作者：Hannes Rince

在经过一些研究并获得一些有帮助的评论后，我编写了这篇关于游戏玩法的文章，即描述基于DKART（游戏邦注：敏捷度，知识，适应性，反应能力，时机）系统的“技能”。在我看来并不只有这些技能，例如团队协作便是一种非常重要的技能，还有像专注度，耐心，自我控制和决定能力对于精通一款游戏都非常重要。

比起进一步拓展一些更宏观的说明，我将在此添加一些更宏观的说明。

所以今天我将基于另外一种范围去划分游戏，即基于：技能，运气和Yomi。它们是在游戏中获胜的一些重要组件。让我们先快速定义这三种元素：

技能是指一切可训练的对象。

运气是能够影响游戏结果的一切事物，这并不会受到任何游戏玩家的影响。

Yomi是能够在任何事情发生前清楚或准确猜到敌方接下来将会做什么的能力。

技能

技能是指一切可训练的对象。包括手眼协调，分析与思考，自律，团队交流等等。如果你投入1万个小时于其中，你便能够做得更好。如果你下定决心并专注于发展与实践，你便能够变得更好。经验，直觉或知识都能够帮助你更好地进行理解与表现，

运气

运气是能够影响游戏结果的一切事物，这并不会受到任何游戏玩家的影响。关于运气的一种暗示便是对于风险管理的需求，这也是一种技能。运气对于游戏的影响越大，游戏便会越偏离运气范围。例如虽然扑克包含了许多运气元素，但它却并非真正关于运气。有时候纸牌会欺骗你，但是因为频繁出现的幸运时刻，这更多的是关于风险管理的游戏。蛇梯棋便是纯粹地基于运气元素。而桌面游戏《Risk》虽然在设计中拥有风险管理功能，但却更多地倾向于运气，因为运气是最终决定游戏结果的内容。正因为如此我并不是很喜欢《Risk》这款游戏（也是因为其混乱的游戏机制）。

Yomi

Yomi是能够在任何事情发生前清楚或准确猜到敌方接下来将会做什么的能力。Yomi是特别的。关于它是否是可训练的对象这点充满争议。你可以使用一些心理技巧而更频繁地在石头剪刀布（RPS）中获胜，就像有些人因为某些原因而比其他人更擅于RPS。但最终当两个都非常清楚游戏技巧且不会受到影响的玩家在RPS中彼此对抗时，他们中仍会有一个人在策略方面比另外一个人突出。我不知道为什么会这样。也许只是因为奇迹，或者是因为心电感应，再或者是因为心理策略的影响，有可能这只是源于另外一种技能。但重要的是这并不是关于运气。关于Yomi的另外一个要点是，你需要另外一个人与你一起游戏；Yomi并不是关于与计算机的对抗。

这三种元素能够进一步划分游戏；并且我们能够从中获得一些有趣的观察结果。首先让我们着眼于一些较为极端的例子：

蛇梯棋：非常多运气，没有技能，也没有Yomi。

因为在游戏中缺少决定元素，这完全是基于运气，

RPS：较少的技能，没有运气，非常多Yomi。

除了需要应对少量心理障碍外，RPS可以说是Yomi游戏的显著代表（游戏邦注：在此Yomi甚至达到了极限）。

围棋：没有运气，没有Yomi，非常多技能。

围棋中不存在随机元素；当你在另外一颗石子后面放置一颗石子并且未作出任何艰难的决定时，至少对于我来说，围棋是不具有Yomi元素。如果你与对手具有同等的技能水平，也许可能会出现一些Yomi元素，但基于该分析的目标，我们决定将其认为是没有Yomi。但是围棋却包含了技能元素，并且非常侧重技能。你可以变得更擅长于游戏，这里存在许多可以学习的内容，你将能在游戏中表现得越来越好。

