游戏邦在:
杂志专栏:
gamerboom.com订阅到鲜果订阅到抓虾google reader订阅到有道订阅到QQ邮箱订阅到帮看

解析游戏中的策略和战术元素运用方法

发布时间:2012-04-25 15:08:27 Tags:,,,,,,

作者:Brian Gleichman

我曾经讨论过关于战术游戏中的各种核心游戏理念设计等内容。而今天我想从一个更广的层面去讨论战术与策略中存在的元素。

战术和策略拥有许多定义,但是在我们被这些五花八门的定义搞晕之前我希望先从细节着手去分析它们。我不会使用军界中普遍存在的那些内容(如战术性,操作性,以及策略性)进行说明,因为在游戏术语中这些理念基本上都包含规模的概念。我将使用象棋或其它类似游戏中的相同定义进行说明。

因此战术游戏是针对于一些实质性内容或即时位置优势而做出的直接决定,或者还可以说这种决定和玩法只存在于游戏层面上。战术最基本的特质便是能够给整款游戏带来立竿见影的作用。

而策略游戏则是发生在Near Game或Meta-Game层面中。在这里我们我们的关注焦点并不在于具体问题,而是应该着眼于长期目标并猜测敌人会做出何种行动和反应。策略并不能直接作用于游戏中,反而能够有效地影响玩家的行动。就像在象棋中,一名玩家可能会决定采取策略对敌方的王翼发起攻击——一方面原因是他在此拥有更强大的进攻技能,另一方面原因可能他注意到敌人在防御中出现了薄弱点。

让我们根据这一定义进一步分析策略的主要元素。尽管这些元素之间都是相互联系,但是我们可以将其分解为以下内容:

孙子兵法

孙子兵法

预测:

“知己知彼百战不殆。”——《孙子兵法》,孙武。

预测性元素能够明确你的敌人以及你自己的性能。举些例子来说吧,意识到Sara现在已是步履维艰了,因为她的“皇后”已经被换走了,所以Joe便决定将最强大的一枚棋子移到中央位置。具有这种预测技能,你那强大的战士便能够一直坚持下去而最终完成你的预期目标。

欺骗:

“因此,当你能够进攻时,你必须假装自己无能为力;当你能够使用工具时,你必须假装被动;当你靠近敌人时,你应该假装你离他们很远;当你远离敌人时,你又应该假装你离他们很近。”——《孙子兵法》,孙武。

这一元素其实也是预测的另一面,即玩家有能力隐藏自己的意图和决定而不让敌人发现或者认为你正在走一条与实际情况完全相反的道路。如果敌人能够相信你的“欺骗”而集中防守中部进攻,这时候你的骑兵就可以从右侧发动突袭——从而大大提高了你的胜算。

因果关系:

“在战争中任何事物都是简单的,但是简单的东西往往也是最复杂的。”—— General Carl Von Clausewitz

这是执行策略决定所需要遵循的因果链。如果你决定使用骑兵对敌人发动左侧进攻,并使用步兵去拴住敌人的躯体,那么这里存在的因果链便是你需要采取所有步骤(和时间)去安排这些兵员的位置,如此你才能最终完成这一目标。

因果链的一大重要特征便是源于它的长度——即关于在特定时间内需要执行多少行动。如果因果链过短,那么策略决定也就变得不再那么重要,反而能够凸显其它元素的重要性。相反地,如果因果链较长,那么策略决策的难度和重要性也会随之提高。预测技能可助玩家看到一些不明确因素之后的内容,而欺骗则能够为玩家拖延更多时间。如果不能有效地处理这些技能,最终必然会造成惨痛的结果。

因此,因果链的长度是这些策略元素中最重要的内容,因为它将制约着其它元素的发展。很多游戏设计师都希望能够同时使用预测和欺骗两大元素,但是这么做的结果便是他们将压缩了游戏设计中的策略属性而添加一些类似于“石头剪刀布”的无聊内容;也就是玩家能够立刻猜出游戏的最终结果。但是不管怎么说这也仍然是一种策略游戏设计,就像一款非常简单的游戏可能就只适合最简单的挑战内容。

根据这些定义并从更加实际的角度去看待这些内容,我们现在需要思考的是哪些设计理念才能够用于创造或评估游戏策略环境?

