Ideas for better online game experience

Planning and discussing Freeciv Longturn gaming
User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby Corbeau » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:57 pm

Knowing definitions is one thing. It's called "reproductive knowledge". It is the second lowest form of knowledge. (The lowest form is "recognition".) You have mastered it. Congratulations. Now onto the next level: understanding and, after that, perhaps, application. Once you accomplish that, you will realise what kind of game I am here for. I don't see the point in explaining it further because you obviously don' t get it.

User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby Corbeau » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:01 pm

pungtryne wrote:
Accomplishednoob wrote: I'm not aggressive.


Having military units are certainly not pacifist.


Quoting for fun.

pungtryne
Veteran
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 5:27 pm

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby pungtryne » Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:52 pm

Corbeau wrote:Knowing definitions is one thing. It's called "reproductive knowledge". It is the second lowest form of knowledge. (The lowest form is "recognition".) You have mastered it. Congratulations. Now onto the next level: understanding and, after that, perhaps, application. ...


What else than definitions that we can agree on should we use? Your personal understanding? That would be confusing to everyone. The thread starts discussion cruel elements, and links and quotes and article where this is used. To avoid confusion we obviously have to use "cruel" as it's used in the article.

Corbeau wrote:... Once you accomplish that, you will realise what kind of game I am here for. I don't see the point in explaining it further because you obviously don' t get it.


You obviously want a game with "cruel" elements as defined by the article, because you play freeciv which is full of these. That's totally ok, that's why we are all here, instead of playing minecraft of sim city. It's important to note that "Cruel" elements in this article does not mean "morally wrong", but simply interactions in the game that are not friendly. In chess for example the puprose is a "cruel interaction" where you kill/set the king check mate.

pungtryne wrote:Freeciv is a cruel game. Therefore, there is nothing to discuss really because we play freeciv because we like these cruel elements (taking cities from other players, killing their units, betraying, conspiring against someone

No, we don't. "We" don't play Civ because of that. Maybe you do, but "we" are not you. We are not same.


If this was true that you don't play freeciv for the "cruel elements", you would prefer a freeciv version without military units, diplomacy, diplomats and spies.

Saying that one isn't playing Freeciv for it's "cruel elements", is like saying one is at a strip club just for beer, not for ladies. Some might feel morally superior saying something like this, but few people like this kind of people.

pungtryne
Veteran
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 5:27 pm

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby pungtryne » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:10 pm

One of the cruel elements could be taken away with success with making team games. This takes away probably the most cruel aspects of the game, betraying an ally and that like.

Multiaccounting however doesn't really go "cruel" as in the definition of the article (I wouldn't call it a deliberate design choice), but should of course be adressed. I think there are too many players in the game for now, which leaves up too many empty spots that not get filled up.

The best solution to this as I see it is fewer games, fewer players in the games, pre sign-up and set a turn-limit for what's the latest someone can join.

wieder
Hardened
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:43 am

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby wieder » Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:52 pm

Now when I think about it, it may be misleading to call stuff cruel. Instead I would call them features that allow the player not only to improve the owner's nation but to make someone else weaker. City improvements make you stronger just like defensive units on the cities. Then again military units can make the others to lose some of the improvements they have. Very few multiplayer games are without elements allowing the player to make others weaker.

Maybe better to focus on making the game more fair and trying to figure out how to avoid sudden death situations. Not removing them but making sure that the players have the possibility of understanding beforehand what will or may happen in the future. One example of this is the experiment with embassies. We added a small wonder giving everyone an embassy with everyone. This becomes available with electricity and the idea was to make the end game more open and predictable. There is a downside to it and this feature may be removed in the future games. Time will tell.

The secret alliances and betrayal are also nice stuff but also something lots of people dislike. In one game Corbeau's friends came to play on longturn.org and they were wiped out because for new players it's not that easy to understand how deception works in multiplayer games when compared to smaller games or games against AI. The aftermath was all but nice. The players wiped out no longer wanted to play another game and one of the players who managed to fool them, also felt that it was too much and never returned for another game. Now there is not too much we can do to avoid something like that while not changing the game too much but something can be done. Alliance sizes and some of the winning conditions were changed to make the game less "cruel" in that way. After that game we also removed tech trading because it made the secret alliances super powerful and devastating to those who spend less time chatting and trading with distant nations.

Btw... Are there alliance size limits on the web multiplayer games with 300 players? I'm not sure if I have fully understood the winning conditions and all the goals on those games.

pungtryne
Veteran
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 5:27 pm

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby pungtryne » Sat Aug 12, 2017 5:14 pm

Speaking about sudden death situations, there are full of situations where these happens. Often it's because one of the players did something really dumb. For example, if you build rails between your cities and leave inside cities unprotected, you can't really cry about the game being cruel.

Si vis pacem, para bellum. (If you want peace, prepare for war). You can't just live in isolation in a small empire hoping that your neighbours will be nice to you and respect your sovereignity. Lacking the ability to know what's going on around you isn't a fault of the game, but a fault of the player.

Civ is a very complex and hard game. The same features that make weaker players get crushed, is what draws the stronger players to the game. Of course those that understand exponential growth will be a lot stronger than those who don't. I'm not sure if I mentioned it before somewhere, but I'll mention it again. A good game that get's to become classic (for example chess and poker) has the advantage that it's quite easy for new players to get started, but have a complexity and depth that also allows the strong players to have sufficiently challenge. The danger of evening out the game (like the civ3 ruleset does, sacrificing exponential growth for more linear) is that stronger players are putt off, and I don't think that would be good for the community either.

I really think 300 players are a bit too much, especially when it's impossible to fill them all with active players. It is about 50 active players, and that's maybe about max that a human mind possibly can grasp during a game with a somewhat resonable time use pr. game. Alliance size should probably be limited too.

Again, I think team games are the less-cruel alternative for those that prefer that, or like variation. I would probably join.

accomplishednoob
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:39 pm

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby accomplishednoob » Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:27 pm

pungtryne, I have a feeling both you and Corbeau got me a bit wrong. Going to war isn't cruel, it's the main reason we all play this game. I won't feel a sad victim if you conquer my cities one by one, I will lose like a man who tried but failed. :mrgreen: By cruel/unfair I mean mechanisms that work for some and don't work for others. You know, some losers leave with the bitter feeling that they are victims of a conspiracy or unpredictable situation which skill plays little role. Apparently not many people think multiplayer games contains unfair (cruel) elements and they are happy with server settings, which is the most important thing, and nothing left for me to discuss anymore.

Canik
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:26 am

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby Canik » Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:22 am

50 players too low should be at least 100. But I agree we should not dumb down the game for whiny quitter noobs. The complexity, challenge and 'cruelty' is whar addicts people to the game.

User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby Corbeau » Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:21 am

I wouldn't call it "cruelty", just normal human behaviour when the chains are off ;) Some say that people are douchebags on the internet, I just like to say that when the rules are off, people just start being themselves ;)

wieder
Hardened
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:43 am

Re: Ideas for better online game experience

Postby wieder » Mon Aug 14, 2017 11:03 am

On longturn.org games there is restrictinfra on. This not only slows down one turn attacks with rails but also forces people to plan to attacks. When the ownership of a city is changed, the rails and roads are useful once again but this needs planning.

Design can't prevent people from making dumb decisions but there are ways to make the sudden death situations more predictable and easier to understand beforehand.