[MUD-Dev] Cognitively Interesting Combat

[ceo]

Derek Larson wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, ceo wrote:

>> ...but [chess] takes too long to play and is too exhausting for
>> most people most of the time. Cognitive complexity == hard

>> once in a leisure sitting.  Bear in mind that combat in games has
>> to be repeated many many many times at a high frequency.

> It is the norm, but I wouldn't call it a requirement.  Instead of
> serving up a glut of meat-grinder combat, games should consider
> decreasing the frequency while offering differentiable encounters.

Nod. I thought carefully before writing that sentence, but decided
that reducing the frequency could only be done to a limited extent:
a game with ultra low incidence of combat would require a major
rethink of the rest of the game. I.e. the context we've been working
in would have changed so much that we'd probably need to start again
from the top.

> And to make it clear, no one is trying to produce a system to
> rival chess; something on par with solitaire or minesweeper would
> be fine (which people can handle in larger amounts, evidence
> suggests).

Chess and C-4 are in one group. Minesweeper and solitaire are in
another. The former require intense per-move planning and
evaluation. The latter require simplistic per-move evaluation, and
many or possibly most moves require almost no evaluation at all
(since nothing significant has changed).

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