《反恐精英》：非常多技能，较少的运气，一些Yomi。

我指的是较高级别的《反恐精英》。在较低级别中，《反恐精英》似乎拥有许多运气元素，但这仅仅是因为玩家缺少对于游戏的了解。《反恐精英》需要不同的技能：反应度，3D目标，小组战术，对于武器和地图的了解，团队协作等等。如果你更擅长这些技能，你便能在游戏中表现得更好。因为实时结构，这款游戏拥有强大的Yomi元素。你是否会轰炸区域A或B？你是否会在门前等几秒或为了在不同角落遇到敌人而快速奔跑？这一观察同时也开启了另外一个有趣的概念。对于拥有较多Yomi元素的《反恐精英》，你和对手都需要较强的技能基础。Yomi只适用于面对同等技能的对手。如果你更擅长射击，那么即使对手突然出现在你身后你也能够将其杀死。

《星际争霸》：几乎没有运气，较多技能，一些Yomi。

《星际争霸》拥有与《反恐精英》类似的结构。除了破坏性输入中一些微小的差异外，在《星际争霸》中几乎没有什么随机元素；所有内容都是玩家可预测并且会产生影响的。《星际争霸》所要求的技能与《反恐精英》具有较大的区别。前者需要多重任务执行，宏观策略，微观战术和单位处理能力，关于多种策略，战术和单位的了解等等；当然了，在一款团队游戏中，还需要团队协作能力；还有经常被忽视的紧凑的2D目标以及使用鼠标和键盘进行快速且准确的输入。在了解了游戏的大体结构后，你在发展技能时需要做的第一件事便是学会使用热键和多重任务处理，如此便能将你的APM（每分钟操作数，即鼠标点击和键盘输入）从60至120提升至200。因为游戏需求，专业玩家的平均APM是在350至450期间。

游戏并不能只是侧重于技能，同时也需要考虑到不同技能。围棋需要比《星际争霸》更多的技能，并且需要与《反恐精英》不同的技能。一款游戏可能需要比其它游戏更多的技能；就像《星际争霸》需要比围棋更广泛的技能。我将着称作“技能专攻”；即需要什么技能以及所需技能的范围都是设置好的。所需技能组决定了不同玩家会喜欢不同的游戏。如果你喜欢更快的反应，那么你便会选择射击游戏。如果你喜欢处理多重任务，你便会选择RTS。如果你喜欢精确的分析，你则会选择围棋等等。

《Risk》：较多的运气，一些技能，没有Yomi。

有效执行Yomi的三大典型例子便是《Risk》，《Diplomacy》和《街头霸王》。首先，就像我之前提到的那样，《Risk》非常侧重运气。你可以拥有最佳策略并且可能被筛子耍的团团转。游戏中包含许多风险管理，与其他玩家的交流，以及一些欺骗设置。但《Risk》中却不具有Yomi。因为每个玩家将一个接一个地做出决定并且不会做出任何复杂的决定，所以也就没有Yomi的存在空间。

《Diplomacy》：没有运气，一些技能，非常多Yomi。

另一方面，虽然《Diplomacy》没有随机元素，但却侧重执行了Yomi。每一轮玩家拥有15分钟的时间与对手和临时同盟一起讨论策略。在这段时间后，所有行动将同时执行。你是否相信France，并支持他进入English部分？你是否认为他将进入你的Ruhrgeiet，而你需要阻止他？或者因为这里充满了骗人的设置（与Yomi相反）：你不得不选择Norway或Sweden才能获胜；作为你最后的对手，Tzar在Finland拥有一支军队；而你的舰队则在Skagerrak。你们都能够进入这些国家，但是你们只能选择进入一个国家，如果你们进入了同一个国家，你们便需要阻碍彼此。从根本上来看：如果你们作出了不同的选择，你便能够获胜。如果你们的选择相同，你便会失败。你可以利用所有的RPS心理技巧，但在最后一切都会变成Yomi。这并不是关于运气也不是关于技能，而是纯粹的Yomi。

《街头霸王》：一些技能，非常多Yomi，没有运气。

最后一个例子，也是呈现出许多Yomi的是《街头霸王》。《街头霸王》需要许多实践才能完美地执行你想要的任何特殊的移动，也需要许多伴随着不同角色和战术的时间和体验；我认同这款游戏不像《星际争霸》或围棋那样过分要求技能，但它却具有压倒性的Yomi。上下阻碍。快速或缓慢攻击。撤退或躲避。《街头霸王》其实非常像石头剪刀布，除了你需要同时向对手丢出5个石头，5个布以及5个见到。与《Diplomacy》相比，《街头霸王》的Yomi非常快速；在几秒钟时间便会出现一些Yomi；而在《Diplomacy》中可能是每个15分钟时左右才会出现。所以这款游戏中存在非常缓慢且周到的Yomi也有非常快速且基于反应度和直觉的Yomi。

