When it comes to something as unfamiliar to most RPG players as terraforming a new world, which system do you think is easier to understand and would be more enjoyable to play: A multi-stage puzzle or a more freeform system of stats that unlock results? For terraforming planets in the RPG-like game I'm trying to put together, I have two possible options: Planets as Puzzles With a deterministic puzzle, players would find the right pieces, in the form of characters as experts, equipment and planetary "ingredients." For example, to make Venus inhabitable, players might learn that they need robust exobacteria, diamond factory-probes, and a huge comet. This leads them to trade favors and do missions for a genius biologist, a wily old industrialist, and the head of a hot-shot drilling team (who will plant nukes to steer the comet). Each puzzle piece would have some sort of connected outcome for success or failure. Failure would require more and more expensive pieces, but planets would wait forever for the player to raise the cash for them. Because it's deterministic, no other solution would really work. The fun of colonizing planets would be in figuring out what each needed. Players would probably be told by NPCs what they'd need, then they'd have to brave the wilds of space to find it.

---

Or.. Planets as Organic Stats With this system, players would be working to change stats that keep tending toward a certain level. Venus, for instance, is too hot and has too much greenhouse gas. So to cool it, players might use one massive comet (with a "Cool" stat) or dozens (that add up to the right "Cool" level). Or, they might deploy a huge network of solar shades, or drop heat dissipating laser towers. With this system, though, stats are linked, so changes in one stat might affect another and would need to be balanced. Dropping too much exobacteria, for instance, to eat up the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could create runaway effects that poison the soil for centuries. The player would then need to find and deploy a countermeasure. This approach would probably focus more on equipment and its functioning than on NPCs, though the same gameplay could be used to get the equipment.

---

The result of both types of gameplay would be a succesful colony that would potentially grow into a powerhouse or a weak backwater. Their role would mostly be as deal-maker, accountant (pinching pennies), explorer and heavy lifter (finding and carting supplies and experts to the planet with their ship). Thoughts?

I prefer the puzzle method, because it sounds really fun to play, but I'm thinking of the system in a vaccuum. I'm worry that such a deep and engrossing terraforming system would either overshadow the rest of the game or seem underutilized, as though the rest of the game was just a drag on the super-great terraforming action.

The stats system is better for a secondary game feature, because it would be easier to automate, so I could have a few NPCs in charge of grinding my planet while I"m off doing whatever it is I"m supposed to be doing in the game.

Actually, the puzzle system you describe is such a neat and versatile dynamic that I'd hate to see it go unused. Could you have more than just terraforming work that way? The recruiting, bribing and otherwise convincing "resources" to work for you would apply in commercial, political, or research fields as well, and if the puzzle type play was the bulk of the game, then having the terraforming use that familiar dynamic would actually streamline its implementation.

Personally, I prefer open ended where you can choose any combination of solutions and produce a unique solution. Of course to do this properly would require a whole lot of code to all for that large number of options...

As others have said- It would depend on the other gameplay.
I seem to recall that you wanted this to be heavily stat-based. Having the planet teraformming be stat based as well would work well with this.

For my own preference, I think the stat based option would be more interesting. It would be good if you could hire a scientist would would evaluate the current scenario and give some options on how to terraform it correctly. I would definitely make all of the processes affect more than one item so the player has to work to tweak it right.

I also think that the planet should be habitable within a range and that the closer to the sweet spot you hit, the bigger the colony can become.

If it is a puzzle, then the final outcome of the colony is predetermined. I suppose, it could be related to how many pieces were accomplished on the first try.

enough babbeling.

I really like the stat system, because it's dynamic and more easily adaptable: just generate some new stats bt whatever method and you're set. That way, it seems less contrived and more flexible. You can still consult experts to terraform a world, but it won't just be done magically when you consult the experts and do what they have to say. Also, you have to worry about side effects of everything you do. You can't just introduce exobacteria to convert carbon dioxide and water into cellulose and oxygen, or they will upset some ecological balance already in place. Perhaps dropping a comet on a world(gently of course:)) will result in a chemical balance more faovorable to a previously irrelevant bacteria that oxidizes the metal of your dome!

