Enhancements station

[evilbob]

Last time I checked, playing a single game of Transcendence wasn't a major time investment. If you do something stupid, like, I don't know, get yourself irradiated and fly through a jumpgate with 5 seconds left, you just restart and try again.

true. My last game, no ressurection took me about 7 hours over about a week. An hour a day for a week? not very long. I spend longer complaining about stuff.

[Karl]

I've always defined hand-holding as increasing a new player's chance to win at the expensive a seasoned player's enjoyment.

Well, that's not what hand holding is, so you'd best get a new term to describe that. That sounds like dumbing down, actually.

Well, maybe it doesn't matter so much... I've always found "hand holding" to be a stupid, misused, and insulting term anyway. I've seen people make complaints like: "Hey, look, a game has a tutorial! That's hand holding!" Oh, really, so you'd rather people not know how to play the game? Or "Aaaah, the game is telling me what my next objective is. That's hand holding!" Oh, really, so you've rather have no idea what your objectives are? Nothing is forcing you to pursue the objectives in exactly that order or exactly the way you're "supposed" to... and if a game DOES do that, then that's railroading, which IS dumb, obnoxous, and kiddie (the invincible plot characters that you mentioned are a good example of that).... but that's another issue.

Last time I checked, playing a single game of Transcendence wasn't a major time investment.

I don't know what game you're playing... but Transcendence is no game of solitare. Even EvilBob's 7 hour romp, which seems rather short to me, is a good day's work.

If you do something stupid, like, I don't know, get yourself irradiated and fly through a jumpgate with 5 seconds left, you just restart and try again.

Well, if you like blowing 5 or 10 or 20 hours of productive gameplay due to one misstep, that's your choice. However, some people have obligations like work or school, you know: I don't have unlimited free time to replay entire games because of one mistake, nor do I want to see my hard work lost, so I'll load the saved game, thank you.

Nethack, the game that is 2 key strokes away from killing your character at all times.

That gives me some ideas... It would be nice to have a game with more situations where you are on the verge of death, fighting for survival. However, that's very hard to pull off without repeatedly placing a pre-set character into pre-scripted situations... something that is the opposite of what you do in a free-form game like Trascendence... though there could be a few pre-set missions where you are in situations like that.

To keep the pre-set missions of a sufficiently challenging difficulty, you could make it so that you have to fly a special ship for that mission. (Switch into it when you start the mission and switch back when you're done.) The special mission ship could be a massive battlecruiser... so you might not mind using it so much.

Another option is to have you get "jumped" on occasion when you dock at certain stations, like the black market. It shouldn't happen too often... maybe two or three jump events per game. That way you'd be surrounded by a dangerous force and have to fight your way out... and the setup should be such that you wouldn't be able to simply fly out of it. but would have to defeat the enemy one way or the other... maybe they blocked the stargates and you have to destroy the lead enemy ship to unblock them.

I could see such a system if the cost per upgrade (not per level) increased expontially...

If there were cumulative upgrades, I think that would be a good system, but since there are not, I don't see the point of it.

[OddBob]

Karl, if the situations you described aren't hand-holding, and what Burzmali described isn't hand-holding, that what IS hand-holding, to you?

Also, I think the problem with priests in NH isn't so much that they give out cumulative defense bonuses (cost is based on level, and after each point given it becomes increasingly harder to get another. You won't get any after a certain point) it's that gold is otherwise worthless in Nethack, there's nothing much else to spend it on (well, that you couldn't steal....), and lots of it. Sort of like late game Transcendence.

Anyhow, about enhancement choices, they aren't choices like character class choices in RPG-style games (like Morrowind), where if you make the "wrong" choice (one you don't like) then by the time you realize it you're looking at 20 hours of gameplay, and gameplay you just played, it's a linear game after all. Transcendence is very replayable, and thus starting from scrath isn't a bore like it would be in Morrowind.)

These are little changes like "can I go faster or fit more stuff".
When you pick "go faster" and then find one extra goodie you can't fit, then you say "Darn, I wish I had had that cargo hold instead" as you fly rings around your opponents with your extra speed.

About dangerous situations: These are best created dynamically, and they show up already. With more AI complexity, they would happen even more often. I would not like them to be scripted.

[Burzmali]

That gives me some ideas... It would be nice to have a game with more situations where you are on the verge of death, fighting for survival. However, that's very hard to pull off without repeatedly placing a pre-set character into pre-scripted situations... something that is the opposite of what you do in a free-form game like Trascendence... though there could be a few pre-set missions where you are in situations like that.

