|
But wait, that's only part of the
story. So far all we know is that the player will lose at
least one crew member a little over half the time. However,
there's another layer to the mechanic. The rule states that the
player loses one crew for each monster showing. So
although we know the player will lose some crew 55.6% of the
time, as thorough game designers we should really calculate the
average number of crew lost. Put simply, we must account
for the fact that sometimes the player will lose two crew
at the same time (by rolling two monsters).
To calculate the average crew lost, we
need to do an "Expected Value", or EV calculation.
This will be familiar to anyone who studies Game Theory, or
perhaps anyone who reads a lot of poker books! (Sadly, I fall into
both categories.)
EV is essentially the chance of
something happening multiplied by the value of that
result. When you're talking about poker, you are
multiplying the chance of a hand showing up by the money you'll
win if it does, but you are also including the chance of the hand not
showing up multiplied by the amount of money you lose. If
the EV is positive, it's a worthwhile value bet; if it's
negative, then math says you'll lose money in the long run. Sure,
you might get lucky here and there, but if you make the bet
1,000,000,000,000 times, you will come out behind.
For Longship, I just want to
know the EV in relation to how many crew will be lost. Maybe
after I do the calc it will make more sense, because all this writing
is confusing me, too:
-
EV
= ChanceOfEvent1 * value1 + ChanceOfEvent2 * value2 + ChanceOfEvent3
* value 3 + etc.
-
EVaveragecrewloss
= (pExactly1Monster * -1 crew) + (p2Monsters * -2 crew)
-
pExactly2Monsters
= 2/6 * 2/6 = .111 = 11.1%
-
pExactly1Monster
= .555 - .111 = .444 = 44.4% (we know we will hit at least one
Monster 55.55% of the time and we know p2Monsters = 11.1%, so
p1Monster is what's left.)
-
EVaveragecrewloss
= (.444 * -1.0) + (.111 * -2.0) = -0.667
Therefore, on average the player will
lose 2/3 (66.7%) of a crew member whenever they raid. This is
significantly different than the 55.6% chance of losing at least
1 crew. It should be accounted for during game balancing.
The Tragedy of the 2d6
Commons
This example illustrates one of the
easiest probability mistakes made when assessing 2d6 combinations and
results. On one hand, you can calculate the chances of, say, at
least one "6" showing up on two dice (a). But if each
individual "6" actually counts for something, then
you really need to make sure that you account for it (b). If all
you are looking for is "at least one six", then it doesn't
matter (similar to the sea monster check earlier in this article).
To drive the point home and use another
game example, let's say we have a pirate game (because we all should)
and in the game, cannons hit long distance targets on a "6″.
You have two cannons on your ship, so you roll two dice when firing.
In other words, there are 11 out of
36 combos for which at least one hit ("6″)
occurs. You could have arrived at this number by brute force by
counting of the combos instead of the converse prob calc. But
converse probability was a bit faster.
Now let's calculate the "EV"
of two cannons at long range, since this is what we'll use for game
balancing. To do this, we need to know how those 11 special combos
break down. As it turns out, 10 of the combos are hits with 1
cannon, and only one combo is a hit with both cannon. See, there
are 10 ways to roll 2d6 and get a "6" on only one die, but
there is one way to roll 2d6 and get a "6" on both dice.
You'll hit 30.6% (.306) of the time on
average, but the average number of hits you will cause is .333.
Sometimes ya hit 'em with both barrels!
Boom-chikka-Boom:
1/36th
of the time!
If this is still confusing, then I
guess I succeeded at least in illustrating the deceptively easy
mistake you can make when looking at 2d6 combos. Most
of the time, it's not a huge deal. But make a couple percent error
when building a satellite, and it will pancake on Mars instead of
nicely landing. Bye bye billions.
Back to the
Longship!
The game, that is. Another rule:
Razing
Territories:
Roll
1 die. The territory is razed if any axes show.
After taking the last treasure from a
territory, there is a chance that it gets razed. This means
that the place is temporarily exhausted of all valuable relics,
coins, peasants, and so on. Razed territories take longer for the
territory to refill with treasures. This makes some territories
suddenly less valuable for a while, which creates some dynamic game
situations.
I decided I wanted a simple 50/50
chance here. Design-wise, I didn't want it to raze all the time
(playtested that, didn't like it) and I also didn't want things not
to raze because I like the dynamic aspect.
Getting 50/50 was fortunately the
easiest calculation yet. For this rule I went with a simple one
die resolution to speed things up and also to differentiate the roll
from the raid check immediately preceding it. If any axes show
at all, the territory is razed:
You've just been
Plwnd3rd
As is tradition in my articles, if
you've made it this far then you should either be commended or
committed. Hopefully, this feature has helped illustrate some of
the design process that goes into something as simple as a dice roll.
If you enjoyed this article (or
didn't!), please be sure to let myself or the awesome Gamasutra
editors know. It may affect how often they let me out of the box in
the future.
Also, if Longship sounds
interesting and you want to know about a potential commercial
release, please drop me an email.
--TS
LEGALESE: Longship:
Viking Raiders is ©2007 and TM Sigman Creative Services LLC. All
rights reserved.
|
All of the games I mention use probability and custom cut dice combinations to evoke a specific model of probabilities for weapon and ability differentiation.
Do you find that the decision for using custom cut dice was more a matter of making your game unique, or was it to map the probabilities in a more grokkable fashion for the player?
Awareness of how game mechanics work at their core is what true game design is all about.
And as a player, even though in a lot of games users are not aware of how probability is involved; there's still a lot of gamers like myself that enjoy clear feedback of probability components and the action of throwing digital dice whatever the shape this takes.
First, it adds a little more personality to the game. It's a little more fun to check for axes and sea monsters than just a check things like "4 or above on d6". Goes with the theme better.
Second, the symbols are a bit more grokkable, as you've pointed out. I'm hoping the rules are more memorable, and less checking of reference tables will be required. Rolling two dice and checking for sea monsters when passing through a Sea Monster-inhabited sea zone maps well to memory (in theory).
Some of the combos I found I needed to do just made more sense with the symbols, whereas they seemed really clumsy with straight d6s. For example, the raiding rules: checking for axes and taking casualties on sea monsters is sorta simple, whereas "5-6 equals 1 success, 6 = two successes, and a roll of 2-3 is a casualty" is just a little more of a mouthful.
Of course, I'm just using normal d6s to prototype.
I'm not saying that custom dice are categorically better; but I like the theme-ey-ness.