In this presentation we introduce the game balance "interesting strategies". It is especially important as games with a single dominant strategy are boring. No strategy must be much better than others and without drawbacks. These slides were prepared by Dr. Marc Miquel. All the materials used in them are referenced to their authors.

1. Lesson 4: Interesting Strategies (iii)
Third year course in Quality Assurance and Game Balance
Bachelor Degree in Video Game Design and Production
Third term, April 2019 Dr. Marc Miquel Ribé

2. BALANCE TYPE 3:
“BALANCE IS TO PROVIDE NO DOMINANT
OR WEAK STRATEGIES”
game-game

3. • What is a strategy?
Strategy: A plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.
Let us say that in a game, a strategy contains an action or a group of actions, and
that we play them to win. This is our goal.
In game, the strategies have their origin in the player characteristics, in the game
objects and possible space. Whenever we are playing, we look for the best outcome.
• How do we call a strategy that reliably produces the best outcome?
• How do we call a strategy that is by far the best independently than the rest?
According to the Oxford Dictionary

4. a. ”A dominant or degenerate strategy is a way of playing a game that is so good that you
must play it to succeed”.
b. “A worst strategy or trap choice is a way of playing a game that guarantees you to
lose. It is also known as a trap choice, a term loosely used to describe a strategy that is
dominated in most scenarios by many other strategies”.
We do not want them, as they actually make the rest of the game useless.
Why else do we detest them?

5. When somebody uses them, they win the game, and it is over. No sustained
uncertainty (PvE). When somebody uses them in a multiplayer, this player wins and the
game is over (PvP). No sustained uncertainty. Even when everybody uses the
dominant strategy, the game becomes less diverse and interesting.
Depending on the circumstances there may be sometimes a better strategy,...but
"What makes games interesting and challenging is the fact that their systems do not
offer a dominant strategy—at least, not at first glance, or even upon repeated play".
Fullerton (2014; p. 290)
"Gameplay is all about making choices and in a poorly-balanced game, many of the
choices available to the player are essentially rendered useless. […] In an imbalanced
game, one or more "dominant strategies" quickly emerge, limiting other strategies
useless except for some un-intended purpose (such as getting used as a handicap
mechanism, or comedic reasons).”
[http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/134768/understanding_balance_in_video_.php]
OK. There is only one kind of game in which we accept a dominant strategy.

6. • “A puzzle always has a dominant strategy. And one of the main
objectives of a game designer is to avoid dominant strategies in
his games. Paradoxically, when designing a puzzle, you are
deliberately creating a dominant strategy: the solution. In the
particular case of puzzle games, the goal (and the whole fun) is
to find the dominant strategy. The problem is that once you get
it, the puzzle ceases to be fun.
• Puzzles often suffer from the enigma syndrome. I mean,
sometimes, to solve a puzzle you need to make a perceptual shift.
Can you arrange six matchsticks so they form four equilateral
triangles? if you make the shift, you solve the puzzle and the
satisfaction is huge. if you don’t, the frustration and shame is also
noticeable. The problem is that it is a matter of inspiration. No
game mechanics are involved.
• Puzzles are not replayable. This is the key problem. All the other
problems lead to this one. And this is the main reason for why
puzzles are so often not considered games.” A unique and stable
dominant strategy goes against replayability. Agree? Mainly.
[http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/ToniSala/20140102/207665/Game_Design_Theory_Applied_the_puzzle_of_
designing_a_puzzle_game.php]
Jesse Schell (2009; p. 209) “a puzzle is a game with a dominant strategy”.

7. • Interesting strategies
Remember that Sid Meier quote: ”A game is a series of interesting decisions”.
In 2012 lecture added: “It is easier to look at it as what is not an interesting decision”.
Of course! And we know that degenerate strategies may become very uninteresting
once we know them.
So,… the opposite of a degenerate strategy is not a worst strategy… or perhaps yes,
but to us, as gam[e designers, the opposite to both of them is an “interesting
strategy”.
• Trade-offs (You gain this, if you lose that).
• Permanence (You took that decision, now you must accept it and carry on).
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMK7VI_2w9c]
[http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/164869/GDC_2012_Sid_M
eier_on_how_to_see_games_as_sets_of_interesting_decisions.php]

8. • (Limited) interesting strategies
But how many interesting strategies?
“Clearly, for a decision to mean anything, there needs to be more than one viable
strategy that might reasonably lead to a good outcome. If there is only one viable
strategy, that strategy is degenerate and the decision becomes a no decision”. […]
“But once we have two such viable strategies, adding more doesn’t automatically
improve the experience. Improving the experience means making the decision process
more nuanced.” Sylvester (2012; p. 162)
Schell paraphrases Michael Mateas (2009; p. 181) to point out that:
• If Choices > Desires, then the player is overwhelmed.
• If Choices < Desires, the player is frustrated.
• If Choices = Desires, the player has a feeling of freedom and fulfilment.
We should provide a reasonable amount of choices, but most important,
none of them should be a degenerate one.

