Alpha Centauri 2

Community => Planet Tales => Topic started by: Green1 on December 08, 2012, 09:58:55 AM

Title: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Green1 on December 08, 2012, 09:58:55 AM

In the first part of the editorial, I mentioned the world needs more sandbox. It needs an amazing engine where all realities for empire running – of any sort is possible. I also feel that making bold critiques without offering rational solutions is not useful. Doing that reminds me of the official World of Warcraft forums filled with irrational demands with no useful feedback and liberal use of suck. If I was the Blizzard dev Greg Ghostcrawler Street, I would have dreams of showing up to Blizzcon with an Uzi to encourage natural selection. To share this, I must continue my gaming story. This part will be about what I feel is a dark turn of gaming and what does not work.

About 2004, my gaming -at least face to face -was coming to an end. All of the sudden, I found it harder and harder to get my regular group of nerds rounded up in one place. Yes, some of it was my fault. While I do like fantasy and magic, I always wanted to do sci-fi. In trying to please everyone, I combined 3e DnD with d20 Star Wars. It did not go over well. Still, I did switch back to the tried and true campaign everyone loved with dwarves and elves wizards and I did have folks show back up. But, there was a movement I was unaware of that would change gaming forever: MMOs and high speed internet became mainstream.

It was like crack hitting the inner city in the 1980s. Nerds walked around like zombies from lack of sleep. No longer did they have to get dressed or request a day off to get a game on. Nor did they have to dial long distance to plus a hefty per minute subscription fee to play a MUD with crude ASCII graphics that only the wealthiest geeks could afford.

BUT – you see, most of these systems were based on DnD and showed a previously unknown flaw in that system. I knew about it, but did not think to realize it. It was revealed to me years before when me and a buddy where trying to debate a World of Darkness Camarilla DM for a prized female gamer. The point is this: White Wolf's Storyteller system is a trait and skill based system. A umpteenth generation vampire, for example, can travel with a newbie vampire and the newbie can still feel somewhat useful and contribute. DnD, on the other hand, is a level based and gear based system. A level 2 fighter can not travel well with a level 18 wizard without croaking continuously and not being able to fight the things the level 18 fights. Now, with a private DnD group, it is not an issue. But our black lipstick and goth sisters really were far sighted for that time. DnD systems would bite us in the butt later. Hell, even Greg  Street admits it to be a design flaw.

In a nutshell.. Level based systems and gear based systems do not work in computer gaming. For an old school  single player RPG,yes. But anytime you get something that has multiplayer, you run into severe problems. You DIVIDE the players. Let's say I am playing World of Warcraft or Everquest and I want to invite T ras and Buster's Uncle to play with me. Uh Oh. I have a level 85. Those guys may have just had to get the game. They can not play with me. It is like when I was playing with the action figures in the front yard of my childhood. It would be akin to me telling someone they can play ONLY with one green binocular army man, while I got to play with Darth Vader riding a demonic T-rex? But--- if you come to several play sessions.. you might get to play with Walrus Man from the cantina scene. That is messed up. Let's not mention the fact that those MMOs are constantly evolving. Even if you have a max level character, you can not travel unless you have the latest and greatest gear. It encourages an atmosphere of unwarranted self importance not based on skill or community contribution but on time played.

But, let's not give our White Wolf sisters too much credit because they have it wrong, too. Eve Online is based heavily on a White Wolf system. So much so that when White Wolf was going belly up, CCP which is the company that makes Eve Online bought the company in Atlanta. White Wolf has it's flaws, too.

White Wolf's flaws and how it applies to the solution came to me after a dark period in my life. Hurricane Katrina destroyed much of New Orleans and I lost everything I owned. I ended up heading back to my home in Jackson, MS to pick ip the pieces. Being a gamer, I looked for games. I checked meetup.com, yahoo groups, you name it. One ad I found for a group run by a female DM who had a business as a  professional photographer. She had a weird screening question: How do you feel about Power Gaming? Well.. I had run a campaign in DnD in New Orleans where characters where demigods towards the end and wrote an essay on it comparing the PC's exploits to those of Hercules, Zeus, and other mythical figures and how these were some of the most compelling stories I had ever had the chance to participate in. She was not amused. She railed against my lovingly crafted essay as our group being immature or compensating for something. Strangely enough, she said she used to run LARPs and some powergaming was okay during a LARP. Okay... so I guess it is okay to control things if you are all dolled up in your LARP group and can throw down mass kills because you are the cool kid. But, giving your players the ability to do cool things is immature? I have gone on epic tirades on Enworld forums under a different handle against these folks.

