Difference between revisions of "Units"

Revision as of 13:58, 2 January 2011

Disposable game elements under the control of the game system or players that are either interacted with on a group level or have no individual distinguishing features from a set of other game elements.

Units is the term for game elements whose influence on gameplay is often considered from a group perspective, and whose uniqueness is not relevant for said gameplay. The Units may have different actions and attributes associated with them but as players controls or interacts with many Units simultaneously, the loss of single units is seldom the cause of losing a game.

Examples

All the pieces in Chess and Stratego (except the king and the flag respectively) are Units since there is no difference between members of the same category (e.g. Rooks, Bishops, and Pawns) and any may be lost without that causing the game to be immediately lost. In Bloodbowl, players control teams playing a version of American football in a fantasy setting and the team members (except star players) start indistinguishable from each other.

In the board game Space Hulk, one of the players controls an essentially unlimited amount of Units, called genestealers, which are replenished endlessly. The opposing player has a preset number of Units, called space marines, which are not replenished once lost. The X-Com series and the Jagged Alliance series are examples of computer games putting players in charge of small groups. In contrast, roleplaying games such as Dungeons & Dragons have players controlling one character of their own but these are typically outnumbered in combat situations by inferior enemies controlled by game masters.

Computational power makes it possible to have large amounts of Units in a game, but typically do so by letting them be only partly under the players' direct control. Pik-Min, a more or less real-time puzzle game, and Lemmings are examples of games that make heavy use of Units and the goo balls in World of Goo can to a lesser extent be seen as an example as well. Real-time strategy (RTS) games such as the StarCraft series and the Age of Empires series make heavy use of Units, where the choice and use of the different available types of units is one of the strategic skills of the games. Defense of the Ancients is similar, but players have no control over the Units (referred to as creeps). Computer can of course also be used to expose players to many enemies - this is especially common in zombie games, e.g. the Left 4 Dead series, the Dead Rising series, and Zombiepox.

Using the pattern

A basic requirement for Units to exist is that the game system or the players have control over more than one game element, since having only one game element gives rise to the Avatars patterns instead. The patterns are however compatible, as for example in Defense of the Ancients where each player in a Team has a Character but have no control over the many creeps that also fight on their side. Units can be used also as Companions to the players' Avatars (or Characters); in this case, they can be given various degrees of autonomy or be directly controlled through the Avatars.

Several design choices have to be made when using Units. Maybe the most fundamental is if the units are supposed to be under players (including AI Players) control or be under control of the game system. Their prime use when directed by the system is to be Enemies, and their behavior is in this case the result of being Algorithmic Agents or having Game Masters. The agency can also be used to make Units take some Initiative, e.g. so that Units in Warcraft or StarCraft attack enemies found after having moved to a location specified by a player. The complexity and skills of these Units can be designed to support both Casual Gameplay and Challenging Gameplay, especially when used as Companions and Enemies respectively. Quite often these types of Units have clearly different modes the operated in, for example going from a passive to active mode when an Alarm is triggered.

The amount of Units available to players is one of the most fundamental choices. The number of the Units may be preset so that the players have Limited Resources or it may be determined by Randomness, or depending on the player actions, during the set-up phase. When the players can affect the number of Units they may have during the gameplay, these Units are Renewable Resources and can be rewards for completing sub goals, be produced from Resource Generators or Converters that are under the player's control, or through succeeding with Gain Ownership goals of enemy Units through Transfer of Control actions. The Units themselves may be part of a neutral pool of Resources, which the player can take control over through succeeding with Gain Ownership goals. In most cases, the lifetime of Units is governed by a Producer-Consumer pattern. For example in the Civilization series, the production of Units is done in cities, and the Units can be consumed in Combat through Game Element Removal. Using Converters, or gaining control over new Producers, may allow players to Upgrade Units to give them New Abilities (which may of course give players as a whole New Abilities). Population Caps can be used to limit the maximum number of Units available, and by this hindering one form of Positive Feedback Loop related to simply out producing opponents.

Beyond how many Units are available to players is the decision of when the players can start to use them. Making all possible Units available at the start makes them a Non-Renewable Resource and typically speeds up the game if they can be eliminated during gameplay. Portioning the available Units over time or giving them out as rewards for goals can be used to maintain Casual Gameplay and avoid Analysis Paralysis. In games with Population Caps, increasing or decreasing the number of Units allowed can be used as Rewards or Penalties. The number of Units can also be regulated by Game Element Removal, for example through being targets of the Damage from Deadly Traps and the Combat motivated by other players' Eliminate goals. Given that they can be present in large number, the destruction of Units or giving them Decreased Abilities does not need to be game breaking events.

The abilities of the Units can either be identical - in order to stress the use of them as a group - or be Asymmetric to encourage Strategic Knowledge related to Combos (most efficiently promoted through Orthogonal Unit Differentiation). In the latter case, this can increase the value of each Unit as it may not be replaced by another and may promote Stimulated Planning on when and where to use uncommon Units. If the players can control the production of Units, the existence of several different types can promote Varied Gameplay and Tradeoffs, as the players have to decide what types of Units they want to acquire. Although the types of actions Units may have can vary widely, unless Movement is possible for them they are likely to be interpreted more as Tokens than Units (especially if their other actions do not have some directional component).

