Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
HOW DO YOU GO ABOUT PLOTTING OUT COMBAT PROGRESSION?
Posts
Pages:
1
narcodis
View playlists
CloseWhat I mean is, how do you guys plan out and implement the numerical stats for monsters and heroes? What method do you use in figuring out how much experience something should give? How many hitpoints something should have? How much damage a spell should do?
I'm totally clueless to this whole process. Explain what you do.
I'm totally clueless to this whole process. Explain what you do.
Personally I just start testing-and-guessing. I prefer to keep the hitpoints low, I think it adds slightly more depth and strategy to battles, AND it is a lot easier to figure in the other stats.
Also, I have found that most RPGmaker games give me too many spells. It wouldn't be a problem if all of them had a use, but usually one just does more damage then all the others. I think in being more creative with spells, and how much MP they cost, it adds a good bit of depth a lot of battle systems lack.
Also, I have found that most RPGmaker games give me too many spells. It wouldn't be a problem if all of them had a use, but usually one just does more damage then all the others. I think in being more creative with spells, and how much MP they cost, it adds a good bit of depth a lot of battle systems lack.
Maybe not the same topic, but related:
http://rpgmaker.net/forums/topics/5932/
http://rpgmaker.net/forums/topics/5932/
The very first step is to establish what party members you will have available at a particular point, and what roles they fill (or can fill, if you have an open-ended customization system). This way, you know if the party doesn't have a healer, so enemies need to do less damage than normal to compensate.
This article of mine has a good chunk about party roles: http://rpgmaker.net/articles/177/
This article by Brickroad is basically the reasoning behind who gets what, with more of a focus on balance than roles specifically: http://rpgmaker.net/articles/4/
You need to know what the party can do in order to determine what enemies can do. You can have the most "perfect" standardized stats, but that enemy that can paralyze two characters each turn is going to be very over-powered... unless the player has the ability to put up a guard against status effects, easily cure paralysis, or simply nuke that enemy's weakness with a single shot.
Something else to keep in mind is that games can profit from having variable difficulty. What I mean is that difficulty isn't necessarily a linear progression; some areas are harder than they "should be," others easier. This can be used for both flavor and as a gift to the player. A hard area can be built up beforehand to be an epic trial that will show that the heroes are truly heroic. The easy area could be a villain's lair filled with minions; fights that are more cinematic and allow the players to cut through enemies like butter. While the game should get harder and more challenging as it goes on, don't forget about climaxes and resting spots.
As for balancing stats out specifically, I like to make enemy parties the same size as the party, with very similar stats. Sometimes an elite/powerful enemy takes up two "slots," and a weaker one takes up 1/2 or 1/3 of a slot. Of course, there is variability possible in this: be nice (and evil) to the party with more or less slots compared to the party size. If you allow for party switching fairly regularly (i.e. in battle, or at any time in the menu), you can be more top-heavy. How does the party win? Their equipment. Let equipment be the party's source of overcoming enemies. Naked and empty-handed, it'd be a relatively even fight; with equipment, the party can handle more than one or two battles.
Also, I really prefer to make each stat equal to each other stat (except usually HP/MP); for example, one point of Agility is equivalent to a point of Magic. It makes things simpler for both you and the player - "okay, enemies in this area should have base 50 in every stat, and around 250 HP."
This article of mine has a good chunk about party roles: http://rpgmaker.net/articles/177/
This article by Brickroad is basically the reasoning behind who gets what, with more of a focus on balance than roles specifically: http://rpgmaker.net/articles/4/
You need to know what the party can do in order to determine what enemies can do. You can have the most "perfect" standardized stats, but that enemy that can paralyze two characters each turn is going to be very over-powered... unless the player has the ability to put up a guard against status effects, easily cure paralysis, or simply nuke that enemy's weakness with a single shot.