Why not have both? For instance, if it's stat based and I am tyring to terraform the planet(s), maybe as I play more I would get better at it and be able to look at the stats and be able to balace it out by doing what you described.However, if I get stuck or can't get it right I could consult an "expert" who would tell me what I would have to do if I do something for him.

Go with the stat based system, since it will allow for more interesting gameplay. A planet could have a set of stats that define its different aspects, and lifeforms have have liveability ranges for each of those stats. In this way you can terrform a planet to suit your client or whoever you want to establish a colony there.

Consider this:

In your travels you meet a fleet of nomadic methane breathing semi gasous lifeforms, who are look for a new home world. So you go out claim a planet terraform it into their ideal world through various means and as thanks they give you zero point engery technology.

In this way you have given the player a puzzle to solve and a completely opened way of resolving it with possibly different rewards based on the how well they solved the puzzle.

Another thing you could do to add a new dimension to the game using this system is with Green wars. Ever heard of the idea of using terraforming as a weapon?

Quote:

Original post by caseyd Why not have both? For instance, if it's stat based and I am tyring to terraform the planet(s), maybe as I play more I would get better at it and be able to look at the stats and be able to balace it out by doing what you described.However, if I get stuck or can't get it right I could consult an "expert" who would tell me what I would have to do if I do something for him.

Okay, I don't know why I didn't even think of a compromise. The idea that there's stats but that experts could "autobalance" them for the right payment or favors sounds pretty flexible. Maybe this could be successfully randomized? Maybe the planet is at stats X, Y and Z and there are characters out there that can perform modifications (X + 1, Y + 5 or whatever). The game should never state things so blandly, of course-- it all has to be cloaked.

Puzzles seem to have a set sequence of logical dependencies. This I'm not so sure would be easy to randomize.

Quote:

Original post by Iron Chef Carnage Actually, the puzzle system you describe is such a neat and versatile dynamic that I'd hate to see it go unused. Could you have more than just terraforming work that way? The recruiting, bribing and otherwise convincing "resources" to work for you would apply in commercial, political, or research fields as well, and if the puzzle type play was the bulk of the game, then having the terraforming use that familiar dynamic would actually streamline its implementation.

That's a good bit of reasoning. My worry though is that people have seen the puzzle bit done over and over again. "Get me that cup and I'll give you this sword... but to get the cup, you've got to steal the magic spoon." etc. etc. I don't think its a bad idea, but hasn't it been done to death? Or am I being myopic here?

Quote:

Original post by NIm You can still consult experts to terraform a world, but it won't just be done magically when you consult the experts and do what they have to say.

Okay, if there were experts who could help you, how much gameplay should this negate or involve? I'm thinking that you have to first convince or (if you're playing dastardly) capture the right person, which means first finding them. To find them, maybe you have to do favors for someone else in a kind of tier system (more favors the higher they are). Or you can just use brute force in terms of money.

Then when you get them to the planet, I was thinking it was fire and forget, with the exception of random events that pop up, like discoveries or supply problems due to pirates or whatever. Those you can choose to go solve personally, or turn to other NPC experts in a kind of God-game like delegation system. What do you think would work better?

Quote:

Also, you have to worry about side effects of everything you do. You can't just introduce exobacteria to convert carbon dioxide and water into cellulose and oxygen, or they will upset some ecological balance already in place. Perhaps dropping a comet on a world(gently of course:)) will result in a chemical balance more faovorable to a previously irrelevant bacteria that oxidizes the metal of your dome!

But when does this become a royal PITA? At what point should the problems stop and the game allow you to just move on to another planet. On the one hand, there's the "genesis device-like option," where you find a planet, get the team and material, and come back to (eventually) find it green. On the other hand, you could make this so detailed that having a cosmos filled with more than one or two planets is pointless because each takes so much work (or is so engrossing-- I guess it could go both ways).

Quote:

Original post by TechnoGoth In this way you have given the player a puzzle to solve and a completely opened way of resolving it with possibly different rewards based on the how well they solved the puzzle.

Wow, I do like that scenario and the setup. It reinforces the idea of trading favors and gives you a reason get out and meet the denizens of the galaxy.

Quote:

Another thing you could do to add a new dimension to the game using this system is with Green wars. Ever heard of the idea of using terraforming as a weapon?

I have now. What an option! [evil]