Requiem RPG (design doc and Battles page attached)

[Sagefire135]

I've always wanted to make a game but I only just started seriously thinking about it 2 weeks ago. In those 2 weeks I managed to create a basic communication system as a practice for coding php and it turned out pretty well (after some trial and error and some help from other members of course). So I feel like i want to take on a larger project so here I am in the beginning planning stages for a REAL game .
*Note this is mostly for me as a "HA you told people you are making something, now you have to follow through!", but I'm sure some people will be interested so its partially for you guys too *

After a little thought I decided I want to make a game that does these three things in order of importance:
1) Keeps new players interested
2) incorporates unique ideas that keep older players interested
3) Uses at least some of my ideas from playing other games where i ask myself, "why not this?"

To keep new players from joining for a day or 2 then never returning, I NEED a simple gameplay that a 5 year old could understand. But, I need that same simple gameplay crafted to also be VERY interesting so nobody gets bored. My plan for this is to only have a few "cool" features available to new players. That way they see what they have to look forward to and are more inclined to stick around until they can at least try those new things out. Until maybe level 3 all that a new person could do would be level up, train stats, battle monsters, ect. At level 3, perhaps clans could become available and a person could join a community that would better guide them toward reaching their next goals. Ultimately by maybe level 15 all but one or 2 REALLY cool features would be available. Which brings us to keeping the first batch of players around.

Its sad when a player gets to the point where they look at the players list and think "wow, there's only a handful of 2 digit ids left. Obviously older players eventually will leave, but to keep them as long as possible there needs to be some really exceptional features for them to use. Not features like a 2D map or elite items mind you (these are cool and worth having, however they have been done to death already) but NEW ideas that people haven't seen before, or at least old ideas with a new twist that hasn't been made standard yet. instead of elite items, maybe have elite items that players design themselves. instead of having a shop where people can but things, give the shops to players and let them sell things. Or a step further, allowing the designed items to be sold from a player owned shop. When a player reaches a max level, instead of getting bored and quitting, they might strive to get their own shop to sell their own creations. Even adding a sort of public checklist to a profile that shows what a player has accomplished encourages someone to stick around and try to accomplish everything on it. some would only take a day or 2 of playing, while others would need maybe year of gameplay to reach, and still other might only be possible if you were awarded a staff spot first.

Finally, there are SOOOOOO many ideas I've gotten over the years that I think would make a game better. everything from making a page look better to a structured staff system. From a different way to use gems and socketing to a balanced system of items that allow a person to take multiple paths instead of always having the same items as everyone else. In a game i used to play, I was given the opportunity to actually work on the items system. It wasn't finished before the game closed down, but what I did get working and available everyone liked for the most part.

All that needs to be done now is sit down and get all my ideas into a organized spreadsheet before I start coding ill post here when I get some substantial ideas out.

[jannesiera]

To keep new players from joining for a day or 2 then never returning, I NEED a simple gameplay that a 5 year old could understand. But, I need that same simple gameplay crafted to also be VERY interesting so nobody gets bored. My plan for this is to only have a few "cool" features available to new players. That way they see what they have to look forward to and are more inclined to stick around until they can at least try those new things out. Until maybe level 3 all that a new person could do would be level up, train stats, battle monsters, ect. At level 3, perhaps clans could become available and a person could join a community that would better guide them toward reaching their next goals. Ultimately by maybe level 15 all but one or 2 REALLY cool features would be available. Which brings us to keeping the first batch of players around.

Very simple but still intresting gameplay would be wonderfull. But keep in mind that it might be the holy grail, so it's not easy to design! If you really want this, you should take your time acctually designing your game instead of begin coding right away.

A good example of simple but intresting gameplay design: http://lostgarden.com/labels/SpaceCrack.html
It's a lot to read, but it's intresting. Even if it's not the genre of game you're making, you could learn from it.

Restricting the player to less cool features in the beginning is, IMHO, a mayor design flaw. It should be the other way around. Start with a few cool features, which should be the core of your game, and give the player extensions when his character develops. If you do it your way, players would quit because there are no cool feature, because nobody has the patiens to wait. Why should they wait anyway? It's just so unfair! (do you get me here?)