Something else to keep in mind is that games can profit from having variable difficulty. What I mean is that difficulty isn't necessarily a linear progression; some areas are harder than they "should be," others easier. This can be used for both flavor and as a gift to the player. A hard area can be built up beforehand to be an epic trial that will show that the heroes are truly heroic. The easy area could be a villain's lair filled with minions; fights that are more cinematic and allow the players to cut through enemies like butter. While the game should get harder and more challenging as it goes on, don't forget about climaxes and resting spots.
As for balancing stats out specifically, I like to make enemy parties the same size as the party, with very similar stats. Sometimes an elite/powerful enemy takes up two "slots," and a weaker one takes up 1/2 or 1/3 of a slot. Of course, there is variability possible in this: be nice (and evil) to the party with more or less slots compared to the party size. If you allow for party switching fairly regularly (i.e. in battle, or at any time in the menu), you can be more top-heavy. How does the party win? Their equipment. Let equipment be the party's source of overcoming enemies. Naked and empty-handed, it'd be a relatively even fight; with equipment, the party can handle more than one or two battles.
Also, I really prefer to make each stat equal to each other stat (except usually HP/MP); for example, one point of Agility is equivalent to a point of Magic. It makes things simpler for both you and the player - "okay, enemies in this area should have base 50 in every stat, and around 250 HP."
I do a lot of this in a way that's not easy to lay out on paper. I have kind of an intuitive sense for this stuff. All of what I can put into words will sound really obvious, but:
I always give enemies notable strengths and weaknesses just like party members. This means there are strong enemies, fast enemies, tough enemies, and smart enemies. There are occasionally enemies that are both but rarely any that are all four except bosses. I also stat enemies primarily based on what they are (what they look like) and assign skills in the same way.
I have been known to figure out the base stats of humanoid enemies as PCs and then roughly add bonuses for their equipment. In Blood Machine I did this to a mechanical exactitude, calculating the stats of enemy mechs based on their exact parts and kit on paper. This wound up being a huge chore and eventually contributed to moral death.
Everything Craze said so far is right, by the way.
I always give enemies notable strengths and weaknesses just like party members. This means there are strong enemies, fast enemies, tough enemies, and smart enemies. There are occasionally enemies that are both but rarely any that are all four except bosses. I also stat enemies primarily based on what they are (what they look like) and assign skills in the same way.
I have been known to figure out the base stats of humanoid enemies as PCs and then roughly add bonuses for their equipment. In Blood Machine I did this to a mechanical exactitude, calculating the stats of enemy mechs based on their exact parts and kit on paper. This wound up being a huge chore and eventually contributed to moral death.
Everything Craze said so far is right, by the way.
I use this to help make sure that enemies do enough damage to be threatening without killing you in one shot (unless I want them to :x). I also have one for turning accuracy, evasion, and skill modifier into a percentile hit rate, and one for turning vitality/magic and level into an HP/SP value.
Yes, these are freeze-framed at the top of my enemy design sheet. I love excel.
I think it's really too subjective to do this the "right" way.
Some people prefer grind fests, others hate them, and the rest are somewhere in the middle.
Some people like the enemies to be somewhat challenging throughout, others like a challenge that falls into an easy lull, then move on to the next area where the enemies are quite rough again.
I basically tinker around with the stats until I accidentally fall upon a progression that works for me, which is often what doesn't work for most people lol. I enjoy a bit of a challenge, but not at the cost of long battles.
Some people prefer grind fests, others hate them, and the rest are somewhere in the middle.
Some people like the enemies to be somewhat challenging throughout, others like a challenge that falls into an easy lull, then move on to the next area where the enemies are quite rough again.
I basically tinker around with the stats until I accidentally fall upon a progression that works for me, which is often what doesn't work for most people lol. I enjoy a bit of a challenge, but not at the cost of long battles.
post=132754
I think it's really too subjective to do this the "right" way.
Of course. There are ways to make finding your own "right" way easier, however, which is what at least chaos and I were talking about.
My personal stance is that standardization is wonderful.
