A proposal that needs feedback

jasonrohrer · 2013-08-15 08:00:50

Ludicrosity:

That's exactly the kind of clever break-in that I love to see and I want to encourage.

There are MANY ways to break into this house. Not just one, clearly optimal way. It's not like you can clearly see, "The cheapest and only sensible way to break into this house is to put 9 ladders right here."

I want every house to have an Achilles heel to be discovered. Like, the building constraints should be such that you have to leave a weak spot somewhere.

Right now, we could conclude that the building mode is under-constrained, which actually allows people to "fall into" uncreative solutions to the building problem. In fact, there is currently NO disadvantage to simply copying the same design that others are using, because such designs always require X ladders that no one can afford.

More constraints lead to more creativity. Maybe once a given design has been "solved," it should naturally die and not be viable anymore. People should seek out different designs that are unexpected in some way. I want that to be the only way people will be semi-successful as home builders: by always doing the unexpected.

I want house building to be ever evolving and cycling, not getting stuck in one local minimum.

To make that happen, I need to weaken certain aspects of home building so that there will no longer be a "sure thing" way to do it. So that it will be impossible to build a house with any kind of security guarantees.

Blip · 2013-08-15 10:02:30

I think that these changes would push house design towards trying to prevent somebody from discovering and utilizing your house's weaknesses, rather than making a house with no weaknesses. Sure, with a full house map you can tell how to cheaply rob the house, but, if the house if a mass of corridors and dead-end traps misleading and threatening to kill you, that perfect solution would be hard to find as a robber.

jasonrohrer · 2013-08-15 11:18:14

Right.... that's more along the lines of how I want this game to feel. The perfect solution is there somewhere, if you can just find it.

bey bey · 2013-08-15 12:07:40

jasonrohrer wrote:

More constraints lead to more creativity. Maybe once a given design has been "solved," it should naturally die and not be viable anymore. People should seek out different designs that are unexpected in some way. I want that to be the only way people will be semi-successful as home builders: by always doing the unexpected.

My thoughts exactly!! I do think a LIMITED movements of animals behind a wall combined with pressing buttons can be awesome - it's just so tense since you don't know what will happen. The problem really is that it has no trade-offs. If walls could only be 3 or 4 thick max or even less between you and the animal (because current doesn't travel this far), you would accept considerable weaknesses for any magic dance or rather be pushed to using this in a clever way instead of as bricks and mortar security.

The power through the corridors looks to me like it could work with modified trapdoor houses but hinder more interesting, complex and confusing houses. A bit of trial and error isn't even all bad, it just shouldn't be ludicrous like it is at the moment.

Yeah, I really feel it's all about the "range" of electricity. And limiting this is the only way of not killing about 90% of the way the game works right now. It would be tricky as to how to do it and how circuits could then interact, and it COULD be slightly less beginner friendly in building mode, yet hopefully a bit more friendly in robbing, at least until Blip comes up with something nobody thought of.

That way, the current build aesthetics AND the "cut-to-know"-aesthetic (which is positive to a very limited degree!) can be rescued.

metaldev · 2013-08-15 15:09:13

bey bey wrote:

Yeah, I really feel it's all about the "range" of electricity. And limiting this is the only way of not killing about 90% of the way the game works right now. It would be tricky as to how to do it and how circuits could then interact, and it COULD be slightly less beginner friendly in building mode, yet hopefully a bit more friendly in robbing, at least until Blip comes up with something nobody thought of.
.

This is kind of similar to an idea i had before:
- each power source can only power up x number of components (doors, floors, etc. )
- as circuit complexity rises, it is also easier to break because an under-powered circuit would act like an un-powered circuit
- therefore as the complexity/importance of circuits starts to go up it becomes doubly expensive because you will want to have backup power sources to mitigate risk to the circuit

Blip · 2013-08-15 15:32:51

I don't think limiting power "range" will do much (if, by range, you mean that power can only travel a certain distance), because, using animals, two circuits can be "connected", effectively making the power travel further than its limited range. http://castledraft.com/editor/jXTWvq.

And there's something nobody thought of.

bey bey · 2013-08-15 15:42:34

Yeah, I kind of think we need a solution that's really quite simple. Something similar to line of sight for dogs. Obviously it won't be as intuitive, but something where there is simply a radius for any given power source to affect. Probably they should even be incapable of interacting so that one can't still do across-the-map bit-locks by chain-linking them like so (left side!): http://castlefortify.com/c/8906414

It might just have to be done with a very tight constraint. Like there are nine sockets onto which one can buy a power source that can exclusively power those 9x9 squares. Any interaction would have to be done by animals - which carry the restraint of having to be "glimpsed". That set of constraints might produce a variety of houses. We might see quite a few "puzzle box" type starter houses, or huge cubes of multiple interaction, but limited wall thickness etc. would mean stuff had to remain easy to cut to - any trapdoor corridor would be fairly unsafe since the cutting to would be a cheap option (any power source could be reached for 2400 max, since they would usually be hidden it can even be cheaper: http://castlefortify.com/c/8906414 (right side)

If Oulipo has taught us one thing than that sometimes harsh constraints produce great things.

ukuko · 2013-08-15 23:53:27

I worry that imposing arbitrary limits on power sources will be especially confusing for new players, or in fact anyone that doesn't frequent these discussions!

dalleck · 2013-08-16 01:20:31

I would like to add my thoughts on the discussion:

I like trapdoors not passing power, but I think electric floors should, both thematically and gameplay-wise. This still leaves the option of 'hallways of death', but at the cost of shorting the circuit if you want to check it out the wiring and only ending on a single trapdoor.
http://castledraft.com/editor/aUdwZ3

I was also thinking trapdoor behaviour could be tweaked, so that the mechanism to raise/lower the trapdoor is electric, but the mechanism is analog. What I mean is, when a trapdoor receives power it triggers into 'up mode' and it is not until it is re-trigger (receives power again) that it drops. This may seem counter intuitive, but not if you recognise that it is the mechanism itself that is activating to either lower or raise the trapdoor into a 'locked' state. This would mean an unpowered trapdoor (after it has been triggered) can actually be safe to cross, and takes some of the overpowered-ness of trapdoors away. Let me know if that makes sense.

I also am continuing to barrack for the on-only-when-pressed button (or the pressure plate) which would tie in with the new limitations and trapdoor behaviour nicely.

largestherb · 2013-08-16 10:27:19

for $200 i don't think these trapdoors are the kind that lock in place! the powered doors don't even have proper locking mechanisms and can be opened with a crowbar
(although if the code allows for it, these more expensive 'locking' trapdoors might be a nice addition. although you can achieve a similar effect with some fancy wiring, but they can't be part of another circuit if you want grids in there. so. hmm. this parenthesis is going on too long)*

i think a range on power sources would be too hard to indicate (a transparent underlay seems a gaming standard, but might look 'messy') and a limit on number of devices powered would just mean placing 4 power sources next to each other.

hmmm... it is tricky.

*example, i guess something like this http://castledraft.com/editor/g5Fxx4 [uuh obviously i didn't check the wiring and the lights can be replaced with some fancy logic. probably a lot of that wiring needs to change as i originally had DOORS in mind and then realised no power through walls and had to change all the doors to other things. so um. yeah, you get the idea though!]
bit of a double barrelled combo lock/mystery dance thing.. guess if animal behaviour changes i can remove the dog and add a person and a horde of dogges to hide/defend logic from anyone without 500 guns or some clever wrangling..

uuuuuuuuuuuuum. lets get some changes live so i can build something fun for real

Last edited by largestherb (2013-08-16 11:05:27)

jasonrohrer · 2013-08-16 18:47:49

Dalleck:

Good point about it really being conducting trapdoors that is the problem (and not electric floors).

