next »

[stefoid]

Im building a squad-based tactical roguelike.  (3 character team)  www.dungeonbash.com 

I feel like I have the squad-based tactics more or less in place. 

But now I feel like I need another layer to the game - some explicit player goals besides the single one - descent to level 20 to kill the big-bad.  That is the main goal, but I feel if I add fairly frequent sub-goals, they will help pull the player along by dangling that a 'just one more' type of carrot in front of the player.

What kind of short term achievements/goals do you think would be a good idea in a roguelike where the main preoccupation is squad-based tactical combat.

For context, the game is based in a dungeon (duh), and currently all items are gained only through killing monsters - there is money, no shops and no items lying around on the ground.  There is XP which results in incremental upgrading of character stats.

thanks,

[baconman]

Taking a squad-based approach would be a very cool balance-finding element.

Generally, roguelikes revolve around 2-3 central things:

1. Get in, win, get out.

You don't just "win" the game when you acquire the equivalent of the Amulet of Yendor; you also have to survive your trip back from the dungeon. So, you'll want zones with this kind of two-directional traffic in mind.

2. Management of limited resources.

Resources, and food in particular, are limited as you go in and out of the dungeon; and there's persistence between the "floors." Also, you get limited cargo room. So, sometimes having resources available on your way out is not always a bad thing.

3. Slash or dash?

Not all creatures are made to be encountered. Some are passive/neutral until you provoke one of their type, and then they aggro up and fuck your day over. Some are intentionally overpowered, because the correct thing to do is immobilize or evade them, or whittle them down across multiple encounters.

[stefoid]

Taking a squad-based approach would be a very cool balance-finding element.

Generally, roguelikes revolve around 2-3 central things:

1. Get in, win, get out.

You don't just "win" the game when you acquire the equivalent of the Amulet of Yendor; you also have to survive your trip back from the dungeon. So, you'll want zones with this kind of two-directional traffic in mind.

2. Management of limited resources.

Resources, and food in particular, are limited as you go in and out of the dungeon; and there's persistence between the "floors." Also, you get limited cargo room. So, sometimes having resources available on your way out is not always a bad thing.

3. Slash or dash?

Not all creatures are made to be encountered. Some are passive/neutral until you provoke one of their type, and then they aggro up and fuck your day over. Some are intentionally overpowered, because the correct thing to do is immobilize or evade them, or whittle them down across multiple encounters.

Hi.  With Db,  I want to concentrate on tactical choices primarilly so going backwards isnt included.  In fact who you send down to the next level first becomes an interesting choice because the next one cant come down until the previous one has vacated the landing spot, and since entry points are random, some situations you drop into can be extremely dicey.  Do you send the toughest down first, the quickest, or the most stealthy and hope the landing spot is in shadow?

The limited cargo room is something that I want, because I dont want the team to be infinitely adaptable - one of the main choices is how to best combine the talents of the three characters in your team.  Which roles are they best suited to etc... If each character was able to carry and use a large amount of stuff then this choice would be diminished.

What Im specifically interested in is sub-goals.  You know how when you play Civilization or those types of builders, there is always that next THING to accomplish that will take a few more turns, and of course by the time you build htat thing, you have started two other things and you just get dragged along trying to accomplish these sub-goals.   Thats what I think is missing from my game at the moment - being able to plan towards sub-goals.  I just have the one huge goal at the end.

[baconman]

Guesswork is BAD. Granted, it *is* a trope of roguelikes, so it's not totally off the ball; but I'd argue it's one of the more annoying features that keep people out of them, more than that attract them.

Sub-goals? Well, it seems really simplistic, but it's usually: explore to find resources, find the exit, don't die while doing so. That said, if you want your title to have variety, you'll have to mix up your objectives depending on the kind of "floor" you generate. Don't explain what's up with them, but I would suggest one that you're attempting to 100% explore/complete, some you try to escape as quickly as possible; some that build your resources up and others that whittle them down. Brogue injects a good "short term goal" system with keys and treasure vaults per floor; but none of the treasures are *so critical* that missing them will cost you the game. They're usually all good stuff, and giving you a choice of prizes that you can take one of keeps the RNG factor from bordering on absurdity.

I see many roguelikes use a set of floors (usually 3-5) as a sort of "character generation phase," rather than pregenerated characters - your character builds are dynamically determined by what appears on these lower-level floors, and what you choose to do with them, as only 3/4 basic, and easily dispatchable enemy types appear on them; and then "shit gets real" from there. Not to say you can't die on these floors, but there's usually some clumsiness/stupidity involved there.

[stefoid]

Youve touched on something there with time per level.  In Spelunky, after a certain period, a ghost comes after you - as with the bouncing ball in 'berserk' back in the day, and many other games in between. Usually in Roguelikes you can fart about indefinitely on a level.  Thats not such a bad thing because a lot of roguelikes feature puzzle solving (secret doors and the like) and experimentation with combining items (basically simple crafting systems).