《街头霸王》中另外一个有趣的内容是技能发展/成功发展的关系。当第一次玩这款游戏时，你只会乱按。即可能按压任何按键以及一些半适合的方向键，你有可能获胜也有可能失败，而这一切都很有趣。因为对游戏的不了解，这对你来说可能是一款运气游戏。但是当你坐下来选择一个角色并学着执行特殊移动时，你便会清楚如何发射Hadoken或Chun Lis如何使用回旋踢。在经过1至2个小时的学习，记忆与实践后，你将再次按压按键，并且有可能再次失败。那时候如果不断尝试着玩游戏有可能导致你玩得更糟糕。在经过1，2周的实践后，你将会慢慢进入状态，并学习如何应对随机的拳打脚踢，并能够跟随着自己的招数；从那时候起你便会不断发展。但是在短时间内你的技能发展与成功率是成反比。还有一件有趣的事是：在学习游戏的过程中，游戏将从基于运气“转向”基于技能再“转向”基于Yomi。

现在我们已经解释了种种元素，我想要再写一写关于自己喜欢的内容以及我们在《UnderRaid》中的尝试与执行。

我并不是很喜欢运气。运气是游戏设计师的一种工具，并且不能过度使用。它能够用于：

—-分解游戏中一些无聊且固定的部分；我认为这是《星际争霸》中一些破坏性中的较小差异（特别是对于具有少量单位战斗的早前游戏）。

—-执行风险管理的需求，如果这是你希望游戏所依赖的一种技能的话。

—-执行一些复原机制；就像我会在另一篇文章写到的那样，运气是对此来说最糟糕且无趣的机制。

太多运气元素会导致游戏混乱不堪。如果你长时间地在游戏中进行战斗，最终你的胜负将只能取决于运气，这会让玩家觉得自己的胜利是没有价值的。如果你因为运气不好而失败，你也会觉得不公平。风险管理可能是游戏的核心，但最后却不改由运气去决定结果，而是因为受到风险管理级别的影响。如果游戏可以不用完全依赖于运气，我便会真正去感受它的乐趣。

Yomi是结束一款游戏更让人满足的一种方式。如果你因为掷筛子而失败，你同时也有可能因为不断掷筛子而获得成功。而如果你的胜负是由Yomi所决定，你便有可能打败对手。你既了解可能性也能够做出自己的决定。在漫长且基于技能的战斗中，Yomi所决定的胜利会让玩家更开心了，而即使是失败也不会导致他们太过沮丧。当然了，不管是Yomi还是运气都不能彻底决定游戏设计。Yomi也许只是另外一种游戏所需技能；如果你所玩的游戏需要Yomi，那么你至少需要去了解它并为其做出适当的决定。

在设计一款游戏时，我认为思考游戏所需要的技能组合非常重要。玩游戏并尝试着思考在游戏中使用什么技能或行动能够获胜。所有的这些技能是否是你在游戏中真正需要的，或者你是否能够更多地专注于其中的技能？游戏是否需要另一个级别？尽管我很喜欢RTS游戏，但我只是因为想要达到更高的APM并处理多重任务。我非常享受于思考策略，但实际上这并不是基于普通技能的RTS游戏所要求的。我总是认为《Risk》是关于策略和交流；但其实它更多地关于风险管理，交流也是依赖于与其他玩家的关系。而桌面游戏《Diplomacy》更多地侧重于策略和交流，并且能让一些玩家进行协商与撒谎。就此而言如果一款游戏能够专注于自身的技能组合我便会非常喜欢它，因为比起不认真地做5件事，我将更专心于其中的1种技能。

yomi(from gamasutra)

话说回来，我们尝试着让《UnderRaid》专注于制作策略决定并从战略上应对敌人（而不是简单地执行之前制定好的计划），而这之间只有少量的Yomi元素。基于快速的回合制游戏玩法，游戏既不需要精确度也不需要较高的APM，我们尝试着保持机制的简单与直觉性，所以不管是游戏还是控制都不会是你的敌人，归根结底游戏便是关于两名玩家之间的互动。从上面的图中我们可以看到《UnderRaid》处于《星际争霸》，《反恐精英》和《魔兽争霸》之间，因为房间选择的原因，我们不像《星际争霸》那么侧重运气元素，而策略调整则更倾向于Yomi以及一些战略元素。

（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转发，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

What a game demands for a win: Skill, Luck, Yomi

by Hannes Rince

EDIT: After some research and helpful comments, I learned about this great gameplay blog, which describes “Skills” with a DKART-system (dexterity, knowledge, adaption, reflexes, timing). In my opinion there is much more to it, as for example team communication is a very important skill, and some meta-skills like focus,patience, selfcontrol and determination are very important to become better at a game (or, for that matter, anything).

Original post here.

Due to the interest in the game theory of the first post, I will talk about another concept that I use. Instead of deepening the broad statements made, I will add more broad statements. Huzzah!

So today I want to classify games on another scale, this time with three axes: Skill, Luck and Yomi. The scale describes what component is needed to consistently win the game. As an overview, quick definitions:

Skill is everything that is trainable.

Luck is everything that influences the games outcome, that can not be influenced or predetermined by any player of the game.

Yomi is the ability to know or to have a high probability of guessing correctly what the enemy player will do next, before anything can actually physically be known.

Skill

Skill is everything that is trainable. Eye-hand coordination, analysis and thinking, self-discipline, team communication, etc. If you put 10.000 hours into it, you will be better. If you set your mind to it, focus on the development and practice, you will become better. Experience, intuition or book knowledge all help you understand and act more precise and efficient in whatever you are doing that needs Skill.

Luck

Luck is everything that influences the games outcome, that can not be influenced or predetermined by any player of the game. One gameplay implication of luck (most of the time) is the need for risk management, which is a skill though. The more impact singular instances of luck have on the games outcome, the higher the game would rate on the luck scale. For example, poker, though having a lot of luck involved, actually is not that much about luck. The cards sometimes might screw you over, but due to the frequency of singular lucky moments, it is much more a game about risk management, bluffing and knowing people. “Snakes and Ladders” is based solely on luck. The board game “Risk”, while it has risk-management in its design focus (and in its name), is based heavily on luck, because luck is what decides the game in the end. Because of this, I am not to big a fan of Risk (and because of its chaotic mechanics).

Yomi

Yomi is the ability to know or to have a high probability of guessing correctly what the enemy player will do next, before anything can actually physically be known.
Yomi is a weird thing. It is very arguable whether it is trainable. There are some psychological tricks you can use to win Rock Paper Scissors more frequently, and there are people who for some reason are better at RPS than others. But in the end, when two players, who both know all the tricks by heart and are not influenced by any of them, play RPS against one another, one of them still can be better with statistical significance. I don’t know how that works. Maybe it’s magic. Maybe it’s telepathy. Maybe it’s empathy and psychology; maybe it’s just another skill. I don’t know. The important thing is, it’s not luck. Another thing about Yomi is, you need another person; Yomi doesn’t work against a computer.

Ok, given these three scales, games can be differentiated on them; and some interesting observations about the dimensions can be made. First, let us look at very extreme examples:

Snakes and Ladders: High Luck, No Skill, No Yomi.

Due to the lack of decision making in the game, it’s based entirely and solely on luck.

RPS: Low Skill, Zero Luck, High Yomi

Except for a small barrier of psychological tricks, that have to be dealt with, RPS is a prime example of a Yomi game (at this point, the term “Yomi” has reached its limit, lol).

Go: Zero Luck, Zero Yomi, High Skill

Go has no random elements; and since you place one stone after another and make no hard decisions at the same time, Go, at least on my level, has no Yomi. Maybe if you’re really, really high up, and if you are on a very equal skill level to your opponent, maybe then it has some element of Yomi; but I doubt that, and for the purpose of this analysis, we might say it has no Yomi. But Go involves skill, very focused skill. You can become better at go all your life, there is always more to learn and train, and the training will always show in better games.

Counter-Strike: High Skill, Little Luck, Some Yomi.

I’m talking about pro-level CS, not about your general LAN-Party-playing-once-a-year-CS. On a low-level, CS seems to have lots of luck involved; but that is merely due to the player’s lack of knowledge about the game. CS needs different skills: reflexes, 3D aim, squad tactics, knowledge of the weapons and maps, and team communication. The better you are at each, the better you are at the game, simple as that. Because of its real-time structure, it has quite the strong element of Yomi in it. Do you go to bomb spot A or B? Do you wait a second in front of a door, or do run fast in hope that the enemy checks a different corner when you meet? Another interesting concept opens up at this observation. For this CS to really have a high element of Yomi, you AND your opponents need a good foundation of skill. Yomi only works against people of equal skill; otherwise one player is just flattened. If you’re a much better shot, you will kill him even if he pops up behind you.

StarCraft: Next to Zero Luck, High Skill, Some Yomi.

Now on this scale, StarCraft has a very similar structure to Counter-Strike. Except for small deviations in damage output, hardly anything in SC is random; everything is very predictable and influenceable by the player. Though a good, albeit obvious point can be made with this example. The skills demanded by StarCraft are quite different from CS. SC needs multitasking, macro-strategy, micro-tactics and unit-handling, knowledge about various strategies, tactics, units and counter-tactics; of course, in a team game, team communication; and, often overlooked, very tight 2D-Aim and generally quick, precise input over mouse and keyboard. After having learned the general structure of the game, the first thing to really let you grow in skill is learning to use hotkeys and multitasking, resulting in ramping your APM (actions per minute, any input from mouse clicks to keyboard taps) from 60 to 120 to 200. The average pro-player has APM from 350 to 450, because the game demands it.

A game can not only be highly based on skill, but also the kinds of skill can be very different. Go needs different skills than StarCraft, which needs different skills than CounterStrike. A game can demand more skills than others; StarCraft demands a broader range of skills than Go. I would call this “skill focus”; what skills are needed, and how broad they are set. The demanded skill set is mostly what makes different players like different games. If you like fast reflexes, go with ego shooters. If you like multitasking, go with RTS. If you like precise analysis, go with Go (ha.), etc.

Risk: High Luck, Some Skill, Zero Yomi.

Three very good examples that demonstrate the implementation of Yomi are Risk, Diplomacy (<a href: DevLog1 >which I described earlier</a> and Street Fighter. First, Risk is, as mentioned above, heavily based on luck. You can have the best strategy and still be screwed by the dice. There is a lot of risk-management involved, some diplomacy with the other players, and maybe a little bluffing. But Risk has zero Yomi. Because every player decides one after another and no hard decisions are made at the same time, there is no place for Yomi.

Diplomacy: Zero Luck, Some Skill, quite high Yomi

Diplomacy on the other hand, while having no random element, heavily implements Yomi. You have 15 minutes every round to discuss strategies and politics with your opponents and temporary allies, and in this time you write down your moves. After this period, all moves are executed at the same time. Do you believe France, and support him to go into the English canal? Or do you think he will move into your Ruhrgebiet, and you will have to block him there? Or, an even better example, since this is a little clouded by bluffing (in contrast to Yomi): You will have to take Norway or Sweden for the win; the Tzar, as your last standing opponent, has an Army in Finland; and your Fleet is in the Skagerrak. Both of you have access to both countries, both of you can only go in one country, and if you move into the same country, you will block each other and stay in Finland or respectively the Skagerrak. Basically: If you choose differently, you win. If you choose the same, you lose. You can do all your RPS psychology tricks, but at the end of the day, its Yomi. It’s not luck. It’s not Skill. It’s Yomi.

Street Fighter: Some Skill, High Yomi, Zero Luck

Last example, that shows a quality of Yomi, is Street Fighter. Street Fighter needs a lot of practice for the perfect execution of whatever special move you want to do, a lot of timing and experience with the different characters and tactics; I would argue it’s not quite demanding in Skill as StarCraft or Go, but it definitely beats both in Yomi. Block above or down. Attack fast or slow. Retreat or close. Street Fighter is pretty much exactly like Rock Paper Scissors, except you throw five rocks, five papers and five scissors at nearly the same time against your opponent. In comparison to Diplomacy, the Street Fighter Yomi is very, very fast paced; in fractions of seconds there are several instances of Yomi; whereas in Diplomacy, there are maybe two every fifteen minutes, and they are not even guaranteed. So there is very slow, very thoughtful Yomi, and very fast, reflex-based and intuitive Yomi.