Nutshell #2: If you can not do cool things, what the hell is the point? In Eve Online, just like White Wolf, supposedly you can be anything or travel with anyone. But, in reality, only a select few get to do the cool stuff. In Eve Online, there are folks that control large alliances and to them the game is people management on a large scale and starting world changing events. In that girl's LARP, it is the same way. The established Vampire Queen of the city can do all these cool things and is the main character. Everyone else is a lackey or minion. Who wants to be a lackey? Who wants to mine asteroids mindlessly so some dude can buy it at and build a bad ass battleship? Who wants to be the green binocular army man in a world full of Panthero driving Thundertanks? Not to say minions do not have a place. But, that place is under control of the player to use as skill provides. Not as the identity of the player himself. I want to be Miriam, Lal, or Morgan. Yes, I may be bested by folks with more skill. Or I may be a outflanked faction. But, never do I want it because I did not work my way up or not be hardcore enough. Most of us spend a life living under bosses and other authority figures. Why not let US be in control and rule empires? All those systems seem like work, not a good fantasy sandbox. No revamping of new player experience is going to change this fact.

Nutshell #3 MMOs in the current form, DnD theme park OR WW sandbox based is NOT the answer. We want to be gods and rulers! 4X sandbox is the best choice! God, that felt good to let that out. So much persecution you get just because you want to be able to do cool things in a fantasy world. Now, there is a difference between OP and broken and empire ruling and being a bad ass character. Do not think me to be a munchkin.

Now, where I am heading there is a proliferation of old school minis wargamers. Lately in Mississippi they are the only ones left at conventions and gatherings since  the MMOs decimated the PnP RPG crowd and severely weakened the LARPers. But, this is so backwards. In editorial part one, we got rid of all the plastic crap. We put it first on paper and in our heads with DnD/WW/GURPS/etc. Then, we moved it to a computer so we would not have to do calculus each battle! Why should I have to invest in a 300 dollar army I must hand paint only to bring out at conventions or some old dude's basement? Do not get me wrong. The Warhammer crowd and historical mini crowd have some awesome hand crafted terrains and paint work. But, sheesh, the price of admission to fantasy should never be that steep.

I will wait to sum things up later in am editorial part 3. I like for other folks to know where I am coming from if they can tolerate my TL,DR.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Yitzi on December 13, 2012, 04:16:28 AM

I'm wondering what you mean by a "trait and skill based system" as opposed to a level based one.  (Gear, I get.)

More about the main point: The main challenge facing any sandbox game is that you can only program a limited number of situations into the game.  (Well, unless you include a GM, but that forces you to a smaller group and completely ruins any chance of an empire-building game unless you can have a substantial percentage of the players be GMs, in which case you might as well just do a pen-and-paper style game using iRC or maybe one of the pen-and-paper-over-the-internet tools out there.)  The more options you have and the more you can affect, the more glaring the limitation gets.
You might want to play Morgan sandbox-style, but there isn't a server in existence that could even remotely realistically model the results of the cool stuff you might come up with.  The best you could get is a more complicated branching-tree game hybridized with a normal 4x game...and that's not going to be able to handle what you seem to want to do.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Green1 on December 13, 2012, 03:05:34 PM

You let the players themselves control the content. Second Life does this. Eve does this, but very limited. As far as open endedness, I think the best way is to design a framework world which does have certain physics and rules. You are hands off for the rest.

