How to define a good mechanic vs. a bad one

from GalCiv3 Forums

Hello, this post will explain what the difference between a good and bad mechanic is. Tyrantis123 here with a ton of examples and experience of over 120 different tittles including galactic civilization II, Starcraft II, Civilization V, Xcom enemy unknown, Rome total war, Empire total war, napoleon total war, Sim City 4, most of the stronghold series, All Monte Cristos games, Supreme commander 2, many tycoon games, capitalism, most of the Sims series, Fallout New Vegas, and many others that I don't feel like mentioning. I do both digital downloads and disc copies to those tittles that I think deserves my money.

Just look at my bedroom floor

bedroomfloor

Alright, so I may have spent way to much money on these things, but seriously, I think its about time we as a community to discuss what mechanics you have seen that are amazing, to hopefully give the development team a good idea of what people like.

Now now, lets get one thing strait, that this can be about any amazing mechanics from any game even if you don't believe it will work for this game. By telling everybody why you liked this part of the game it will help devs make sure that the target they are trying to hit will appeal to us gamers.

What you should be looking for in a good mechanic>

-A mechanic must function as flawlessly and effectively as possible (Since this is rts, I think this should take priority once the mechanics are made)

-A good mechanic helps you to get closer to victory and has advantages in specific situations (multiple victory conditions makes this task easier)

-Most good mechanics must have alternatives in case one method of using it is not possible (otherwise people get stuck in the game and nobody likes being trapped)

-it helps to show a mechanic visually (why do you think the health bars became so popular in all game types?)

 

First things first, lets go back in time to the most remember able mechanics I just love to talk about. 

1. Star Wars: Empire at War -- The first thing that comes to mind is this amazing mechanic found in the space battles of Star Wars Empire at War where larger sized ships had multiple health bars for each part of the ship that has a function. This allows players to focus fire on a section of bigger scale ships giving fighters a distinct advantage over star destroyers. Each time you destroy a segment of a ship, you slow it down, cripple its fire power or shields and ultimately cripple super weapons or hanger bays that spawns fighters. Easily on my top ten list of best space game mechanic I have ever played.

-This mechanic was in a RTS game and can be calculated instantaneously

-This mechanic helps you increase your odds of winning a space battle and destroying the enemy defenses of a planet, making battle torn ships more vulnerable to destruction overtime.

-This mechanic gave you many many options and flexibility as whether you want to reduce firepower, speed, or crippling a ship so bad that it can no longer attack really helps speed up gameplay (this means that just because you have a imperial star destroyer, does not mean you are not vulnerable or weak, as bomber squads are cheap effective means of getting rid of this dangerous ship)

-All weak points are displayed visually when you mouse over the ship, and gives you further info when you mouse over a specific target point like the name and function if you hold it there for a while.

-This mechanic can be modified to weaken ships that are combat worn, that way its possible to take out a dread lords ship by having weapons that bypasses shields and do damage to specific ship components.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will add more of these good mechanics in updates, since it takes time and effort to explain why these mechanics are so great

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

33,494 views 13 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Good read except this is not an RTS. Its a turn based game.

 

Reply #2 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Well mecha nics I think are the best in games I like the best in games are.

1. Flexibility I like to look at options and decide which ones I like.This includes picking options on the game usually game play. I like to customize whether we are talking about customized factions or customizing stock factions. I mean that the more options I pick on the player I'm playing the better. These options can be cosmetic, but I prefer meaningful options. I even prefer options where I can't have everything I want, so I feal like I'm losing something no matter what I pick. So I'm forced to play different variations.

2. Multiple games in a game.

3. Lots of opponents more the merrier.More is more important than different, but then them being different is important.

4. Complex easy to use interface.

5. Not to many menus.

6. Good opponents. This is probably the most important. I really don't like games where all I have is levels because all the opponents are to easy. I also don't like to have to give something up to have a good Ai. Not being able to beat the game is not as bad as being not able to play the game because once I learned it it becomes a cakewalk. Enough of a challenge I don't mind having time to build up as long as when I fight it is hard. 

7. Combat tactics I can use.

8. Able to play the game on my speed. I'm talking about turn based or a pause button. I'm also talking about the speed of the game. I also consider how well I can manage the game after I pause it. I think Sins of a solar empire could also do this better.

9. Complexity I don't like to simple of a game.

10. Are we playing a game or watching a movie. Don't get me wrong I like Simcity. I just don't expect it to be a strategy game.

11. If we are talking about strategy games I like tech research. If strategy games don't have this it is spoilers for me. Civilization has spoiled me in this area. I isdo insist on one thing with I insist on having at least partial meaningful control over this. There is no point in researching techs if you can't decide what to research.

12. I love randomness.

13. I love dialogue the more the merrier. Also the more meaningful the merrier. As many diplomacy options as possible.

14. I like rebellions.

15. I like pirates.

14. I'm not much of a modder, but I do like editors instead.

SoundPackager - Customize the Windows sound scheme
Reply #3 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting Ryat, reply 1

Good read except this is not an RTS. Its a turn based game.

 

EAW was a okay game. What amazed me was how land AND space were RTS. It's rare to see that.

I think it's ironic that some people think TBSs weren't supposed to have playable combat and activity make sure those that want it can't for no real reason besides saying it doesn't so it can't. When this game is packed with advanced combat mechanics I have never seen in a game apart from the Armored Core series.

And it's totally awesome! Stardock is inadvertently closing the gap and blurring the lines between TBS and RTS by implementing Long Range, High Efficiency, and Low Mass versions of weapons, and High Density, High Yield, and High Efficiency versions of defenses. With three types of defenses and weapons all countering one another, and there's factors like; range, evasion, accuracy, speed, something called augmentation, rate of fire, and I think I'm forgetting some others. No game has all this, and lets you make your own ships AND run a empire, with it not a being secondary feature. I love it! I love those features.

so I think it's ironic all this awesomeness is coming and some say RTC and tactical combat doesn't have a place in the game or the future, when the only way to describe what all those features add up too is tactical combat, no RTC has all this. And there's a auto resolve option. I'm going to love this game, thank you Stardock<3

for those wondering, there's a 99.9% chance I'll be a founder by the 27. My last problem has been taken care of. So I should have more use to everyone after that. :)

 

DARCA

Reply #4 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

The fact that OP classified GalCiv as RTS really hurts my soul, not sure to take seriously now.

@Admiral, nice long winded list of stuff but those are not what I think OP had in mind about game mechanics. "Complexity" and "Pirates" are not game mechanics, they are characteristics, features or themes. Then again simply saying you like pirates with no details or examples of how pirates are implemented brilliantly in a game is not very useful.

 

Here is a mechanic I like. In City building games ( been playing several of those lately )

-Buildings in Zones upgrade themselves as city progress.

In good old SimCity and Ceasar, you would zone some territory and the buildings would build themselves according to the quality of your city layout and services. In example, it was extremely hard to get the palaces in Old school ceasar 2, everything had to be perfect, which made it an achievement to get them. In many newer city game, you just build everything directly. Fancier buildings just cost more money to build and sustain.

Not so much related to GalCiv but that is what I just thought about.

Reply #5 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

 

The problem is its hard to define a 'good mechanic' in broad terms. A mechanic that works in A, may not work in game B. Even in any game, each mechanic needs to be tweaked and adjusted. You never come up with the magic right off the bat. It's an iterative process. ANd it's also hard to tell the difference between

1) This mechanic is sound we just need to find the sweet spot

or

2) This mechanic is fundamentally broken and can't be fixed no matter whatyou do

And the main issue is #1 and #2 LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME

 

At the end of the day, a mechanic is good if it's FUN. There's no functional way to tell this unless you try it. Like most game designers will tell you, stuff can look awesome ON PAPER, then when you implement it, it sucks!

Reply #6 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I would love to see non-grid planets.

Build freely where-ever you want/ Plantes should have max buildpoints instead of slots. Each structure being xx points.

The location on the map can also affect the stats of the buildings +/- for resource being present or geografic influance (aka windmill on hill or farm on good soil)

 

What i missed in GC2 was a combat system which i could control. I like the system in swords of the stars 1. 

Reply #7 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

A mechanic I find missing from TBSes is an overlay showing the last turn's moves (or replay).  This is very frustrating when you can place a unit on 'sentry' mode to awaken when a hostile unit enters its sensor range, but the hostile unit scoots out of sensor range off-screen, so you don't see it -- but you get hassled to do something with your awakened unit, but you aren't allowed to know what it was your unit saw to wake it up.  Some sort of overlay would help, showing what moves your unit saw, if not a 'replay' button allowing all moves from the last turn that were within your sensor range to be replayed.

Reply #8 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Galactic Civilizations is a TBS, but I digress.

I like games where movement is unfettered by "jump lanes" or "phase lanes" and you can move things freely and independently. 

Reply #9 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Well the one that was said is that this time around you are going to be able to pick the combat sequence at the beginning of the battle. Ships will be assigned priorities. The rest is going to be like Galactic civilizations 2 as far as combat. This sounds a lot like endless space to me.

I forgot about sentry, guarding, and patrolling; I tried using it. I didn't like it for the reasons of first it didn't work to prevent planetary invasions this was a deal breaker for me to not use this right hear. Second as far as patrolling all I could use this for one space that seems to allow enemy ships to pass without engaging. So I agree this system need to be improved for me to actually use it. To me this is a waste of programming on the game.

Reply #10 from GalCiv3 Forums Top


Hello, this post will explain what the difference between a good and bad mechanic is. Tyrantis123 here with a ton of examples and experience of over 120 different tittles

You said tittles...  snicker snicker...

Reply #11 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting satoru1, reply 5

 

The problem is its hard to define a 'good mechanic' in broad terms. A mechanic that works in A, may not work in game B. Even in any game, each mechanic needs to be tweaked and adjusted. You never come up with the magic right off the bat. It's an iterative process. ANd it's also hard to tell the difference between

1) This mechanic is sound we just need to find the sweet spot

or

2) This mechanic is fundamentally broken and can't be fixed no matter whatyou do

And the main issue is #1 and #2 LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME

 

At the end of the day, a mechanic is good if it's FUN. There's no functional way to tell this unless you try it. Like most game designers will tell you, stuff can look awesome ON PAPER, then when you implement it, it sucks!

Also, "fun" is kind of subjective anyway. Look at that tactical combat thread if you want a concrete example.

Reply #12 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting qrtxian, reply 11

Also, "fun" is kind of subjective anyway. Look at that tactical combat thread if you want a concrete example.

True but at the end of the day 'fun' is what people want out of game. There's no formula for it. There's no API for it. There's no middleware for it. There's no design document for it. There's no 'checklist' for it. You play it and it's eitehr fun or it's not. You can have a mechanic that does everything the OP says, and it can still totally be not fun.

Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Quoting satoru1, reply 12


Quoting qrtxian, reply 11
Also, "fun" is kind of subjective anyway. Look at that tactical combat thread if you want a concrete example.

True but at the end of the day 'fun' is what people want out of game. There's no formula for it. There's no API for it. There's no middleware for it. There's no design document for it. There's no 'checklist' for it. You play it and it's eitehr fun or it's not. You can have a mechanic that does everything the OP says, and it can still totally be not fun.

My point is that "fun" very frequently depends on the individual. What's fun for me may not be fun for you.