It was really the trapdoor-electric-floor combo that replaces wiring through walls that got me thinking they needed to be changed. But that combo would break if only trapdoors did not pass on power.

Also, I'd make it so that doors wouldn't pass on power, just to match the way that trapdoors work. I mean, what appliance "passes on power" in real life? But electric floors? Those are electrified!

Also, I REALLY like how pouring water on electric floors (cheap!) might let you pass through but could disable circuits by cutting power. And we'd lose that if floors stopped passing power.

OKAY....

So, current plan for changes:

1. Powered Doors and Powered Trapdoors stop passing power.

2. Walls stop passing power.

3. Animals only follow/flee you if they can still see you.

bey bey · 2013-08-16 19:00:00

Yeah, I think I share the concerns about implication and effectiveness and results of any power-source restriction. Indications could be done by something like "hover over the power source and there is a hovering frame around the area of effect" which is also briefly indicated after building the power source or so.

In the end, I'm not certain about this. It's an option to try and limit bit-locks and magic-dances while keeping the sweet aspects of the game going. (I like limited animal movements behind walls - it forces you to make choices and it's levelling things. A respawned player might figure out an easy dance for free, while any half-wealthy player would just have to spend cash on every trapdoor or floor in the vicinity just because of the risks involved. Those effects are interesting I think.)

I can imagine brilliant things coming out of very clear restrictions and I can imagine it being a dead-end like blueprints. It would have to be tried out to see if it's a good thing or not.

dalleck · 2013-08-16 23:09:06

largestherb wrote:

for $200 i don't think these trapdoors are the kind that lock in place! the powered doors don't even have proper locking mechanisms and can be opened with a crowbar :P
(although if the code allows for it, these more expensive 'locking' trapdoors might be a nice addition. although you can achieve a similar effect with some fancy wiring, but they can't be part of another circuit if you want grids in there. so. hmm. this parenthesis is going on too long)*

I was actually trying to show how these trapdoors would be weaker than the current implementation, as they would be circumvented more easily. Problem is, their behaviour would probably be too confusing to comprehend.

jasonrohrer wrote:

It was really the trapdoor-electric-floor combo that replaces wiring through walls that got me thinking they needed to be changed. But that combo would break if only trapdoors did not pass on power.

I mean, you could still do multiple trapdoors using this method, just like your wiring example, except you have allowed a pathway (as long as you bring some water and a couple of ladders).
http://castledraft.com/editor/lfrzL5

I also like that you will be able to trigger adjacent doors independently. This will allow for a little tomfoolery.

Last edited by dalleck (2013-08-17 23:25:54)

jasonrohrer · 2013-08-19 08:26:27

But Dalleck... do you see how that map is more interesting than a magic dance behind a wall of concrete with a line of trapdoors to cross after you complete the magic dance?

There's nothing to explore or figure out in such a v15 house (unless you cut straight through to the magic dance guts, study them, and after that, you're done).

But there's a lot to poke around in the house that you designed there. There are potential weaknesses to discover and exploit. The whole thing looks more fragile.

Maybe I'm just under the spell of novelty, though.

ukuko · 2013-08-19 10:08:31

I'm yet to see an optimal design for these new rules that would be anywhere like as unbeatable or boring as the current concrete dance staple.

That can only be a good thing!

bey bey · 2013-08-19 10:53:51

Hm. Idk. I'm obviously not a fan of the trapdoor corridor, but this doesn't look sexy to me either. But I guess I'll stop the whining for now and see what happens.

Axious · 2013-08-20 01:56:05

I designed my first house to have a lot of nice small traps, that were fun to make, and fun for a player to get through. Power doesn't need to transfer long distances to make a lot of little puzzles along the way through a maze type house. Here is my full house design in case you guys were interested (I must have been Cortez) and this was my first house in castle doctrine, unfortunately joshwithguitar robbed me with very few tools, but it sounds like it was a fun house for both of us!

http://castlefortify.com/c/34a5deb

If you want to encourage more house exploration to make robbing more fun, then I would like to propose the idea of making a colored door that can only be opened with a colored key (found somewhere else in your house on the ground)

Such a door and key could be cheap to place, so that new players could use it to force players to want to explore more to find the key before deciding to cut through the walls of beginner houses.

Last edited by Axious (2013-08-20 02:37:26)

bey bey · 2013-08-20 04:26:04

Yeah, I remember that house!! Probably the best to play for a while since one could do lots of exploring with a few bricks, drugged meat etc. without dying and since there was no "obvious" way to the safe.

Since Castlefortify messed it up, I copied it to http://castledraft.com/editor/tOsT8L .

And funnily enough, stuff like this seems to be the safest thing to do right now!! I have seen trapdoor houses fall while my maze type house survived. It might even be that natural selection will end the reign of the trapdoor corridor because it's no longer the safest option. (I wouldn't wonder...)

Blip · 2013-08-21 11:34:14

I see a bit of a problem posed by this new design of "floors conduct power". Even with animals following only on sight, some pretty devious designs can be created, like this one that I whipped up: http://castledraft.com/editor/yzUUWM. Frankly, I think all that'll happen is that houses will gravitate towards hidden combo dances (where you see the animal and buttons, but the combo is offscreen) along corridors of floors.

jasonrohrer · 2013-08-21 13:01:16

Well.... I could get down into the guts for around $150 worth of Water, right? I mean, it would be really annoying, but not expensive. Anyway, this house looks way more interesting than a thick chunk of concrete.

It will be easy enough to make electric floors non-power-passing if needed, though.

Blip · 2013-08-21 13:55:37

Also, now that I showed that off, everybody will know which of the new houses is mine.

Anyways, it seems pretty good so far! I haven't seen a magic dance yet!

jasonrohrer · 2013-08-21 14:02:47

Yeah! You're magic dance is at least visible there. I made a mistake and fell in the trapdoor. Otherwise, I would have come back with a ladder to explore deeper. Now your house is giving me the chills.

Blip · 2013-08-21 14:07:47

I'm sorry to the late Ronald Scott Henderson, but he deserved it. Nobody robs me! *evil laugh*

Actually, now that I look around, I probably will soon. I'm the only house on the block.

Last edited by Blip (2013-08-21 14:09:45)

gumshoe · 2013-08-21 17:30:46

Sooooo, I just brute forced my way through every single house on the market, every spouse is dead( they call me... the wife beater!). I did this in less than 30 minutes. With defensive capabilities nerfed so hard, aren't offensive capabilities due for a nerf now as well? Then again, this version just started XD so perhaps it to soon to get scared

jere · 2013-08-21 17:34:23

XD

gumshoe, I'll agree with you that defenses are way underpowered at this point, but.... you have a problem. this "XD" thing has got to stop.

Last edited by jere (2013-08-21 17:47:04)

The Castle Doctrine Forums

#51 2013-08-15 08:00:50

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#52 2013-08-15 10:02:30

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#53 2013-08-15 11:18:14

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#54 2013-08-15 12:07:40

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#55 2013-08-15 15:09:13

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#56 2013-08-15 15:32:51

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#57 2013-08-15 15:42:34

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#58 2013-08-15 23:53:27

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#59 2013-08-16 01:20:31

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#60 2013-08-16 10:27:19

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#61 2013-08-16 18:47:49

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#62 2013-08-16 19:00:00

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#63 2013-08-16 23:09:06

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#64 2013-08-19 08:26:27

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#65 2013-08-19 10:08:31

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#66 2013-08-19 10:53:51

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#67 2013-08-20 01:56:05

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#68 2013-08-20 04:26:04

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#69 2013-08-21 11:34:14

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#70 2013-08-21 13:01:16

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#71 2013-08-21 13:55:37

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#72 2013-08-21 14:02:47

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#73 2013-08-21 14:07:47

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#74 2013-08-21 17:30:46

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

#75 2013-08-21 17:34:23

Re: A proposal that needs feedback

Board footer