Actually, no it's real easy. You force the player to make hard decisions, you prevent them from save-whoring. There's a game I play called Titans of Steel: Warring Suns, it keeps me in that state all the time (with a few self-imposed restrictions). System Shock 2 can do it too. You only have so much ammo, and so many upgrades, and you don't know what is around the next corner. Even if you manage to kill the next enemy, you haven't improved your situation, you've just reduced your ammo supply.

I could see such a system if the cost per upgrade (not per level) increased exponentially...

If there were cumulative upgrades, I think that would be a good system, but since there are not, I don't see the point of it.

Well, if by that you mean that in order to buy level 2 you have to buy level 1, then yes.

[Karl]

Karl, if the situations you described aren't hand-holding, and what Burzmali described isn't hand-holding, that what IS hand-holding, to you?

I didn't say that things like tutorials and visible objectives aren't called hand-holding by some people; I said that some people do call them that, which is why the very concept of "hand holding" is so dumb and wrongheaded.

Transcendence is very replayable, and thus starting from scrath isn't a bore like it would be in Morrowind.

Making it easier to start from scratch doesn't excuse it. Why start from scratch if you don't have to? I don't like having to abandon games and restart them, and I don't think anyone else does, either. (Well, I'm pretty sure 98% or so of people don't like to, anyway.) So let's not and say we did.

...save-whoring...

You must be among the 2% or so minority of gamers who don't like to use saved games.

In your view, when does using saved games become "save whoring", by the way? In my view, I would say: when the use of saved games becomes an exploit. (Though I wouldn't use the term "save whoring" since it sounds stupid; I'd say "saved game abuse".)

The main instance I know of where using saves becomes an exploit is when people reload to get a different result on a random event... basically using saves to reroll the dice. This exploit can be avoided, as a number of games do, by saving the random number generator state in the saved game file, so that the same series of randomly generated events happens each time you load the save game file.

p.s. Titans of Steel: Warring Suns looks like an interesting game... too bad there doesn't seem to be a demo for it.

[Burzmali]

...save-whoring...

You must be among the 2% or so minority of gamers who don't like to use saved games.

I honestly can't imagine liking to reload. I prefer games that have a gradient of winning and losing. For example, in Titans of Steel, I can win the battle, but lose 3 of my pilots or I could lose the battle but only have to pay for repairs. A clean win is rare, and a crushing defeat is a threat that can usually be mitigated. If I am playing a game like this, I don't reload. Why would I, what is the challenge in beating the enemy with the mass of your ship's wreck hulls?

p.s. Titans of Steel: Warring Suns looks like an interesting game... too bad there doesn't seem to be a demo for it.

The pre-commercial version is freeware, it should be around somewhere. It is just called Titans of Steel.

[dvlenk6]

EDIT - for the topic at hand.
I always enjoy upgrading and enhancing characters (I view the playership as a character). Having a way to upgrade incrementally in minor ways would be a cool addition to the game, IMO.

- - - - -

Unless you are simply saving a game to resume later; save/reload is a clear cheat. If you are going to die, kill the game, and reload to try a different tactic...what is even the point of playing the game in the first place?

Saving RNG states only makes the 'save-scum' cheat even more reliable, since there aren't rerolled random factors to contend with.
Adventure/RPG games use the exploit to recon areas, with no regard to safety, then reload and walk-through with phony foresight.
Strategy games use the exploit to measure difficulties and uncover ambush/hidden/undiscoverd enemy forces, then reload and deploy with 100% perfect intelligence.
Both genres use the exploit on a engagement-to-engagement level to get the best results from an encounter.

It is like making a move in a chess game, then 6 turns later when it has been shown that your move was unsound, replacing the board to the position it was in and trying something else. This is a common save/reload cheat with computer chess games.

[OddBob]

I didn't say that things like tutorials and visible objectives aren't called hand-holding by some people; I said that some people do call them that, which is why the very concept of "hand holding" is so dumb and wrongheaded.

I didn't ask if you said those things weren't hand holding...

I asked what you think hand holding is.
In other words, give us an example of something that you would call hand-holding.
Judging from the quoted response ("the very concept..."), you believe there cannot be such a thing, is this correct?

>OddBob wrote:
>Transcendence is very replayable, and thus starting from scrath isn't a >bore like it would be in Morrowind.

Making it easier to start from scratch doesn't excuse it. Why start from scratch if you don't have to? I don't like having to abandon games and restart them, and I don't think anyone else does, either. (Well, I'm pretty sure 98% or so of people don't like to, anyway.) So let's not and say we did.