9. • It seems easier to try to find degenerate strategies
One way: calculate the *dominant strategy with payoffs (Game Theory)
The problem is that using payoff matrixes only works for sum-zero games, and it is
not easy to assess every action. Still, it could be useful to make assumptions in
regards of certain strategies…
• In game theory, *strategic dominance (commonly
called strictly dominant strategy; do not confuse
with the game design term dominant strategy)
occurs when one strategy is better than another
strategy for one player, no matter how that player's
opponents may play. We say a “rational agent” will
always play the dominant strategy, if one exists.
• We can measure the effectiveness of a strategy
using a payoff matrix. What is the dominant
strategy in Prisoner’s Dilemma? Anyone?
* [http://policonomics.com/lp-game-theory2-dominant-strategy]

10. • Let the game be played by players: they find them!
• “There is, however, an extremely fuzzy line between degenerate strategies and
imaginative ways to play a game. There is something exciting about having players
explore the space of possibility of your game, rooting around for new strategies
and new ways to play.” Salen and Zimmerman (2003; p. 273)
• Strategy players discovered a set of great strategies. In a way, the strategy game
converted into a micromanagement and action game.
• Pacman players discovered the patterns by which ghosts appear. This became a
dominant strategy and they changed this in Pacman 2.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actions_per_minute]

11. • Degenerate strategy: Low Costs and High benefits
The easiest way to define a degenerate strategy is… a strategy whose costs are
much lower than its benefits and this makes it decisive.
How can we identify a degenerate strategy?
Cost-benefit analysis… just like in economy!

12. BALANCE TYPE 3:
“BALANCE IS TO PROVIDE INTERESTING STRATEGIES”
game-game
For this, we will (1) analyze and (2) modify strategies!
We will study the costs and the benefits.
The same slide but in positive!

13. Overview of the Lesson
In this lesson we will see the next topics:
1. Object-based strategies
2. Action-based strategies
3. Situation-based strategies
4. Time-based strategies
5. Economy-based strategies
6. Loopholes: Exploit and metagaming-based strategies
Analogously to previous sessions, the most important idea for this one is to assess
the cost-benefit relationship for every strategy.
I will analyze the strategies in a systematic way (6 points). I will be happy if you give
me some more examples.
It is important you learn this vocabulary. It is easier to think with the proper concepts
and this is the best way to communicate among designers.

14. 1. Object-based strategies
PROBLEM:
An object has a benefit but no cost; an object has a cost but no benefit. This creates
both degenerate and worst strategies.
SOLUTION:
Each object should get you closer to the goal with the benefits or advantages it
provides, but also have proportional drawbacks or costs.
“This kind of balance is specific to games that give players a choice between different
game objects. Some examples:
• Cards in a trading-card game. Players build a deck with a set number of cards from
their collections. The choice of which cards to add is one of the key factors in the
game’s outcome, and designers try to make the cards balanced with one another.
• Units in some war games and real-time strategy games. Players have the ability to
purchase units during play, and different kinds of units may have different abilities,
movement rates and combat strengths.
• Weapons, items, magic spells, etc. in a role-playing game, either tabletop or
computer/ console. Players may purchase any of these for use in combat, and they
have different costs and different stats and abilities.” Schreiber (2010)

15. “The costs and benefits do not have to be exactly the same (in fact, usually the
benefits are greater, or else you would simply ignore the object). However, when
comparing two different objects, the proportion of costs to benefits should be roughly
the same for each.” Schreiber (2010)
• The costs can also be very different… mana, rupees, two turns, etc.
• The benefits can also be very different… more defence, more attack, etc.
We need to ensure variety in terms of costs and benefits but most
importantly to keep proportionality.