Another fun thing that can be observed in Street Fighter, is the Skill Growth / Success Growth relation. When playing the game for the first time, you just button mash. Press any buttons and some half-fitting directional keys, and you win or you lose and its fun. Due to the missing knowledge about the game, it might as well be a luck-game. But then you sit down, choose a character, and learn to execute the special moves. You know how to Hadoken or you know Chun Lis spinning kick that looks like a Helicopter ( <3 Chun Li). And after an hour or two of learning, memorising and practising these moves you play against a button mashing noob again… and lose. Consistently. Trying to play the game better at that point actually makes you play worse. After a week of practice or two, you get the hang of it, and learn to block and counter random kicks and punches, and to follow with your own combo; from then on, it’s continual growth. But for a short time, the growth of your skill was inverse to the growth of your success rate. Also fun: Over the course of learning the game, the game “changes” from luck based to skill based to a Yomi based game. Only on a high skill level does the dimension of Yomi in the game open up.

Now that we have set and explained the dimensions, I want to write a little about my own preference and reason, and how I try and implement this in UnderRaid.

I am not a fan of luck. Luck is a game designers tool, and should only be used sparingly. It can be used

- to break up boring, fixed parts of the game; I believe, that is what the small deviations in damage in StarCraft are for (especially for the early game, where very few units battle);

- to implement the need for risk-management, if that is a skill that you want your game to be based on;

- to implement some sort of comeback mechanism; though, as I will demonstrate in another Log, Luck is the worst, un-fun mechanism for that.

Too much luck makes the game chaotic. If you battle for a long time in whatever game and in the end you win or lose solely based on luck, it just doesn’t feel like a deserved win. If you lose due to luck, it doesn’t feel justified. Risk management might be core to the game, but the end should not be decided by luck, but by the level of risk management. I really enjoy it if a game is designed in an interesting way that does not rely on luck at all.

Yomi is a much, much more satisfying way to end a game. If you lose by a dice roll, you could also won, without anyones doing, only by the arbitrary will of soulless dice. If you lose or win by Yomi, then you defeated your opponent. You both knew the possibilities, you both decided, it’s a focused showdown between two spirits. A win by Yomi, at the end of a long, equally skilled battle, feels epic; and a loss feels good and deserved. While I’m at it, neither Yomi nor Luck are the last word in game design, of course. Yomi might be just another skill needed; if on a high skill level your game demands Yomi, at least know it and decide for it.

When designing a game, I think it’s very important to think about the skill set your game demands. Play your game and try to think it to the extreme, and what skills and actions are needed to win. Are all the skills needed really what you want from the game, or can you focus it more? Does it need another level? While I enjoy RTS games, I just stop at the point where I’m needed to have higher APM, and for that matter, extreme multitasking. I enjoy well thought out strategies, but actually, that is not what RTS games are about at some (my) mediocre level of skill. I always thought Risk was about strategy and diplomacy; but it is much more about risk management, and the diplomacy depends heavily on the other players. The board game Diplomacy is much more focused on the strategy and diplomacy, and even brings qualitative players to negotiate and lie. For that matter, I really like it if a game focuses its skill set; because then I can really concentrate and enjoy that skill, rather than doing five things half heartedly.

Having said that, we try to focus UnderRaid on the tactical decision making and the strategic adaption to the enemy (rather than simple execution of a previously devised plan), with a little Yomi in between. With the fast turn-based gameplay, neither precision nor high APM are needed; we try to keep the mechanics simple and intuitive; so neither the game nor the controls are your enemy, and the game comes down to the interaction of two players. In the picture you see UnderRaid between StarCraft, Counterstrike and DotA; due to the room-selection we are a little heavier on the luck than StarCraft, and the strategic adaption is heavily yomi-based as well as some tactical components.

Dear reader, thank you for reading all these broad statements without scientific aspiration.

Until next time, just play whatever you feel like(source:gamasutra)