战术元素:

强大的战术游戏总是能够自然地衍生出强大的策略元素。

象棋仍然是个很典型的例子,因为在此我们只需要通过战术设计便能够呈现出有趣的策略挑战。在拥有均等的战术技巧的玩家之间,因果链总是较长且较复杂,如此我们便能够利用无限的策略而有效地击败游戏中的敌人,这与掌握现实的喜悦同样让人激动(游戏邦注:就像“深蓝”——IBM的国际象棋超级计算机击败了国际象棋世界冠军Gary Kasparov那样)。

因此,为了实现策略基础我们首先需要着眼于战术元素:资源管理,不同资产,演习和做决定的速度。这些元素将能够用于定义因果链并且能够构成策略环境的框架。

除了那些来自于战术环境中的策略元素,游戏设计师还能够不断提高他们游戏中的策略深度。如此他们便能够创造出一些更具有挑战性的战术游戏,或彻底改变所有苛刻的环境。

隐藏决定:

通过对敌人隐藏自己所做出的决定,玩家还需要去判断敌人的意图并预测他的行动。并且玩家也不清楚自己能够使用的资源在哪里。他们将会不断问自己“这些资源在哪?”“敌人可能会将它们藏在哪里?”等等。

在战争游戏或者角色扮演游戏中(很少会在规则中直接说明对象),隐藏行动便是这一方法的最典型例子。举个例子来说,《D20》虽然未详细提及更多内容,但是它却基于特定的闪电场景提供了视野范围的相关规则。我自己的《英雄时代》也提供了所需要的视线范围——让玩家能够根据地图做出GM判断。在任何系统中添加这一内容便能够取得不错的效果。

除此之外,隐藏行动还是用于隐藏目标(如一些隐形法术,烟雾等)或欺骗对手(诱骗军队去运载重要单位的的标志,而骑士尾随其后)的好方法。而所有的这些方法都能够帮助玩家不断地扩展自己的策略选择。

侦查:

有人想法藏东西,肯定就有人会想法去找出这些东西。

在游戏中添加更多资源和方法其实也是在原先的策略环境中添加另一个层面,特别是当它们所面对的资源非常有限之时。在此一个非常经典的例子便是《龙与地下城》中的预测法术。玩家将能够获得敌人的相关信息,但是相应的代价则是失去今后能够用于战斗魔法中的一个法术。除了魔法,在任何系统中使用侦查兵也意味着我们能够将资源(能够用于主力军中)变成侦查或袭扰的角色。

与之前提到的策略三要素一样,隐藏决定和侦查也是相辅相成的两大元素。当两者得到有效平衡时,玩家便能够发现对手的因果链并想办法破坏它——但是判断正确的因果链却需要玩家具有预测技能而不能只是简单地陈述事实。

所以我想在此强调两个涉及上述内容的重要因素——因为它们对于策略具有重要的影响。

“在战争中,避开强大的敌人而攻击弱小的敌人便是生存之道。水流会在途经的地表上形成水道;战士获得胜利也与自己所面对的敌人有关。”——《孙子兵法》,孙武。

我发现在战术元素中存在着一些各不相同的优势,并影响着我们所提到的策略元素。我们必须努力去拓展这一理念。不仅个人所拥有的优势会互不相同,每个人所获得的优势类型和属性也会有所不同。就像战争游戏《战锤》便有效地使用了这种优势而提高了游戏中的战术和策略环境范围,而《龙与地下城》也通过提供大范围的生物和物种创造出非常棒的效果。

地形是冲突的基本属性;树木和丘陵可用于掩饰某人的行动;高地创造了一种战斗优势或者说是良好的侦查位置;沼泽能够减少并引导行动。所有的这些内容对于战术和策略环境的影响就像锤子对于钉子的作用那般重要;反过来说,离开了这些内容也就等于巧克力蛋糕没有巧克力一样——如此你也就没有理由抱怨别人嫌弃你的游戏无趣了。

