1
\$\begingroup\$

I am developing a new game and would like to know if anyone could point me in the right direction for deciding the type of scoring system to use for my new game as well as the number of points to assign to enemies and rewards so to make the game exciting to play. I remember to have read something re this in a maths' paper/assignment during my undergraduate but cannot remember what it was about any more. I think it was something to do with game theory and the formula allowed to work out the 'best' number of points to assign to enemies and rewards as well as well as their frequency within the game so that the game would always be theoretically achievable but never/ or almost never possible to achieve the highest score. There might have been something else some other assumption but I really cannot remember more about it. Does this ring a bell to anyone?

Can anyone point me to the right track if you've kind of know what this is about?

Thank you!

\$\endgroup\$

closed as too broad by Alexandre Vaillancourt, DMGregory, Kromster, Anko, Seth Battin Dec 2 '16 at 21:06

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ We'll need far more details about the nature of your game and your intended play experience. There's no one magic recipe, in game theory or elsewhere, that will decide the best scoring system for every game. (We can however use game theory to help evaluate different options, and make predictions about the kind of play they encourage) Please edit this question to include a description of the aspects of your game you want to score, what scoring system(s) you're currently considering, and where you need help deciding which best serves the experience you want to create. \$\endgroup\$ – DMGregory Nov 14 '16 at 0:28