Its sad when a player gets to the point where they look at the players list and think "wow, there's only a handful of 2 digit ids left. Obviously older players eventually will leave, but to keep them as long as possible there needs to be some really exceptional features for them to use. Not features like a 2D map or elite items mind you (these are cool and worth having, however they have been done to death already) but NEW ideas that people haven't seen before, or at least old ideas with a new twist that hasn't been made standard yet. instead of elite items, maybe have elite items that players design themselves. instead of having a shop where people can but things, give the shops to players and let them sell things. Or a step further, allowing the designed items to be sold from a player owned shop. When a player reaches a max level, instead of getting bored and quitting, they might strive to get their own shop to sell their own creations. Even adding a sort of public checklist to a profile that shows what a player has accomplished encourages someone to stick around and try to accomplish everything on it. some would only take a day or 2 of playing, while others would need maybe year of gameplay to reach, and still other might only be possible if you were awarded a staff spot first.

It certainly is important to keep older players happy.

Giving them another "role" after "retirement" might be a good idea, though you still might lose some players who don't like their new role. It depends on how you do this.

In my opinion some sort of "achievements", "medals", "ranking" or whatever perfectly fit many games.

Finally, there are SOOOOOO many ideas I've gotten over the years that I think would make a game better. everything from making a page look better to a structured staff system. From a different way to use gems and socketing to a balanced system of items that allow a person to take multiple paths instead of always having the same items as everyone else. In a game i used to play, I was given the opportunity to actually work on the items system. It wasn't finished before the game closed down, but what I did get working and available everyone liked for the most part.

All that needs to be done now is sit down and get all my ideas into a organized spreadsheet before I start coding ill post here when I get some substantial ideas out.

The good part about making your own game is that you can try out new or adapted features and ideas.

Though, I suggest not trying to do too much at once. What usually makes a good game, without years of testing and development, is a game that has a strong core mechanic. Also, you should try making a simple prototype first. Create a game with these core mechanics. Then built everything else around these core mechanics. It will make your life easier and more enjoyable.

Just throwing all your ideas together in what looks like a coherent design, which will most probably be a lesser design, will not give you the enjoyment you would have of making several games with a strong core mechanic. That way your cool features and ideas would really stand out and prove their value.

Probably you dream of making a total game world, where you are god, which would be your perfect dreamworld. But I learnt that you have to start simple, with a heart. The rest of the world will grow around that heart.

Note that I haven't yet launched a game. But I've done a year of development (though on my own pace ) on my own game, and have had new ideas of game design and quite a bit of reading. I think that's all I've got to say for now. And I apologize for any spelling and grammar mistakes in this post .

Good luck with your game!!!

[Sagefire135]

Well, i think i am getting somewhere, the beginnings of a game design are starting to form. i have attached what i have so far to the first message if anyone wants to take a look (note it is poorly formatted, and only looks right in notepad...lol ill fix that next time). i like what i have right now but its bound to be changed alot to accommodate other parts before i start coding

Right now the design isnt in any particular order, i just wrote down the parts that were on my mind. eventually when everything is written ill be going back and organizing stuff so it flows better

EDIT:
decided to scratch trying to use ** to make what i think the page should look like, added a bunch of topics to the table of contents (not written yet though), reworded and wrote the staff related topics (those are finished)

And re-uploaded it to the first post.

[Sagefire135]

Ok, First draft complete and has been added to the first post. Going to go over it again tomorrow and try to add some more important sections that i may have left out. Also going to start thinking about some hard numbers for certain areas...especially battles...as well as exact effects of certain things like gems.

all in all i like what i have sofar, and its KILLING me not jumping right into coding!!! lol

[Sagefire135]

Well, i broke down lol, i couldnt stand all the paperwork so i decided to begin working on code. Basic stuff though nothing important to the game play.
Ive done pseudo ToS, registration, login, logout, account settings, announcements (first page seen when logging in) and an admin page. along with these there is a game menu (empty right now, just a big blank box) that is added to the top of all the pages after logging in.

