#system design

[askagamedev]

Why do you think MOBAs manage to remain so popular when losing a match can be such a long and arduous process?

MOBAs as a genre generally sustain themselves primarily because playing the game at lower skill levels allows players to feel ownership and powerful when they do well, but also provides them excuses from having to admit their own responsibility in their loss. This creates a powerful feedback mechanism where players get to feel significant early validation and offloads having to deal with their own inadequacies until they choose to become serious about the game.

In MOBAs players get to see the results of their own good plays immediately. Whether it's landing a skill shot, hitting with an ultimate, winning a team fight, gathering resources through laning or jungling, pushing a lane, taking down a tower, these are all immediate "wins" for the active player. It's easy to see the causal nature of the forward progress here - the player performs the action and gets to see the positive results of that action almost immediately.

On the other side, players get to blame their teammates when they're losing because their own mistakes are easy to dismiss. It's extremely difficult for a game loss to be attributed to a single mistake; game losses tend to result from accumulations of multiple bad decisions made over the course of the game. Most of the time, the bad decisions are fairly small and easy to miss. These mistakes only become backbreaking as they add up, resulting in gradual overall momentum change for the entire team. They're also often about proving a negative - that the player didn't do something they should have, rather than choosing to do something they shouldn't have.

This becomes a feedback loop for players - they see themselves improving by making better choices early on, but they don't really have to deal with their own mistakes and failings until they get serious about improving. This is why so many MOBA players get stuck in "ELO Hell" - they have hit their personal skill ceilings but haven't realized it yet.

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

Frequent Questions: The FAQ

[lexchxn]

A Triad for Bosses

The Three S's

I had a realisation about Dark Souls.

This is a design insight, and I think it’s one that’s applicable to TTRPGs.

Some Dark Souls bosses (a lot of people’s favourites), essentially have three methods by which you can beat them: 1. Skill |Just outright pracice and precision letting you take a small enough amount of damage to survive while dealing a large enough amount of damage to kill. 2. Strength | Whether through stats or a power solution (either being 10 levels high enough or using a damage type the boss is weak to). 3. Solution | You “Solve” the combat before it begins, either through an item that trivialises the fight or a puzzle that outright bypasses it. These “Three S’s.” can of course mix and match, and I think the Eldemonsoulsbornekiro games (sorry) lean on Strength as a primary pillar, Skill as a close second, and Solution as a surprise tool they occasionally pull out, but I was considering how these principles could and could not be applied to TTRPGs. So... Do they?

First, they require some adaptation. TTRPGs don’t have the bounding boxes that video games do, nor do they maintain as much of a balance between elements like player skill and character build. What adjustments do we need to make?

Well, while Skill certainly continues to exist in the TTRPG space, dice luck can have a very large dilutive effect on one’s ability to express Skill. Skill also, I’d argue, has much more of a direct impact on “Strength” in TTRPGs than it does in video games. Building a character here has, again, weaker bounding boxes than a preprogrammed game.

Strength can vary wildly depending on the style of the TTRPG, but regardless of the chosen book table play tends to be farther away from insurmountable/trivial encounters than video games due to GM tailoring. If you’re in an encounter, there’s typically both an expectation for you to engage with it and knowledge that it won’t waste your time.

And Solution is interesting. Depending on the GM or the story scenario, this may be all but impossible. But it might also be the primary focus of your game. Every fight you take meant to be solved, every combat a puzzle. Also typically, the higher allowance for Solution expression, the more Skill expression has space to shine. After all, someone’s gotta find those solutions!

With weaker availability for Skill expression, a usually tighter box on Strength expression, and Such a wild variation in Solution expression, what kinds of incentives and rewards can we now build into our campaigns? - We can build in Power rewards for their Skill in character creation. - We can prompt Skill growth by facing our parties with difficult tasks they can still achieve. - We can create narrative or prompt creative focus and reward Skill by putting all of our eggs into the Solution basket, waiting for our parties to “Figure it out.”. - We can create a feeling of immense resistance (or outright despair) by using combats that require more Strength. ...and more! Balancing encouragement and reward between these three pillars to create your style of encounter, I would say, covers just about every design you’ll ever field.

Think about the Three S’s next time you’re building an encounter! Hopefully this can provide a solid framework for your next brainstorm.

[system-design-hospital]

Introduction

Hello, we are final year students from the National Institute of Design, Haryana. We're documenting our system design project here.

hehe.

[thehuskies]

Systems Thinking

Singla Rice Mills

Hello from Group 3 - The Huskies B)

This is a blog to document the everyday progress of our Systems Thinking Research and you are welcome to give your valuable feedbacks every step of the way!

The group includes Akriti, Akshaya, Gautham, Karthik, Ketaki, Madhumanti and Prerna.

Day 1 - 21.08.2024

First day started with brainstorming for the domain. The group decided to focus on a topic within the agriculture sector, as Haryana is well-known for its agricultural activities.

Initially, we planned to conduct our research at a sugar mill. Upon visiting the site, we learned that the sugarcane harvest season hasn’t started yet, and the factory wouldn’t be operational until November.

After exploring other nearby agro-based industries like disposable leaf plate makers, poultry farms, wheat factories, and honey bee farms, we finally connected with Singla Rice Mills.

The CEO, Harsh Singla, was very welcoming and gave us a comprehensive overview of the business and its technical aspects. He explained the rice processing stages, discussed the factors that directly impact the business, and provided a tour of the facility.

We also saw samples of different rice categories obtained after processing. The first day was full of valuable insights that will guide our research moving forward.

Thanks, see you tomorrow :)

[fallingintolove]

Portfolio 2023

Hey guys, i am tanisha kharde, a communication design student; and this is my portfolio. please have a look, it will be very appreciated. 

https://www.behance.net/gallery/165746665/Communication-Design-Portfolio-2023

[hope-and-sleep]

2023年01月03日 (禮拜二) [3/100] 

More system design notes for today. Also did some cleaning and went through some Cantonese flashcards. Overall: a productive today, but I wonder if I could achieve the same amounts of productivity I did when it was exam season and I was cramming like hell. It's sort of been a while, huh....?

[systemdesignone]

heartbeat signal is used for checking the status of the client in real-time

[adastra-sf]

Bad faith often drives the law of unintended consequences.

Writers: Great concept to play with in your worldbuilding.

this is so on the nose

just adding (since it seems to have stirred some people up) that obviously this is not an absolute - it just points to how some oppressive systems (for example) rely on bad faith to cover for their systems doing what they're really intended to do by claiming that they're still in progress - but there are plenty of other less bad faith examples too that are more to do with poorly thought out or poorly implemented plans

[ID: post by The Garantine quoting the start of a wikipedia article

Very tired of hearing about what the intentions are. If a system constantly produces a different outcome than the one it is "intended" for then it's perfectly reasonable to assume the actual intention is the outcome it continues to produce.

beginning of quoted article below reads as follows:

The purpose of a system is what it does

The purpose of a system is what it does (POSIWID) is a systems thinking heuristic coined by Stafford Beer, who observed that there is "no point in claiming that the purpose of a system is to do what it constantly fails to do." The term is widely used by systems theorists, and is generally invoked to counter the notion that the purpose of a system can be read from the intentions of those who design, operate, or promote it. When a system's side effects or unintended consequences reveal that its behavior is poorly understood, then the POSIWID perspective can balance political understandings of system behavior with a more straightforwardly descriptive view.

ID ends]

[mindfulengineer]

Comprehensive Guide to Building a Scalable Rate Limiting System Design: High-Level to Deep Design - https://mindfulengineer.ai/rate-limiting-system-design/

#technology #systemdesign #computerscience #ratelimiting

[the-generous-fool]

Guard borbs

[askagamedev]

Why is ranged combat so much more common for the biggest action games than melee? What are the design benefits of having a gun or things that work like a gun?

It's generally easier to prototype and develop ranged combat that feels good than it is for melee.

Melee combat lives and dies by the animations and systems we build. If my character swings her sword in a horizontal arc, it creates very different expectation for a hit reaction than stabbing or chopping. A player will probably realize near-instantly if the reaction animation doesn't match the type of attack properly and it will make the combat feel cartoonish, breaking immersion. The melee animations are also performed extremely close to the camera, so the player gets full view of all of the details. We need many different attacks and many synchronized hit reactions in order for the melee combat to look right.

Ranged combat, on the other hand, does not usually carry this kind of action-reaction animation expectation. Shooting animations are generally simple and small motions. Playing a hit reaction can be as simple as a flinch or just falling over. Hit reactions are limited to hit location and typically don't need to take the motion of the weapon into account. Enemies that play hit reactions are also usually smaller on screen and further away, meaning less overall player scrutiny. We can sometimes just get away with turning on ragdoll and not even need a specific hit reaction.

Really, it comes down to the fact that animation and system requirements of making a good melee combat system work are more expensive than making a good ranged combat system work. Since the act of shooting and the act of getting hit are significantly distinct from each other, ranged combat is much easier to get working than melee combat where the hitting and the getting hit are inextricably linked. Combine this with the fact that melee combat is, by necessity, up close and immediately visible and you have a noticeably higher bar for acceptable quality from a melee combat system.

