Tweet
F_Smith: I don't see how the descriptions you listed are incompatible with the current system. All we have to do is have a description of what the current percentage means.
Chopping up tech progress into 'levels' will generate one of two problems:
If all techs at a certain level are the same, you have the odd situation where you research for 30 years and your ability to do something doesn't improve at all, and then that thing is suddenly a level higher and much more powerful overnight.
If percentages are kept the same but groups of percentages are put into a category called a level, then the description will be useless. If one thing is more powerful than another but thery are described as being at the same level, the player will get frustrated.
You may not have read my post saying that the percentages are on a logarithmic scale. Each ten percent increase in a tech represents approximately a doubling in knowledge or skill. So a society with 70% Metalworking makes much better ships than a society with 60% metalworking. If they were both described as "level four metalworking" the player would wonder why one is twice as good as another.
And if all things of a certain level really are equal, then you have the odd situation where there are only five levels of ability in the entire course of human history. Each level would then be about four times as good as the previous one. That would generate huge amounts of micromanagement as players tried to push something exactly to the next level. But with a percentage system, players can rest easy knowing that each turn brings about the same level of improvement, assuming that the ability to generate RP's is growing constantly as they manage their civ well.
Either way, levels will cause problems. But you do have valid concerns about the player interface. We are working on perfecting the model now, and will work in interface when we are done with the model. I think that what we all want is a good, informative interface on a model that is as precise and realistic as possible. I believe that if we make a good model, we will be able to make a good interface for it. I don't want to sacrifice model functionality or precise information to make the interface look better. But your input is helpful, and I will try to make sure that it is possible to put a good interface over any model I work on.
[This message has been edited by Richard Bruns (edited January 28, 2000).]
Chopping up tech progress into 'levels' will generate one of two problems:
If all techs at a certain level are the same, you have the odd situation where you research for 30 years and your ability to do something doesn't improve at all, and then that thing is suddenly a level higher and much more powerful overnight.
If percentages are kept the same but groups of percentages are put into a category called a level, then the description will be useless. If one thing is more powerful than another but thery are described as being at the same level, the player will get frustrated.
You may not have read my post saying that the percentages are on a logarithmic scale. Each ten percent increase in a tech represents approximately a doubling in knowledge or skill. So a society with 70% Metalworking makes much better ships than a society with 60% metalworking. If they were both described as "level four metalworking" the player would wonder why one is twice as good as another.
And if all things of a certain level really are equal, then you have the odd situation where there are only five levels of ability in the entire course of human history. Each level would then be about four times as good as the previous one. That would generate huge amounts of micromanagement as players tried to push something exactly to the next level. But with a percentage system, players can rest easy knowing that each turn brings about the same level of improvement, assuming that the ability to generate RP's is growing constantly as they manage their civ well.
Either way, levels will cause problems. But you do have valid concerns about the player interface. We are working on perfecting the model now, and will work in interface when we are done with the model. I think that what we all want is a good, informative interface on a model that is as precise and realistic as possible. I believe that if we make a good model, we will be able to make a good interface for it. I don't want to sacrifice model functionality or precise information to make the interface look better. But your input is helpful, and I will try to make sure that it is possible to put a good interface over any model I work on.
[This message has been edited by Richard Bruns (edited January 28, 2000).]
Comment