After that, went back to the details of things. i really needed to get my battle system worked out to do much else so decided to devote all energy toward that. i gave up on trying to use fancy functions so i stuck to linear with programed limits where i want them. and i think it works alright. Its still possible to have stats so high that you have a ~100% chance to win, but you would need RIDICULOUSLY high stats in comparison to most players. (it might be easy enough against a new player)

Battle system will somehow need to incorporate these actions.
1) swing order
2) does a swing hit or miss
3) does a hit get through or is it blocked
4) does a unblocked hit strike and reduce HP or it is withstood

Attack order is decided by:
1) the person who attacked always gets the first swing.
2) the ratio of the agility of each player involved calculates whether a second swing is successful. by the piecewise scale 11x+50 where...x=ratio when ratio is >1     x=0 when ratio = 1     and x=-1/ratio when x<1. (this gives a 50% chance to hit 2 times for players with equal agi)
3) the chance for a 3rd, 4th and 5th swing is equal to the previous chance minus 15, 20, 25%. This allows someone with 10X as much agility to have a 100% chance to hit 5 times in a row.
4) if a person misses a swing or, swings 5 times in a row, they stop and the other person is given a 100% chance to swing once then they follow the equation above. (someone with ~22 agi against someone with 100 will have a 0% chance to hit twice in a row, however they will ALWAYS hit once no matter the agi ratio)

Hit or miss will be determined by the ratio of concentration:
1) piecewise scale 3.5x+55 where...x=ratio when ratio is >1     x=0 when ratio = 1     and x=-1/ratio when x<1. the chance to hit is set to 5 when it goes below 5.
someone with 10X as much conc will hit 90% of the time, equal conc is 50%, .09X or less 5%

Blocking is based on difference of dextarity:
1) the ratio*7 is the chance to block caped at 50% (would need about 7.2X as much dex) and with a shield, you gain +15% so a max of 65% is possible.

Successful attacks are based on an attackers weapon power vs your defense.
1) 5x+50   with 10X power over def you have 100% chance to strike, with the same 50%, with .1X  25%

attacks will hopefully be made individually so eac one has all these chances for everything, and A LOT of attacks will end up being exchanged.

with all this, someone with identical stats has about a 31% (25.475% if there are shields) chance to make a successful damaging hit. with 2X as many stats you have about 40% (34%) to damage. 4X as high stats gives 51% (43%) to damage.  with half as much stats 21% (17%).  with 1/4 stats but 4X conc also about 21% (17%).

All these numbers will be put into an admin page where i can chance them at will...balancing will be a bitch but i kinda like the whole battles having crap chances for damage idea. since battles will easily last like, hundreds of rounds, a battle report will show something more like this:
attacker:
total swings made: 462
total hits landed: 91
total hits blocked: 8
total damaging hits: 35
Defender:
same stuff, different numbers.

too complicated...probably. will it kill a server with every battle...with my programing skill yup (hopefully with others help, its possible to make the code efficient though). will careful thought for assigning stats be required...definantly..if you want to be the best. But the best SHOULD require real planning right? If you are lazy and just haphazardly assign stats where they look nice to keep things balanced looking your still bound to perform decently.

phew....feel free to comment if you want. Also, if you read all that...you are far to interested in me...should i be worried?

[Sagefire135]

hmm, with 2 players of equal stats each with 50 HP i get a battle report of this (simplified the attack order part for testing purposes. they just exchange h its 1:1):

Total swings: 164.
Total hits: 74.
Total hits blocked: 5.
Total ineffective hits: 28

with 100 HP each
Total swings: 372.
Total hits: 196.
Total hits blocked: 13.
Total ineffective hits: 83

This actually worked out much better than i was hoping!!! i have a functioning nearly complete battle system!

[Nox]

Hi,
it's nice you thoroughly prepair for your game.

Here are some my thoughts
they are all imho's, I won't put it everywhere because the text would be 3x longer

1)
You often describe situations when one have a stat 10x greater then his opponent or 100% chance to win.
This shouldn't happen, you won't like a game with newbie bashing and there should be some mechanic that you
would fight only similarly powerful players.

2)
There is too little chance to successfuly hit. As I wrote elsewhere... unsuccessful hit is kind of "fail" for the player, it's negative thing,
and considering attack is a basic action (well, from what we read the only player-triggered) in your game and constantly fail is nothing
to make one enjoy it. I agree that some things like critical hit should be rare, but because they are something special.

There can be a situation when misses might be common, but there has to be some mechanics connected with it. Concretely I mean
this great concept made by jannesiera: http://community.bbgamezone.net/index.php/topic,2271.msg14887.html#msg14887
There you can miss often but there would be a whole number of options and various actions and tactics for you to win

I like the 4th rule (hit at least sometimes)

---------

It's not complicated, remember that the game imho always seems much more simple for player than for creator.
You know how Diablo 2 is considered a primitive game?
Just take a look here: http://forums.diii.net/showthread.php?t=392254
This is description only of generating items and those are pages and pages and pages, insane amount of them

[jannesiera]

phew....feel free to comment if you want. Also, if you read all that...you are far to interested in me...should i be worried?

