74 lines
8.8 KiB
Markdown
74 lines
8.8 KiB
Markdown
# node-system.md — Review Log
|
||
|
||
## Review — 2026-04-29 — Verdict: MAJOR REVISION NEEDED (first pass)
|
||
**Scope signal**: XL
|
||
**Specialists**: game-designer, systems-designer, qa-lead, ux-designer, creative-director
|
||
**Blocking items**: 8 | **Recommended**: 9
|
||
**Summary**: First review found critical spec/implementation contradiction (node types are fixed in code, not randomized as spec stated), arithmetic impossibility in TotalGold tables (3 inconsistent values: 830/750/670), missing Shop/Event system definitions, and LossPenalty system completely unimplemented. Creative director synthesis concluded this constitutes "fundamental design integrity failure" requiring major revision.
|
||
|
||
**Prior verdict resolved**: N/A (first review)
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Review — 2026-04-29 — Verdict: NEEDS REVISION (post-revision)
|
||
**Scope signal**: XL
|
||
**Specialists**: game-designer, systems-designer, qa-lead, ux-designer, creative-director
|
||
**Blocking items**: 0 (resolved) | **Recommended**: 9 (partially addressed)
|
||
**Summary**: All 8 blocking items resolved in-session. Key changes: spec updated to fixed node sequence (matching implementation), TotalGold rebuilt using DRLevel.RewardGold, Position 9 probability gap fixed, LossPenalty marked [NOT YET IMPLEMENTED], all 7 broken ACs corrected, BaseHp=0 design resolved (any loss = run end), architecture references fixed. Remaining recommended items: Shop/Event systems need separate GDDs, accessibility improvements pending.
|
||
|
||
**Prior verdict resolved**: Yes — original MAJOR REVISION NEEDED addressed; design now internally consistent and implementable pending Shop/Event GDDs.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Review — 2026-04-29 — Verdict: MAJOR REVISION NEEDED (second review — pre-revision)
|
||
**Scope signal**: L
|
||
**Specialists**: game-designer, systems-designer, qa-lead, creative-director
|
||
**Blocking items**: 6 | **Recommended**: 8
|
||
**Summary**: Second review found economy mathematically broken (Boss=70% total gold, shop decorative), fantasy contradiction (enemy composition never revealed to player), BaseHp structurally meaningless (any loss=instant run end), AC5/7/9/10/13 not independently testable, Shop/Event code exists but no GDD, stale NodeComponent reference in diagram. All 6 blocking items resolved in-session.
|
||
**Prior verdict resolved**: Yes — first NEEDS REVISION addressed; new issues were economy balance, fantasy consistency, and testability.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Review — 2026-04-29 — Verdict: NEEDS REVISION (third review — post revision)
|
||
**Scope signal**: L
|
||
**Specialists**: game-designer, systems-designer, qa-lead, ux-designer, creative-director
|
||
**Blocking items**: 3 | **Recommended**: 6
|
||
**Summary**: Third review found 3 blocking issues: (1) TotalGold range stated as 780 but table sums to 1100 — fixed to 1100; (2) BossEffectiveHp GDD formula (linear × LoopScaling, 5× cap) didn't match code (exponential × 2^n, no cap) — GDD reconciled to match code; (3) Assembly Phase forced blind commitment before seeing next node types, contradicting stated Player Fantasy — fixed by showing Next Node Preview on Assembly screen before Ready. All 3 blocking items resolved in-session. Remaining recommended items: 2-choice differentiation unspecified, Boss scaling disconnected from run performance, Event node design unspecified, accessibility gaps, "within 2 seconds" unenforceable, single-loss zero-partial-rewards design.
|
||
**Prior verdict resolved**: Yes — second MAJOR REVISION NEEDED addressed; new issues were economy arithmetic, spec/code mismatch, and Assembly Phase UX flow.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Review — 2026-04-30 — Verdict: MAJOR REVISION NEEDED (fourth review)
|
||
**Scope signal**: XL
|
||
**Specialists**: game-designer, systems-designer, economy-designer, qa-lead, ux-designer, creative-director
|
||
**Blocking items**: 8 | **Recommended**: 9
|
||
**Summary**: Fourth review found 8 blocking issues: (1) Both edges lead to identical node types — cosmetic choice, not tactical (all 5 specialists converged); (2) Early economy starvation — 300g first shop arrival, Red costs 200-220g, shop non-functional; (3) Boss difficulty completely uncorrelated with run performance (nodesCompleted has zero effect); (4) Core Rules vs UI Requirements contradiction on Assembly Phase entry; (5) TotalGold n=1-9 ambiguous (count vs indices), Boss loop count domain 0-∞ but clamped; (6) Coin currency has no documented sink; (7) AC coverage gaps for Core Rules 3, 5, 9; (8) Boss VFX color crimson (Combat color) contradicts Color Palette gold/amber. All 8 resolved in-session. Key changes: edge divergence clarified as level-variant model; first shop tiered to White/Green only; Boss formula extended with (1 + 0.1 × nodesCompleted) multiplier; Assembly Phase set to auto-enter; Boss VFX color reconciled to amber/gold; Coin sink clarified (CombatNode intra-combat tower building); 5 new ACs added. Re-review in fresh session recommended.
