Author Topic: Cyborg's updated review  (Read 2626 times)

Offline Cyborg

  • Master Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,929
Re: Cyborg's updated review
« Reply #15 on: July 05, 2015, 11:37:08 AM »
Btw, I just came up with a more balanced implementation for inflation.

If it is correlated with total number of buildings in the world -not with time-, it will be balanced, and cant be manipulated that easily. With also more interaction between physical wealth versus financial wealth (factories and banks and optimal mix of them), race for dominating economy would be interesting enough for being a victory condition :)


Are you sure? Because you can scrap buildings.
Kahuna strategy guide:
http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,13369.0.html

Suggestions, bugs? Don't be lazy, give back:
http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/

Planetcracker. Believe it.

The stigma of hunger. http://wayw.re/Vi12BK

Offline tombik

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
Re: Cyborg's updated review
« Reply #16 on: July 10, 2015, 04:16:53 PM »
Btw, I just came up with a more balanced implementation for inflation.

If it is correlated with total number of buildings in the world -not with time-, it will be balanced, and cant be manipulated that easily. With also more interaction between physical wealth versus financial wealth (factories and banks and optimal mix of them), race for dominating economy would be interesting enough for being a victory condition :)


Are you sure? Because you can scrap buildings.

Yeah but you can only change total number of buildings marginally.

When I say total, I am meaning total number of buildings in whole map, by all players and computer controlled races.

Offline doctorfrog

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
Re: Cyborg's updated review
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2015, 08:18:38 PM »
I've fiddled around with the game probably less than anyone, but I feel similar to what Cyborg is saying, rather more baldly than I can. I can grasp the basics of plopping down buildings, and I have a vague notion that I should be spreading out like any other 4X, but beyond that, I'm kind of lost. I don't yet understand who my people are, or what they want, so I don't know what I should be doing.

I'm hoping for something that's a bit different from the 4X standards, though. That early rush where you spread out as much as you can, lock down territory, then fight and defend, then come up with an ultimate goal that wins the game. Tried and true, yet, it's been done. What if there's a different way to do things? What if instead of spreading out, you have a race whose success depends on supporting one massive superstructure that takes up a single tile, but requires a complex supply chain surrounding it.

Useless spitballing, I can't seem to help myself. But in the meantime, the only mechanical metaphors I have at my disposal to play this game are my familiarity with the 4X genre... and yet I don't want a typical 4X.

Offline x4000

  • Chris Park, Arcen Games Founder and Lead Designer
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,231
Re: Cyborg's updated review
« Reply #18 on: August 03, 2015, 01:15:11 PM »
All good, guys.  I understand the frustration, and I have the same feeling.  One of the things that I'm trying to solve most centrally, and I think I do have a line on it.  I'll post here again when I think I have something that might interest you better.

It probably still won't have tutorials at that point, but I kind of want to see what happens without those.  If it's enough to pull you along even when you're a little lost (or a lot lost), then that's a really good sign.  If it is still losing you, then maybe that's because of the lack of tutorials or maybe there is still some other fundamental issue that can be identified.  I don't really want the quality of tutorials to be perceived as a factor at that point, so having none at all is my solution to that in the short-term. ;)

I say that in a joking fashion, but I'm actually serious.  If someone really wants to like a game, and goes into it without any sort of tutorial, then what happens to them?  Are they able to power through confusion based on what the game gives them, and have fun even if they still are fairly confused?  Or is it not quite engaging enough?  That's a pretty useful question.

Tutorials are 100% needed of course, but in an ideal world the game itself will grab you enough that you'd gripe (justifiably) about the lack of tutorials but still play it even without them.  That's not always going to be possible, but getting as close to that is my goal; that way when tutorials ARE there, hopefully the people who choose to skip them still have a good time.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline crazyroosterman

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,558
  • Cluck.
Re: Cyborg's updated review
« Reply #19 on: August 03, 2015, 02:16:18 PM »
what chris is saying reminds me of when I was first playing mount and blade I remember my brain practically melting from the information over load when I entered the map for the first time(although after a couple of months and a fairly lengthy detour from when testing came I can now find my around fairly competently) to be honest I wish that tutorial had taught a bit about some of the nuances of the game rather than just teaching me how use the combat system so yea that was a bit rambly but I can happily say that didn't quite happen with this game although granted my first game of this was in a version which pretty much had nothing to do with the game its become.
c.r