I do not think there would be any need for a GM save for bugs or people hacking/abusing system. There does need to be rulesets, though. Someone who likes Napolenic wars would not like mindworms popping out of fungus at Warterloo to eat Wellington! (Did Napoleon have the planet rating to capture those worms..lol)

You are right that I probably was not clear on the whole gear/trait/level deal. You are obviously going to have to have some gear. In 4x, this is the difference between a spearman and a guy in the tank. But, unlike the way many MMOs do it, all gear really needs to be lootable or destuctable in some way. That eliminates gear imbalance to some degree. But, then again, that would depend on what world the creator wants. Who knows, it could be a Shadowrun world and that spearman could have a magic vorpal spear that phases through tank armor. Or it could be WW2 Italy vs Ethiopia were the spearman is a blood splat under the tank treads.

Traits/skills do better than levels, though. That, I am convinced of.

When I get to part three in few days, I do have what I think is a workable solution. The main thing I am pitching here our community needs a construction set that is not tied to commercial engines and is very, very flexible.  Maniac did a good job with Planetfall, but it will be forgotten as Civ 5 turns to Civ 6. The Dungeon Siege modders did a redo of Ultima V, but that game is nearly forgotten now.

Get a good engine- then you can do all sorts of things - even a MMO4x! Imagine that for MP. (No, Evony does not count..lol..)

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Yitzi on December 13, 2012, 06:08:33 PM

Quote from: Green1 on December 13, 2012, 03:05:34 PM

You let the players themselves control the content. Second Life does this. Eve does this, but very limited. As far as open endedness, I think the best way is to design a framework world which does have certain physics and rules. You are hands off for the rest.

Would your "certain physics and rules" include how the population would react to what you do?  If yes, that'll be a huge mess to program if you want to be really open-ended (probably not much easier than making a program that can pass the Turing Test.)  If no, then you're going to need a large number of players who are not leading a civilization, which you seemed not to want.

Quote

Did Napoleon have the planet rating to capture those worms

If it'd help him win, he'd be right there with Cha.

Quote

Traits/skills do better than levels, though. That, I am convinced of.

Maybe you'd better describe the difference, as I still don't understand it.  What is the difference between improving your traits and skills on the one hand, or gaining a level on the other?

Quote

When I get to part three in few days, I do have what I think is a workable solution.

Maybe then I'll see what about your goal I'm misunderstanding...

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Tarvok on May 19, 2013, 11:06:31 AM

I'd be very surprised if there is any way around the problems you describe in MMOs. Sure, you can get away from leveling systems (I feel like the guys behind Guild Wars 2 did an excellent job of preserving level progression while allowing people to play together regardless of level), but with the sheer number of people involved, you either end up with an atomistic playerbase in a theme park, or a system with a few major players with others as essentially cogs in the machine, simply because if you have that many players, and you have winning and losing, people are going to organize. They have to.

The only way to preserve importance for all players is to to have smaller numbers of players, which means private 4x games, and private RPG sessions.
|
Yitzi, the difference between skill systems and level systems basically comes down to scaling. Under a skill based system, you build your character fairly quickly, and he doesn't change much, stat-wise, once he is established. Leveling systems take characters from the level of a novice and steadily progresses him to the level of a godlike being. Under skill based systems, the numerical difference between a character you just started and one you've been playing for a few months is far narrower than the difference between the Level 1 character you just started, and who is like a fly compared to your Level 5-10 character a few months later.

In the White Wolf system, there is an early part of the game where you can put points into advancing your abilities, but the costs of advancement grow exponentially, while the points you earn do not. An even more stark example is the Traveler system, where your character does all his "leveling" during the character creation process, and remains essentially the same during play.

They support different kinds of narratives. A leveling system is good for stories in which characters start out as barely distinguishable from the rest of the population, but end their stories as godkilling combat machines. A skill-based system is better for stories where your character gets his skills from his background, and the story is about the use of those skills, not their steady progression. Essentially, to use Anime analogies, level based is Dragonball, which is all about Training Ur Pwr Lvl. Skill based is more Cowboy Bebop or Outlaw Star.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Green1 on May 19, 2013, 12:33:46 PM

I agree somewhat. One of the thing MMOs in particular work on is a skinner's box principle where they HAVE to continually reward folks by increasing power level. That way, some one who has been playing for a few months can have an advantage over the newbs through gear imbalance or levels. While the pencil and paper DnD was all about just advancement and your characters getting more powerful in the world, when you start adding level 3s and level 40s and level 90s at the table, you create an entitled base that has nothing to do with the sandbox. It is almost sad. In DnD, the low levels were cool. But in the modern MMO, they seem to be "busy work" or punishment you must endure just to get to where you can play with other people.

