Openrct2: Scenario Improvement: More granular pass/fail conditions.

[grahambilley]

OS: [Windows 10]
Version: 0.2.4]
Commit/Build: [d645338]

This is an enhancement request. I'm putting this here per request of Aaron van Geffen.

Allow creators to specify more granular pass/fail conditions. Examples include:

1. Cannot have more than 5% of guests thinking "this path is disgusting" (fail condition).
2. Cannot have more than 2 "negative awards" at any given time (fail condition).
3. Must have 3 positive awards at the same time (pass condition).

Thank you,

[grahambilley]

A few more...

1. Must have $100,000 in cash at the end of ... (pass condition)

2. Must pay back your entire load by the end of ... (Pass condition)

[James103]

I'm thinking of the following for the new scenario goals:

1. Allow an arbitrary number of goals for a scenario (up to 255 separate goals ideally).
2. Goals should be modular. Each goal should have a statistic, a comparison, and a value. You should be able to pick from almost any statistic of your park to use as part of a goal, even ones as specific as "Number of entertainers" or "Monthly profit from burger sales", as well as the standard ones like "Park value", "Park rating", and "Number of guests". The comparison can be any of the seven standard comparisons, which are "less than", "greater than", "at most", "at least", "between", "exactly", and "not equal to". The value can take on values depending on a goal. For example, a guest goal of 1,237, an excitement rating of 6.28, a happiness of 87%, and/or a date of "July, Year 3".
3. You should be able to specify (ideally by boolean algebra, but checkboxes will work) which combination of goals will pass the scenario and which combination of goals will fail the scenario, if met. You should also be able to specify how long you must maintain full completion of all goals before you pass/fail the scenario.

[pizza2004]

I think it's important to make sure it's still easy to make a scenario, so I'd avoid adding anything that makes the interface difficult to understand, but I do like the idea of being able to add different goals like this instead of just selecting from a set list of possible win conditions.

[James103]

In the very least, I would like, (in order from most important to least important):

1. A few more objective types to satisfy some scenario creators looking for new objectives to use
2. More precision when setting goal values, similar to how the money cheat works ($1,098,762 park value, $5,773 monthly sales, or 1,234 guests in park instead of $1,098,000, $5,700, and 1,200 guests)
3. Ability to set park rating requirement for guest goal scenarios
4. Ability to set excitement rating requirement and number of coasters for the coaster building goals
5. Ability to set time limit independently of the goal and with more precision (to allow for example "Build 8 roller coasters with length 2,048m and excitement 7.68 by the end of June, Year 4")

[duncanspumpkin]

More precision when setting goal values ($1,098,762 park value, $5,773 monthly sales, or 1,234 guests in park instead of $1,098,000, $5,700, and 1,200 guests)

Why? That would just be annoying to input into a form.

[Umdlye]

That would work if the spinners were still stepped but you could enter a more precise number by clicking the spinner, like how the add/set money cheat currently works.

[ocalhoun6]

While we're at it on this massive wish list of scenario options, it might be interesting to have artificial caps on a scenario in conjunction with a financial goal. Such as 'no more than X number of rides', 'no more than X number of staff', or 'no more than X number of guests'.

It would give a scenario designer interesting ways to make the scenario more challenging. Imagine, for example, a scenario where the ride limit is set to 1. Then, instead of building lots of rides, the player would have to build one affordable ride, then save up to replace or improve that ride, making it bigger and better. Or in a park limited to 10 staff, they'd have to carefully manage how much their paths sprawl and also focus on all the non-staff ways of dealing with litter and vomit.

[James103]

@ocalhoun6 In addition to the items you proposed, I think it would be interesting if you could only carry, for example, $1,000 in your account at once. A scenario like this would be challenging in the sense that you would have to keep investing your money almost immediately it comes in. Another idea would be to set a limit on how many sprites can be used for rides. For example, you can only have 64 ride sprites in the entire park, shared by all your coasters, flat rides, and more.