It's nice to see you progress. And, yes, I'm intrested. No need to worry though .

[Scion]

On approach that you might like to consider is to structure your code so that your battle engine is swapable, and can be called/run independantly of any specific page.

Benifits include the ability to swap or modify a battle engine without altering the existing ones... or to run a montecarlo tests with a battle engine.

In general i like to plan for change....because its inevitable...and if i do change something then i want to  do it by providing a new alternative implementation not by updating the existing one. ( But thats just the fear of introduced bugs talking )

the other general approach is to prototype the game......that means you dont necessarilly have to get bogged down in maximising performance or perfecting your layout instead get your game mechanics sorted, make sure that the game actually works....(ie its fun, and achieves your goals ) its easier to tweak the game in a prototype, or to completely re hash a large part....once your spent weeks perfecting the layoutr or optomising code your less likely to want to go in and make such sweeping changes.

[Sagefire135]

Nox:
just some comments to your points.
1) originally i tried VERY hard to use arctangent to prevent 0% and 100% from happening, but the equations were just not behaving at all lol. the reason i mention 10X as strong is that a new player will start with at least 10 in each stat. so someone with 100 stats would always rip them apart anyway. a decent player with 100 stats in each would always be ripped apart by a player with 1000 in each. So either way newbie bashing will be possible. Im planing to discourage fights with people way weaker than you but some people are just mean, and i really would rather not have to completly prevent battles with players weaker than you by X ammount.

2) with the mindset of a typical battle system where Hp can be up to like 100,000 then misses SUCK. But the way i have it planned Hp is going to be really low, so a miss for my game might be more like dealing 100 damage to someone with 100,000 HP its practically a miss cause it did basically nothing. i think once a player realizes how important HP is (and how little of it they have) they will understand that they dont want to be hit by every swing at them. So likewise their swings cant always be a success either. When i get the game done and have people start playing it im sure ill hear about it if im wrong

Scion:
swapable, like have the page battle.php?id=# where # is the person your attacking? so you can put the battle link in lots of places? i do plan on doing that. right now, i just have everything set up to run between 2 premade players when i click my button for testing purposes. the whole thing is probably nowhere near done yet but its getting closer and closer each time i work on it.

speaking of working on it, after some changes i have the attack orders implemented so its not just exchanging hits 1:1 anymore. A pretty typical battle report (10 hp each, no shields):

The defender wins

Attackers report:
Total swings: 17.
Total hits: 8.
Hits blocked: 1.
Ineffective hits: 2.

Defenders report:
Total swings: 21.
Total hits: 16.
Hits blocked: 1.
Ineffective hits: 5.

functions were a lifesaver here. the WHILE statement for battling is only 25 lines long instead of the 100+ it was before. one function does the chance stuff, one specifies whether the attackers or the defenders turn, and the 3rd is the actual battle code with some added inputs used for displaying the reports.

I attached the code to the main post for those interested, its still really sloppy to read and very busy, also very few comments...but now that its working at least, i am going to go back and make it more readable

[Nox]

1) "So either way newbie bashing will be possible." Just remember it's a game above all, not simulator of real life in whatever time period
2) Okey, thats better than in this aspect. On the other hang it would rest even more on luck (you know, to throw 1-3 on dice you have 50%, but in 10 throws you'll get totaly different stats, so really 50% of throws are 1-3 only when the amount of throws is infinite).
You may also read that jannesiera's post as I think that it's really interesting, it has also very low hp and low chance to hit, but instead of resting on luck you may increase your chance to hit by proper combat tactics

[Scion]

swapable, like have the page battle.php?id=# where # is the person your attacking? so you can put the battle link in lots of places? i do plan on doing that. right now, i just have everything set up to run between 2 premade players when i click my button for testing purposes. the whole thing is probably nowhere near done yet but its getting closer and closer each time i work on it.

Nope i mean like having something like

$outcome = BattleEngine1.calculate($attacker, $defender);

Where the outcome of a battle is calculated in a seperate piece of code from where the attacker, defender are selected or where the result is generated.

If your using OO php then you define an interface to represent a battle engine and the objects passed to and returned from the call to calculate the outcome, If your going with a non OO approach you can still achieve something similar using a functions and includes.

