Rostygold
Posts: 346
8/9/2017
|
Firstly, I want to say here that I have already sent a feedback message to Failbetter. I am writing this here to request that anyone who believe that this is an issue that should be addressed to do the same.
That said, I am referring to the opportunities to gain favours whose outcomes are determined by luck, such as the "A disgraceful spectacle", "The next victim" and "Secure an invitation to a scandalous party" options on certain opportunity cards.
These options have players gaining Favours, or not at all, depending on their luck. In the case of some of these, the players are saddled with guaranteed Menace gains too.
Considering that there are other opportunities where the player gains Menaces or spends resources in return to gain guaranteed Favours, these luck-dependent options are unreliable in comparison.
Where the other kinds of options reward the player for having the skill to manage Menaces and resources, these ones reward good luck more than they do good skill.
|
|
|
-1
link
|
dov
Posts: 2580
8/9/2017
|
I'm not sure what the issue is. Some options in the game are luck based. That's nothing new.
--
 Want a sip of Hesperidean Cider? Send me a request in-game. Here's an_ocelot's guide how.
(Most social actions are welcome. Please no requests to Loiter Suspiciously and no investigations of the Affluent Photographer)
|
|
|
+6
link
|
Estelle Knoht
Posts: 1751
8/9/2017
|
For most part, it is a small problem because
- text does not fit well if you gain no favours
- result texts do not clearly indicate you just have a bad roll of dices
- getting nothing tend to feel worse than getting little
Not much strong feeling about it, though.
--
Estelle Knoht, a juvenile, unreliable and respectable lady.
I currently do not accept any catbox, cider, suppers, calling cards or proteges.
|
|
|
+6
link
|
Wiwo
Posts: 365
8/9/2017
|
I have zero issue with this. Plenty of places in the game have a range for the output. Sometimes that range includes zero.
Would you be more comfortable with it if it were a 50% luck challenge which gave you 2 favours on success and 0 favours on failure?
--
Wiwo. Almost certainly not a squid in a cunningly tailored suit. Surely.
 Care for some cider? Here's how to ask me for some. Strange pranks strongly preferred.
Care to pet a Heptagoat? Too bad. It doesn't do anything (probably).
I'm a Correspondent and would be delighted to lecture at your orphanage.
|
|
|
+5
link
|
Wiwo
Posts: 365
8/10/2017
|
Estelle Knoht wrote:
For most part, it is a small problem because
- text does not fit well if you gain no favours
- result texts do not clearly indicate you just have a bad roll of dices
- getting nothing tend to feel worse than getting little
Not much strong feeling about it, though.
This is a good point about the text. I would favor making these luck challenges with suitable failure text, with either a 2/0 favour split or a 1/1 favour split depending on the desired flavor.
--
Wiwo. Almost certainly not a squid in a cunningly tailored suit. Surely.
Care for some cider? Here's how to ask me for some. Strange pranks strongly preferred.
Care to pet a Heptagoat? Too bad. It doesn't do anything (probably).
I'm a Correspondent and would be delighted to lecture at your orphanage.
|
|
|
+2
link
|
Rostygold
Posts: 346
8/11/2017
|
Siankan wrote:
I see no problem. There are reliable cards for every favor, and then there are riskier opportunities. The game would be a lot more boring without variability. (Super-predictable options are the heart of grinding, which most people do not consider the height of their London experience.) If the risk is too high for you, discard the card and use the action point on something else.
I understand your arguments, but I will add that all-or-nothing RNG rolls do not contribute to the value of the experience.
That said, the only unpredictability that I appreciate are the kinds exhibited by options such as "Advance your friendship to a condition of intimacy". These are sophisticated.
All-or-nothing outcomes, with no accompanying flavor text (as mentioned by some people above), are lazily designed in comparison.
|
|
|
+2
link
|
Rostygold
Posts: 346
8/11/2017
|
Estelle Knoht wrote:
For most part, it is a small problem because
- text does not fit well if you gain no favours
- result texts do not clearly indicate you just have a bad roll of dices
- getting nothing tend to feel worse than getting little
Not much strong feeling about it, though.
I, for one, feel more strongly.
Fallen London already has options where the outcomes may have alternative or rare variants, some of which are amusingly outrageous (like "Pass the Cat: the Unwrapping!"). These are far better implementations of luck as a factor of gameplay than these all-or-nothing favour gains.
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Kaijyuu
Posts: 1047
8/10/2017
|
They could double everyone's favors, double the favor rewards from everything, double the costs on everything, and have these give 1 favor.
edited by Kaijyuu on 8/10/2017
--
Be of good cheer. Our contacts have assured us that your sins are forgiven.
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Siankan
Posts: 1048
8/11/2017
|
I see no problem. There are reliable cards for every favor, and then there are riskier opportunities. The game would be a lot more boring without variability. (Super-predictable options are the heart of grinding, which most people do not consider the height of their London experience.) If the risk is too high for you, discard the card and use the action point on something else.
--
Prof. Sian Kan, at your service.
|
|
|
+1
link
|
genesis
Posts: 924
8/9/2017
|
These options are basically intended to give you half a favour. As with most luck-dependent but repeatable options their true value is in the average run.
You may well dislike it, of course. Plenty of people find it unpalatable. But it's such a well understood property that it's all but certain to be a conscious decision by FBG rather than something they overlooked the side effects of.
--
http://fallenlondon.com/Profile/mikey_thinkin
Keeping track of incomplete content and loose ends in Fallen London
|
|
|
+1
link
|