Balance was RE: Damaging items was RE: [MUD-Dev] New Bartle artic le

[Palacio]

msew wrote:

> What tools, mechanisms, strategies, do people use for balancing
> their games?  Which benchmarks?  How to implement changes in the
> game: Bottom up?  Top down?  Massive spreadsheets?

Unfortuantely, I think the term balance has too many mathematic
connotations that are taken to extremes (ie - exclusive use of
integrals, equations, algorithms, etc).  Though I use the terminology
"balance", I prefer to think of it as "polishing".  Design and
"balance" are as much (if not more) an art as they are a science.
Numbers help to provide a landscape, or backdrop, to the scene in
question; they are not the solution in and of themselves.

Ideally I think there are 3 ways to balance a game:

  a) Play your own game - understand the evolving look and feel of the
  game

    Becoming so out of touch with how your game _FEELS_ as to be
    unable to relate to constructive criticism in an effective manner
    is cardinal sin #1 (imno) Today's MOGs try to introduce higher
    levels of player involvement.  We talk about player-run economies
    and evolving, dynamic worlds where players can impact them, yet
    many devs fail to realize that in handing the reigns over to the
    players, they now need a higher level of interaction with said
    players.  Ideally development team members communicate with each
    other effectively.  Post-release, in these kinds of environments,
    the players ARE a part of the game development.  They need to be
    communicated and interacted with.  Numbers and spreadsheets will
    NOT give you a feel for the game...  players will.

  b) Unions, organizations, and political assemblies

    Following up on the same idea from (a), players need
    representation.  Obviously, in an environment where the player to
    dev ratio can go beyond 10,000:1, there is no way that devs (or
    even reps) can interact with or adequately address the issues,
    concerns, and needs of all of these individuals effectively
    without high signal to noise channels.  That being the case, we
    need a huge filter. Ideally, these filters would be the players
    themselves.  This not only removes the need for company
    interference, but also removes the potential player fears (such as
    company bias and player favoritism) with regards to dev
    administated player assemblies.  To accomplish this, players need
    tools.  Devs need to supply the tools.  Lastly, official channels
    need to be opened exclusively between the elected officials and
    dedicated liaisons.  Utilizing the filtered feedback, devs can
    then look at the concerns with the backdrop of statistics and
    address the contended issues as they see fit.

  c) Err on the side of "too difficult"

    When faced with a tough decision, err on the side which does not
    favor the player.  Retention is key in these environments,
    therefore it is important to not place players in a defensive
    stance where they feel things are being taken from them.  Players
    are there to satisfy some innate RL need.  Do not infringe on this
    and leave them with a feeling that they left with less than they
    started by "over-balancing".  Additionally, if your decision was
    in fact in err and (a) and (b) are satisfied, the players will let
    you know.  This gives you the opportunity to be perceived, in the
    long-term, as an open and willing-to-listen administrator instead
    of a self-serving authoritarian entity while still looking out for
    the best interests of the game/product, company, _and_ the
    players.

Just my 2 cents,

~Ryan
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev