Re: Vector programming

The problem with this scoring method (in isolation) is that it does reward
the player for dying sooner. If he can just make it to the next level and
die he will get a higher score (and end up higher on the hi-score table)
than someone who tries to complete the level, makes it to the last enemy and
dies. So you have to introduce some incentive not to die. Here are a couple
suggestions:

1) Make high-score ranking based on somthing other than score, like number
of enemies destroyed, instead. Or, at least have two separate high-score
tables, one based on score and the other based on numbers of enemies killed.

2) Make it valuable to stay alive. Time detracts from your points but
killing enemies increases your points. This way, played poorly but completed
a player can still gain points, or at least break even. But if an expert
player clears all emenies very quickly he will get a maximum score much
higher that that of the level-starting bonus.

Actually, now that I write that, I realize that model has been used before
(Donkey Kong, among others).

The difference is that instead of having a separate bonus counter on-screen,
the "bonus" is applied immediately to the score and your concept of
detracting from score earned on previous levels would still apply.

You would have to present all enemies immediately thereby giving the
experienced player the opportunity to clear them all quickly. They could
appear in a dormant state and awaken over time. Or perhaps they are off in
the distance and much harder to hit. With accurate aim, as developed by an
experienced player, it would be possible to shoot them early while they are
still not a threat. As they came closer they would be easier to hit but pose
a greater threat (and be worth fewer points?).

Perhaps the threat is that their wepons have limited range. When in range it
would still be possible to avoid their attack by maneuvering quickly
(perhaps their attacks are directional). As the skill level increases the
attacks could come from a greater distance and/or with more advanced wepons.

Ok. So let's review. You are in the center of a playfield and are being
approached from all directions. Enemy fire is coming toward you but is
falling short. You are awarded a certain number of points at the beginning
of the level but those points are decreasing over time. You fire off in all
directions killing enemies, gaining score. As the enemies get you into their
range you maneuver around to avoid their fire while shooting at them. New
enemies appear and speed increases in each level, along with the level's
starting bonus.

btw - I've been playing a lot of Black Widow lately. :)

Oh, yeah - there is that count-down bonus feature.

Just my ramblings.
-roy-

----- Original Message -----
From: Clay Cowgill <ClayC@diamondmm.com>
To: <vectorlist@lists.cc.utexas.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 5:39 PM
Subject: RE: Vector programming

> > I think if your score is used as fuel the high score will always be
zero.
> > You could measure "peak" score durring a game. Or perhaps the game could
> > end someother way too, and then the challenge would be deciding when to
> > get killed to maximize score - Can I rack up points faster than they
> > are draining, or is it time to quit while I'm ahead...
> >
> > Strange concept, I may like it.
> >
> Yeah, it seems like it might do some interesting things... It's not
exactly
> like a bonus because it's directly tied to your "real" score (and more
than
> just a portion is at risk), yet it's a little different than fuel 'cause
> your score increases (without limit) as you pass levels-- thus building up
a
> "reserve" over time for harder levels.
>
> It would probably be important to not award extra lives-- that would tend
to
> have the score always head towards zero on the higher levels (too many
extra
> lives let the score fall for too long without leaving anything). With a
> finite amount of lives a player would likely be able to play up to a
certain
> point where he's killed off, leaving his remaining score. As long as the
> game has survival skills that you can improve at, playing it again would
> result in quicker level completions (building up the score) and give you a
> buffer for harder levels later on.
>
> Seems like it would reward speedy level completion and efficiency, and the
> thought that you're *losing* your hard-eraned score on a new, challenging
> level that you're taking too long on might make for a good game-induced
> panic effect. ;-)
>
> -Clay
>
> (When Defender first came out I used to just *dread* taking too long and
> having those damn Baiters show up. My pulse probably ticked up 20% when I
> thought they were getting close to appearing... Evil Otto too... ;-)
>
>
>
>
Received on Thu Oct 14 21:42:56 1999