|
| Thread: The role of chance in strategy games |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Salamon01
Tavern Dweller
|
posted January 05, 2013 11:57 AM |
|
|
I do think chance improves the game. As you've said, making chance is more realistic. Sure players can complain all they want that it wasn't their fault they lost, but in real life you can't do that, accept it and try again. There's no way you're unlucky all the time! I like to have that rule for life too.
Besides, I think no matter how much you try to reduce chance and make all elements of the game "conscious", chance will still play a minor role (like interrupted connection while you're making you masterpiece attack), and players will always complain.
If you're interested in strategy games for these kind of elements, [url=http://www.interactive-strategy-games.com]this strategy games site[/url] deals with similar questions about strategy games. It analyses each strategy game in terms of the "critical thinking" and "entertainment" they provide, with emphasize on strategy and critical thinking. It's still growing, but you can keep an eye on it  .
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted January 05, 2013 12:20 PM |
|
|
But should games be as unfair as life? I don't think so 
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 05, 2013 12:55 PM |
|
|
Games are generall fair because no one is forced to take part. In life your options are fairly limited.
Salamon is completely right that EVERY competetively minded player, who thinks he's a whizz kid and tries to prove something, will complain when they lose. It's NEVER their fault, and it's never because THEY screwed up, made a wrong decision, took things too easy (and victory for granted) or were just too cocky.
Lastly and very importantly - even in chess ONE game isn't seen as decisive when it comes to really ESTABLISHING a pecking order (or a leader board). If you add random elements - like in Heroes - the only thing that makes sense competetively is LEAGUE play. Over a series of games stretched over some period of time you CAN establish things. You may be lucky or unlucky a few times, but things will even out in time.
Of course things may take the same direction then as in sports. League play for Heroes means, if a good player starts with an unlucky loss against someone considered weaker, followed by another really tight loss against a roughly equal player that may put a lot of pressure on that person leading to overly aggressive play and more losses due to a tendency in favour of risk.
Conversely an underdog lucking out in the beginning may go on a roll by simply playing straight through and making no serious error.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted January 05, 2013 01:36 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It's NEVER their fault, and it's never because THEY screwed up, made a wrong decision, took things too easy (and victory for granted) or were just too cocky.
Except that, in some games, loss is really not the player's fault
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 05, 2013 02:26 PM |
|
|
Same would be true for WINNING, though. Still, you don't find many who'd say, yeah, well, absolutely lucky win, can't be attributed to skill.
Ultimately it's ALWAYS your fault when you lose a game, because you agreed to play under these conditions - no one forced you. So even it is POSSIBLE in a game to lose by sheer bad luck - and most tend to forget that in order to win, even if you are lucky on the way, you must not make any major errors, so a winner always has come so far first - you agreed to play it and complaining makes no sense, since you KNEW it might happen.
I mean, if you play Hold'em, it makes no sense to start complaining, when you went all in and lost, hey, I had AK and lost to a pair of Jacks. You KNEW, it MIGHT happen.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 05, 2013 03:15 PM |
|
|
Well, all I played online was H2-H3 couple of thousand games and yes, you can lose while making no error. Superior tactics do not implies you made error, and "out of thin air" bonuses for the other side may penalize you but still does not mean you made an error. Accepting conditions is not an error neither, just a choice. Also, very few if none of games are perfectly balanced, but this is something different to discuss.
Finally, complaining after a game loss makes no sense in the absolute, because it should NOT have impact on your life or mood. Gaming is a relaxing time, sometimes it could be a challenging moment, but in the end it is just dust, once the game is over there is no track left, you are neither better or worse.
Chess is not a simple game, it is an art. It requires very heavy analysis skills, patience, talent and long years studying, no luck involved, no shortcuts. You could make it to Stracraft lead rankings with some thousands of hours invested and good reflexes, but not in chess.
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted January 05, 2013 03:16 PM |
|
|
I like both types - I enjoy playing Chess, and I like to play boardgames where all fighting happens with pure dice, like Descent. But for different reasons naturally. Other "entertains" your brain and tickles your fancy that way. And other is entertainment on another level. More fun, casual and less stressing for your brain.
Games can be good without a lot of luck and with a lot of luck - if the game is made well. Depending on my cravings I play the game that suits those needs.
____________
"These friends probably started using condoms after having produced the most optimum amount of offsprings. Kudos to them for showing at least some restraint" - Tsar-ivor
|
|
Locksley
Promising
Famous Hero
Wielding a six-string
|
|
posted January 05, 2013 06:34 PM |
|
|
People are too clever and will play the optimal way(s) as soon as they know the rules.
Not much variation but much predictability.
Chess may seem to be varied but involves a lot of studying, like learning the "Sicilian" or whatever game opening/style. Learn to know what kind of game the current duel is and you have the advantage.
With some randomness the best player is the one who is the best at adapting to unexpected situations. That's better than just having a good memory. And it makes the games more varied, interesting and fun.
|
|
Locksley
Promising
Famous Hero
Wielding a six-string
|
|
posted January 05, 2013 06:54 PM |
|
|
I'd like to add that I like chess a lot, I just used its negative features in my example.
Its good features makes it interesting despite no randomness.
But in other games where you choose bonuses its usually enough to choose a few optimal combos and the allround counter, like dispel.
But this discussion belongs to thread about skill system redesign.
|
| |
|
|
