Progress in everlasting strategies

[Chris]

A game without resets. It's some sort of strategy (which you can define any way you wish as long as there are no monsters to kill for gold and experience ).

How to make player progress in that kind of game? How to make it that it won't go totally unbalanced with huge numbers after a short while? Any examples of such games?

[Harkins]

Define progress by PVP rankings. Works for World of Warcraft, both explicitly and by folks racing to be the first to kill a new boss.

Also check out Eve Online, which is sort of the standard outlier to mention for every conversation about persistent worlds.

[Chris]

Hmmm, Eve Online is surprisingly primitive game.

You get skill points over time which you use to train skills, to train all skills you need 22 years, the skill points gain is flat and purely time based (first few months generate x2 skill points), skill training cost depends on attributes (4) and implants (boost attributes) and skill level, each skill has 5 levels.

There are also ships (some cost so much that a solo player would not live long enough to affor one) that give module slots, to use a ship you need a certain combination of skills. Then there are various modules that give bonuses.

Next there are several resources to craft things and money. And that's all...

[Harkins]

Yep. All the progress is social, group-based, and defined by players rather than game mechanics.

[Marek]

In other words you could say that most of EVE's gameplay is a result of emergent properties on top of the simple game mechanics. I've always been impressed by the political maps in EVE: you can see various player alliances controlling whole chunks of the galaxy, and the balance of power is constantly shifting.

[Chris]

That's radical opinion... I feel many players play for themselves, not only for their gang. Only social without solo features... I don't buy it

I have also another problem with "social progress only". Right now in eRepublik Poland eradicated USA and is finishing conquering Canada... Sure, it is fun for Polish players but I guess US players are not so thrilled Leaving too much power to social forces will eventually make someone get a total domination which is not necessarily good for the game.

[Chris]

Any more thoughts on this? I'm still struggling how to bite this...

[CygnusX]

You said "Leaving too much power to social forces will eventually make someone get a total domination which is not necessarily good for the game.".  I disagree with this.  Some of the greatest stories of all time from from Alexander the Great and Hitler.  Allow someone to gain a force and try for hegemonic domination.  Then allow uprisings that allow players to take down the ruler by force.  Eventually, people will tire of serving the same lord, especially as they become powerful and neglect the people they've stepped on to get to where they are.

[jannesiera]

You said "Leaving too much power to social forces will eventually make someone get a total domination which is not necessarily good for the game.".  I disagree with this.  Some of the greatest stories of all time from from Alexander the Great and Hitler.  Allow someone to gain a force and try for hegemonic domination.  Then allow uprisings that allow players to take down the ruler by force.  Eventually, people will tire of serving the same lord, especially as they become powerful and neglect the people they've stepped on to get to where they are.

+ Hitler was not nice...

[Chris]

Anyway, I definitely want non social parts too. Things for lone wolfs.

How they can progress in an everlasting strategy? How to make it so the system does not break up completely due to constant increase of assets?
(especially the: you build a farm for 100 gold, it brings you 10 gold a day, then you build a new farm using the gold from existing farm which let you build further farms faster and faster)

[jannesiera]

Anyway, I definitely want non social parts too. Things for lone wolfs.

How they can progress in an everlasting strategy? How to make it so the system does not break up completely due to constant increase of assets?
(especially the: you build a farm for 100 gold, it brings you 10 gold a day, then you build a new farm using the gold from existing farm which let you build further farms faster and faster)

I find it really hard to think about that because it is so "general". It's easier to picture a game and try to find solutions to it's flaws than to not picture a game and find solutions to it's flaws. If that makes any sense...

However how you put it here: what if there is no increase in assets? There are a set of assets (soldiers, gold, .., whatever) and players battle for control over these assets in a chess-like way. Strategy not in how you most effectively produce your assets but how you use them. In case of for example armies where soldiers die on the battlefield, a solution would be to automatically let them re-spawn. However perhaps with some sort of cooldown (for example).