Eve/White Wolf has an interesting solution to the problem, but it is still not perfect. While they say you can do anything and travel anywhere, lets be honest: you go out to 0.0 with less than 10 Mill skill points you are worthless except for warp scrambling folks and getting blown up. You cannot fight the things out there or have an income.

In the 3rd editorial I was going to tie this all back in to 4xs, but got kind of distracted by real life in addition to some AARs I was supposed to do. But, for MMO purposes, I kind of wish they would tone down advancement and just give skills and make it like a FPS that is more actual skill based. Not auto win because you have Missiles V, Missile Specialization V, and all the other shills and a battleship or in a level-based system level 20 versus level 5, but actual skill with unique traits so folks can be that special snowflake.

Now, I do realize that there still is power creep. After all, a dragon is just much more powerful than a farmer with a double barreled shotgun. But, a little more sanity in progression and a bit more skill would be nice. A cave man with bone weapons and hide armor will be no match for a Sith Lord weilding dual light sabres.

Maybe one day :)

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Yitzi on May 19, 2013, 04:08:55 PM

Quote from: Tarvok on May 19, 2013, 11:06:31 AM

Yitzi, the difference between skill systems and level systems basically comes down to scaling. Under a skill based system, you build your character fairly quickly, and he doesn't change much, stat-wise, once he is established.

So then how is he ever supposed to reach the point where he's fighting, and beating, enemies he couldn't defeat at the beginning of the story?

 Leveling systems take characters from the level of a novice and steadily progresses him to the level of a godlike being. Under skill based systems, the numerical difference between a character you just started and one you've been playing for a few months is far narrower than the difference between the Level 1 character you just started, and who is like a fly compared to your Level 5-10 character a few months later.

In the White Wolf system, there is an early part of the game where you can put points into advancing your abilities, but the costs of advancement grow exponentially, while the points you earn do not. An even more stark example is the Traveler system, where your character does all his "leveling" during the character creation process, and remains essentially the same during play.

Quote

They support different kinds of narratives. A leveling system is good for stories in which characters start out as barely distinguishable from the rest of the population, but end their stories as godkilling combat machines. A skill-based system is better for stories where your character gets his skills from his background, and the story is about the use of those skills, not their steady progression. Essentially, to use Anime analogies, level based is Dragonball, which is all about Training Ur Pwr Lvl. Skill based is more Cowboy Bebop or Outlaw Star.

I think that poorly-done level based is Dragonball, but Star Wars and the Belgariad (to break the anime pattern) are also going to need to be level-based.  And that's a pretty significant and major niche there, so I think it should be represented.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Green1 on May 19, 2013, 04:55:55 PM

Yitzi...

When you look at the difference between a novice, a seasoned warrior, and a demigod I do not believe levels do this justice.

The difference is techniques and skills. The novice has nowhere near the techniques of a seasoned warrior. I do not believe just adjusting numbers to infinity does justice. Instead, the seasoned warrior probably just needs more "abilities" or "powers" to activate or choose from. Lets face it, a recruit in Miriam's army may be able to hold and fire an impact rifle but the veteran can do far more tricks with that rifle that should be reflected with more abilities/ skill.

In the case of a demigod, you are looking at a template of additional powers. Probably transmutation into a different creature. In DnD 3.5 lesser powers could see and hear everything from a certain distance from any shrine put up to them, countless immunities, true sight, etc. 4 E, though there is no real rules, you can assume they get discorporation at 1/2 hit points and special condition to be slain as well.

However, with the level power creep, even stock gods from 3E Deities and Demigods could fall to a party of level 40s armed with +20 vorpal, sonic, bane, etc weapons and +infinity everything. Now, granted, the pnp game did not have a problem with this because few games lasted that long and the social interaction between folks at the table was more important than the game. BUT, take in person social interaction out of it where progression is the ONLY thing keeping folks paying your subscription/microtransaction, you end up in the trap where you must constantly introduce things with greater and greater numbers.

