Developers requesting feedback: Warfare Points (Return of Points)?

[x4000]

You know... carnage took an arrow to the knee awhile back.  Now you want him to limp back out into the open?

Before we had to many units out and about.  Now we have more barracks to get enough units out to combat each other and bandits   Now we might need to have even more to meet some level of expected carnage?

Well, the unit counts were always supposed to be small mainly because guys pop out and kill each other so fast.  But... yeah.  Now might not be the best time to be introducing some score gating.  Perhaps that will be a post-1.0 added feature or something.

And from the sound of things from orzelek's latest play session, it hard enough as it is even on Medium now.

[Cinth]

Well, the unit counts were always supposed to be small

Just to poke fun but I have 15 military producers on the map at turn 23... and I'm nowhere near how many I want to place

[Misery]

By encouraging the correct behavior with score also limits your need to stop exploits (for victory that is).

See, I don't really like that. I feel like it's a shortcut to making a challenging game by just saying "Yeah, it's super easy to win, but at the end of the game we will tell you that you played it wrong."

My goal would be this:
1. It's hard to win at all, especially on higher difficulties.
2. If you want to go the extra mile, you can show off your mad skillz by having an extra high score.

I think that something like Bionic Commando: Rearmed is a really good example of this sort of system.

I just wanted to say that I totally agree with this idea.  I see this all the time in the sorts of games that I play (particularly shmups), and it's one of the things that KEEPS me playing them.   While you have to be a certain type of player to totally "get" this one, if you ARE that sort of player, it really adds alot to a game if it's done right.

[Penumbra]

  I mean, I don't need stuff that can't fit in that timeframe at the moment

From a gameplay perspective, I think aligning the goals is a really good idea. Turning turn count into a turn limit to achieve "X" sounds, in my completely unknowledgeable opinion, "not too hard" (please don't hit me  )

This is a little offtopic for this thread, but from a marketing/theme perspective, I also think bringing more of the "middle management" aspect to the forefront would help give the game an identity. You had said earlier that it really made Skyward unique, and I think it needs to be seen. This would be just in flavor text thrown around, no real "changes" to gameplay.

The tutorial says "Your job as The Creator" could actually reference "your job." Instead of "This tutorial" it could say this "new-hire orientation". It would give the game a true, unique, identity that other sites could use as a tagline. If the one sentence description of your game is both accurate, catchy and funny, it could only help.

[x4000]

  I mean, I don't need stuff that can't fit in that timeframe at the moment

From a gameplay perspective, I think aligning the goals is a really good idea. Turning turn count into a turn limit to achieve "X" sounds, in my completely unknowledgeable opinion, "not too hard" (please don't hit me  )

From a technical sense it's not hard at all.  But getting it balanced in a way that makes other players not want to hit me?  That's a different matter.  I could particularly see this making the rage resulting from Woes hit catastrophic levels.

This is a little offtopic for this thread, but from a marketing/theme perspective, I also think bringing more of the "middle management" aspect to the forefront would help give the game an identity. You had said earlier that it really made Skyward unique, and I think it needs to be seen. This would be just in flavor text thrown around, no real "changes" to gameplay.

The tutorial says "Your job as The Creator" could actually reference "your job." Instead of "This tutorial" it could say this "new-hire orientation". It would give the game a true, unique, identity that other sites could use as a tagline. If the one sentence description of your game is both accurate, catchy and funny, it could only help.

We've actually been downplaying The Master ever since edicts were removed, and all references to middle management.  Aside from the first panel of the comic, there's no reference to that anywhere.  I don't think the game needs that as a hook (the gameplay mechanics are way unique enough of a hook as it is, and the game has already formed an identity on various sites because of how peculiar playing both sides is).  All of our marketing materials are also already done, in particular trailer and so forth (final tweaks aside), so it's not like this would affect more than some in-game stuff anyhow, which wouldn't affect branding at all.

Granted our marketing copy could still change, but I don't think a new identity would be really forged from that, or is really even needed.

[PokerChen]

If you don't mind one more input, I easily cruised through my hard4 game on .817 before bandit fortresses and social decay's temporary appearance.

Score gating doesn't need to be very high, and I would like seeing it in game for the original intent of being. employed to cause carnage. Having easily attainable scores on easy/medium would not be taxing to the player, but it enables the temptation to keep bean counting.

An easy score-gating's purpose is really to allow players to mini-sandbox potential high-scoring strategies without as much random influences. Then they can road-test them in hard.

[Cinth]

The way scores are implemented now work.  If you want it, you can set it in the lobby.  There are even different setting for the gating if you want it.