Reset Password
Existing players used to logging in with their character name and moo password must signup for a website account.
- Hek 2s
- FunkyMango 3m
- Bruhlicious 34s Deine Mutter stinkt nach Erbrochenem und Bier.
- BubbleKangaroo 10m
- AdamBlue9000 9s Rolling 526d6 damage against both of us.
a Mench 1h Doing a bit of everything.
- PsycoticCone 16m
- DoubleD20 9s
- adrognik 1m
- Wonderland 1s
And 21 more hiding and/or disguised
Connect to Sindome @ or just Play Now

More complex skill interactions
Math is Cool


I am making this suggestion based on the assumption that the MOO has CPU cycles to spare on more complex skill checks. If that is not the case, ignore this.

I am working on the assumption that staff has access to analytics which will allow them to assess the impact of these changes.

I am putting this out there as a general suggestion to staff. I don't "know" what I am talking about with the examples I am going to provide. I am offering them to facilitate discussion around one way to enrich the game.

CPUs continue to get faster every year. Fundamentally CPUs and computers are there to do math.

At its core, the Sindome "game engine" is about math. It pulls together a bunch of variables from Character A, pulls a bunch of variables from Character B, compares them and computes a result.

On one of the recent threads about bleeding, someone mentioned that the 'meta' would shift to more combat characters spending UE on medical skills. That was presented as a negative. eg "Combat characters will have less UE to spend on other (non-medical) skills and therefore there will be less diversity." Let's not rehash that discussion. I bring it up for context.

What if "medical skills" were incorporated into the "variables" that the game engine uses when doing combat computations?

One obvious answer is that the UE investment in medical skills would be a positive, not a negative.

To take that out a level, what if "every" skill had the potential to be a variable in the use of every other skill? (Probably unrealistic given the computation power required for that kind of cross checking.) The classic example is a 'warrior' who practices 'art' because the steady hand and focus that comes from doing art re-enforces the steady hand and focused mind that is useful in combat.

(Let's not go into specific examples. Let's not talk about game mechanics. I'm just putting out this example for discussion's sake.)

For all we know, medical skills and the implied knowledge of anatomy are already factored in combat computations.

What if combat computations are currently limited to 1 or 2 "additional variables" because that was all the game could handle (CPU or otherwise) when those computations were originally coded?

Can the game engine / CPU enable more computations?

Is using those spare CPU cycles for this use case on the staff's radar? (No need to answer publicly. This is just to encourage discussion at the staff level if it's not already happening.)

Think beyond combat. Maybe Stealth can compliment Disguise and vice versa. Maybe Trading plays into either or both in a tertiary way because all of them involve deceiving people for an advantage.

(I "know" nothing about game engine computations. This thread is not to talk about specifics or go down the game mechanics rabbit hole.)

I think that adding more variety and variables to the various game engine computations could allow staff to:

Subtly adjust the 'meta'

Encourage wider adoption of skills and attributes

Encourage late game / max UE characters to continue adjusting and fine tuning themselves (via forgetting skills, using skillsofts, etc.)

Start small. Pick something non-combat and non-combat adjacent like auto-tech. Tweak one variable. Let it run for a few months. See if there is any notable uptick on the "success rate". See if there is any notable impact on CPU utilization.

It would be a cool project to update the player base on during Town Halls. The updates can be vague. "Staff tweaked 1 group of skill computations in the last 6 months. Based on that, we are planning to tweak 2 more groups of skill computations in the next 6 months."

What do the rest of you think? Is this a good way to keep the game fresh and encourage diversified character builds?

Can you say all that in a different way? I'm totally not getting it.
This post has so many caveats and dictates about what should not be discussed I'm lost as to what you're actually suggesting.
I was trying to keep this vague to not run afoul of discussion "how the game works".

I will do my best to provide off the wall examples to 'draw a picture' of what I'm suggesting.

Assumption : The game combines variables and compares them for skill checks.

Assumption : Variables can be Attributes or Skills

Hypothetical Example : Non Combat

Variable A + Variable B < "Success Result" = FAIL

Variable A + Variable B > "Success Result" = SUCCESS

What I'm assuming is that when the original code was written, it was based on less powerful CPUs. The code was "stress tested" in dev and prod during the occasional "free for all" or whatever the event is called where staff lets players go on crazy combat killing sprees to see how the MOO handles the load.

Let's assume that when the code was written, the MOO could only support two variables. A, B.

The MOO now has a more powerful CPU. The MOO now has a more efficient engine (Toast or whatever it's called).

Given that, can we introduce additional variables? C, D, E, etc.

Hypothetical Example : Non-Combat (Stupid Assumptions)

Buying from a merchant using Long Blades

Bob the Solo believes he can get a good deal at the market due to his expertise with katanas.

Variable A = Charisma (because everyone knows charismatic people are the best sword fighters)

Variable B = Long Blades (because everyone knows the best negotiations are done with swords)

Variable C = Biotech (because everyone knows that you can't really look into a vendor's soul unless you anatomically know where the soul is)

Variable A + Variable B + Variable C < "Vendor computation" = FAIL

Variable A + Variable B + Variable C > "Vendor computation" = SUCCESS

IF there are spare CPU cycles

IF the code is flexible enough to add more variables


Please consider adding more variables (and keeping those variables secret) in order to encourage: a more varied meta, players / characters to adopt more "useless" skills (with useless being subjective because player won't "know" which skills are complimentary with which other skills) , Max UE characters to stick around to experiment with skill combinations (via forgetting skills, skillsofts, etc.)

I'll save everyone the breath and say 'no'.
It basically sounds like suggesting all skills, or multiple skills, get checked on rolls and are just weighted differently? I think there's some either-or skill checks but I'm not sure about cumulative ones.

There is certainly an argument to be made that some skills are so niche and limited in power they barely rise to the level of a discrete skill and grafting extra functionality onto them could probably help with build variety.


That's exactly what I was suggesting. I believe it would better mimic the way people develop skills / talents / abilities. There is a lot of overlap in neural networks and synaptic clusters such that different activities end up re-enforcing each other and adding up to be greater than the sum of the individual parts.

Per MirageGM, there's no interest or appetite to take on the coding challenge.

So off to the trash heap of "It would have been cool if..." this one goes.