Risk System Comparison
Two games. Two risk models. One design principle: decisions must have consequences.
| Dimension | Ami — Combat Risk | Ida — Economic Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Currency | XP (experience points) | Karma (reputation / money) |
| Risk Resource | Unbanked XP (at risk of loss) | Debt (negative karma accumulating interest) |
| Safe Resource | Banked XP (permanent, protected) | Earned karma (cumulative) |
| Risk Trigger | Staying in Manhattan (danger zone) | Taking loans / overspending |
| Escalation | riskLevel increases over time in danger zone | Debt accrues interest over time |
| Safety Mechanic | Bank XP at Camp (resets riskLevel to 1) | Take small, safe jobs (no debt risk) |
| Failure Condition | Lose battle → lose all unbanked XP, respawn | Debt exceeds -50 → bankruptcy, progress reset |
| Core Decision | "Do I stay longer for more XP or bank now?" | "Do I take a loan for a bigger build or play safe?" |
| Tier Progression | 3 tiers: enemies get stronger, XP reward increases | 3 tiers: jobs get bigger, payouts and costs increase |
| Unlock Thresholds | Tier 2: 50 banked XP, Tier 3: 150 banked XP | Tier 2: 100 karma, Tier 3: 300 karma |
| Signature Feature | Boss encounter (Tier 3, high riskLevel) | Car unlock (400 karma → speed + second block) |
| Emotional Core | Greed vs Safety | Ambition vs Prudence |
The Shared Principle
Both risk systems follow the same design pattern:
- Accumulation: Progress builds over time (XP / Karma)
- Vulnerability: Some progress is at risk (unbanked XP / debt)
- Escalation: Risk increases the longer you push (riskLevel / interest)
- Decision: Player chooses between security and reward
- Consequence: Wrong choice leads to real loss (XP loss / bankruptcy)
The surface is different. The structure is identical. That's systems thinking.