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

Frequent Questions: The FAQ

[lexchxn]

Expectations, Descriptions, Names

This is a bit of a shorter one than before, but I've found it interesting how many times I've seen the release of a system or a new piece of content within a system be met with hostility, even long after initial exposure, due to some breakdown in understanding for what something is meant to be.

What do I mean by this? I'll use a couple of examples, one old and one new, from Pathfinder 2e. Funnily enough, they're both from the Cleric class: The Warpriest doctrine, right from the start, focused on being more defensible than its Cloistered counterpart at the cost of some of its spellcasting potency, and was long derided as a cheap, unsatisfying alternative. In what I've heard from those who disliked it, this is mostly due to a miscommunication that starts with the name. People expected a Cleric capable of "war"; a damage-dealer and front-line fighter. What the subclass actually was (and remains, to this day) is a way to massively improve your survivability on the front lines, not necessarily your damage-dealing capability or even combative prowess. Not that it doesn't have any of that, but it's ultimately secondary to the Warpriest's attempt to emulate an old-school mace-and-shield, chainmail Clerical role in a party. You retain your full spellcasting suite, and the fact that the spells are weaker incentivises your focus further towards protective aspects of your character, honing in on a utility and support role without the cloth caster trappings of low AC and health. The Battle Harbinger, recently released in Lost Omens: Divine Mysteries, seems to be going down a similar pipeline, at least if the initial reactions I've seen online are in any way representative of general attitude (which they aren't always). The Battle Harbinger gives up not only their spellcasting potency, but most of their suite, and in return gains combative efficacy- ability to hit enemies with a weapon. But they don't gain any significant damage boosts, and their "Battle Auras" (buffing or debuffing auras they can cast and sustain with their unique feats) are still resource-limited by their spellcasting resources (though retain full, or even better, potency than standard spellcasting). Battle Harbinger's role ends up being one of offensive support, and notably still not damage. They can hit with the best of them, but they don't receive the damage-dealing bonuses that are crucial to the "standard martials" damage-dealing roles- and this is pretty clearly intentional, due to their ability to use scrolls and significantly buff themselves and their teammates. Yet, player reaction has skewed negative. What do you mean the Battle Harbinger can't hit as hard as a full martial?

People end up missing the playstyle and role defined and supported for these subclasses, instead projecting their own desires for the name or the concept onto it and being disappointed when it doesn't pan out. I'm left wondering what's more important here when it comes to player response- the name, the flavour text, or the mechanics themselves. And I think it might be skewed towards name and flavour text more than one would assume. Would the responses have been the same were the subclasses named "Heavily Armoured Support Cleric" and "Rallying Offensive Support Cleric"? They're certainly less evocative names than "Warpriest" and "Battle Harbinger". Where does one draw the line on these things? Ultimately, this will all be up to the writer to weigh and decide. But it's worth thinking about next time you name or describe something- what image are you trying to present? What image might your chosen words conjure? If there's dissonance between the two, is it worth conceding ground to mend that gap?

Little bits of TTRPG and player philosophy like this are what I live for when I'm not considering the mechanics themselves. May your quests be fruitful, friends.

[system-design-hospital]

Day 1: Exploring different systems

First day of our project, our group discussed various areas of interest like hospital, bus stand, hotel, police line etc. It was decided to check out clusters of settlement in Kurukshetra- legal settlements like govt quarters and apartments, as well as illegal settlements like the ones in Umri and Ladwa.

Huda Office

We went to Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) office in Sector 4 to inquire about different kinds of settlements in the region- Govt quarters and apartments. The information was given by Mr Anuj. From there we headed to Umri Village to check out rural illegal settlements.

Umri Village

This settlement connected with the Indra road in Umri had around 8000 houses. The houses were all clustered together based on the caste. There were sections or mohallas of Punjabi community living together. Similarly there were sections of Jatt, Harijan, Vyapari community etc. The area had a govt school, a mandir, many kirana stores, barber shops, parlours and stationery shops etc. The clusters were not consistent and unorganized. Moreover, the land was disputed for many people. Most of the houses had been constructed on the land illegally, but they had gotten it legalised in the past year. Only a few lands were disputed in court.

[bestquadrada]

ArtStation - Marceau Nakayama

[tutortacademy1]

Prepare for a System Design Interview: Tips & Strategies | Tutort Academy

Preparing for a system design interview requires a well-rounded approach that encompasses both technical knowledge and soft skills. By understanding the basics, researching the company, reviewing key concepts, practicing consistently, and refining your behavioral skills, you can increase your confidence and likelihood of success in these challenging interviews.

[hope-and-sleep]

2023年01月04日 (禮拜三) [4/100] 

Wednesday already! Absolutely not information I like to hear, where has the week gone...?

At least I have bread. Used this recipe over here. I think I've overbaked it a bit but i bet it'll still taste nice toasted with some cheese.