Having a time limit raises the tension A LOT.  It cuts down your timing for physical challenge (its a realtime game) and it cuts down your planning time (which is all about planning how to get the most resources by spending the least).  Many is the time you will be weighing up if you have time to get that THING before the ghost comes, and although you dont know exactly when its coming, you feel steadilly more anxious the longer you spend farting about fruitlessly.  its a GREAT mechanic!.

But in dbash the focus is on tactical combat - there is no particular reason to rush through a level, but no reason to fart around and explore either.  In fact, exploration is a grind as far as dbash is concerned - its spending time wandering aimlessly NOT FIGHTING in order to maybe pick up a few extra XP.  

There is no physical challenge involved in a turn-based game, but you can still feel time-pressure through 'number of turns'.   Im thinking perhaps it could be a good mechanic to introduce a soft time limit into dbash.  Because one tactic is simply to mash 'pass turn' until your health recovers.  Another tactic is the grind-explore to maximise XP per generation per level.  Both of these are valid up to a point for dbash, but if they were balanced against a time limit, it would ratchet up the tension - too much time spent explore-grinding or pass-mashing and something bad happens.

DOH, I have just realised that roguelikes that have food is a soft time limit and resource management problem combined into one mechanic.  thats kind of neat.

But the time limit i was thinking of would be that instead of going to meet the mini-boss on the same level every time, perhaps the miniboss comes to you.  So he will appear after X number of turns rather than X number of levels.  This introduces a time tension that if you spend too much time farting around, you will are likely to be whacked by the miniboss before you are in a position to defeat it.  

Well, thats the stick way.  The carrot way is time-related bonus XP.   And that becomes a sub-goal - do it quickly.

[diegzumillo]

In Diablo (I only played the first one) they used to throw you in small quests like the butcher. Gathering resources, advancing and killing butcher is like a mini Diablo inside Diablo. Fractal design! Hey, look, I made up a new term. I am smart.

You may have already in place some bosses separating level blocks or something equivalent. The difference between simply putting a boss between a level and 'a butcher' is the tension and focus on that boss. When I started the game I was aware of the final objective and all but I was more focused on the butcher, people were talking about him, I was preparing myself for him. Knowing of its existence gave me a more immediate objective to focus on.

[Rarykos]

Oh my god, I know this feeling.
But honestly, the solution is simple, make the core mechanic tight and rewarding. So players have this extremely short term goal - win a fight, and long term - finish the dungeon. Achieving the first goal should feel good enough and should prepare players for the second goal.
Because players can get bored anyways and they won't care about any sub-goals.

In your case , the best way would be to have some additional turns pass over.
I like that miniboss idea! I think the best time limit I've seen was implemented in FTL, it's not a loss state, but you're getting there.

[stefoid]

Oh my god, I know this feeling.
But honestly, the solution is simple, make the core mechanic tight and rewarding. So players have this extremely short term goal - win a fight, and long term - finish the dungeon. Achieving the first goal should feel good enough and should prepare players for the second goal.
Because players can get bored anyways and they won't care about any sub-goals.

In your case , the best way would be to have some additional turns pass over.
I like that miniboss idea! I think the best time limit I've seen was implemented in FTL, it's not a loss state, but you're getting there.

After much muling over, I worked out what I have to implement next, and there is a tired and true method I can use. 

I am going to introduce mini-bosses, but not for the sub-goal reason, but for tactical variety.  Normal monsters advance towards the player in a more or less zombie-horde like fashion.  The player is trying to slow them down using choke points and terrain - playing a defensive game usually.  Mini-bosses, on the other hand, will sit near an exit and defend it, forcing the player to play an offensive game to get out of the level.  I think this switcharoo will be a welcome change-up every 3 levels or so, and the prize will be a unique item that the mini-boss carries. 

As for sub-goals, the solution is XP and character design - at the moment killing monsters and finishing a level earns XP that automatically and incrementally increases player stats in proportion to their starting values.  This is a wasted opportunity in that it takes decisions away from the player and stops them explicitly working towards a sub-gaol.  bad design!  by allowing the player to choose and purchase stat upgrades with accumulated unspent XP, it gives the player decision making and at the end of each level and sub-goals to aim for in the purchase of certain stat increases and abilities they have planned.  Tried and true for a reason!

[JWK5]

Misc. ideas:


Protect the target NPC
The enemies are after a specific NPC target, you have to protect them. You can switch things up by having different protected NPCs have different team-boosting abilities, or some that even make things more difficult (maybe the NPC is normally under player control but is prone to panic and on random turns it takes off to a random space on the map).

Assassinate
A specific boss NPC must be killed, every X turns he can call in reinforcements. You need to get in and take him out fast.

Rival Assassinations
A combo of the first two, the enemy has a boss NPC you must kill and you have an NPC you must protect.

Hostage Situation
The enemy has NPC hostages. Every X turns after they've made contact with the player's characters they will kill a hostage. Take out the enemy as quickly and as stealthily as possible, at least one hostage must survive (more points for more living hostges).

Control Points
You have to hold down key locations on the map for a certain number of turns to control it, and when you have all such points held down you win. Or perhaps each turn one is held down you get points and when a certain number of points is reached you win (thus you must race the enemy to them and the more you control the better your advantage).

