On 11 July 2016 at 18:31, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> I've been thinking about currency/grind games, and was trying to
> enumerate what makes them "successful" in Agora in my experience.
> Here's my start on a feature list; thoughts?
>
> The Ideal Grind
>
> 1. Allows each player to perform around 3-6 "grindy" ("I harvest 1 corn")
> and 1-2 strategic ("I change my field to wheat") solo moves per week.
>
> 2. Need to think ahead 2-3 weeks to make best moves, "thinking ahead"
> includes looking at other players' positions.
>
> 3. You can miss 2-3 weeks and catch up (not that it shouldn't disadvantage
> you a bit).
>
> 4. Win conditions achievable in 4-6 months.
>
> 5. Big question: cutthroat (everyone's position re-set on a win)
> versus friendly (you could win today and someone else could get there
> tomorrow).
>
> 6. Other big question: amount of randomness.
>
> 7. At some point, requires trade (if game is friendly) or alliances
> (if game is cutthroat) to cross the finish line.
This is a good list. I'd lean towards the friendly model, but without
huge advantages for well-established players, to encourage newbies to
get involved.
I tend to prefer economies that link up with the rest of the game
somehow: rewards for getting proposals passed and holding offices, and
Agora-wide benefits to playing the subgame (extra votes, etc.). This
hopefully turns it into a game which is about political/economic power
as well as calculating the most effective moves. However, does that
end up taking us too far away from the grindy concept?
