Longer But Fewer Normal Encounters

[Wavelength]

@SOC & @trouble time - you guys are starting to talk past each other; it may be worth trying to find some common ground in your design philosophies before continuing to discuss.

At the risk of being reductive, I think one of the big differences is whether certain genres necessitate certain types of dynamics (which is an extension of how closely players can be grouped by the genres they like).

And to that point, I believe that there's some wisdom in understanding your genre and what players expect of it - after all, they became fans because they like certain dynamics or aesthetics of play that the genre usually offers. If you offer none of it, you're probably doing to miss your audience.

With that said, especially in modern gaming (from the early 2000s until now), there's a lot of diversity between games of the same genre - not only because you find games taking mechanics from other genres, but also because games within the same genre are starting to offer more diverse dynamics/aesthetics. Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles and Dark Cloud offer very similar mechanics within the same dungeon-crawl RPG genre, but very different aesthetics of play. World of Warcraft and Guild Wars (the first one) offer very similar mechanics within the MMORPG genre, but very different dynamics. The easy "mental break" battles exist and belong in WoW, but less so in GW.

It's absolutely true that "the player" is not an unchanging, crystalline monolith. But in the same breath, "the player" is also not a completely unknown, mysterious entity. We decide who we want our player to be by the feelings we want to inspire in them; we attract our player by the presentation and messaging that we choose; we deliver for our player by creating a set of mechanics (and narrative and content) that creates those feelings.

 

[Countyoungblood]

@trouble time I think in general you could divide players into escapists who want to feel powerful and strategists who want a challenge. I prefer a challenge.. but you and I are part of the minority.

@Wavelength is your game publicly avalible?

Reducing the number of battles and equivelently raising the exp from battles would:

make travel easier assuming escape is an option. Id just run from everything till i hit a boss then grind if i lose to said boss.

Make leveling easier if any damage output spikes are found.. if the 5 turn battle can become a 1 turn battle (with buffed exp)
If the player becomes op for the zone all challenge and area bosses are null and any rewards further the problem.

Scumming could become an issue.. if zone 1 is lvl 1-3 monsters and zone 2 is 4-6 if i could kill in 1 turn id probably farm easier monsters.. assuming the exp/time ratio was there.

The problem is id probably enjoy the challenge of the harder monsters but if the most effective tactic is to run or spearhead or scum then i can see players taking that route especially escapists.

But if i didnt enjoy the combat or feel like i needed to focus to win i wouldnt bother doing any of the above since id just be buffing a character that wont be fun to play at any level.

Overall id say its a good idea since i hate tedium and grinding is boring.

 

[Wavelength]

@Wavelength is your game publicly avalible?

Not at the moment. It was public as part of the 2014 IGMC for a while, but I believe that was taken down, and since I've been spending years expanding it and improving its presentation to bring it out commercially, I decided not to put the cheapo-deepo original version back up. I'm nearly done with the improvements (I expect to have it on Steam by early 2019), but I could always use some extra opinions, so if you want to test it out as it stands now, feel free to send me a PM!