关于伤害计算公式的一点领悟(An understanding of damage calculation formula)
At the beginning of entering the industry, most planning generally starts from executive planning or system planning, and I am no exception.
At the beginning, I only know how to make systems, and I have a shallow understanding of numerical values in the game experience. After entering the industry for a period of time, he began to realize the importance of numerical value. The most radical change was that during a period of wandering, influenced by the design concept of nine entertainment, he thought that the game was designed based on numerical value, and the system was just the filling content and concept packaging in line with the numerical rhythm and framework. But now looking back, more and more people feel that the system is the key. The more solid and reasonable the system framework is, the larger the fault-tolerant space of the value is, and the more effective the icing on the cake is. There is a process of understanding that mountains are mountains, mountains are not mountains, and mountains are mountains.
Take the subtraction injury formula as an example. The division formula has been used in the last project. It is very convenient to put the value, but it is inconvenient to understand, and there will be some biased problems in the pursuit of attributes.
The new project plans to use the basic formula of attack defense to make a concise and intuitive experience. Referring to the subtraction formula, some plans will have a headache on the problem of not breaking the defense, resulting in avoiding it, or generally dealing with the situation of not breaking the defense with the lowest damage.
First of all, the subtraction formula itself is actually no problem. It doesn’t matter if you don’t break the defense for personal combat. This is the normal embodiment of the strength gap. Of course, forced damage = 1 is also a kind of sensory positive feedback for the oppressor, which can be retained.
The key lies in the defects of this formula on some occasions, such as the often mentioned group war in which one person destroys one country. In my opinion, this can also be understood as a system design problem. Since it is a system problem, it can be handled by system rules, that is, set rules in the problematic system to solve this seemingly numerical problem.
Every time a group war kills one person, the slain will add a certain defense breaking value (conceptually, it can be understood as armor loss) to the slayer to reduce the defense attribute of the slayer.
In SLG war chess, the concept of encirclement and pincer attack is used to increase the attack attribute, or reduce the defense attribute, or cause additional real damage to solve the problem of not breaking the defense.
The reason why it is called system thinking rather than numerical thinking is that this solution is obtained according to different game playing methods and system rules. This method can be solved by adopting corresponding concept mechanisms in different system concepts. Instead, it can provide characteristic experiences of different systems. The numerical idea is to give a formula for not breaking the defense, whether SLG or RPG.