Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

FREE SOFTWARE GIVEAWAY

We have 4 x Pro Licences (valued at $59 each) for 2d modular animation software Spriter to give away in this Thursday's GDNet Direct email newsletter.


Read more in this forum topic or make sure you're signed up (from the right-hand sidebar on the homepage) and read Thursday's newsletter to get in the running!


#ActualAngleWyrm

Posted 24 October 2013 - 04:24 PM

Some tech trees offer 'upgrades' that serve the same function and are an improvement in every way to their predecessor -- a strictly dominant strategy, and therefore it's not a choice, it's a no-brainer.

 

In some games (Endless Space:Disharmony, for example) new technology is hard-coded to imitate such a forced decision, even though the tech is only a weakly dominant technology. There are times when a price, time or space advantage could have been better, but the interface is designed to prevent such considerations.

 

If we consider the environment, (such as Galactic Civilization 2's rock/paper/scissors weapon & defense systems) then it can become an interesting interplay. Guns aren't automatically inferior to Lasers, it's a matter of what the other player is doing.

 

There's also a mentally compartmentallised problem with price. 'Upgrade' techs almost always have a higher resource cost, be it materials, time, space, research points, whatever. But it's not a tradeoff, because that implies a set of valid choices, which is not the case when there's a strictly dominant strategy. So the game ends up senselessly inflating the price of stuff.


#1AngleWyrm

Posted 24 October 2013 - 04:20 PM

Some tech trees offer 'upgrades' that serve the same function and are an improvement in every way to their predecessor -- a strictly dominant strategy, and therefore it's not a choice, it's a no-brainer.

 

In some games (Endless Space:Disharmony, for example) new technology is hard-coded to be a forced decision, even though it's only a weakly dominant technology. There are times when a price, time or space advantage could have been better, but the interface is designed to prevent such considerations.

 

If we consider the environment, (such as Galactic Civilization 2's rock/paper/scissors weapon & defense systems) then it can become an interesting interplay. Guns aren't automatically inferior to Lasers, it's a matter of what the other player is doing.

 

There's also a mentally compartmentallised problem with price. 'Upgrade' techs almost always have a higher resource cost, be it materials, time, space, research points, whatever. But it's not a tradeoff, because that implies a set of valid choices, which is not the case when there's a strictly dominant strategy. So the game ends up senselessly inflating the price of stuff.


PARTNERS