16. “The ratio between properly balanced costs and benefits is referred to as a cost curve
and represents a mathematical relationship between the two. By identifying the shape
of the cost curve, and properly relating each object’s costs and benefits to the correct
numbers, a game designer can design objects that fall along the cost curve, and
identify existing objects that fall above the curve (too powerful) or below the curve
(too weak) so that adjustments can be made”.
What should you do to construct a cost curve? It is very simple. You can use Excel.
1. Identify the costs for every object
2. Identify the benefits for every object
3. Plot them in two axis: x, y.
You can estimate the costs and benefits when objects do very different things,… and
you can also create several cost curves for categories of objects (defense, attack, etc.).
Do you want to learn more? “Harmony: A Game to Teach Transitive Game Balance”. Ian Schreiber’s
Master Thesis. 2013.

17. Each game needs a cost curve, and there is no universal solution.
This is the one from ”Monster Zoo”.
What happens when it is too steep?
What happens when it is dense?
Does it need to be ‘perfect’?
You could unbalance some superpowerful cards but also make them less probable.
Unavailability can be seen as a cost.
[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/142092/monster-zoo]

18. Challenges of the cost curves for objects?
• You need to make one for each ‘group of cards’. Think of Magic or other trading
card games.
• They are not good for accounting combinations, order of effects, etcetera.
Although you can calculate the probability for each combo and consider it a cost.
“In Magic, for example, a player has to get the exact cards they need and be able to
use them both in order to make the combo work. In a 60-card deck this can be tricky,
and so they must bring in even more cards to help them get the combo they are
looking for. The more cards the combo requires to create, the stronger it can be.
When it does happen it will make the player feel great for having done it, but it will
be unlikely to dominate play over all because of how difficult it is to make happen. “
Thinking Exponentially: The Tricky Task of Imbalancing Collectible Games by Paul Peterson.
M. Selinker. The Kobold Guide to Board Game Design. 2011
Even though they do not provide a solution by themselves, cost curves are useful to
detect imbalances and to understand your game.
Even though I am referring a lot to cards, they are useful for any kind of game.

19. A particular scenario that makes life complicated to designers? To gameplay modes:
single-player missions and multiplayers
In regards of Starcraft II, Dustin Browder (design director): “We had some balance
problems (with campaign and multiplayer). (In campaign) people were building
nothing but marines and medics all the time. We've since addressed that issue. The
medic has been a little bit nerfed for campaign, so you get more diversity in the
campaign, which is almost as important to us as unit diversity in the multiplayer
experience.”
In regards of Overwatch, Kaplan (game’s director): ”For a 6v6 PvP game coming out
with a whole single-player campaign is like making a brand new game in and of itself.
I’m not sure our players understand the magnitude of development that would go
behind that. But certainly it’s a fascinating idea.”
[https://spout360.com/games/news/overwatch/no-overwatch-single-player-plans-for-now-director]
[http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/5827/starcraft_ii_building_on_the_beta.php?print=1]
It depends on where you start first, you need to keep the cost curve from one
gameplay mode to another.

20. 2. Action-based strategies
PROBLEM:
Some actions may be difficult to perform and require high skills, but they do create
similar outcomes. Why should we perform them?
SOLUTION:
Performing an action of higher difficulty should be valued with higher power!
An action is similar in an object that it may have costs and benefits, but it has
something else: You need two kind of skills to make action: think it and execute it.
To think and perform actions that require more skills (COST) should be
compensated with more power (BENEFITS).

21. "The more power gives you something, the more skill you should require”.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EitZRLt2G3w]
Balancing for Skill - The Link from Optimal Power to Strategy - Extra Credits / Skill-power ratio

22. Triangularity
If more skills required (costs) gives more benefits,…Then, more risks (potential
costs), should also give more benefits!
This is the main idea behind triangularity. To create this “illusion” is marvelous to the
player because it gives the sensation that they do control the game. It makes the
game full of interesting choices.
Schell (2009; p. 181)

23. Triangularity is old, which means that passed the test of time. In Space invaders,
regular ships are worth 10 to 30 points, meanwhile, the dangerous red flying saucer
which is more difficult to aim and poses more risk (you need to deviate your sight) is
worth 100 to 300 points.
In Mario Kart, triangularity appears in the vehicle choices. You may take the bike or
the kart, the automatic or the manual. It depends on you.
This ratio of skill/power or risk/power…also stands for risk generated by randomness.
In certain games, you should allow the player to take higher risks in terms of luck and
provide proportional rewards. Hence, lower probability in chance = higher power.
Mario Kart 8 KARTS VS BIKES - Speed Comparison!
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPt1kJ4gDng]

