Doom wrote:
MeckMeck GRE wrote:
The best of course is Bavatos Dungeon but making a hold like that is maybe too hard for anybody here expect about 5 members. Look around how holds => 6.0 look like.
Maybe it's just me but I don't really like it that everyone is comparing anything with Bavato's Dungeon.
I agree. All holds are different, and each hold is more or less unique, with its own style of layout and puzzles. Comparing holds so generically doesn't say much about
the hold itself
I suggest looking here for some tips about making good holds.
5) Aim for fun, not difficulty.
Remember that people will play your hold because they think they'll enjoy it, not out of some unspoken duty. If your hold is unreasonably hard without being fun to figure out, people will stop playing it.
That's why I think that Bavato's Dungeon might not be a good example for beginner architects unless they really know what they are doing.
Also, I think the definition of "
unreasonably hard without being fun to figure out"
is different for different people. I made a hold that contains lots of difficult puzzles with emphasis on manipulation of monsters in large areas, efficiency, timing and large hordes, which some people find fun, but which I guess others find tedious. At another end of the genre spectrum are holds like "
A Quiet Place"
, which places emphasis on manipulation of small groups of monsters in small areas and puzzles with specific solutions. Again, some people enjoy working out what specific solutions are, although I don't myself.
What I don't think is fair about the scale is that it itself is too generic. I think when most people use it, they rate holds relative to whatever else they have played, without taking into account what the holds are. I'm guessing that larger holds with more puzzles might, on average, be more "
fun"
than smaller 30 minute diversions, simply because they're larger, and so smaller holds don't get represented as well as larger ones.
____________________________
Resident Medic/Mycologist