For instance, WoW. Onyxia is a friggin DRAGON. A dragon should be rough for any party. But, with power and level creep, the encounter is meaningless and content and entire areas except the current stuff is now irrelevant. What next after Pandaria to keep folks playing? +2000 stat items and level 150? Madness.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Yitzi on May 19, 2013, 08:34:13 PM

Green1: On the one hand, I think you have correctly identified some serious problems in the MMO, and to a lesser extent pen-and-paper RPG, world.  But on the other hand, I think it is possible to have a level-based system that does not have those flaws, and I also think that a non-level system has difficulty dealing with power differentials even when they aren't on the level of power creep, and especially with a character that progresses over the course of the game.

I would say that level- and gear-based systems can work in computer gaming, if:
1. The power progression with level is slow enough that the lower-level characters are actually more powerful as a whole than the higher-level characters due to their greater numbers.
2. The world is sandbox-y enough that good roleplay/innovation is more useful than a high level and fancy gear.
3. The world is sandbox-y enough that it gets interesting for reasons other than levelling, reducing the urge to introduce power creep.

Basically: Level is a good way to have progression and distinguish between more powerful and less powerful characters, as long as it's forced to take second place to the sandbox.

Keep in mind also that gaining levels doesn't have to mean more numbers; it can mean more options instead, or a mix thereof.  Or everyone can have the same options, but some are almost impossible for lower-level characters whereas veterans can have a decent chance of making them work.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Nexii on July 07, 2013, 06:34:57 PM

But what is the parallel between 4X and MMORPGs?  4X games are single player games, and MMOs are multiplayer (by definition).  As well all 4X games I've played are 100% skill based (as in player skill).  MMOs like WoW I would say are also much more dependent on skill than gear if you're talking current content.  Yes old content gets trivialized and I won't argue this point.  There is a real issue of being able to deliver enough interesting content fast enough to keep players engaged.  And WoW is bleeding subscribers due to this issue.  But note that WoW has been massively successful - what works in 'theory' isn't always what is fun.  For example SMAC was a great game but it was only somewhat successful.  I wouldn't change much about it but obviously the turn based 4X game isn't for everyone.

MMOs and 4X games are similar in terms of game length, if that's what we're getting at here.  The problem of the epic game that you need players who can regularly dedicate 10-20 hours to a single game.  I think if anything that's where a 4X game could improve.  Simultaneous turns (with time-limits) and a way to organize playtime by means of a calendar.  For example, I might want to play 3 hours on Sundays over 4-5 weeks, with a few friends, and perhaps some AI factions.  So if this can easily be done within the game UI that would be a big help.  Also there is the issue of runaway games, surrendering, catch-up mechanisms and such.

I'm not fully convinced that making the 4X world more sandbox-y would solve these issues.  Then you end up spending an inordinate amount of time customizing your 4X world rather than just playing and enjoying it.  I suppose having better user-friendly tools to create content is always a good thing.  For example, SMAC's faction creator is a good concept that could be improved upon.  Lately the trend has been towards 'watchability' of a game on places like Twitch.tv.  The 4X genre will probably never be that exciting to watch due to its pace.  It's like trying to make chess appealing to the casual viewer.  I think to most 4X gamers the appeal is in becoming more skillful at the game than the 'coolness' factor.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Green1 on July 10, 2013, 06:29:30 AM

I personally think and push for FAR more customization in both 4x and MMOs. I do not currently think we have enough. I push for complexity and deepness. It is the reason you still have folks crazy about Dwarf Fortress even though that game has crap graphics an an interface from 1980. (Take that back... Telengard and Pools of Radiance had a FAR better UI than DF) They can do almost anything!

Of course, you would have quick play variations for ease of getting into. But, for those who really want it, a vast amount of customization. But, let's be honest, how many of us actually like the dumbing down that is happening in both genres? I think people WANT games where they can do everything. A private world.

I think the modding community hits on that. BUT, they are limited by the tools they are given where they can not stray too far off the rails. I think if the game makers would just focus on a user friendly engine instead of the "world" , the community could come up with much better things. That is part of the sandbox I am referring to.

