Sidequest #4 Perfect Imbalance

This seems like a good place to start:

Though I disagree with League of Legends being a good example of cyclical imbalance (which we'll return to in a moment), the crux of the video, that imbalance is conducive to creating an enjoyable gameplay experience, is absolutely true and worth delving into a little more closely.

Before we get too deep into what Perfect Imbalance is and how best to achieve it, there are a couple of ideas worth keeping in the back of your head:

1.) Balance is always relative to all of the Means within a given context (in this case specific games). You cannot directly compare how “balanced” something is in one game relative to something else in another game.

2.) Perfect balance is not preferable to all gameplay experiences. Tutorial sections for instance, should generally feature challenges skewed in favor of the player, while boss fight should be skewed against them. More broadly, if a game is supposed to be challenging, the systems are usually best designed to be imbalanced against the player, if not, then they shouldn’t.

3.) The concept of balance discussed here applies not only to videogames, but many, many, aspects of life and order in the universe. For a fun(?) thought experiment, try applying the general principles of balance and “Perfect Imbalance” to other things in your life (but make sure it’s actually appropriate!).

Balance Issues

Most “hardcore” players will say that a game should be balanced. It makes sense, as the alternative just sounds undesirable. Most wouldn’t want to date an unbalanced person, nor would they want to play a game with a set of rules stacked against them (excluding Dwarf Fortress psychopaths fans). Right? Well, when designing a video game, you typically want to create a win-state of some description. And, in order to achieve that win-state within a reasonable amount of time, the game either needs to be imbalanced in favor of the player, or has to contain mechanisms built into its overarching mechanics that allow a player to create an advantage (imbalance) for themselves [or it could just be mechanically simple, but then it’d just get boring]. In fact, virtually all games that involve the player overcoming some sort of external opposition will contain both; the former serving as an initial challenge, and the latter acting as a vehicle to address it.

For example, take the game that inspired this Sidequest, Advance Wars: Days of Ruin. On the game’s various trial maps (as depicted below), the player is expected to eliminate the opposition often while playing with a fixed set of handicaps.

Pictured: four stainless steel testicles

The player’s force is the Red (orange, really) Army composed of two extraordinarily adventurous Artillery units. While the three opponents have a complete ground army (Blue), devastating Naval fleet (Black), and a sizable infantry army and bomber sitting on an airport (Yellow). A casual player would likely yell NOPE loud enough to cause alarm for the neighboring country’s border patrol, then shut the game off and go play Jenga or something.

But, believe it or not, this map is actually slightly imbalanced in favor of the player, not the enemies. Or at least, potentially. The enemies unquestionably start with an absurdly powerful army that would make Emperor Palpatine proud. But, if you count the buildings on the map, you’ll notice that there are more red ones than those of any other color. More buildings equals more income, and more income means faster production. Additionally, the Red player has a significant terrain advantage in that they can only be attacked from the south via the two blue sea ports (which can easily be occupied), and the only army breathing down the player’s neck are the conga line of frail infantry men from the Yellow player. Together, these two seemingly minor advantages afford the player plenty of time and safety to develop an army and systematically crush their opposition, provided they can neutralize the Yellow army (which granted, isn’t easy, but doable). So eventually the player can make the map become imbalanced in their favor. 

In contrast, the map to the left is incredibly balanced and vastly more difficult to complete. You have no advantage to press and no small edge with which to exploit. The map is always as balanced as it looks, and if you don’t finish it within an extremely narrow time-frame you will find yourself locked into a near never-ending slugfest with the AI’s annoying as hell equally competent low-cost army. In being so bewilderingly balanced, the map feels imbalanced (as well as both boring and frustrating).

So, as is gradually becoming apparent, perfect "Balance," in the general sense of the word, is actually not ideal, while perfect "Imbalance" can paradoxically lead to the most balanced feeling gameplay experience. So, the real question all game designers and critical players need to consider is, “what kind of imbalance is necessary to achieve a balanced game?” Well, conveniently, the above wording already delineates the overarching game balance from the specific aspects of the game that could be imbalanced, highlighting the other detail to bear in mind when observing balance...balance.

“Macro hard, Microsoft”

The Extra Credits video largely describes the interplay between specific characters and mechanics, and extrapolates how their relationships might be imbalanced. While useful to consider, this is only half of the equation and what I’ll from here on refer to as Micro Imbalance. As the video argues, micro imbalances are not inherently bad, and are in fact potentially conducive to empowering players and creating a dynamic metagame that can evolve free of developer influence. What we are ultimately concerned with however is the big picture, and here is where Extra Credits makes a very grievous error in praising League of Legends.

While micro imbalance in a competitive setting will almost certainly lead to James’ (the writer of Extra Credits) “cyclical imbalance,” the system of cyclical imbalance only works when all of the options in the game are in rotation and available to players prior to beginning the competition. The League example used doesn’t take into account the fact there are champions who are too underpowered to ever fall into the cyclical rotation described, nullifying the competitive worth of their inclusion in the game. And as a result of this problematic imbalance, Riot has to ceaselessly buff and nerf champions in order to bring more into rotation and take others out. In short, the game is still imbalanced on a macro scale, despite its metagame of cyclical imbalance.

The Theory of All Things Equitable

For a codified way of thinking about balance, at this time I have broken down the components of systems capable of containing balance to four factors. The relationship of these factors, expressed by the statement below describes what I believe to be Perfect Imbalance on a macro level, or more plainly, “Macro Balance.” The wording is a little clumsy (and will probably be refined at some later date), but the meaning is absolutely intact:

“Given a specific set of Obstacles and Resources, each available Means of overcoming a specific Obstacle must use an equivalent amount of Resources and achieve an equivalent total Degree of Effectiveness in overcoming the entire set of Obstacles.”

I told you it was clumsy.

To clarify that gobbledygook, Obstacles refers to the entirety of extenuating circumstances in a game, ranging from opponents to tasks that must be accomplished. Means are the tools at one’s disposal that might assist them in accomplishing their task. The Degree of Effectiveness is the ratio of how completely an obstacle is overcome to the amount of resources required to do so. And lastly, Resources refers to factors relevant to the player’s agency that the player must manage whenever they employ a Means; things like time, money, statistical investments, production facilities, etc.

Seeing as how Effectiveness and a number of the Resources are ostensibly unquantifiable, the above statement might not appear to have much functional use (and it doesn’t). However, the overarching idea of the sentence is intrinsically observable to anyone aware of the all of the factors within a given game, and stating it in plain English is hopefully useful for anyone unfamiliar with a game in figuring out whether or not it is actually imbalanced (read: here’s a rubric for all you haters and hipsters).

These are all extremely broad terms, and the variables within each class varies from game to game, so when considering the balance of any specific game, one needs to keep sight of the entire array of factors. Understandably, keeping so many invisible variables straight is what most people would call “difficult” and rather not think about unless it becomes a personal problem. But, fret not! For the systems within some videogames are just as complicated and obtuse as those in real life. So ideally, mastery of one will lead to proficiency in the other. There, this Sidequest is now justifiable as a self-help resource. Go life-hacking and what-not!