Create structured scaling with exactly 3 tiers.

Discussion Question: Think about a game you love. Does it get harder? HOW does it get harder — more enemies? Faster speed? Smarter AI? Or does it give you defined "levels" of difficulty? Which approach feels better to play?

Progression = increasing stakes in controlled steps. Not infinite scaling — defined tiers. Each tier increases both risk and reward. Three tiers keep Version 1 manageable.

Tier 1Tier 2Tier 3
DifficultyLowMediumHigh
RiskSafe to learnReal consequencesHigh stakes
Reward×1×2×3
Feeling"I can do this""This is getting real""One mistake and I'm done"
Ami — Danger Tiers

Tier 1 (Low Threat): riskLevel < 2. Base enemy power 5–10. XP reward ×1.

Tier 2 (Medium Threat): riskLevel 2–4. Enemy power 10–15. XP reward ×2.

Tier 3 (High Threat): riskLevel > 4. Enemy power 15–25. XP reward ×3.

if (riskLevel < 2) { tier = 1; } else if (riskLevel < 4) { tier = 2; } else { tier = 3; }
Ida — Development Tiers

Tier 1 (Small Homes): karma 0–99. Low build cost, low payout.

Tier 2 (Medium Builds): karma 100–299. Medium cost/payout. Medium debt risk.

Tier 3 (Major Projects): karma 300+. High cost, high payout, high debt risk.

Time: 15–20 minutes | Materials: Paper, pencils

Draw 3 columns on a piece of paper: Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3.

For each tier, write down:

  • Ami: Enemy power range, XP reward multiplier, risk level range
  • Ida: Job cost range, karma payout, debt risk level

Then answer these questions for each tier:

  1. What is the unlock requirement to reach this tier?
  2. How does this tier feel different from the one before it?
  3. Is the jump between tiers noticeable? (If Tier 2 feels like Tier 1, the tiers are too close.)

Compare: Both kids show their tier maps to each other. Are the tiers balanced? Does each tier feel meaningfully different? If not, adjust the numbers until they do.

  • Implement getCurrentTier() function
  • Define tier thresholds in gameState
  • Adjust enemy power ranges per tier (Ami)
  • Adjust job payout ranges per tier (Ida)
  • Scale reward multiplier per tier
  • Display current tier in console
  • Test: tier changes as progress increases
  • Checkpoint

    Tier changes visibly as progress increases. Higher tiers feel harder and more rewarding.

    Exactly 3 tiers in Version 1. No sub-tiers. No dynamic difficulty adjustment.

    Tiers too close together — they don't feel different. Make the jump between tiers noticeable.

    Not scaling both difficulty AND reward — if Tier 3 is harder but doesn't pay more, it feels punishing, not rewarding.

    Making Tier 3 impossible — high difficulty should be challenging, not unfair. Playtest each tier.

    Ask: "Why 3 tiers instead of infinite scaling?" Answer: constraints create design decisions. Infinite scaling is lazy — you never have to decide when things change. Three tiers force you to define exactly when and how.

    During the tier mapping activity: Watch for tiers that are too similar. If a kid writes "Tier 1: power 5–10" and "Tier 2: power 8–12," those tiers overlap. Push them to make each tier feel distinct. The numbers should tell a story of escalation.

    Key insight: Tiers are not just numbers — they represent a change in how the game feels. Tier 1 should feel safe. Tier 2 should feel tense. Tier 3 should feel dangerous. If the feeling doesn't change, the numbers aren't different enough.

    Looking ahead: Tomorrow we add unlock gates — you can't reach Tier 2 until you've earned it.