Alex & Adam - Getting +1 Wit for Kills: Why it's a really poor change to Outwitters

[Ravernoth]

This feature is in beta, but it seems likely to go live with the update in a few days. It feels like OML may have decided from the beginning to go ahead with this change regardless of feedback. It's understandable if they see it as an attempt to win a new audience.

But knowing that they do read these forums, I want to make a last ditch effort to show them the downsides of this change.


Short version: Outwitters had perfect gameplay mechanics. And this change breaks that elegance and balance in numerous ways, while contributing little and worsening many aspects.

My guess is that Outwitters' poor sales performance has given Alex and Adam the impression that the gameplay is lacking.

Despite us fans and the critics praising the brilliantly simple yet deep gameplay, OML don't see that they've produced a gem, and that the flaws are in the business model and the marketing. Here's another good post on this topic.

Quick look at what's wrong with this change:



Why has OML come up with this 'Wits for kills' change?

I can't recall a single person saying that the gameplay needed changing. What needs work?

• Special unit or heavy balancing - possibly.
• Fix FTA - yes.
• Fix Matchmaking - yes.
• Create new teams and maps - yes.
• Offer a speed or realtime option for instant gratification - yes.
• Radically change the core gameplay? - No. No. No.
  

So, why then?

It seems that this change is intended to have one or both of these effects:


First Intended Effect: Speed up the game so that it's more appealing to casual players and tire kickers

Actual Effect: Worsens gameplay and does not increase appeal to casuals

A player looking for immediate and continuous gameplay will not stick with Outwitters just because he can kill 5 units instead of 3 units before waiting 20 minutes for his next turn.

Say RTS and other realtime games have an 'Instant Gratification' factor of 100.

Outwitters has an 'Instant Gratification' factor of around 10 - which is fine with us async fans.

This change might boost this factor to 15 for Outwitters. Which does nothing for realtime fans.

And any 'rush' that the change adds while killing units, quickly becomes a sinking feeling when your units are decimated on the counter.

Better solution: Speed or realtime game option.


Second Intended Effect: Reduce turtling/defensive play

Actual Effect: Encourages turtling/defensive play

Giving wits for kills might seem on the surface to reward aggressive play and discourage defensive play.

But in fact it does the opposite.

A turtler does not get fewer kills by being defensive. If anything, his counter attack (especially with a Bombshell) is likely to kill more units than the initial attack.

I haven't seen this myself, but sniper turtling is apparently an effective defensive strategy now.

Better solution: Do nothing - the 8 wit FTA fix already addresses this. FTA forced P2 to defend, and allowed P1 to turtle with impunity. Address Bombshell balancing.


Here are the major downsides of this 'Wits for Kills' change:

So, the change doesn't do what it's intended to do. But that's not the end of it. This change also has a huge impact on the rest of gameplay:

• Reduces the skill factor in the game
  Because it causes larger swings in matches. If you imagine Outwitters as a tug of war to get enough of an advantage to get over the line, and each player taking turns to tug. This change causes each tug to be much bigger, and therefore you can get over the line easier. To use another analogy, we've given each boxer metal gloves so that each punch is more violent, and knockouts are easier and require less skill.
  

• It is an awkward hack to the gameplay.
  OML's stated goal was to see if simple rules could create an interesting strategy game. And they succeeded - the gameplay mechanics as they were, were pretty much perfect.
  
  The game is built around wits - each action costs a wit. Removing the wit requirement for kills to spice things up does not gel with the rest of the gameplay. Outwitters is a symphony, and now you want to add a thumping bass to it to make it more appealing.
  
  Why not give wits for attacking a base? Wits for moving next to an enemy unit? Wits for attacking an enemy unit?
  

• Rewards something that needs no reward
  A kill already has the benefit of removing an enemy unit.
  

• Planning becomes confusing and complicated
  1 wit for some attacks, and 0 wits for others adds a layer of almost arbirtrary complexity onto the elegance of Outwitters. Even top ranked players have commented on the difficulty of assessing a situation - whereas before the player was in control, now it feels more like guesswork. Testers have been unable even to properly assess the Bramble and FTA change because of how much this wit change unbalances the game.
  

• Benefits a player almost randomly
  Since outcomes of skirmishes are much more unpredictable. Depending on who kills more units in an exchange (which should not necessarily be the goal of an exchange). This is related to the previous point.
  

• Removes an element of decision making.
  Delivering a blow for a kill is a decision that costs a wit that you could be using to do something else. Making it free lessens the game.
  

• Scouting is discouraged, reducing one key aspect of strategy, leading to more guesswork rather than skill, and lessens the game.
  

• Special units are more unbalanced. Bombshells, which by most accounts is already the strongest special, get even stronger. A bombshell attack killing 3 units now GAINS 2 wits. Scrambler is even weaker, since the scrambler and his target usually get killed the following turn, granting the opponent 2 wits.
  

• Speeds up the whole game unnecessarily and unevenly by giving extra wits in spurts.
  

• Forces your players to relearn the game. Outwitters is a game of skill, where the layers of depth are only uncovered with time, experimenting and experience. This change means much of what we know would be invalid.
  
  Think about the scale of the change - we had a long discussion about whether 3 wits for P2 was a good amount to fix FTA. Yet this change can give a player 2-5 wits in a single turn.
  

Alex and Adam, if youre reading this, I hope you can see why it's a hugely flawed change that doesn't fix what it's intended to fix, radically changes the feel of the game AND breaks a beautifully balanced game on top of it.

Please listen to your fans and don't implement this change.

And if you've read this, please vote in the poll and share your thoughts.