Player Feedback requested - Victory Points

[Misery]

I definitely approve of this idea. I wouldn't worry too much about the "Do what ever to win, then stop" attitude, either. If folks want to play that way, don't waste effort stopping them.

Well why not sorta do both?  Give players a number they need to hit.   Whatever that is.   But ALSO encourage them to keep going past that point as far as they can, yet make it optional.   As for how to encourage it, heck if I know, that'd be for the rest of you to figure out, heh.


Either way though, the VP concept as a whole does sound like it should do the trick if implemented properly.   Definitely liking where this is all going.

[mrhanman]

Well why not sorta do both?  Give players a number they need to hit.   Whatever that is.   But ALSO encourage them to keep going past that point as far as they can, yet make it optional.   As for how to encourage it, heck if I know, that'd be for the rest of you to figure out, heh.

Online leaderboards.

[Mick]

Well why not sorta do both?  Give players a number they need to hit.   Whatever that is.   But ALSO encourage them to keep going past that point as far as they can, yet make it optional.   As for how to encourage it, heck if I know, that'd be for the rest of you to figure out, heh.

Online leaderboards.

Top 10 - all reached 999,999,999 VPs. First day.

[mrhanman]

Well why not sorta do both?  Give players a number they need to hit.   Whatever that is.   But ALSO encourage them to keep going past that point as far as they can, yet make it optional.   As for how to encourage it, heck if I know, that'd be for the rest of you to figure out, heh.

Online leaderboards.

Top 10 - all reached 999,999,999 VPs. First day.

Only if there's an achievement for getting into the top 10.

[chemical_art]

Only if there's an achievement for getting into the top 10.

Top 10 is enough of an achievement in itself. It needs no external one for this to happen.

[mrhanman]

Only if there's an achievement for getting into the top 10.

Top 10 is enough of an achievement in itself. It needs no external one for this to happen.

I think Mick was implying "hacking" would be used to get into the top 10 with a max score on the first day.  Which could happen, certainly.  It seems to be fairly uncommon in the steam leaderboards I've looked at.

[Mick]

I was suggesting hacking. Even if it doesn't happen, I think it's a concept that just seems like wasted effort to me.

One of the great things about Arcen is how much they modify their games. Modifications pretty much mean everything on the leaderboards becomes meaningless, unless you reset them on every update.

I just don't really find them all that interesting myself. I want the game to reflect that I've played well because I "won", not because I played in some gamey fashion to inflate my score. There is a distinction, which is why I think the focus should not be placed onto "getting as many VPs as possible" and more on "getting enough VP to win." If you want to advance your skill, you can add in more difficult edicts, increase the number of VPs required to win, maybe toggle on something similar to AI-War "factions", etc.

[iozay]

I actually quite like the idea of victory points, but it also should refund the lost points to bandits if you take things from them again ^^ Would be nice for new players if they could turn it off though.

[tigersfan]

I actually quite like the idea of victory points, but it also should refund the lost points to bandits if you take things from them again ^^ Would be nice for new players if they could turn it off though.

They won't be optional, but, there will be the ability for newer players to need fewer in order to win.

[Misery]

Ok, one last bit of input from me before I go to bed:

How might the list of these work?  One idea I'd had.... if there was a decently large list of available VP-producing things.... would be to have them a bit randomized.   Like, say there's 40 total, right.  Maybe the game randomly highlights 20 of them at the start of the game (start of each round?), and those are the ones that are active and will produce VP if done.  something like this could be totally optional, turn it on/off before the game, adjust how many are selected.... yada yada yada.


It's a bit of a vague idea, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.


As leaderboards go, they're not a bad idea, though I dont see them as necessary.   They're a nice addition if they can be done.

[tigersfan]

Ok, one last bit of input from me before I go to bed:

How might the list of these work?  One idea I'd had.... if there was a decently large list of available VP-producing things.... would be to have them a bit randomized.   Like, say there's 40 total, right.  Maybe the game randomly highlights 20 of them at the start of the game (start of each round?), and those are the ones that are active and will produce VP if done.  something like this could be totally optional, turn it on/off before the game, adjust how many are selected.... yada yada yada.


It's a bit of a vague idea, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.


As leaderboards go, they're not a bad idea, though I dont see them as necessary.   They're a nice addition if they can be done.

There is going to be a bit of randomization, and, it's not quite how you're describing it here, but, it's not too far off either. I don't want to go into specifics yet, I'll do that when I get a draft of the new tutorial up, but, I think you'll be happy.

The leaderboards are ... possible, I'm not sure about those now.

[chemical_art]

I still don't understand how this is different then scoring, aside the latter was optional.

[madcow]

Sounds like victory points could shape but well. Definetly think there should be -something- to encourage unbalanced play and a way to judge how things are going beyond pass/fail.

[tigersfan]

I still don't understand how this is different then scoring, aside the latter was optional.

Well, for one thing, it's a LOT easier to balance. We don't have to try to figure out things like "well, is this unit worth more than that other unit?" Since individual units won't be directly scoring.

Sounds like victory points could shape but well. Definetly think there should be -something- to encourage unbalanced play and a way to judge how things are going beyond pass/fail.

Well, the encouragement would be that doing things like using the really unbalancing god tokens would be worth more VPs.

[chemical_art]

Well, for one thing, it's a LOT easier to balance. We don't have to try to figure out things like "well, is this unit worth more than that other unit?" Since individual units won't be directly scoring.

So the core was that scoring was not as implied not fun and opaque in the notes, but rather hard to balance?

Because somehow these VP's sound even less fun and opaque. There are both less ways to get them and they are now necessary.

For example god tokens- The goal may be that they are meant to cause chaos. In practice? I'll be hunting ways to isolate them so they do not cause chaos. See the disconnect? Not fun.