First off:
The quoted statement by myself is a parenthetical aside (granted, the first parenthesis is missing ) to the lead-in to the real argument which is in the paragraph after that, as well as the first sentence of the quoted paragraph. I will restate it here for your convenience:

The choices the player is making in this situation are minor. In addition, they are not required. The player chooses between two things that will help equally. Nothing except "potential opportunities" are lost when the player chooses one over the other, and the player loses potential opportunities every time he chooses to turn right instead of left.


Also, I believe there is a misconception/understanding here. Many of us here play without resurrects, and Transcendence is really designed for this. (you can see it in insurance, and the fact that there is only one save and you cannot go back to previous saves, only ressurect after death. Ressurection carries a steep score penalty as well).

Nethack, and indeed almost all roguelikes (Transcendence is based on roguelikes, it's a roguelikelike ) do not allow the player to save except to leave the game: there is one save, and when the player dies it is deleted.

Save-scumming in the roguelike sense is copying your save file so you can play from there when you die and you save is deleted, or in Transcendence's case, marked with a death.

[Burzmali]

Just to be clear, save-scumming is the practice of duplicating your save game in a rogue-like. Save-whoring is the practice of using saved games to give yourself an unfair advantage over the AI. I don't consider it save-whoring when the game requires it, unstable and unbalanced games obviously need lots of saving, and games with linear content are very boring to replay through repeatedly.

An example, in Star Ocean for the Super Famicon, at best, you have a 1 in 20 chance to suceeding at a "Forging" attempt to make a cool weapon. That's not too bad, getting cool weapons shouldn't be easy. However, to get the really good weapons you needed to make a "Customization" roll too (also at 1 in 20 at best). In the end, in order to actually make an "ultimate" weapon, you would have to go through 3-4 times as more gold as you would normally acquire in the game. That's just plain unbalanced, and the standard practice in the game is to save and reload dozens of times until the roll is successful.

But on the topic at hand, how about this? Four improvement class: Armor, Propulsion, Devices and Reactor. Each of these classes has 3 sub-classes:
Armor: Regeneration, Reinforcement and Resistance
Propulsion: Thrust, Maneuver, and Speed
Devices: Extension, HotShot, and Efficiency
Reactor: Output, Compatibility and Efficiency

With effects such as:
Armor: Regeneration: lvl 1 - intrinsic repairCycle= "500,600,600,700,1000"
Armor: Regeneration: lvl 2 - intrinsic repairCycle= "250,300,300,350,500, 500,500,500,500,500"
Armor: Regeneration: lvl 3 - intrinsic repairCycle= "125,150,150,175,250, 250,250,250,250,250, 400,500,500"
Armor: Reinforcement: lvl 1 - intrinsic hpBonus="5"
Armor: Reinforcement: lvl 2 - intrinsic hpBonus="15"
Armor: Reinforcement: lvl 3 - intrinsic hpBonus="30"
Armor: Resistance: lvl 1 - intrinsic blindingDamageAdj="50", deviceDamageAdj="50", EMPDamageAdj="50"
Armor: Resistance: lvl 2 - intrinsic blindingDamageAdj="33", deviceDamageAdj="33", EMPDamageAdj="33"
Armor: Resistance: lvl 3 - intrinsic blindingDamageAdj="10", deviceDamageAdj="10", EMPDamageAdj="10"
All armor enhancements increase installCost and repairCost of armor by 25%, 75%, or 150% according to level.

Propulsion: Thrust: lvl 1 - intrinsic increase thrust by 5%
Propulsion: Thrust: lvl 2 - intrinsic increase thrust by 15%
Propulsion: Thrust: lvl 3 - intrinsic increase thrust by 30%
Propulsion: Maneuver: lvl 1 - intrinsic increase maneuver by 5%
Propulsion: Maneuver: lvl 2 - intrinsic increase maneuver by 15%
Propulsion: Maneuver: lvl 3 - intrinsic increase maneuver by 30%
Propulsion: Speed: lvl 1 - intrinsic increase maxSpeed by 5%
Propulsion: Speed: lvl 2 - intrinsic increase maxSpeed by 15%
Propulsion: Speed: lvl 3 - intrinsic increase maxSpeed by 30%
All propulsion enhancements increase propulsion fuel use the same % they improve the system.