The parallel between MMOs and 4xs (and what I think 4x loses) is you are playing a character. That is the reason I like AC after all these years. While in 4x, it may be a leader of a powerful nation and in an MMO one character, I do see some parallels.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: JarlWolf on July 11, 2013, 03:09:43 AM

If I were to design an Online RPG thing, first thing I'd do is completely remove level systems entirely. Instead, players choose their stats to accustom the idea of what they want to do. This way everyone is of equal status potential and that it can't really be unbalanced. You can poorly design your character but that is your own fault then. And then to fix that: You just create a new character or you can have a modify stats thing available.

Then, I'd have ALL but the most very basic equipment degrade in some way. This prevents people from gearing up and overpowering other people, because the more they use said gear the more it degrades. Eventually it will start breaking, and depending on you stats and skills, you may or may not be able to repair it. Just the same as if you are wounded someone with certain skills will be able to heal you. But to invest in something means you draw away from other skill area's so it all balances out through a bit of Social Darwinism. And healing and repairing both require time and resources as well as the skill.


The setting for such an RPG could vary, but I'd personally place it in a Post Apocalyptic environment. You get a variety of crowds coming in, people who like guns, who like melee, survivalism, post apoc junkies, people who wish to be warlords and create their own groups, etc.

That way everyone is balanced, and it wouldn't be too hard to implement a system like this. You could easily use an existing engine and modify it to make a game like this, and in terms of who's running the game they can still make money with other things, maybe you can buy certain customizable (entirely superficial/not game breaking) clothing or modifications to your character's appearance, etc, or insider peeks to new updates and access to beta tests.

And yes, it would be free to play as well. Not pay to win either. You can pay as said for small superficial things to make you look cooler, but it won't help you when you are facing another person or some mutant in the wastes.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Green1 on July 11, 2013, 09:20:54 PM

Jarlwolf...

On gear overbalance which plagues the fantasy MMOs and 4xs, you will always have some gear imbalance. A tank in a post apocalyptic world is just better than riding around on a motorcycle driving it with one hand ad a machine gun in the other. It takes LOADS of gas, though, which I do not think any game 4X or MMO really take into account. A dagger may have it's uses, but a heat seeking rocket launcher is just so much better at taking out a helicopter.

But, this gear imbalance is based on abilities and attributes, not ever increasing numbers. A sharpened stick is just not as good as a balanced spear made by a craftsman. Plate armor is just better at stopping swords. A magical armor may be harder. But, that armor's hardness would not expand into infinity. A halberd is great for dismounting horse riders, but would be useless and kind of dangerous in a bar fight. And, no, the rocket launcher you used to take out the helicopter probably is not useful to take out the cutpurse you meet walking down a city alley.

I know folks tend to have these images of heroes that always have their "uniform" on like a signature weapon, etc. But all objects in a true sandbox must be destructable. They also take resources from the world and when destroyed leave scrap or wreckage that can be used again. Consider a Civ 4 game where there was an ancient battle! One of the cool things I liked that Civ 5 BNW did was now these sites are archeological digs! Or.. one of the stories from the American Revolution was this guy that pretended to be an English loyalist and sent the Tories to ambushes. he would then go back and loot all the muskets and cannons and sell them back!

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: JarlWolf on July 12, 2013, 01:37:14 AM

Well that's part of the system that can be implemented: Things degrade and eventually become of no use, as well as costing resources to fix, repair or create new items. Plus the more advanced something is, the more advanced resources/more resources it will require so it all balances out.

And you highlighted why my proposed system would work far better then a leveling system: It makes sure that people of any stage can fight. Of course the better equipped and more experienced player will beat the lower skilled player, but you get enough lower skilled players, they can overwhelm said experienced player. And it's a circle of life sort of thing that way, people live and learn. As for a completely destructible sandbox environment, that is utopian but the issue is creating the engine for that.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Green1 on July 12, 2013, 11:11:32 AM

Eve Online/ Dust 514 is a modern example of a totally destructible item environment. It works pretty well. Only problem is it's skill system and combat system. (btw... Russians love it...) My only deal with it is that it takes FOREVER to be useful. They have a real time skill system to pilot any ship. For some ships like, say, an asteroid mining barge you can fly competently in about a month. Huge "deathstar" type Titans, years. There is a huge divide between veterans and noobies. If you can not fly T2 ships, battleship or above, there is much you can not do. Unlike the ship to ship combat system of Star Trek Online, Eve is just orbiting at your weapons optimal orbit and trajectory and whoever has the highest skill or best weapons wins. There is no strategic targeting of guns or shield generators, etc.

