User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sandbox899: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__[toc] | __NOTOC__[toc] | ||
{| | {| | ||
| width="40px" style="border-right:solid 1px | | width="40px" style="border-right:solid 1px white;color:white" | ........... || style='padding-left:10px' | [[File:Survivor-Zombie Ratio.png]] | ||
<center> | <center> | ||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
</center> | </center> | ||
Line 17: | Line 16: | ||
<Big><big><big>'''INTERPRETING THE GRAPHS'''</BIG></big></big> | <Big><big><big>'''INTERPRETING THE GRAPHS'''</BIG></big></big> | ||
The first graph | The first graph shows the survivor-zombie ratio. The graph below shows the absolute survivor and zombie populations in a series of three parts: Early Day Volatility (EDV), The Swings (TW), and The Long Tail (TLT).<sup>4</sup> These graphs go in-depth, listing most game updates and a small number of player-initiated events. While the game updates are listed regardless of their impact on the survivor-zombie ratio, partly due to the relative infrequency of the updates, the player events are (usually) listed if they seem to be responsible for a shift in the survivor-zombie ratio. | ||
An underlying assumption is that the ratio will only change if a force acts on it, whether a game update or player event. Although it often seems "obvious" that a game update or player event caused a shift in the ratio, it is impossible to identify all player events occurring at a given time, considering that not all have been [[:Category:History|written into history]]. And given a specific time point, multiple events could be happening at the same time. How do we determine the degree to which each event influenced the ratio? | |||
Sometimes, however, an event is [[March of The Dead 2|so large]] that it undeniably caused a change in the ratio. Call it a [[Wikipedia:natural experiment|natural experiment]]. | |||
All that said, '''the purpose of the following in-depth graph is to chronicle the game balance over the years, without pointing too many fingers.''' | |||
Line 283: | Line 275: | ||
<br><BIG><BIG><BIG>'''THE LONG TAIL'''</BIG></BIG></BIG><br><big>Plot of <font color='#98c1d9'>'''Survivor'''</font> and <font color='#8bd08b'>'''Zombie'''</font> populations. <br>Mid 2011 to 2020.</big> | <br><BIG><BIG><BIG>'''THE LONG TAIL'''</BIG></BIG></BIG><br><big>Plot of <font color='#98c1d9'>'''Survivor'''</font> and <font color='#8bd08b'>'''Zombie'''</font> populations. <br>Mid 2011 to 2020.</big> | ||
<div style="width:560px">The lack of player events and game updates stagnates the game. It also provides convincing evidence that the "default" ratio is about three survivors for every | <div style="width:560px">The lack of player events and game updates stagnates the game. It also provides convincing evidence that the "default" ratio is about three survivors for every two zombies, or about 60% survivors and 40% zombies. That is, unless something disrupts it.</div> | ||
|- | |- | ||
| width='100px' | [[File:threeone.png|560px]][[File:threetwo.png|560px]][[File:threethree.png|560px]][[File:threefour.png|560px]][[File:threefive.png|560px]][[File:threesix.png|560px]] || style="vertical-align: top; width:600px;position:absolute" | | | width='100px' | [[File:threeone.png|560px]][[File:threetwo.png|560px]][[File:threethree.png|560px]][[File:threefour.png|560px]][[File:threefive.png|560px]][[File:threesix.png|560px]] || style="vertical-align: top; width:600px;position:absolute" | | ||
Line 507: | Line 499: | ||
|} | |} | ||
|} | |} | ||
<Big><big><big>'''CONCLUSION'''</BIG></big></big> | |||
The ratio stabilized as time went on. By The Long Tail, there were three survivors for every two zombies. (To be precise, it's an average of 1.55 survivors per zombie over the entire game history.) Is this a sign of game imbalance? | |||
What things ''should'' look like is each person's opinion, grouped as follows. | |||
*'''Equal numbers of zombies and survivors'''. This is the most "on the nose" interpretation of game balance. It implies that if survivors are more numerous, they are stronger than zombies (and vice versa). Typically this takes the form of one side being more efficient with AP, whether its killing the opposing side, revivifying them, or barricade dynamics. | |||
*'''Zombies heavily outnumber survivors'''. The most in-genre, and some believe this is a way to [[end of the game]]. While it presents both great danger and excitement for survivors, it runs the risk of creating frustration in survivors who stay dead for long periods of time and for zombies who find nothing to munch on. The self-correcting nature of revivification rates through [[Syringe#NecroTech_Revivification_Syringe|syringe search odds]], as well as [[Imagine/DIRT:NAP|Dirt Nap]] tactics and new characters signing up, makes this scenario unlikely to hold up over the long term. | |||
*'''An unstable ratio.''' Sometimes survivors outnumber zombies. Sometimes zombies outnumber survivors. The game might be the most fun if the ratio never stabilizes over the long term. | |||
*'''Let it be (Laissez-faire)'''. In other words, don't alter the game mechanics and let the ratio go wherever it will. This is the current state of the game. | |||
The opinion of this author: the ratio favours survivors because they have more things to do and are more fun. The actual game mechanics are secondary to this. It could be that while survivors might be more AP efficient ''overall'', efficiency isn't the only reason why players play the side they play (check out "See Also" below). And it is debatable that survivors are more AP efficient ''overall'', as many factors need to be considered. While a shotgun objectively has a higher hit rate and damage over claws, search rates, movement, reloading, [[encumbrance|opportunity costs]], and situation are also relevant. | |||
<Big><big><big>'''OLDER GRAPHS'''</BIG></big></big> | <Big><big><big>'''OLDER GRAPHS'''</BIG></big></big> |
Revision as of 02:50, 7 June 2020
[toc]
........... |
The Survivor / Zombie Ratio, December 2005 to April 2020. Data from Urban Dead statistics, April 2017 to current day. Older data from the Wayback Machine was collected manually.3
INTERPRETING THE GRAPHS The first graph shows the survivor-zombie ratio. The graph below shows the absolute survivor and zombie populations in a series of three parts: Early Day Volatility (EDV), The Swings (TW), and The Long Tail (TLT).4 These graphs go in-depth, listing most game updates and a small number of player-initiated events. While the game updates are listed regardless of their impact on the survivor-zombie ratio, partly due to the relative infrequency of the updates, the player events are (usually) listed if they seem to be responsible for a shift in the survivor-zombie ratio. An underlying assumption is that the ratio will only change if a force acts on it, whether a game update or player event. Although it often seems "obvious" that a game update or player event caused a shift in the ratio, it is impossible to identify all player events occurring at a given time, considering that not all have been written into history. And given a specific time point, multiple events could be happening at the same time. How do we determine the degree to which each event influenced the ratio? Sometimes, however, an event is so large that it undeniably caused a change in the ratio. Call it a natural experiment. All that said, the purpose of the following in-depth graph is to chronicle the game balance over the years, without pointing too many fingers.
EARLY DAY VOLATILITY The first year or so of Urban Dead's history was marked by rapid game updates, establishing fundamental mechanics that flattened the ratio close to equality. These changes came quickly on the heels of social upheaval, the kind consisting of protests, violent riots, and roaming zombie hordes. It was an energetic, though uncertain time.
CONCLUSION The ratio stabilized as time went on. By The Long Tail, there were three survivors for every two zombies. (To be precise, it's an average of 1.55 survivors per zombie over the entire game history.) Is this a sign of game imbalance? What things should look like is each person's opinion, grouped as follows.
The opinion of this author: the ratio favours survivors because they have more things to do and are more fun. The actual game mechanics are secondary to this. It could be that while survivors might be more AP efficient overall, efficiency isn't the only reason why players play the side they play (check out "See Also" below). And it is debatable that survivors are more AP efficient overall, as many factors need to be considered. While a shotgun objectively has a higher hit rate and damage over claws, search rates, movement, reloading, opportunity costs, and situation are also relevant.
|