|
||
**Prior verdict resolved**: Yes — third NEEDS REVISION addressed; new critical issues were false-choice architecture, economy starvation, Boss uncorrelation, and spec contradictions.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Review — 2026-04-30 — Verdict: MAJOR REVISION NEEDED (fifth review — post-revision)
|
||
**Scope signal**: XL
|
||
**Specialists**: game-designer, systems-designer, economy-designer, qa-lead, ux-designer, creative-director (via general-purpose agents)
|
||
**Blocking items**: 4 | **Recommended**: 11
|
||
**Summary**: Fifth review found 4 P0 spec integrity failures: (1) BossEffectiveHp formula had `(1 + 0.1 × nodesCompleted)` run-progress multiplier in GDD but NOT in code — prior review claimed "reconciled to match code" but it wasn't; (2) `nodesCompleted` range table stated 0–9 but only 6 non-boss combat nodes exist; (3) `completedLoopCount` cap was 31 but `2^31` overflows int — correct cap is 30; (4) Missing variables (`completedLoopCount`, `BossBonus`, `HasDefeatedBoss`, `BossLevelGold`) absent from formula tables. All 4 P0 items resolved in-session: multiplier removed from GDD to match code; variable tables corrected; cap fixed to 30; `RunNodeStatus.Exception` defined as error-only state; Boss loss event clarified as `NodeCompleteEventArgs(CombatWon=false)`; ACs improved (timing, modal behavior, visibility, ordering). 11 recommended items identified (variant visibility accepted as intentional design; economy and UX issues noted but not blocking).
|
||
**Prior verdict resolved**: Yes — fourth MAJOR REVISION NEEDED addressed; new issues were GDD/code divergence on Boss HP, variable table incompleteness, and AC precision.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Review — 2026-04-30 — Verdict: APPROVED (seventh review — lean, post-fixes)
|
||
**Scope signal**: L
|
||
**Specialists**: lean review (no delegation)
|
||
**Blocking items**: 1 (Fantasy line 37 stale Into-the-Breach reference promising variant transparency that the opaque-variants design withholds)
|
||
**Recommended revisions**: 1 (completedLoopCount cap description 2^31→2^30 × BaseHp)
|
||
**Summary**: All 6th-review blocking items confirmed resolved in GDD text: variant opacity accepted as intentional per Overview; Next Node Preview fully specified in Core Rules + AC + UI Requirements; view-only inventory, Boss loss, mandatory commitment all have AC coverage; BaseHp floor correctly at data-load layer. One new blocking item found: Fantasy line 37 (Into the Breach reference) said players see "level variants" but the opaque-variants design explicitly withholds this. Fixed by revising reference to accurately describe Geometry TD's model (player sees node types, variant revealed at node). Minor recommended fix to completedLoopCount cap description also applied.
|
||
**Prior verdict resolved**: Yes — 6th-review blocking items confirmed resolved; new Fantasy/documentation issue fixed.
|
||
|
||
## Review — 2026-04-30 — Verdict: NEEDS REVISION (sixth review)
|
||
**Scope signal**: M
|
||
**Specialists**: game-designer, systems-designer, economy-designer, qa-lead, ux-designer, creative-director
|
||
**Blocking items**: 4 | **Recommended**: 7
|
||
**Summary**: Sixth review found 4 blocking items: (1) Level variant opacity — node cards show only type/index with no characterization of the two level-variant choices; contradicts Into-the-Breach reference which requires complete information at choice time; (2) Next Node Preview mandated in UI Requirements but has no Core Rules/state machine definition — spec gap; (3) 3 explicit behaviors missing AC coverage: view-only inventory constraint, Boss loss withholding BossLevelGold, "This Path Cannot Be Undone" as mandatory (not flavor) text; (4) BaseHp floor documented at wrong layer (data load vs resolve-time). Creative director synthesis concluded: node system architecture is sound; blocking items are spec gaps and one core design contradiction (variant opacity). Prior P0 items (BossEffectiveHp, nodesCompleted range, completedLoopCount cap, variable tables) confirmed resolved.
|
||
**Prior verdict resolved**: Yes — fifth MAJOR REVISION NEEDED addressed; new issues were variant opacity, missing ACs, spec gap on Next Node Preview.
|
||
|