LordOfKao$ wrote:
This is a good thread and glad to ideas thrown about the AA but I'd just make sure that this thread doesn't turn in an antagonistic one nor is it a critical deconstruction of each others posts.
I don't know how ringing the bell of concern over negativity is going to accomplish anything but the opposite of what you suggest you want; or what place it has in this thread... As far as any serious technical discussion is concerned (the only kind of discussion I ever
initate and participated in, unless objective moderation is forsaken) "
critical deconstruction" of individual posts and arguments is a keystone to any serious technical discussion, understanding, clear and literate evaluation of german material and fact.
Certainly some people don't like having the basis of their prefrences questioned, or the falacies of their argment presentation pointed out; that is not and should never be the concern of any individual seriously and
honestly interested in technical discussion of any kind.
Certainly it's possible to do '
seat-of-the-pants' game design that ignores the science of measurement (Matematics), facts, and a lucid objective design discussion; ModDB is littered with the forgotten rementnts of such games, as is the bargin bin of any store that sells commercial game titles. The Official TC:E Forums are saturated with the kind of discussion that builds such games, and I have no interest in initiating or indulgeing that kind of discourse on any level -- ass kissing or even being polite don't have any place in a technicad discussion.
It shoudl be well known by now that I am not in the least interested in indulging '
touchy feely' sophmoric '
boy bonding' discussion or walking on egg shells for the benefit of individuals not desiring or equipped for a lucid, objective, technical, English language game design discussion. I
always have and always will welcome and enjoy: objective, accountable criticism, and deconstruction of any argument or presentation I make.
It warrants mention that when
Coroner himself initially criticised no less then five key design points I made about TC:E, and then I in turn reproached him with a deconstruction of facts, evidence and the suggestion he reevaluate his argments on that basis -- he later agreed my arguments and pointswere valid. This isn't to suggest I'm always correct, just that there is better and more valid means to technical game design anaylsis and discussion then involving feelings, and opinions that are not solidly based in fact or evidence.
In my
opinion people that are not technically inclined or interested, that are sensitive and personalize impersonal, critical, technical discussion -- should either learn, and/or get Moderator guidance regarding the those threads they choose participate in.
LordOfKao$ wrote:
The per map based AA is certainly an idea we have came accross and are very keen to explore further. This concept is one that has been coded in for some time into the TC:E "engine" with various other functions.
I don't really understand what needs to be explored further; the one advantage that commercial game designers virtually universally agree game asset play management ie. feature rationing offers is replay incentive.
There functionally can not be a more compelling means that fairly limits or rations weapons availablity then a per Level Design/Mission design approach. It's simply not technically/mathematically possible to micro-managing fairness as a reward feature and remain fair; this is a design that
by design is mathematically unfair, even tweaked is still unfair, andany manner of manipulation will only redistribute unfairness, not remove or 'fix' it. You can pretend it's been tweaked to an acceptable level but that is purely subjective; simple statistical and stochastic math can show that it will still be unfair to gross
casino degree, ie. staked -- even with any manner or amount tweaking.
Per Level/Mission AA also offers a powerful tool to 'balancing' game play on a particular map where that's necessery, an incentive to Fans to actually take a deeper look at maps that might not initially/superfically appeal to them as strongly, and can add another dimension of scale realism to the game.
This raises another issue that's never been objectively discussied in any TC:E venue regarding the: accuracy / time & impulse damage balancing dissimilar weapons for fairness something that can be mathematically accomplished -- even maintaining a scale design... Clearly from current weapon performance, Official Forum statements and discussion -- little/no attention to proper scale or science is being applied to this issue...
Δ