Destroy all objects
There are barrels (or whatever, some objects or structures) that must be destroyed and they are scattered across the map.

Spawn Factories
Several obelisks (or some other destructible structure) are placed across the map and ever X turns they spawn enemies. Fight your way through the horde and destroy the obelisks to stop the reinforcements and beat the level (or floor or whatever).

Separate Enemies
There are two or more types of enemies but you can only kill 1 type (which you must do to win). Either the other types of enemies can't be hurt (invincible) or perhaps they can be hurt but you are penalized for doing so (maybe they are civilian thralls under the control of an insidious monster enemy type).

Survival
The enemies spawn in waves. You must survive until X waves has passed.

Super Weapon
Somewhere on the map is a tile that is the controls for a super weapon capable of doing heavy damage each round (or every X rounds) to a unit (or an area). Get to it before the enemy has control of it (or take it from them if they have already) and use it to wipe them out. Can be combined with "survival" for good fun.

Juggernaut
Somewhere on the map is a powerup that turns a character into a powerhouse juggernaut. You must kill the juggernaut to become the juggernaut.

Marked Every X turns, at random, a character is marked (and a previously marked character becomes unmarked). A marked character takes more damage and provides a major boost to whoever takes them out. Quickly wipe out the marked enemy but move carefully in case it is one of your characters becomes marked.

Bomb Tag
At the start one character becomes "it" and has their bomb activated, that character has X number of rounds to deal damage to an enemy unit before their bomb goes off (and they die). Once the enemy character has been hit, they are now "it" and so on.

Safety Zones
Every X turns a safety zone is randomly moved across the map. Units in this safety zone heal each turn. Taking advantage of the safety zones will keep you in the fight and give you the advantage.

[valrus]

As for sub-goals, the solution is XP and character design - at the moment killing monsters and finishing a level earns XP that automatically and incrementally increases player stats in proportion to their starting values.  This is a wasted opportunity in that it takes decisions away from the player and stops them explicitly working towards a sub-gaol.  bad design!  by allowing the player to choose and purchase stat upgrades with accumulated unspent XP, it gives the player decision making and at the end of each level and sub-goals to aim for in the purchase of certain stat increases and abilities they have planned.  Tried and true for a reason!

Yeah, I was gonna say, you just need to do something interesting with your XP accumulation.

For some additions or alternatives to the "spending XP on upgrades" model... I think your game might jive nicely with "FF9/FFTA upgrades", abilities or boosts that you get when holding a piece of equipment, but that you get permanently if you gain a certain amount of XP while it's equipped.  This can provide lots of sub-goals, potentially as many as pieces of equipment in the game, plus once the sub-goal is done there are opportunities for two more sub-goal choices (What do I equip in its place? and Who to equip this on next?). 

(Also, I think this equipment model addresses a common problem in roguelikes, in that when you have a +2 sword and find a +6 sword, it's a no-brainer to equip it.  There's not really an interesting choice to be made.  But when equipment acquisition is timed well, this style presents the player with choices on a regular basis: Do I keep my trusty +2 sword long enough to learn "Pierce Armor" or do I need this +6 right away?)

For a different (and weird) level-up system, but one that also strikes me as possibly interesting for your game:

Each character type has a list of N upgrade bundles (let's call it U[]), with a variety of upgrades but of increasing value, like Gradius upgrades.  (Maybe the first is +1 STR +1 DEF, the second is +4 STR, the third is +4 EVA +2 CRIT...)  Each character has a counter I that starts at 1.  When a character deals a finishing blow to an enemy, they immediately get the bonus in U, but all other characters increment I.  (In other words, the upgrade tier a character receives when finishing an enemy is how-many-enemies-ago they last dealt the finishing blow.)

This might add an additional sort of strategic "rhythm" to the three-player battles, in that you might want to finish an enemy off with a particular character (in order to not miss out on a specific upgrade) or hold off on using a particular character (in order to hold out for a later upgrade).  In any case, it's an additional kind of subgoal to keep players going for more (Oh, I only need one more enemy to get that important U[3] upgrade for my elf.  Okay, got it!  But now I'm only two away from a U[4] upgrade for my rogue...")

[stefoid]

Interesting stuff, thanks.

I used to have "character that kills - gets extra XP" but I changed it to team-based XP.  Because each character does their bit (maybe one character draws the monster attention or tanks, while another deals damage), so having the character that deals the damage get the XP is sort of 'artifical' and skews decisions in a way I dont like.

I like you ideas about equipment.  Ill have to mull that over. There are 4 types of damage in dungeon bash and various creatures are resistant to certain types or combinations, so it isnt necessarily just a case of one item being always better than another, but certainly one energy weapon is allways better than another energy weapon, all other things being equal.

Another way of mixing up items that I havent taken advanatge of iis to give them various different bonuses.  At the moment the equipment is fairly one dimensional.  weapons have varying amounts and types of damage, but not many have other attributes such as increasing attack skill for instance.  Armour has defensive characteristics only.  I could, for instance, have some sort of really heavy armor that also has a speed penalty. 

And while thats low hanging fruit that I should get around to, its not addressing subgoals like your ideas do.