"Par" rating for scenarios

[chaos_incar]

Salutations!

There should be a "par" amount of gold associated with each scenario. It should represent the amount of gold that a "good" player would have after the scenario. The campaign should be playable (that is, you have a good chance of getting all the way to the end) if you have 70-80% of par. This will probably vary depending on difficulity. This value should be displayed on the victory screen. That way, you know whether or not you should replay the scenario in order to have enough gold to finish. Perhaps there should also be some mention about the number of experienced units, but that may be a bit much.

[turin]

Salutations!

There should be a "par" amount of gold associated with each scenario. It should represent the amount of gold that a "good" player would have after the scenario. The campaign should be playable (that is, you have a good chance of getting all the way to the end) if you have 70-80% of par. This will probably vary depending on difficulity. This value should be displayed on the victory screen. That way, you know whether or not you should replay the scenario in order to have enough gold to finish. Perhaps there should also be some mention about the number of experienced units, but that may be a bit much.

why should this be done? i don't really see the point...if i go into a scenario with too little gold, i will realize it in time. but i don't want to be told before i start a scenario that i have a "below par gold total". Not fun, IMO, and unneccessary.

And, if it is implemented, you would want it to be the amount you NEED for the next scenario, so you can only win if you have it or higher, IMO.

[chaos_incar]

why should this be done? i don't really see the point...if i go into a scenario with too little gold, i will realize it in time.

It's the "in time" part that I'm a bit worried about. I don't want to realize 3 scenarios down that I really didn't have enough gold to stand a chance. Also, it allows the scenario designer to express what he was expecting you to have when a scenario starts. This allows a newbie player like me to narrow down where I went wrong. (I.e. am I getting my butt kicked because I started with only 100 gold, or is 100 about expected and I'm just stupid with my strategy.)

I don't want to be told before i start a scenario that i have a "below par gold total"

I would expect this to be the case most of the time. Only "really good" players would actually attain par. It's like those "finish-times" in Doom (or par in golf.)

[Dacyn]

er, I think it would be kind of insulting to rate the amount of gold at all; the rating system is basically a crude AI and humans are much smarter than AI.
it seems that you want this as a feature to give you 'hints' about how to play the game, like some games where you can let the AI indicate which move it would do in your position.
if implemented at all, it should be an optional feature; experienced players would not want this (at least not for the same reason you want it).
and if you want hints about how to play the game, I would suggest going to the Strategies and Tips forum.

[Boucman]

I like the idea of a very hard to reach "par" for advance players to measure their time compared to a sort of ideal score.... how ever

1) gold amount can change highly from one lvl to the next, and gold amount is usually not a reason to restart two or three scenarii before

2) units would be a better indication, but as pointed before, that type of information would be spoiling a part of the fun

no, if the "par" is done somewhere, I would do it in number of turn a good player would use. this way there is no strategic information, but still an interesting challange for experienced players

[mbabuskov]

How about making the change in the game so that when you start level with less then 150 gold, you have 150?

Or 200.

That way, the players would never have to go back, 200 gold is enough to recall 10 units, or if you need more, than recruit at lower price.

[Dave]

That way, the players would never have to go back, 200 gold is enough to recall 10 units, or if you need more, than recruit at lower price.

I don't think our goal is to make it that players "never have to go back".

We want to make a game that is challenging. Part of being challenging means that players will have to sometimes backtrack.

A game where the player can win it on their first go through is not interesting imo.

David

[mbabuskov]

That way, the players would never have to go back, 200 gold is enough to recall 10 units, or if you need more, than recruit at lower price.

I don't think our goal is to make it that players "never have to go back".

We want to make a game that is challenging. Part of being challenging means that players will have to sometimes backtrack.

A game where the player can win it on their first go through is not interesting imo.
David

Perhaps you're right. IIRC, in all RPG adventures I played, when I got to 60-70% of the game, I just had to start from beginning and use the experience I had to build a stronger party that can go all the way to the end.

[Ishark]

I like the idea of a "par", both to give newbies like me an idea if they are doing well both as a challenge for experienced players. But it doesn't need to be in the game, just like replays are available for download, it may be possible to setup a website where there's a permanent "competition" showing the best possible results obtainable through one campaign at a given difficulty level.