BUT... Eve has one of the most dynamic economies, politics, and just deepness because of it's sandbox. Seriously, they write academic papers on Eve.

But, as sandboxy as it is, Eve does not go far enough. You still do not have total interaction with planets. You can not just fly by with a Titan to a planet with Dust marines and alter tides while nuking entire portions of continents. (They say they are working on that, though). You can not do space walks. They have an avatar, but for the most part, your Avatar is a spaceship. I can not strap on guns and park a ship in a station and be a gambler in a space cantina. Nor can I be both a marine and a fighter pilot. Shame too. They paid those kids at White Wolf a lot of money for a state of the art Avatar system to walk in stations and do stuff just like that. Only thing is many of the playerbase play Eve like a 4x and have multiple clients of star ships. The beautiful walking Avatars interfered with managing fleets of 2 to 6 ships and did not interest the players. they had to abandon it to where the only thing you can do on foot is hang in a captain's quarter. 

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: JarlWolf on July 12, 2013, 01:52:58 PM

Quote from: Green1 on July 12, 2013, 11:11:32 AM

Eve Online/ Dust 514 is a modern example of a totally destructible item environment. It works pretty well. Only problem is it's skill system and combat system. (btw... Russians love it...) My only deal with it is that it takes FOREVER to be useful. They have a real time skill system to pilot any ship. For some ships like, say, an asteroid mining barge you can fly competently in about a month. Huge "deathstar" type Titans, years. There is a huge divide between veterans and noobies. If you can not fly T2 ships, battleship or above, there is much you can not do. Unlike the ship to ship combat system of Star Trek Online, Eve is just orbiting at your weapons optimal orbit and trajectory and whoever has the highest skill or best weapons wins. There is no strategic targeting of guns or shield generators, etc.

BUT... Eve has one of the most dynamic economies, politics, and just deepness because of it's sandbox. Seriously, they write academic papers on Eve.

But, as sandboxy as it is, Eve does not go far enough. You still do not have total interaction with planets. You can not just fly by with a Titan to a planet with Dust marines and alter tides while nuking entire portions of continents. (They say they are working on that, though). You can not do space walks. They have an avatar, but for the most part, your Avatar is a spaceship. I can not strap on guns and park a ship in a station and be a gambler in a space cantina. Nor can I be both a marine and a fighter pilot. Shame too. They paid those kids at White Wolf a lot of money for a state of the art Avatar system to walk in stations and do stuff just like that. Only thing is many of the playerbase play Eve like a 4x and have multiple clients of star ships. The beautiful walking Avatars interfered with managing fleets of 2 to 6 ships and did not interest the players. they had to abandon it to where the only thing you can do on foot is hang in a captain's quarter.

Using these statements from you, I am in agreeance, and it furthers why I think there should be a scrapping of the level system.
Levels divide players and in a sense are unrealistic, as if you are better at something in real life through experience you get more knowledge on it and can operate faster: And people can naturally represent this by being better at the game.

With removal of level requirements the only thing that would truly separate people is in game wealth, and with an RPG that can be abridged with both expensive costs of more advanced equipment and the fact that if a bunch of newer folks band together to take on a more advanced player and ambush him, or scavenge after a battle between the more advanced players they can cash the rewards. And with a post apocalyptic environment you play as an individual: An individual who can fight and do other stuff.

As for Russians loving it, I am fully aware. My daughter's husbands have played Eve online and I see advertisement on television for it more then a few times  ;lol

As for me though it removes tactical and intimate feelings of personal interaction for me. It's too much of a massive strategy game and while I like strategy, if you just have a mathematical calculus time waster I am not buying it. It's why I am not a big fan of games like Europa Universalis. Alpha Centauri doesn't fall into that trap because 1. It has interaction and great depth of story to it and 2. It has tactics and intimate battles. They may not be the most detailed things on the planet but they are there and the action is there. And even the micromanagement level of building bases and cities is there where you can customize and tool your cities for specific jobs and purposes. It may not be as intimate in tactics or micromanagement as say games like Age of Empires 2, but it's a nice balance of tactics and strategy.