It means you can have engine1 the returns attacker wins.....engine 2 = some hugh and complicated calculation.....engine 3 the hugh calculation refined and improved....engine 4, the whole thing simplified to be bassed on estimated expected outcomes.....engine 5 and so on...

then if you want to test a specific engine you can run the engine 100, 1000, or as often as possible over the the same two protagonists, to see what the actual chance is of player A beating player B. or you can pass the same players through different engines to compare the average outcome from each engine.

This is a general approach bassed on isolating things that are most likely to change. Since the logic for how you determine the outcome of a battle is most likely to require tweaks and changes it is good practice to isolate it from other code. Defining an interface either through OO constructs or just through convention helps to do this....it effectively segments your problem into two smaller task...1, create the code to select the protagonists and generate the result in user viewable format and 2, create a balanced battle engine.

for example you mentioned that you wanted to eliminate 0 and 100% through the use or arctangent....well now you dont need to worry so much about it...because you can do that later if its still needed....it only affects one battle engine...

Note i havent specifically said it yet but this also implies that if you want to update a battle engine then its not necessary to alter the existing code, instead you can just add a new engine that calculates things differently.....this makes it easier to compare two version....if you decide that you wont ever use one of them after a while then you can allways delete it then.

[Sagefire135]

Ohh, i think got it not. That does make alot more sense. separate the functions, the chance calculations, the battle result, ect to different places and call them when they are needed.

**EDIT**
After moving some stuff around, i have come up with this, and it really works very well. its  also ridiculously easy to change things like you said 

Code: [Select]

<?php
include "includes/header.php";

include "battledocs/chance_calculations.php";
include "battledocs/battle_functions.php";
include "battledocs/battle_generator.php";

echo '
<form method=post action=battles.php>
<input type=submit value=Battle name=battle>
</form>
';
include "includes/footer.php";
?>

battledocs/chance_calculations.php has the 4 formulas in function form that can be changed easily. it also has the function getchances() that converts the formulas into actual numbers based on stats (which will end up being moved to its own page as well probably.

battledocs/battle_functions.php has the chance calculation function along with the function that does the actual battle

battledocs/battle_generator.php calls the battle_functions up and does the battle calculations. then it displays the results.

[Sagefire135]

i got to thinking about people with stats 2x as high as the opponent. Since there are 5 stats being used in the battle, and it wont be unreasonable for an average player to have ~100 in each, were talking someone of 1000 stats vs someone with 500. this is a pretty high difference, that would probably fall into the category of the battle not being worth the spent energy.

more often people of relatively close stats will be fighting. maybe 500 vs 500. with 100 in each stat each player has the 30.69% chance of a swing counting as a strike, dealing damage. but if someone takes 50 from their agi, and puts it into their conc. their chance to damage jumps to 33.60%, and brings the other guys chance down to 27.76%. BUT the chance for multiple swings in a row takes a penalty. so whats better?

i tried to run a test to find out, but i discovered that my formula for calculating swing chances is REALLY unbalanced. with 1 less agi than someone else, your chances drop about 13% which is no good. >.<. ill fix that and get back to everyone.

[Sagefire135]

I definantly know where the problem was. by setting equal stats to use 0 in my formulas i ended up not using the values [-1,0)U(0,1] so at stats 1 point away from equal there was a huge jump. i fixed it by ading/subtracting 1 when the ratio wasnt 1. values are now slightly different and its all going to need adjusting again, but the point about how much of a difference individual stats makes is still valid.

with the chanced equations. players have a 23.25% chance of causing damage with equal stats, and the same chances for multiple swings. by moving 50 from agi to conc  you get a 24.06% chance to damage and your opponent lowers to 22.43% BUT your chances for a second swing lowers to 39% and theirs increases to 61.

according to a battle simulator i made, over 1000 battles having more chances to swing is better, winning 734 to 266. only moving 25 agi instead of 50, and more swings wins 627 to 373.  moving just 5 agi however and having a slightly higher hit% wins 523 to 477. So there is a point someplace in there that could be found to have a perfect stat setup.

Again, the formulas need balancing still so things will chance, but there will always be that optimal distribution of stats that always puts you at an advantage.  so careful consideration is needed if you want to be THE best and less is needed to simply have fun.

[jannesiera]

The problem I have with these battle systems is that I have way to few feedback on what to improve.

