Leveling

[Suomiboi]

Hey! I decided to make a thread for this since it's been raising so much discussion in the build 29 thread. So this is continuation from that discussion.

Rathlord:

Fair points Kaspar, though I would mention that it's necessary to make *some* concessions for gameplay- on the whole, I agree, though. I also totally agree that having a bit more frequent, smaller jumps might be preferable to few large ones. Maybe 20 total levels instead?

continued:

I have to agree with Rathlord to the fullest that the increments of leveling could be smaller.

 

I'd personally only make the increments add certain abilities (eg. new furniture, crafting item or farming info etc.) and otherwise make the skills follow the experience points in a y=f(x) manner, where there'd be a cap for the skill that you couldn't actually achieve, but could always get closer. It would be the most realistic option since, as everything else in life, nothing really goes in increments. I've always wondered why every game goes with the traditional level system. I mean what are the level numbers for, except tell the player a supposedly easy to grasp system that limits variety to an extent. I think that in perspective to many other 'realistic' features in PZ, a system like this could separate it from other games making it look more professional. That's just my respective opinoin though and I can definitely see people liking to see the actual numbers or boxes fill up.

 

Here's a quick pic explaining what I mean:

instead of the red curve (which is more or less the current one) we could have the black one.

 

I guess I just can't get it why you'd have something limited when you could have the full potential, except if it's a performance issue or would add too little to the gaming experience in relation to the coding.

 

I'm not going to go further in to the leveling as of yet but I just wanted to post this off my heart.

[Geonjaha]

I agree fully with the system you're proposing, but if it isn't added, or even in the mean time - I'd like to point out that I've estimated it'd take 80 hours of real life time to get to level 4/5 in Sprinting in the game at the moment. In fact, if people could post screenshots of the highest agility level they've ever gotten we could check - along with maybe an estimation of how long they've played that save file for (Time survived etc).

[Rathlord]

What's the maths term for a curve that's always approaching a value but will never reach it? I want to say it starts with a "d" but I'll be damned if I can remember it.

But ya, that's definitely be an acceptable solution and is what I meant by exponential increases in time spent to reach the next point.

I kind of think we have the skill points system simply because the devs want PZ to feel like a traditional RPG in some aspects- an aspiration I can respect, but not necessary agree with.

[EnigmaGrey]

Yes . . . Rathlord.
[9/24/2014 9:40:20 PM] EG: Might be better to have 10-20 small, incremental jumps rather than breaking it into mega-levels like the current system.

 

I like the concept of plateauing, personally: get up to level 10, train half way to the next level, then ignore it: fall back to level 10 over a period of time.  Not that this can't be done with a straight exp value, but use-based systems displease me greatly . . . I'm a much bigger fan of the "level up, distribute skill points and traits" approach of games like Fallout 1/2 or Arcanum.  It requires a balancing act to make sure jumps are small enough yet still rewarding enough to be fun, however.

Of course, this could all be accomplished with a simple curve and addition/substraction, as mentioned previously. To me, it just feels like more of an accomplishment to have incremental increases in ability and levels.

[Realmkeeper]

What's the maths term for a curve that's always approaching a value but will never reach it? I want to say it starts with a "d" but I'll be damned if I can remember it.

Asymptote. In terms of graphing, it's a line (or plane, or possibly function) that a function will always tend towards but never reach - ie. as x, y, or z approaches infinity, the distance between the function and the asymptote approaches, but never reaches, 0.

 

Back to Suomiboi's proposal, I personally think the reason for discreet 'skill' values is because it would be rather peculiar to represent a skill as an analog value - think along the lines of, "Agility: 32.8%" or "Aiming: 12.624" (though you'd probably represent non-discreet values as a percentage of the asymptotic value).

I can think of a few games which already 'track' the skills as analog values, but which represent them to the player as one of a set of values - Like if the skill is under 10%, "Rookie", under 25%, "Novice", etc.

You can still have the next 'level' being gradually harder to achieve, through the use of differing increment functions, but you don't end up with the peculiar UI value being something like a percentage towards mastery of a given skill.

[Viceroy]

Good stuff in this thread. Especially a gradual and plateuing level-up. With as realmkeeper mentioned perhaps breaking it up to "rookie" and so forth. The added benefit would be if a skill were to decrement, it would do so slowly as well, possibly allowing for dynamic 'skills' representing fitness for example. Or in the future even more nebulous things like your mental state.

 

Regardless of the finer points though, I am in favour of the general principal of the system.

[Suomiboi]

 

What's the maths term for a curve that's always approaching a value but will never reach it? I want to say it starts with a "d" but I'll be damned if I can remember it.

Asymptote. In terms of graphing, it's a line (or plane, or possibly function) that a function will always tend towards but never reach - ie. as x, y, or z approaches infinity, the distance between the function and the asymptote approaches, but never reaches, 0.

 

Back to Suomiboi's proposal, I personally think the reason for discreet 'skill' values is because it would be rather peculiar to represent a skill as an analog value - think along the lines of, "Agility: 32.8%" or "Aiming: 12.624" (though you'd probably represent non-discreet values as a percentage of the asymptotic value).

I can think of a few games which already 'track' the skills as analog values, but which represent them to the player as one of a set of values - Like if the skill is under 10%, "Rookie", under 25%, "Novice", etc.

You can still have the next 'level' being gradually harder to achieve, through the use of differing increment functions, but you don't end up with the peculiar UI value being something like a percentage towards mastery of a given skill.

 

Yes I agree that the accurate percentage would seem a bit off, but I'd rather have it represented with a simple line with no numeric information at all. You'd see about where you are, but would have no real exact comparison, just as irl. Of course the math would be there and I would be ok even if it would be presented with those 5 increments, if it would be clear that there'd be no actual "jumps" between them.

 

About the decreasing values, I'd prefer if that'd be per skill rather than all skills degrade with the same amount. Because many of the skills are more physical attributes it would make sense at least to separate those from the actual skills that should imo degrade a lot slower if at all.

 

To me, it just feels like more of an accomplishment to have incremental increases in ability and levels.

I do get this at some level, but to me the accomplishment comes from noticing the actual difference to what it was way back when I started, rather than seeing the actual numeric value, which is how I see the traditional leveling. It's again just as with any learning process: I for example play the guitar and get very frustrated a lot because when I train for a week, I don't see any immediate progress, but when I reflect back, I get that sudden realization of "hey I don't suck after all!!"

 

I guess, Enigma, that your sentiment goes along the RPG aspect that Rathlord mentioned?

 

EDIT: Oh and Geonjaha: I agree that there's quite a lot to do in terms of balancing the game, but as long as it works for now, even if it'd be a slight problem, I'd rather have those handled later in the development process. But that's again just my opinion.