That should fix the problem of "infinite assets". However, there is still the issue of "progress".

The first thing that comes to mind is some sort of "control keypoints" which has influence on your ladder ranking. When players battle over assets it's mostly a battle on controlling certain keypoints on a map (for example). Perhaps how longer a player can control a certain amounts of keypoints the better, when players are trying to break some other guy's record.

Something else that comes to mind is "story" in a sort of rpg way. It's not something that I'm personally into but it seems that people can have a lot of fun playing text-based rpg's on fora. Set up a framework of assets and ways of people to interact with those assets (either on the level of where a player represents a character or evena whole kingdom). Then let them make a story of alliances, dark tribes, ...

I find it the hardest to come up with something that would please the lone wolf here... Maybe you should be thinking about what a lone wolf desires (eg building a stronger char, exploring, ... ) and let that be the required features or something. So that there is something more concrete to work with for starters.

What about some form of deck-building games?

EDIT: Typo

[Chris]

I find it really hard to think about that because it is so "general". It's easier to picture a game and try to find solutions to it's flaws than to not picture a game and find solutions to it's flaws. If that makes any sense...

I first wanted to get an overview of this issue. Like how they did it in various strategy games. So I can see all theorethically possible options before going to details.

BTW, I will need it for this http://community.bbgamezone.net/projects/europe-1300/ you are very welcome to post your comment there, I'm starving for feedback

what if there is no increase in assets?

You know, I think people play these everlasting games because they have a constant progress and never lose it (no resets). So, the whole purpose and the sweet spot of such games is to get these assets and keep it forewer and ever (I might be wrong through, I don't play such games).

and players battle for control over these assets in a chess-like way

Yes... but this limits the genre to wargames only. What if it was a strategy without war element? Or with some minimalistic war only?

Set up a framework of assets and ways of people to interact with those assets

Sounds interesting, expand it please.

I find it the hardest to come up with something that would please the lone wolf here... Maybe you should be thinking about what a lone wolf desires (eg building a stronger char, exploring, ... ) and let that be the required features or something. So that there is something more concrete to work with for starters.

Lone wolf (and any starting player who has not made friends in the game and hasn't made social connections yet) would need some sort of solitare improvement. Like improve his small personal farm with vegetables

What about some form of deck-building games?

Yes, I was thinking about it too, but deck building requires a lot of content, also it limit the genre/mechanic too. Maybe as a part of the game, but not as the driving force.

[jannesiera]

I find it really hard to think about that because it is so "general". It's easier to picture a game and try to find solutions to it's flaws than to not picture a game and find solutions to it's flaws. If that makes any sense...

I first wanted to get an overview of this issue. Like how they did it in various strategy games. So I can see all theorethically possible options before going to details.

BTW, I will need it for this http://community.bbgamezone.net/projects/europe-1300/ you are very welcome to post your comment there, I'm starving for feedback

Haven't browsed through that section of the forum yet.

what if there is no increase in assets?

You know, I think people play these everlasting games because they have a constant progress and never lose it (no resets). So, the whole purpose and the sweet spot of such games is to get these assets and keep it forewer and ever (I might be wrong through, I don't play such games).

If that's really the case, it might be an issue . My guess is that you'll either end up with massive numbers of everything (what you don't seem to desire) or you'll need to constantly produce content (which you hate so much).

Can anyone name a game where there is increase in assets without ending up in one of these two scenarios?

and players battle for control over these assets in a chess-like way

Yes... but this limits the genre to wargames only. What if it was a strategy without war element? Or with some minimalistic war only?

Who said chess is a war game? It's a game about conflict and most off all strategy. A game studied by warlords, managers, business men, mathematicians, ... Anyway trying not to go to deep into any chess metafor or discussion try to see it as a model for conflict simulation and strategy. IMHO it would fit into any strategy game. If not I doubt you are really looking for a strategy game (at least in my definition).

Set up a framework of assets and ways of people to interact with those assets

Sounds interesting, expand it please.

Mhm... I'll try to give a simple example to explain this: You give the player an asset <King's Crown>. There is a limited supply (in this case only one crown). The effect of this item is that the player gets a title ("King" before his name). Then you add a way for players to interact with it. For example: Kill attempt on the king. If a player chooses this option on the crown a dice is thrown and either the player can't perform this action for 24h or either the "King" is killed and the player receives the crown.

This obviously is a simple example but you can expand this to create an interesting framework for players to create a story. E.g. add 5 "Dagger" assets. Only players with dagger can kill the King. This way the King will have to find those 5 and try to friend them to secure his position.

I admit this set-up  requires a lot of initial content creation. However when that is done the framework should be able to exist without adding much and let the players create their stories. Though realistically players will greatly appreciate exciting updates from time to time.

This is just one way of going about it though, the first that came to mind. It depends on what you want or what creative input you get. It's obviously not an "easy" solution to anything.

I find it the hardest to come up with something that would please the lone wolf here... Maybe you should be thinking about what a lone wolf desires (eg building a stronger char, exploring, ... ) and let that be the required features or something. So that there is something more concrete to work with for starters.

Lone wolf (and any starting player who has not made friends in the game and hasn't made social connections yet) would need some sort of solitare improvement. Like improve his small personal farm with vegetables

Farmville? :S

[Chris]

Haven't browsed through that section of the forum yet.

That's waht you get for not visiting the forum for too long. Things to read pile up

what if there is no increase in assets?

You know, I think people play these everlasting games because they have a constant progress and never lose it (no resets). So, the whole purpose and the sweet spot of such games is to get these assets and keep it forewer and ever (I might be wrong through, I don't play such games).

If that's really the case, it might be an issue . My guess is that you'll either end up with massive numbers of everything (what you don't seem to desire) or you'll need to constantly produce content (which you hate so much).

Can anyone name a game where there is increase in assets without ending up in one of these two scenarios?

That's exactly my question Does such game exist or I will have to be the first one to invent it? :-P

Who said chess is a war game?

Because you kill enemy units one by one till only king remains and then you kill him too? That's a pure wargame to me

Farmville? :S

Yes, but Farmville does not involve thinking nor rich decision making. But yes, the overall mood of Farmville is of an strategic/economy game.

[edmazur]

My game doesn't have resets. To keep things fresh, there is a monthly clan competition for which progress is reset on the first of each month. I try to maintain a balance between making it possible for new players to do well in this monthly competition while also giving some benefits to players that have been around awhile and performed well in it.

[Chris]

My game doesn't have resets. To keep things fresh, there is a monthly clan competition for which progress is reset on the first of each month. I try to maintain a balance between making it possible for new players to do well in this monthly competition while also giving some benefits to players that have been around awhile and performed well in it.

Does the outcome from previous competition increase chance of doing well in the next competition? Does clans hoard permanent assets that let them do well next time too or these assets are consumed/reset?

[edmazur]

My game doesn't have resets. To keep things fresh, there is a monthly clan competition for which progress is reset on the first of each month. I try to maintain a balance between making it possible for new players to do well in this monthly competition while also giving some benefits to players that have been around awhile and performed well in it.

Does the outcome from previous competition increase chance of doing well in the next competition? Does clans hoard permanent assets that let them do well next time too or these assets are consumed/reset?

Indirectly, yes. One benefit for the winning clan is that they all get "platinum" trophies. These in turn provide tangible benefits in the form of points which can be used to purchase temporary buffs that increase things like experience/money received in battles. Since every member in a clan (max size 20) gets one of these trophies, it increases the clan's total platinum count by quite a bit too. This doesn't have any direct benefits, but it's displayed prominently and meant as a measure of how "veteran" a clan is, so winning also sort of increases your status in the game.

This has seemed to be a good balance that keeps things fresh, but still gives some balanced benefits for sticking around awhile. There are many other ways to obtain trophies/points too.