This system is a system of problem solving. It's purely mathematical. I have certain stats I need to adjust based on the feedback I get from a fight. But this doesn't go intuitive. I need to think hard to come with a good solution. But it's almost impossible to come with a good solution.
Because:

1. I don't have the formulas
2. There is not much opportunity to test my different setups.

So for me there are 2 solutions to this problem, since I don't have that much information.

Solution 1: Guess what would be good. Maybe spread my points over all stats and give an extra to a stat that looks a little bit better than the other.

Solution 2: Rely on advice from older players and manuals you find on the internet.

But this all sounds boring to me. Like Nox said, there aren't any battle tactics involved. But after everything I must say your battle engine at least sounds a litle bit more intresting than the average you see in that genre of games...

So I think your idea has potential but is still boring at this point. A little bit like in Hypemaster's game, I remember to comment something similar.

Still have the feeling this is a messy post, but it's all I've got right now ...

[Scion]

I dont know janisiera, it usually doenst take long for the playing community to reverse engineer if not the exact formula's used then at least good emperical approximations. You also tend to see similar patterns of effect in game stats, so there is often some carry over in experience for players from other similar games.

I will agree with you though that in games like this there are limited opportunity for battle tactics, instead the strategies are much more bassed around how you developed or set up your character in advance.

Personally i dont think that these games are any less fun than more tactical games. They may just appeal to a different audience.

One serious problem that a lot of this type of game has is that they typically end up inadvertantly defining a god build.....namely a setup or strategy that is optimal. Eventually as the player base gains experience players shift to these optimum strategies and the designers desired variety goes out the door.

[Sagefire135]

One serious problem that a lot of this type of game has is that they typically end up inadvertantly defining a god build.....namely a setup or strategy that is optimal. Eventually as the player base gains experience players shift to these optimum strategies and the designers desired variety goes out the door.

All games have a optimal build though dont they? if it isnt 'train strength as high as it can possibly go', its 'level up as high as you can go so you have the most HP.' if there is a point where having more agility doesnt help, the optimal agi is right at that cutoff. unless you leave a battle system TOTALLY up to chance there is going to be some combination of something that gives you a strong advantage.

with my plan, if someone finds that optimal build they arent guaranteed a win since there is some luck involved too. even if 2 players with the optimal build fight each other it could go either way because of the luck factor. every once in a while you might even see the optimal build get beat to death by someone who just threw stats together. this way works better, but theres still that god build

That all being said though, you are totally right. a game where there are several equally good builds is what im aiming for in the long run,  and achieving that will take ALOT of tweaking and creative thinking. eventually, it will more than likely take totally scraping my current idea and starting from scratch with what i have learned from my first try.

[jannesiera]

That all being said though, you are totally right. a game where there are several equally good builds is what im aiming for in the long run,  and achieving that will take ALOT of tweaking and creative thinking. eventually, it will more than likely take totally scraping my current idea and starting from scratch with what i have learned from my first try.

Well, that sounds like a very good way to do it  . Keep us updated!

[Scion]

All games have a optimal build though dont they? if it isnt 'train strength as high as it can possibly go', its 'level up as high as you can go so you have the most HP.' if there is a point where having more agility doesnt help, the optimal agi is right at that cutoff. unless you leave a battle system TOTALLY up to chance there is going to be some combination of something that gives you a strong advantage.

In a way yes, but if we look at paper rock siccors, then the choice of 'build' for a single battle is entirely arbitary.....if the opponents choice has already been made then one choice is optimal, the other is sub-optimal, and the third results in a draw. However if you did per chance choose the optimal one then it would be nieve to continue using that same choice for all further bouts.

What im pointing out is that it if you apply a similar logic where A beats B, B beats C, and C beats A then you should be able to achieve a situation where a build is strong against one and weak against another. This can be applied to many situations, stats, equipment, classes, etc.

Just something that might help you with your planning, or at least give food for thought.

with my plan, if someone finds that optimal build they arent guaranteed a win since there is some luck involved too.

Im sure youve seen it on game forums before yourself, some people complain that they have no chance to beat a player with better stats (usually those with the lower stats) and others complain that the battles are bassed too much on luck (usually those with higher stats that have just been beaten)
finding a good balance between how stats and luck affect the outcome of a battle could be as difficult if not more so than finding balance between different builds.....

makes you start to appreciate the effort that went into the games that you have played right (KF by any chance?)

[zykal]

ahh yes luck the double edged sword.

It allows "weak" people to do incredible things against "strong" people.


but I like the idea that you are planning everything out its very rare, most people start off with code right away.