These questions are just food for thought.
- Is 50% accuracy (keeping in mind that accuracy starts at 100% at 2 range and drops off to around 65% at 7 range; 50% is the asymptote) the optimal (in terms of balance and unit design) default accuracy for heavy cavalry archers? Why not 60% or 40%? Think of how it affects civs like the goths or khmer.
- Are stone prices for buildings optimal? Does the revealed preference of players toward castles and away from stone walls and towers inform us of something or is it simply just a reflection of habits or preference? Why not have towers cost 75w 100s? Why not 25w and 150s?
- are stone mining techs really optimally priced? What about the default stone mining rate?
- are pike and skirmisher upgrades optimally priced given the units inflexibility and design goal of being cost effective counters? Consider the counterplay available from militia, siege, poorly upgraded xbow, and freely available knights.
- is the training time difference of 4.5 res/sec and 2.7 res/second between knights and pike appropriate given the role and relative inflexibility of pikes?
- are mills, farms, and wheelbarrow optimally priced given the dynamics we observe with food costs and food heavy units between feudal and late castle age? What makes having mills cost the same as lumber camps good design? What makes 60f the optimal price for farms?
- given that unit line costs stay the same across time, is it really prudent to have significant divergence between food and wood/gold economy in the mid game relative to dark age and imperial age? Doesnt this imply that actual villager time costs also diverge in the midgame?
- was supplies at -15f really necessary in the late game or was its a band-aid to fix the food divergence above? If such divergence was not present what would the appropriate discount be?
- what differences between units or civs are necessary to prevent 30 or 40% price differences in the same unit line from being overpowered? Or from forcing the non-discounted version from being underpowered? Does the blacksmith and UT parameter space even allow such balance to occur? Keep in mind upgrades and unit combinations are not free but discounts are usually provided freely.
Meta questions:
- given that any of these parameters need to be changed what is the most appropriate updating proceedure for said change? Large discrete changes? Forward guidance to players on direction followed by frequent small changes in that direction?
- What relation exists betweent the answers to these questions? Between the answers to these questions and other game parameters?
- what do the civ bonuses which affect these parameters imply regarding sensitivity of the game toward these values?
- what are risks associated with getting any of these questions wrong? What might occur if one begins hardening these decisions by optimizing conditional on these specific parameter values? How large of a difference might develop between the “perfect” AoE2 game and the local maximum being moved toward via naive optimization.
- Can gradient descent with respect to win rate or civ balance totally ignore these questions and not run the risk of killing certain important game design? How would one identify if such risk were being realized?
Meta meta question:
- What discipline or profession would be best suited to answering these types of questions? Where might combinations of knowledge be required to tackle this problem?
For those thinking of answers:
- How many answers to the above end up being “I dont know the answer but I’m too afraid to touch it?”
- What does uncertainty with respect to answering these questions imply about knowledge of the game and its dynamics? About the ability to optimize the game balance in general?
- Is there a way to link these answers in a way that makes answering the entire collection much easier?