24. Different strategies to reach the goal: in the actions, in the scenario.
You want each of the different ‘victory condition’ or ‘win-strategies’ to be balanced. It
may mean that some of them are more risky, but shorter, while others are safer but
longer. They may even share ”part of the journey”. This makes games interesting.
This exemplified in Mario Kart or any platforms with different paths, but also in board
games where there are two or more victory conditions. On the right, Hanamikoji card
game has two victory conditions that are very close (win geishas and win 13 points).
We may discuss if it is dominant depending on the benefits and skills required.

25. 3. Situation-based strategies
PROBLEM:
Some objects or actions may appear useless or powerful, or simply resemble the
existing ones. They are just more or less powerful; in other words, they form a
transitive relationship.
Shotgun > Pistol > Fists
We do not want them to be useless?
What could we do?
You could tell me “an intransitive relationship”, but not this time…J
SOLUTION:
We need to think about more different costs and benefits to make each object truly
valuable. We need to think in terms of ‘situations’. This way, we make the objects
valuable and we make the game more interesting.

26. Complex real-time games have situational (strategy, shooters, etcetera) costs and
benefits. They need to be identified.
What is a situation?
Character capacities, Object/action, Scenario/Enemies Approach, Execution Time,
etcetera.
Schreiber (2012) calls it Situational Balancing:
"What is situational balancing? What I mean is that sometimes, we have things that
are transitive, sort of, but their value changes over time or depends on the situation.
In each of these cases, finding the right cost on your cost curve depends on the
situation within the game, which is why I call it situational balancing.”
We need to understand the entire situation and use a few concepts: expected value,
versatility, hidden costs, among others.
We need to analyze the situation with all the factors, costs and benefits they imply.
Let’s see some examples…

27. EXAMPLE: What are the cost-benefits of “keeping a powerful the sword” in an RPG?
“You have a sword that is 1.5x as powerful as the other swords in its class, but it only
does half damage against Trolls. But let’s also say that trolls are pretty rare, maybe
only 5% of the encounters in the game are against trolls.
So if a typical sword at this level has a benefit of 100 (according to your existing cost
curve) with a troll, a 1.5x powerful sword would have a benefit of 150, and maybe a
sword that doesn’t work actually has a cost of 250, because it’s just that deadly to get
caught with your sword down, so to speak. The math says the expected value will be:
95%*150 + 5%*(-250) = 130. So this sword has a benefit of 130, or 30% more than a
typical sword.” Schreiber (2010).
EXAMPLE: What are the benefits of “napalm” weapon in Worms?
Expected value of using napalm =
probability of aiming well * normal napalm
damage * damage per second measure *
number of worms in aim * probability of
worm-fall situation according to the
scenario…
It depends! It is not easy to calculate but
the benefits can be interesting.

28. EXAMPLE: Desktop Tower Defense
Take two towers: Swarm tower (attacks flying enemies) and Boost towers (increases
the damage of the towers around it).
You are trying to minimize cost and maximize damage. You need to study:
• What is the optimal placement of these towers?
• What is the damage-to-cost ratio of each combination of towers?
[http://armorgames.com/play/1128/desktop-tower-defense-15]

29. What is versatility?
The capacity of adapting from one to another of various tasks. In a shooter, you have
knives, which are good at short-range, machine guns which are good at middle range,
and snipers which are good at long ranges. What is the most versatile weapon?
Probably the machine gun, because if you are caught by another player, you always
have something useful. But it depends on the scenario characteristics… It depends on
the cost of switching (in time and risk). It depends on the player inventory capacity…
For instance, the overall benefits of a
particular weapon:
Expected value of the ‘weapon’ /
number of total scenarios in which
can be used > space they occupy in
the inventory / total space.
The big question is: How many different scenarios can I create in which there are trade-offs?
OTHER CONCEPTS OF SITUATIONAL BALANCE

30. What are shadow costs (or hidden costs)?
“Shadow cost, a term from economic theory, refers to secondary, or hidden, costs
that lie behind the apparent costs of goods or services. For our purposes, a shadow
cost is one that the designer creates but doesn’t warn the player about explicitly.
For instance, giving the Ford a smaller fuel tank that requires the car to stop to refuel
more often in the road race could counter its speed advantage. The smaller fuel tank
serves as a shadow cost that the player becomes aware of through repeated play.”
When you buy an alarm clock in the Chinese online shop. The time it takes to send,
the possibility of paying a higher tax, the possibility of not working because of me
mistaking the bad UI, the possibility of not working on an important work day…
There are many hidden costs in products…! So they can also be in game objects, if
we want to make them interesting.

31. What are the sunk costs and opportunity costs?
• By sunk costs, I refer to a setup cost that has to be paid first, before you gain
access to the thing you want to buy in the first place.
As an example, each Dragoon unit in StarCraft costs 125 minerals and 50 gas (that is
its listed cost), but you had to build a Cybernetics Core to build Dragoons and that
cost 200 minerals, and that cost is in addition to each Dragoon. You also need a
Gateway (150 minerals). What is the final cost of a single Dragoon (if you stop here)?
This is interesting because you are forcing the player to think in mid-term.
If there are different types of costs, then it is harder for an object to be overpowered.
• By an opportunity cost here, I refer to the the cost of giving up something else,
reducing your versatility. The value of the best option not performed in that
moment (investing on a future option).

32. Four situation-based strategies which competitive players do not like.
My question for you: what do they have in common?
1) Spawn camping is a practice where a player waits near precise spawn points to kill
enemies as they spawn. This is usually considered to be poor sportsmanship and
some players even perceive it to be exploitative of the game itself.
Why players don’t like it?
No costs (in terms of risk), high benefits.
[http://devmag.org.za/2012/05/07/loopholes-in-game-design/]
It is best (as a game designer) to define
rules and avoid discussions whether it is
cheating or not.
Possible solution: Maybe you try making
players respawn in random locations
rather than designated areas.

33. 2) Circle strafing is the technique of moving around an opponent in a circle while
facing them. Circle strafing allows a player to fire continuously at an opponent while
dodging counterattacks.
Why some players they don’t like it?
Less risk for the player who does it and
few costs (never getting tired crashing
with anything?).
• How to counter as a game designer?
Provide instantaneous weapons, larger
number of bullets, etcetera.

34. 3) Spamming, in the context of video games, refers to the repeated use of the same
item or action. For example, "grenade spamming" is the act of a player throwing a
large number of grenades in succession into an area. In fighting games, one form of
spamming would be to execute the same offensive maneuver so many times in
succession that one's opponent does not receive a chance to escape the series of
blows.
Why some players they don’t like it? No
costs (in terms of risk), high benefits.
• What can we do as players?
Escape and find another way.
• What can we do as designers?
To design scenarios with different ways.
To decrease the spammer’s energy or
create some ’bad frames’ for them.
To provide shields.

35. 4) Turtling happens in games with resources — typically strategy games — and there
are more than two players. When two players engage in combat, both will consume
resources. This puts the combatants at a disadvantage since they both lost resources
in the engagement. In the meantime, a third player (the turtle) is better off than
both, since she did not need to spend any resources, giving her an advantage in the
next combat against either player.
Why players don’t like it? No costs (in
terms of risk), high benefits (in the
future).
• What can we do as players? Rush with
several players?
• What can we do as designers? To
introduce randomness to make it non-
effective at all times. Also, to give
more resources to the round winner.
[http://devmag.org.za/2012/05/07/loopholes-in-game-design/]

36. 4. Time-based strategies
PROBLEM:
In some games winning may depend on the gameplay in a particular moment of the
game, and this may turn the rest of time and strategies into useless. In other words,
one particular playing time of the game has a higher benefit-cost ratio.
a) Beginning. Early Rush (i.e. zerg rush or tank rush)
“In real-time strategy (RTS) game player communities, for example, players constantly
look for ways to get ahead on the rankings boards. Command and Conquer, like most
RTS games, was intended to emphasize steady planning and gradual development.
But over time a degenerate strategy evolved called the "tank rush." Instead of slowly
building up forces, a player using the "tank rush" strategy could quickly create a
group of tanks and wipe out his opponent's base camp in the early game, before his
opponent had a chance to prepare his defenses.” Salen and Zimmerman (2004)
Solution:
Although the early rush degenerate strategy ruined the games of many players that
desired a more typical long-term conflict, it also spawned new kinds of defensive
strategies.