The value of units relative to each other is also worth considering. This may typically affect the cost to create them with Producers and be linked to their power, especially if the Units have different Limited Set of Actions available or if any Privileged Abilities exist. The different abilities of Units do not have to be inherent; the use of Tools can explain various Privileged Abilities as can Location-Fixed Abilities, e.g. Alarms. Orthogonal Unit Differentiation between Units may be used to set up Paper-Rock-Scissors power relations so that some weak unique can be powerful in special cases. This is for example done in Stratego, where the weakest Unit, the spy, is the only type to be able to kill the most powerful one, the Marshal. This evens the usefulness of the Units even though they have varying power, and typically also provides more Varied Gameplay.

Providing players with sufficient information about the current state of the Units can require the use of a Game State Overview or a Game World that can be viewed in its entirety all at once. Many games using Units, and especially those where the number of the Units can change over time, make use of a Camera for Third-Person Views and a God's Finger to allow the players to navigate the Game World in order to locate and select which Units to use.

Units typically have no Characters associated with them since they are most often meant to be indistinguishable from each other. However, the patterns can be combined when most of the player interaction with the Units are on the group level but some individual management occurs intermittently. The X-Com series and the Jagged Alliance series are examples of this.

Diegetic Aspects

Units that have different abilities are typically distinguished from each other through use of Diegetically Outstanding Features - this to help players understand the game state and more easily navigate to specific units.

Consequences

Units which are under another player's or the game system's control are typically examples of Agents. If compared with single Avatars with the same action repertoire, Units allow a greater Freedom of Choice simply because a choice can be made for each Unit. In addition, having several game elements that can be controlled typically allows Combos which are impossible otherwise. As a potential downside to these effects, having many Units often requires more input to the system which can in effect become Excise. This is especially true in Self-Facilitated Games.

Units are Resources in games, and often acquiring them represents a form of Investment. For this reason, players controlling Units that are in some form of danger have Evade and Survive goals, especially when the Penalties for losing Units include Ability Losses and the ability to perform Combos.

Units allow the players to have multiple Focus Loci where they can affect Game Worlds without breaking their Diegetic Consistency. However, they may create Complex Gameplay due to demands of Attention Swapping. This is especially likely if the game does not support a Game State Overview, which shows relevant information about each player's Units.

Various Units can have different Limited Set of Actions by making use of Orthogonal Unit Differentiation, so using them can require the players to make Tradeoffs between different types of Units. Different stages of the gameplay can further require different types of Units, allowing Varied Gameplay as do games using Paper-Rock-Scissors power structures between the different types of Units.

Units let the players simulate Teams even in Single-Player Games as they can let Combos appear to be Team Combos. This encourages Stimulated Planning and allows players to do Resource Management on a higher level than using Avatars, as the destruction or death of Units may in some cases even be advantageous and necessary. Thus Units can be seen as a use of Parallel Lives which in contrast to Avatars are more or less dispensable.

Units have compatibility problems with the Non-Player Characters pattern since the former assumes both diegetic individuality and not being under player control.

Relations

Can Instantiate

Analysis Paralysis, Attention Swapping, Combos, Companions, Complex Gameplay, Enemies, Evade, Excise, Focus Loci, Freedom of Choice, Gain Ownership, Investment, Parallel Lives, Resource Management, Resources, Stimulated Planning, Survive, Tradeoffs, Varied Gameplay

with Asymmetric Abilities

Strategic Knowledge

with Combos

Teams

with Companions

Casual Gameplay

with Enemies

Challenging Gameplay

with Self-Facilitated Games

Excise

Can Modulate

-

Can Be Instantiated By

-

Can Be Modulated By

Ability Losses, Alarms, Algorithmic Agents, Asymmetric Abilities, Camera, Characters, Combat, Converters, Damages, Deadly Traps, Decreased Abilities, Diegetically Outstanding Features, Eliminate, Game Element Removal, Game Masters, Game State Overview, God's Finger, Initiative, Limited Set of Actions, Limited Resources, Location-Fixed Abilities, New Abilities, Non-Renewable Resource, Orthogonal Unit Differentiation, Paper-Rock-Scissors, Population Caps, Positive Feedback Loops, Privileged Abilities, Producers, Producer-Consumer, Renewable Resources, Resource Generators, Third-Person Views, Teams Tools, Transfer of Control, Upgrading

Potentially Conflicting With

Avatars, Non-Player Characters

History

A rewrite of a pattern that was part of the original collection in the book Patterns in Game Design^[1].

References

1. ↑ Björk, S. & Holopainen, J. (2004) Patterns in Game Design. Charles River Media. ISBN1-58450-354-8.

Acknowledgments