Devices: Extension: lvl 1 - increase maxNonWeapons by 1 (or maxDevices if maxNonWeapons is not declared)
Devices: Extension: lvl 2 - increase maxWeapons by 1 (or maxDevices if maxNonWeapons is not declared)
Devices: Extension: lvl 3 - increase both maxNonWeapons and maxWeapons by 1 (or maxDevices if either is undeclared)
All Devices: Extension enchancements increase the cost to install devices by 50%, 150% and 300% by level.
Devices: HotShot: lvl 1 - intrinsic 5% bonus to HP or Damage of each Energy weapon and shield and a 5% increase in powerUse.
Devices: HotShot: lvl 2 - intrinsic 15% bonus to HP or Damage of each Energy weapon and shield and a 15% increase in powerUse.
Devices: HotShot: lvl 3 - intrinsic 30% bonus to HP or Damage of each Energy weapon and shield and a 30% increase in powerUse.
All Devices: HotShot enchancements increase powerUse same amount as the enhancement.
Devices: Efficiency: lvl 1 - intrinsic 5% reduction of powerUse for all devices.
Devices: Efficiency: lvl 2 - intrinsic 15% reduction of powerUse for all devices.
Devices: Efficiency: lvl 3 - intrinsic 30% reduction of powerUse for all devices.
All Devices: Efficiency enchancements increase the cost to install devices by 50%, 150% and 300% by level.

Reactor: Output: lvl 1 - intrinsic 5% increase to maxPower
Reactor: Output: lvl 2 - intrinsic 15% increase to maxPower
Reactor: Output: lvl 3 - intrinsic 30% increase to maxPower
Reactor: Output enchancements reduce fuelEfficiency by the same amount as the enhancement.
Reactor: Compatibility: lvl 1 - intrinsic reduction of minFuelTech by 1 and increase of maxFuelTech by 1
Reactor: Compatibility: lvl 2 - intrinsic reduction of minFuelTech by 3 and increase of maxFuelTech by 3
Reactor: Compatibility: lvl 3 - intrinsic reduction of minFuelTech by 6 and increase of maxFuelTech by 6
Reactor: Compatibility enchancements reduce maxFuel 5%, 15%, or 30% according to the level of the enhancement.
Reactor: Efficiency: lvl 1 - intrinsic 5% increase to fuelEfficiency
Reactor: Efficiency: lvl 2 - intrinsic 15% increase to fuelEfficiency
Reactor: Efficiency: lvl 3 - intrinsic 30% increase to fuelEfficiency
Reactor: Compatibility enchancements increase minFuelTech by 1, 2, or 3 according to the level of the enhancement with a maximum of maxFuelTech.

The cost of each class of enhancements would start at 100k, and double per enhancement purchased. I tried to avoid zero-sum enhancements with these, but in some cases it does make sense to increase one at the cost of another.

[Yugi]

Wow! That's so much better than the current system in-game. Good work, Bulzmari!

I think the thrust increases should be slighter higher, though - I wouldn't even pay 50,000 for a 5% increase on the freighter. The same goes for all of the percentages in the drives section - 5% makes barely any difference - not enough for me to bother spending money on, anyways.

[Betelgeuse]

in this system would the effects stay if you change armors or reactors?
Also for the armors there bonuses seem a bit tame compaired to the other bonuses.

[Burzmali]

The concept is that the changes would be part of the ship, not part of the reactor itself. For example, the Reactor: Output sub-class would represent a fuel enrichment system, the fuel is cycled through the system to increases its purity/power/etc., allowing the reactor to run hotter/faster/etc. Of course this means that some of the fuel is wasted in the bolt-on, but that's the proce you pay for more power.

These numbers aren't final, but I think that having the enhancements follow the pattern 1x, 3x, 6x for bonus and 1y, 2y, 4y, 8y ... for price is the way to go. Honestly, it might be better to have the penalties follow 1z, 2z, 3z, ... instead ...

I choose x = 5, and y = 100k for my example, I am sure it could be tweaked though.

[george moromisato]

I really like these ideas. Very cool!

[Karl]

Re: A ship-based enhancement system

I was thinking about that. Since the device system already exists, the enhancements could be implemented through devices...

However, if you want to have just one special enhancement at a time, then I think a cool way to do it would be to have astromech droids, each one with special abilities. Since you could only have one astromech droid installed at a time, people would have to choose.

C'mon, who doesn't want to have their own R2? 8)

[george moromisato]

However, if you want to have just one special enhancement at a time, then I think a cool way to do it would be to have astromech droids, each one with special abilities. Since you could only have one astromech droid installed at a time, people would have to choose.

C'mon, who doesn't want to have their own R2? 8)

That is also a very cool idea.