37. Think about it. What factors make a rush succeed?
• Information about the other player (Scouting)
• Location of your units (Defend)
• Simultaneous approach enemy (Attack)
b) End. Final exam syndrome (perhaps I may recover everything in just one day…)
In some games, the best cards or the more valuable “prizes" appear in the end.
Some players survive till then and then strike!
Some sports competitions are also based on this pattern. In the beginning there are
many more possibilities to survive and pass.
By the way, Google “Zerg Rush”! Funny ah?

38. Solution:
Make “gained power” (remember the feedback loops) decisive at the end. In the
football it is the number of goals in case of tie…This avoid a team which ‘wakes up’ in
the middle of the competition.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Cup#Qualification]

39. 5. Economy-based strategies
PROBLEM:
In persistent worlds, being in the game in a precise period of time is highly beneficial
for strategies based on resources (money, treasures, etc.). These players can use
resources and these become degenerate strategies.
In games with persistent worlds and economies there may be an increase in the
amount of total money in the game. Prices go high because the currency is less
valued (inflation). Inflation is a problem for new players, because they still earn at the
same rate. Old players have accumulated more treasure. Then, certain items become
degenerate strategies. What could we do?
MMO Economies - How to Manage Inflation in Virtual Economies - Extra Credits
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W39TtF14i8I]
MMO Economies - Hyperinflation, Reserve Currencies & You! - Extra Credits
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sumZLwFXJqE&t=1s]

40. SOLUTION:
Some mechanisms must balance the economy to bring down inflation by adding
costs (negative-sum elements).
• When you die, you could lose money or your equipment is damaged and you pay
money to repair it (i.e. wow).
• Any money paid to NPC shopkeepers (especially consumable items) is gone.
• Offering really expensive ‘hedonistic’ items that do not provide any advantage in
gameplay but are a luxury show off.
Or you could make monsters to drop treasure but no gold, or forbid to sell or trade
what’s drop,… or to make players pay taxes (I have not seen this last one, and I am
not sure it would work, but it does in real life).

41. PROBLEM:
In games with persistent worlds and economies, some strategies imply trespassing
powers to newer players (twinking). So certain new players may aim at these
strategies to benefit without paying any cost.
“In MMORPGs, twinking refers to a character gaining equipment with the assistance
of a higher level character, particularly by giving said low level character higher level
equipment that is otherwise unattainable”.
For example, Pokémon allows trading Pokémon with each other. In Guild Wars, low-
level characters could benefit from objects obtained by high-level characters.
SOLUTION:
Provide some restrictions or costs in order to do that:
• In some games, certain items require a minimum of ability score or level.
• In other games, items are restricted to a character (WoW, Everquest, etc.).
• Among others.

42. 6. Loopholes: Exploit and metagaming-based strategies
“A loophole can be defined as a flaw in the system that users can exploit to gain an
unfair or unintended advantage.” Fullerton (2014; p. 281)
Then, a loophole can become a degenerate strategy as long as it provides high
benefits with a low cost. There are two types of loopholes: exploits (not intentionally
designed actions available in the game mechanics, physics,…) and metagaming
(actions not in the rules that tell how it is played).
a) Exploit-based strategies
PROBLEM:
Some strategies appear based on particular game characteristics which have not
been designed to be used that way (bugs, glitches,...).
SOLUTION:
It depends on the benefits: patch the game to repair the exploits. Fix the bugs!
Sequence Breakers
The most unique way to use exploits: sequence breakers (allow the player to
experience events in a different order than intended).

43. Do you want to see these exploits? Check speedruns and you will see very strange
things. They use every exploit. They compete beyond the game design.
[http://devmag.org.za/2012/05/07/loopholes-in-game-design/]

44. Saving Systems
“Save scumming is when a player makes multiple saves so that they can play a
‘perfect’ game. The player creates a number of saves and simply reloads one until
they get the result they want.
A solution is to remove, or disable, a save that is frequently used without the correct
condition for the load to happen — player death is typical.” Or you can locate save
points in certain places even allowing the player to save at all times.
Spawn jumping
An example of this is the rainbow bridge in Mario Kart, where a player could skip half
the race by spawn jumping.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_ofGEYvEJ0]

45. Fortune hunting
“Fortune hunting occurs in games with random level generation. The player briefly
glances around the level to decide if they feel the level is easy enough for them to
complete; if not, they simply restart the level in the hope of a more favourable one.
Like the hustler, the fortune hunter is playing the game at a difficulty lower than the
one that designer intended.”
• The designer can prevent it by generating better equivalent levels, or by not
generating new levels until the one is created (when is the condition of generating
the level?).
[http://devmag.org.za/2012/05/07/loopholes-in-game-design/]
You must value each exploit in terms of cost-benefit!
Castle Of the Winds
levels are randomly
generated.

46. b) Metagaming-based strategies
PROBLEM:
Some strategies appear based on knowledge of the game rules, other players' habits
and style, or character's characteristics they memorise in order to deploy a strategy
which provide high benefits. Since these are not part of the game itself, they are
known as metagame.
SOLUTIONS:
It depends on the benefits each strategy provides. You can create new rules,
introduce mechanics or show/hide information.

47. Killing the leader occurs in games where a scoreboard is available during play. Players
attack the leader, since she is the person most likely to win, often forming coalitions
to achieve this goal. With the multitude of players attacking the leader, it is likely that
they may suffer damages to a point where they can’t recover from them, and they no
longer have any chance at victory."
A simple solution is to remove scoreboards from the game. A more complex solutions
is to prevent players from cooperating with one and other.
Ghosting is when a non-playing observer in a multiplayer game communicates to one
player, or team, the actions of their opponent.
Solution? Penalizations if detected. There is no evident counter.
Predicting is when the player can learn the logic of the AI, and easily defeat it by
predicting its next action. Studying the other player’s most usual techniques is also
metagaming (although it is not a degenerate strategy but something wise).

48. Learning the game in advance or memorizing their best possibilities. In fact, in some
games this is considered cheating…Actually, are they games made of puzzles?

49. Gamesmanship is “the use of dubious (although not technically illegal) methods to
win or gain a serious advantage in a game or sport. It has been described as "Pushing
the rules to the limit without getting caught, using whatever dubious methods
possible to achieve the desired end”.
Common techniques:
1. Breaking the flow of an opponent’s play (taking long times in turn-based games;
breaking the concentration with noise; etc.).
2. Causing an opponent to take the game less seriously or to overthink his or her
position (nasty comments, defying attitude, claiming less expertise, etc.).
3. Intentionally making a “mistake” which gains an advantage over an opponent.
What are the costs and benefits of
gamesmanship? It is a good ratio!
No wonder why some players find in
them their favorite degenerate
strategy!
Check out the examples from various sports.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamesmanship]

50. Concluding Remarks
1. Let playtesters feedback, intuition and statistics rule your
decisions. You have seen that in just few times, Math can help
you, as situations may be complex.
2. You need to anticipate where degenerate strategies may come
from. It is best to give variety so there are possible counters,
rather than deleting the elements which create the strategy.
3. Think of original costs, this is what is going to make your games
interesting at the same time that you are balancing the elements
with benefits.
Game Balance is over. Thank you very much!

51. The golden rule of gameplay/gameplay balance
“All options in the game must be worth using sometimes, and
the net cost of using each option must be commensurate with
the payoff you get for using it."
Rollings and Morris (2003, p. 140)

52. Game Balance Course Selected References
• Adams, E. (2014). Fundamentals of game design. Pearson Education. Chapter 11.
• Adams, E., & Dormans, J. (2012). Game mechanics: advanced game design. Chapter 8.
• Fields, T. (2014). Mobile & social game design: Monetization methods and mechanics. CRC
Press. Chapter 9.
• Fullerton, T. (2014). Game design workshop: a playcentric approach to creating innovative
games. CRC press. Chapter 10.
• Oxland, K. (2004). Gameplay and design. Pearson Education. Chapter 16.
• Schell, J. (2014). The Art of Game Design: A book of lenses. CRC Press. Chapters 10-11.
• Sylvester, T. (2013). Designing games: A guide to engineering experiences. " O'Reilly Media,
Inc.". Chapter 6.
• Rollings, A., & Morris, D. (2003). Game architecture and design: a new edition. Chapter 5.
• Selinker, M. (Ed.). (2011). The Kobold Guide to Board Game Design. Part 4.
• Schreiber, I. Game Design Concepts [https://gamedesignconcepts.wordpress.com] (Level 16).
• Schreiber, I. Game Balance Concepts [https://gamebalanceconcepts.wordpress.com].