| 1 |
[q][q]... The possibilities that widgets use have existed before. If this was not the intended balance, then the intended balance was already different from the actual balance before. [/q]
|
1 |
[q][q]... The possibilities that widgets use have existed before. If this was not the intended balance, then the intended balance was already different from the actual balance before. [/q]
|
| 2 |
I can't respond to the last sentence because no matter how I try to process it, it doesn't make any sense. It's just words for the sake of words.[/q]
|
2 |
I can't respond to the last sentence because no matter how I try to process it, it doesn't make any sense. It's just words for the sake of words.[/q]
|
| 3 |
I'll help you out @PRO_Dregs. The concept of [i]actual balance[/i], as expressed here, is balance under superhuman perfect play. Imagine the game is frozen then subjected to 100 years of dedicated Korean pros, each with a team of widget-writing AI researchers. For example, in the actual balance of Starcraft 2, Siege Tanks can only kill one Zergling per shot. See
|
3 |
I'll help you out @PRO_Dregs. The concept of [i]actual balance[/i], as expressed here, is balance under superhuman perfect play. Imagine the game is frozen then subjected to 100 years of dedicated Korean pros, each with a team of widget-writing AI researchers. For example, in the actual balance of Starcraft 2, Siege Tanks can only kill one Zergling per shot. See
|
| 4 |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKVFZ28ybQs
|
4 |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKVFZ28ybQs
|
| 5 |
This view of the balance is 'actual' in the sense that it is the logical result of the physical abilities of Zerglings and Siege Tanks, given perfectly optimal frame-by-frame behaviour.
|
5 |
This view of the balance is 'actual' in the sense that it is the logical result of the physical abilities of Zerglings and Siege Tanks, given perfectly optimal frame-by-frame behaviour.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
This relates to widgets because, by definition, widgets have no effect on 'actual balance'. All widgets do is receive information and send orders, and actual balance only depends on details of the underlying mechanistic functions of the game world. So if all you care about is 'actual balance', then it is easy to advocate for a widget free-for-all. In fact, widgets are arguably beneficial for improving 'actual balance' as powerful widgetd reveal the implications of previously unexploited game mechanics. Imagine if there was some frame-perfect order spam trick that let Harpies fly infinitely high, raining death on the map from above. This could be hiding in the game at this very moment, and it would mean that Harpies are ludicrously OP in the 'actual balance'. By making a widget that does this you would force me to fix it somehow, improving the 'actual balance'.
|
7 |
This relates to widgets because, by definition, widgets have no effect on 'actual balance'. All widgets do is receive information and send orders, and actual balance only depends on details of the underlying mechanistic functions of the game world. So if all you care about is 'actual balance', then it is easy to advocate for a widget free-for-all. In fact, widgets are arguably beneficial for improving 'actual balance' as powerful widgetd reveal the implications of previously unexploited game mechanics. Imagine if there was some frame-perfect order spam trick that let Harpies fly infinitely high, raining death on the map from above. This could be hiding in the game at this very moment, and it would mean that Harpies are ludicrously OP in the 'actual balance'. By making a widget that does this you would force me to fix it somehow, improving the 'actual balance'.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
(On that last sentence, I and the widget developers would waste a lot less time if they would simply push the fix rather than write the bug and force me to fix it.)
|
9 |
(On that last sentence, I and the widget developers would waste a lot less time if they would simply push the fix rather than write the bug and force me to fix it.)
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
Anyway, the short version is that if you think 'actual balance' is what matters, then widgets don't break the game. Widgets at worst reveal that the game was broken this whole time and then force me to fix it.
|
11 |
Anyway, the short version is that if you think 'actual balance' is what matters, then widgets don't break the game. Widgets at worst reveal that the game was broken this whole time and then force me to fix it.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
I too am a little confused about 'intended balance'. On a surface level it sounds like me intending that riots beat raiders. But upon further thought I have a few problems with this concept:
|
13 |
I too am a little confused about 'intended balance'. On a surface level it sounds like me intending that riots beat raiders. But upon further thought I have a few problems with this concept:
|
| 14 |
* 'Actual balance' is by definition a single precise point in strategy space. Zero-K is a finite game. Perfect play exists as a theoretical fact. Just expand the game tree.
|
14 |
* 'Actual balance' is by definition a single precise point in strategy space. Zero-K is a finite game. Perfect play exists as a theoretical fact. Just expand the game tree.
|
| 15 |
* None of my conscious intentions for balance re itemised to the point of being a reasonable comparison to actual balance.
|
15 |
* None of my conscious intentions for balance re itemised to the point of being a reasonable comparison to actual balance.
|
| 16 |
* So intended balance is never going to match actual balance.
|
16 |
* So intended balance is never going to match actual balance.
|
| 17 |
* So the sentence "If this was not the intended balance, then the intended balance was already different from the actual balance before." is vacuously true.
|
17 |
* So the sentence "If this was not the intended balance, then the intended balance was already different from the actual balance before." is vacuously true.
|
| 18 |
* To take a different tact, predicates such as "riots beat raiders" aren't even my true intentions. Interactions such as these are complicated. The intention of the balance is to make a fun and fair game where lots of stuff seems possible.
|
18 |
* To take a different tact, predicates such as "riots beat raiders" aren't even my true intentions. Interactions such as these are complicated. The intention of the balance is to make a fun and fair game where lots of stuff seems possible.
|
| 19 |
* In this way 'intended balance' and 'actual balance' aren't even comparable things. 'intended balance' is a statement about player feelings and sentiment while 'actual balance' is a statement about properties of an expanded game tree.
|
19 |
* In this way 'intended balance' and 'actual balance' aren't even comparable things. 'intended balance' is a statement about player feelings and sentiment while 'actual balance' is a statement about properties of an expanded game tree.
|
| 20 |
I suppose it is clear that I don't intend for bugs that break balance.
|
20 |
I suppose it is clear that I don't intend for bugs that break balance.
|
| 21 |
\n
|
21 |
\n
|
| 22 |
\n
|
|
|
| 23 |
\n
|
|
|
Widgets in competitive games