A game that I tried was Fallen Earth, and it would've been extremely good if it wasn't for the abhorrid level system and gap. It had resource collection and looting, and even people making factions with distinct cultures but it took too long to be of any use to anyone due to the incredibly tedious and slow level systems.

The system I dream of is simply this:

If any of you have played the old Fallout games, imagine you have a two point system: You have your base attributes,
Strength, Perception, Endurance, Charisma, Intelligence, Agility, Luck.

You have a certain amount of points that you are automatically given, at the creation process to make your character with. Everyone gets the same amount of points and time and exploits aren't going to change this base.  Each base affects a multitude of different skills or just things about your character. How this translates?

Strength would be good for anything that involves strength. Handling heavier weapons, melee, or raw labour, and generally makes your physical attacks have more damage. It can also be tied with endurance for carrying weights/gear, can also help with lockpicking.

Perception would be good for anything involved ranged weapons, it would give you better alertness (there could be a identification system like a HUD interface and players with higher perception identify things from a longer distance) and makes you more accurate with firearms, or lockpicking.

Endurance would make you physically tougher and more resilient, and may tie in with certain skills or enhance them, such as chem making as you can endure things better. It can also be tied to strength for carrying limits, or tied with Agility to determine how long you can sprint.

Charisma affects your base interactions with NPC's, it may give more chat options and it also can help with taming animals or what not. A skill for NPC interaction mainly, and maybe the higher you have it you can do certain actions as well that people with lower Charisma can't.

Intelligence would be mainly for certain skills, like hacking, medical/healing skills and also fixing or creating gear, among other things. People with higher or lower intelligence may also have interesting chat options, the former having very intelligent, approaching genius knowledge in NPC conversations and the other being that of a mental deficient. And both can have their advantages even. (the latter may have people giving sympathy to you.)

Agility would be for things just like general movement speed, skills like pickpocketing, how fast you can sprint and tied with other skills like melee and sneaking.

Luck would translate to how often someone gets a critical hit, chances of finding good loot in random generated containers and generally how well they are in gambling games. This would give a small boost in the latter as we don't want to unbalance any poker games happening inside the game ;)

Then the second tier of points would have more points then the first, much more. These are for actual skills and they also go from ratio's of 1-10. 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest, so if you are +7 in a skill you are pretty proficient at it and the higher you go the better you are at it, and thus the faster you do something/better. As for what skills are actually there that would have to be determined by someone actually making said online RPG.


My point is that with this sort of system, no gained levels whatsoever, with degrading items, can both be easily made and greatly improve gameplay. Throw in 4x Sandbox elements in there and you got a utopian game.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: Green1 on July 17, 2013, 08:57:40 AM

While I would probably do things just a tad differently, I agree with you on all except the "luck" stat.

Remember that this applies to NPCs, too. NPCs currently suck. They just stand there or issue quests or are there to be blown up. NPCs would be part of the sandbox. Someone has to be the lackey and cannon fodder, let NPCs do it. They are who you "hire" to be the bartender of your space cantina. They are the units closing in on New Jerusalem. They can be on your side or not. I do not think we have had convincing NPCs with real lives since Ultima.

Title: Re: Editorial part 2: The 4X world needs more sandbox!
Post by: JarlWolf on July 17, 2013, 09:16:13 AM

Indeed: better yet in this hypothetical RPG, have actual NPC factions that work and operate, and make them be a potent force. If you help or support a faction you can get very good bonuses, but if you are hostile with them you can have a very dangerous time in their territory: They may even send soldiers and such after you and not only that, players affiliated with said faction may even target you.

NPC characters would follow the same system as players do in stats for the most bit, meaning that fighting NPC's is still challenging. I agree with you fully on that, but lets take it even further.


What we need to do is find a starting place: Even if we mod a currently existing RPG and make it online, we can make this work.