Crystalgate
694
post=132628
I do a lot of this in a way that's not easy to lay out on paper. I have kind of an intuitive sense for this stuff.
I do it the opposite way, I plan it out carefully and calculate what stats the monsters should have. I make sure I know what happens if you raise or drop a stat, like "if I drop Attack Power by 10%, the monster will deal 20% less damage to the average character" and so on. I think this goes to show that not everyone can use the same method and that you need to find what works for you.
I guess I have something important (if, again, obvious) to say, which is more of a general principle/rule of thumb:
*Always remember your game will be harder to play for anyone who didn't make it.
This is where beta testers come in handy, but since beta testers are somewhat in the inner circle and have a specific motivation to keep playing, it's a bit easier for them, although not as pronounced.
*Always remember your game will be harder to play for anyone who didn't make it.
This is where beta testers come in handy, but since beta testers are somewhat in the inner circle and have a specific motivation to keep playing, it's a bit easier for them, although not as pronounced.
lol not always. My beta testers were way better at my game than i was. I prolly just suck at RPGs in general, doesn't stop me from lovin'em though.
That is just bizarre.
Logically, doesn't knowing exactly how everything works (and how many HP everyone has) give you an innate advantage of epic proportions?
I have made dumb mistakes and got my ass kicked in my own games, but in general...other people have almost always found them harder than I have.
Logically, doesn't knowing exactly how everything works (and how many HP everyone has) give you an innate advantage of epic proportions?
I have made dumb mistakes and got my ass kicked in my own games, but in general...other people have almost always found them harder than I have.
Max: Make a complex enough system and people will do it. Both Ark and chaos have managed to beat the final boss of Visions & Voices solo, and Solitayre (I believe) beat every boss on Insane. Each used a different strategy (granted, Ark played on Easy compared to the chaos/Soli Insane mode, buttttt whatever).
Me? I can barely beat the final boss on Normal, let alone his powered-up form (an unlockable).
Me? I can barely beat the final boss on Normal, let alone his powered-up form (an unlockable).
Wouldn't you have to make sure you could at least beat the final boss on Hard (assuming there is a Hard between Normal and Insane) just for playtesting purposes?
Edit:
Come to think of it, there are a few cases where people found shit to be way easier than I did in my games.
Edit:
Come to think of it, there are a few cases where people found shit to be way easier than I did in my games.
I am really bad at games. Karsu and I assumed that if I can beat it on Normal, most people can beat it on higher levels of difficulty.
EDIT: Hey not-Max, how about looking at the big posts related to the OP instead of saying "I'm good/I'm bad at playing games?" I say "not-Max" only because he agreed with my big post. :< (I know that chaos does also simply because we spend our time masturbating each other's equations, but still, feed my ego!)
EDIT: Hey not-Max, how about looking at the big posts related to the OP instead of saying "I'm good/I'm bad at playing games?" I say "not-Max" only because he agreed with my big post. :< (I know that chaos does also simply because we spend our time masturbating each other's equations, but still, feed my ego!)
Testing is the way to go. I tend to keep the numbers even (I.E. 1500 HP instead of 1495), and try to avoid dragging out battles forever. I prefer hard hitting enemies with fairly low HP -- so low in fact that you can take them out with one or two well-timed skills.
LightningLord2
230
I'm trying to make non-boss battles so that none of the enemies are easily one-hit-ko'd (weaknesses might cause them to do so). Also, if they become tedious, I can give out a combat item that immediately ends the battle (no rewards, no effect on bosses).
Nullmech
0
post=133423
Testing is the way to go. I tend to keep the numbers even (I.E. 1500 HP instead of 1495), and try to avoid dragging out battles forever. I prefer hard hitting enemies with fairly low HP -- so low in fact that you can take them out with one or two well-timed skills.
Personally I can't get enough of the uneven numbers. Something about a monster with 792 HP just seems great to me. Aside from that, I have a strange aversion to odd numbers... I really don't like them for some reason.
Pages:
1