测试一个策略游戏设计是否优秀的简单方法便是观察游戏中的战斗是否运用了这些理念。引用上述所提到的孙武和Clausewitz的例子,如果你的游戏中的角色利用了这些理念,你便有了一个好的开端;而如果你是因为忽视了这些理念而不能获得成功,你就要想法解决问题。

游戏邦注:原文发表于2003年2月11日,所涉事件和数据均以当时为准。(本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译,拒绝任何不保留版权的转载,如需转载请联系:游戏邦

Elements of Strategy

by Brian Gleichman

Feb 11,2003

I discussed in a previous article various core concepts of game design that resulted in tactical play. Now I’d like to cover the big sister of tactics, strategy.

Since there are a number of possible definitions for both tactics and strategy it would be best to nail down the specifics of the discussion before things become more confused than they should be. I’m not using the common one found in military circles (tactical, operational, strategic) since in game terms those concepts are basically contained in the idea of scale. Instead I’ll be using a definition that is much the same as the one used in chess and other similar games.

Thus Tactical play is the immediate decisions made for material or immediate positional advantage, or in terms of another previous article- decisions and play that exists purely at the Game level. At its most basic, tactics is playing the board for immediate effect.

Strategic play however takes place at the Near Game or even the Meta-Game level (if not using the finer definitions from the Layers of Design article, I’d simply say it takes place in the Meta-Game). Here the focus isn’t directly on immediate concrete concerns, but rather on long-range goals and estimates of how one’s opponent is going to move and react. Strategy is not playing the board, but rather playing the man. As an example, in chess one may decide as a matter of strategy to launch your main attack on your opponent’s kingside- either because you’re more skilled in that line of attack than you are with other options, or because you know your opponent is weaker in that line of defense.

Let’s consider the primary elements of Strategy under this definition. Although they are greatly interrelated, almost like dance partners, they can be broken down as follows:

Prediction:

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.” Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

This element covers predicting the decisions of your opponent and your own performance. Some examples: Knowing that Joe tends to put his most powerful units in the center or realizing that Sara loses effectiveness in chess if her queen is exchanged. Knowing that your heavy fighters can hold the line long enough to complete the flanking maneuver you have planned. Etc.

Deception:

“Hence, when able to attack, you must seem unable, when using your tools, you must seem inactive. When we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away, when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

This element represents the flipside of Prediction, the ability to conceal your intentions and decisions from your opponent or even convince him that you are following a different course from your actual one. If he has positioned himself to protect from a strong center attack at the moment your Cavalry hits him on the right flank- your chances for victory is enhanced.

Causality:

“In war everything is simple, but it’s the simple things that are difficult.” General Carl Von Clausewitz.

This is the causal chain required to implement strategic decisions. If one decides to use your Cavalry to flank your opponent on the left while tying down his main body with your infantry- the causal chain is all the steps (and time) needed to properly position your troops in order to reach that objective.

A very important characteristic of the causal chain is its length- how many actions are needed over how much time. If the chain is too short, strategic decision itself will become trivial as the other elements become irrelevant. On the other hand, as the chain lengthens the difficulty and importance of the strategic decision increases. Prediction must look further ahead into increasingly fuzzy ground while deception must be prolonged. Failure on either point can result in catastrophe.

As a result, the length of the causal chain is perhaps the most important of the Elements of Strategy as it determines the impact of the others. Many game designs seek to employ both Prediction and Deception, but by resolving the end result immediately in a single roll or two they reduce the Strategic nature of their design to something no more interesting than rock-scissors-paper; an immediate guess followed by immediate and final outcome. It is still a strategic game design, if a very simple one suited only for those seeking the simplest of challenges.

Given these definitions and moving from theory to more practical (if still abstract) concerns- what design concepts are important to consider in creating or evaluating a game’s strategic environment?

