp to contemplate what this game really needs, I will leave that to my trusty CCP devs I have counted on for years for the above logic, in the OP
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1012	Posted - 2012.08.12 21:12:00 - [5] - Quote J'Jor Da'Wg wrote: I agree that making no gun better than another is boring, but I would also venture to say that EVE balance is going to be different than gun balance in an FPS, simply due to the fact the FPS relies more on "skill", as in, ability to recognize a target, acquire a sight picture, aim, and eliminate that target in the shortest amount of time possible. Skill in EVE is there, to be sure. Its just a different skill, a "management" skill, that isn't based as much on twitch reflexes as it is on managing a group of variables to output the greatest possible amount of favorable percenteges, hence, "Spreadsheets Online" moniker EVE has. In an FPS, the virtue of you having a "better" gun should not make you win by default. However, a worrying thing about DUST is that it does. It is harder to overcome a huge difference in stats between two players than it might be in EVE. Honestly I think the design philosophy behind the progression curve in DUST needs a looking at, possibly base gameplay fundamentals. In my personal opinion, DUST would be better served by making the difference between proto and militia gear more of an EDGE than a ADVANTAGE. I think the whole EVE philosophy of bigger percentege differences (working with a lot more in an EVE ship than a DUST dropsuit), isn't good in DUST. Making mercenaries fragile and die a lot could be offset by lower costs for dropsuits, instead of dying 4 times, you would die 49 times, but it would br the same cost overall keeping inter-game price balance even between economies. I am not calling for CoD fragility, but instead of taking 12 shots to die as a merc, taking 5-9 shots depending on suit you are using (basing numbers off of the Assault suit.) Instead of the difference between a miitia and proto suit being 10 shots, the difference would be 3. Thats kind of how I always envisioned DUST; medium damage, medium health, instead of the low damage high health model currently employed. If you cant aim you wont kill
Aighun Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 666	Posted - 2012.08.12 21:50:00 - [6] - Quote J'Jor Da'Wg wrote: I agree that making no gun better than another is boring, but I would also venture to say that EVE balance is going to be different than gun balance in an FPS, simply due to the fact the FPS relies more on "skill", as in, ability to recognize a target, acquire a sight picture, aim, and eliminate that target in the shortest amount of time possible. Skill in EVE is there, to be sure. Its just a different skill, a "management" skill, that isn't based as much on twitch reflexes as it is on managing a group of variables to output the greatest possible amount of favorable percenteges, hence, "Spreadsheets Online" moniker EVE has. In an FPS, the virtue of you having a "better" gun should not make you win by default. However, a worrying thing about DUST is that it does. It is harder to overcome a huge difference in stats between two players than it might be in EVE. Honestly I think the design philosophy behind the progression curve in DUST needs a looking at, possibly base gameplay fundamentals. In my personal opinion, DUST would be better served by making the difference between proto and militia gear more of an EDGE than a ADVANTAGE. I think the whole EVE philosophy of bigger percentege differences (working with a lot more in an EVE ship than a DUST dropsuit), isn't good in DUST. Making mercenaries fragile and die a lot could be offset by lower costs for dropsuits, instead of dying 4 times, you would die 49 times, but it would br the same cost overall keeping inter-game price balance even between economies. I am not calling for CoD fragility, but instead of taking 12 shots to die as a merc, taking 5-9 shots depending on suit you are using (basing numbers off of the Assault suit.) Instead of the difference between a miitia and proto suit being 10 shots, the difference would be 3. Thats kind of how I always envisioned DUST; medium damage, medium health, instead of the low damage high health model currently employed. I don't want to play this game you are describing. It is a very simplistic game universe view and not why I would go to CCP shooter over any other. Why is dying 49 times better than dying 4 times, again? That sounds terrible, a game consisting entirely of trips to and from a spawn point. My games are bad enough like that as it is. And between which militia suit and which proto suit should the 3 shot difference occur? You aren't leaving enough room for any of the boosts you get from suit modules so are you advocating getting rid of them entirely? Why would I want to play a CCP game without modules? In Dust right now we have: Medium damage medium health, as per your request. We also have high health low damage. Low health high damage. High health high damage. Low health low damage. You are essentially advocating for making no suit loadout "better" than any other. Teh boring...
J'Jor Da'Wg KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 648	Posted - 2012.08.12 22:36:00 - [7] - Quote EnglishSnake wrote: J'Jor Da'Wg wrote: I agree that making no gun better than another is boring, but I would also venture to say that EVE balance is going to be different than gun balance in an FPS, simply due to the fact the FPS relies more on "skill", as in, ability to recognize a target, acquire a sight picture, aim, and eliminate that target in the shortest amount of time possible. Skill in EVE is there, to be sure. Its just a different skill, a "management" skill, that isn't based as much on twitch reflexes as it is on managing a group of variables to output the greatest possible amount of favorable percenteges, hence, "Spreadsheets Online" moniker EVE has. In an FPS, the virtue of you having a "better" gun should not make you win by default. However, a worrying thing about DUST is that it does. It is harder to overcome a huge difference in stats between two players than it might be in EVE. Honestly I think the design philosophy behind the progression curve in DUST needs a looking at, possibly base gameplay fundamentals. In my personal opinion, DUST would be better served by making the difference between proto and militia gear more of an EDGE than a ADVANTAGE. I think the whole EVE philosophy of bigger percentege differences (working with a lot more in an EVE ship than a DUST dropsuit), isn't good in DUST. Making mercenaries fragile and die a lot could be offset by lower costs for dropsuits, instead of dying 4 times, you would die 49 times, but it would br the same cost overall keeping inter-game price balance even between economies. I am not calling for CoD fragility, but instead of taking 12 shots to die as a merc, taking 5-9 shots depending on suit you are using (basing numbers off of the Assault suit.) Instead of the difference between a miitia and proto suit being 10 shots, the difference would be 3. Thats kind of how I always envisioned DUST; medium damage, medium health, instead of the low damage high health model currently employed. If you cant aim you wont kill And currently, even if you can aim, you still wont absoulutely get the kill, even if you have the better situational advantage. Am I saying my way is the best way? By no means. It is merely my preferred way. And to the other comments, I am not saying all numbers I gave are absolute. I was merely giving examples. They merely served to illustrate the general direction I would have PREFFERED Dust to go.
Stupid Drunk1 Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 96	Posted - 2012.08.13 01:10:00 - [8] - Quote We shall see Jor Dawg
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2283	Posted - 2012.08.13 04:20:00 - [9] - Quote if the difference between militia and proto is 3 shots like u want J then whats the point droppin all that ISK for a 3 shot difference? even with the current prices now it wont be worth it.....and prices will be raised so what incentive would someone have to blow all that ISK on a suit if its just 9 shots to kill them 3 more than standard? dont get me wrong the idea is good but i cant see it working when u have to actually pay for dropsuits and gear.....if it was a one time buy and u have it forever then hell yes i fully agree with ur suggestion but that cost factor changes things up significantly tbh
Lurchasaurus SVER True Blood Unclaimed. 808	Posted - 2012.08.13 04:21:00 - [10] - Quote its not so much about the extra squeak of health.... its about the increased CPU/PG and the increase in slots.



Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page