Designing RPS Tactics
Rock Paper Scissors takes me out of the fiction when playing a Cataphract. If I was to be shown a Weighted RPS where each option is weighted with a bonus I would still be unsatisfied. These systems can be interesting in how they interlock with other battle mechanics but ultimately I have not found a satisfactory iteration of RPS with bonuses that I am entirely happy with.
I have been a very loud fighting game enjoyer in the community, and sometimes as a joke or unfamiliarity these games are called complicated real time RPS and the implementation of a RPS is a fighting game mechanic as it emulates the Throw/Block/Hit triangle (abbreviated to TBH going forwards). However I believe there is a lot of design value in the genre that is not just RPS that merits discussion:
Firstly I would like to discuss one of my creations for Vanguard which was made in deep collaboration with my fellow GMs. It implements an RPS triangle that grant the +1 and additionally a large amount of "intents" that trigger regardless of winning or losing the tactic. Some of these intents are locked from you depending on which RPS you choose (you cannot take an intent that is offensive if you took the defensive RPS) which adds some weighting and helps naturalizing the RPS into the world (though it is not fully there yet in my opinion). While one may look at this and say "oh another RPS with bonuses", I believe the intents list being much larger, triggering no matter if you lose or win the tactic merits it a different analysis.
The Vanguard Tactics system was designed with an age old Fighting Game Discourse in mind.
What happens when I get a knockdown?
In Street Fighter 2 the answer was simple. Your combo is declared over and the opponent slowly stands up at a fixed rate allowing you to set up your next attack. This basic behavior has been the subject of endless debate in the FGC. SNK would introduce the roll as an option separate to the Normal Get Up. So in addition to the normal get up, you could roll in a directiom, left or right, to reposition yourself, recovering at the same rate tota. Mantaining the advantage of the player who got the knockdown while giving the loser some amount of control or return to a neutral situation or an advantage if the opponent committed to a massive attack.
Vanguard takes directly from the Virtua Fighter current wherein losing a tactic is equivalent to getting knocked down. In Virtua Fighter you have multiple options when recovering from a knockdown:
Quick rise — get up immediately. Delayed rise — stay down briefly to throw off timing. Side roll / tech roll — roll to one side while getting up, avoiding predictable attacks. Normal rise into guard — stand up safely and block. Attack while rising — use a wake-up kick/attack to discourage opponents from pressuring you. Stay down — sometimes useful to make attacks whiff, but can leave you vulnerable to grounded attacks.
These do not neatly fit into an RPS triangle and generally mantain the idea that the other got the advantage while giving the loser various options to shape the next encounter and the final result. Notably most of these are not about directly countering an opponents pick as you get up but rather defining the shape of the match and discouraging certain behaviors. As during this time the victor has plenty of options to inflict on the knocked down opponent including Okizeme. In Virtua Fighter, one player won the encounter but both got the chance to personalize and define the encounter.
Games in the airdasher subgenre might look at this problem and provide a burst option that completely resets the encounter and gives the knocked down player an advantage (Read, hard reset tactics and get some misc bonus if you hard read both the RPS Option and the intent of how the opponent is trying to shape the battle. Furthermore an airdasher in the Modern Team Red style translated to the space might even give the loser of tactics an advantage in not allowing the winning army to pursue and press their advantage. Something Trad, Kuso and 3d players would hate!
For another example I am currently designing another tactics system that is influenced by Melty Blood and French Bread style games:
Bloody Tactics:
At Game Start with help of the Referee, propose a series of complex tactics to train your detachments in. These tactics may include bonuses when attacking strongholds, hastened retreats written as one would in base Cataphract. These are the tactics your commander understands deeply enough to successfully implement. These are classified with the referee as Offensive, Defensive or Special
Commanders may train new detachments in these for X loot
At Battle Start Declare your Objective to either be Offensive or Defensive and choose 1 of your pre-written tactics to Prepare your detachments in.
Offensive players may either may a calculated (+1) or a reckless assault (+2) with calculated always beating reckless.
Defensive players choose to target one of the two types, cancelling its bonus.
At any moment either player may instead choose to use their prepared tactic instead getting its effects. If the Defensive player chooses to defend agaisnt calculated agaisnt this, deny the bonus but the effect still triggers.
While the above is still a WIP it is inspired by the strong defensive options of Melty Blood and how freeform that game allows itself to be more loose in terms of what the offense can do because it has very hard and definite defensive options.
The fighting game genre is a massive well of inspiration that we can take lessons from beyond the world of RPS. Some concepts and base interlocking systems I have yet to cover here (everyone please look at how GRD works in Undernight).
If we are to mechanize and make tactics something more definite there is still loads of room to explore that does not fully reduce us to a base mind game that does not represent the totality of what is possible and allow ourselves some of that more free writing appeal that many want to mantain.
Lots of work to be done. Play more games!