Tactical Elements:

A strong tactical game will by nature normally produce a strong strategic one.

Chess is again an excellent example of this case, as it needs nothing but its tactical design to present strategic challenges worthy of centuries of play. Between players of near equal tactical skill the causal chain is long and complex enough that essentially limitless Strategies become available and defeating your foe’s perception of the game is nearly as (if not more) important than mastering its reality (as Deep Blue’s defeat of World Champion Gary Kasparov showed).

So for strategic groundwork first look to the tactical elements: Resource Management, Dissimilar Assets, Maneuver and Pace of Decision. It will be these elements that define the causal chain and it will be these elements that frame the strategic environment.

A game design however can increase its strategic depth beyond that provide by its tactical environment in a number of ways. This can be used to make a moderately tactical game into something considerably more challenging- or turn an already demanding environment into any commander’s nightmare.

Hidden Decisions:

By hiding decisions made by a player from his opponent(s), the need to judge the intent of your foe and predict his actions is greatly increased. Resources that are to be used against you are not in sight. Where could they be? Where would your opponent likely place them?

Hidden Movement is perhaps the most common example of this method in wargames and even in rpgs although the latter seldom emphasizes the subject in the rules directly. D20 for example includes rules for sight range under specific lightning conditions without much comment. My own Age of Heroes takes line of sight limits for granted- a matter for GM judgment based upon the map. Adding this to any system is easily done to great effect.

Beyond the simple fact of hidden movement are active measures taken to hide (invisibility spells, smoke, etc.) or deceive (decoy troops carrying the banners of important units, riders trailing branches to raise dust, etc). All can be given to a player as a toolset to expand his strategic options.

Reconnaissance:

If some attempt to hide things, others will always develop methods of investigation to reveal them.

Adding resources and methods to allow for such in a game adds yet another layer to the strategic environment, especially if by their use other resources are limited or spent. A classic example here are the divination spells from D&D. Information about one’s opponent can be had- at the price of losing a spell slot that could have been used for combat magic. Outside of magic, even the use of scouts in almost any system means that resources (which could have been of use in a main force) are diverted to a recon and/or harassment role.

Like the three elements of strategy above, Hidden Decisions and Reconnaissance are each part of a dance- play benefiting from both having their impact. When balanced to a fine degree, one may well discover part of a foe’s casual chain and thus act to interrupt it- but interpreting scattered clues to determine the correct causal chain can be left in large part to the Prediction skills of the player instead of being given as simply stated fact.

I’d like to emphasize two factors touched on above due to their potentially vast impact on strategy.

“So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak. Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it flows; the soldier works out his victory in relation to the foe whom he is facing.” Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

I’ve already covered Dissimilar Assets in the Elements of Tactics article and noted it’s impact on Strategy above. One should take effort however to extend this concept. Not only can the assets within ones own force be dissimilar- the type and nature of assets each force can draw from may differ. Wargames such as Warhammer use this to great effect to increase the range of its tactical and strategic environment while D&D gains the same effect from its vast range of creatures and races.

Terrain like ground-to-water shapes the very fundamental nature of a conflict. Woods and hills to conceal one’s movement. High ground to provide a combat bonus or a good spotting location. Swamp to reduce and channel movement. All impact the tactical and strategic environment as the hammer impacts a nail. Leaving it out is like leaving chocolate out your devil’s food cake- sure you’ll have a cake; just don’t complain when someone describes it as bland.

One of the easiest tests for good Strategic game design is to see if the classic wisdoms of war apply to the end results. The quotes from Sun Tzu and Clausewitz above for example. If characters in your game can make use of such concepts, you’ve at least got a good start. If they can’t gain victory without using such concepts constantly, you’ve managed it.

Lastly a challenge to the readers. I’ve left out at least one important concept in increasing a game’s strategic complexity (due to the fact that I wanted this article to be a reasonable length). Can you name it? I’ll give you a hint; the quote I would use for it is from Napoleon. (source:RPGnet)


上一篇:

下一篇: