Timeline for Balancing stats in a monster fighting game (similar to Pokemon battle/stats)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 26, 2012 at 12:44 | comment | added | willmer | THat is true that there would be some elements of the AI that would be difficult to code and try to test, but the priority system would be based upon calculations to see which moves are best at the time with some random chance thrown in. So if a monster has 3 attack moves and a stat modifying move, it would figure out which of the 3 attacks does the most damage and give it a 60% chance of being used, the remaining moves might get a 20%, 15% and 5% for example. So the "better" moves are used more often. This would at least give me a way to test 1 on 1 battles. | |
| Jul 26, 2012 at 7:57 | comment | added | Adam 'P1' Burch | Priority system; what's the priority? How do you know what's the right move in any given situation? Would an attack be effective? Or would it be better to swap into a monster with a stronger element? What if they swap? What random factors do you have? If you truly want to say that your game is 'balanced' these are huge problems for your AI system to solve well. It's better to make the game itself, and then try to balance it once you have an idea of what's 'powerful', which you can only get via constant playtesting. | |
| Jul 25, 2012 at 17:12 | comment | added | willmer | I agree, that having an AI to play against would be a good idea. I'm sure I could even code a program to run 100 battles of X against Y using a simple AI with a priority system for what skills to use to see if it is balanced. I would expect certain matches (fire vs water for example) to generally end in more wins for one, but I could then just adjust stats or skills to have the win/loss ratio fall into a desired range. | |
| Jul 25, 2012 at 6:03 | history | answered | Adam 'P1' Burch | CC BY-SA 3.0 |