Sil 1.1.1

[Psi]

Is there any chance to get a Sil subforum? (I am quite lost here as Sil threads are spread all over the place and Sil is the only game of the family I play.)

I think it would be a good idea if pav is happy with it. The giant generic Sil threads we often have are a little cumbersome to search. I suspect there is enough Sil activity to justify having one.

[taptap]

Is there any chance to get a Sil subforum? (I am quite lost here as Sil threads are spread all over the place and Sil is the only game of the family I play.)

[WaveMotion]

Don't know if you have heard already, but the in-game description for Polearm Mastery still mentions tridents.

[HugoVirtuoso]

Found a bug with a torch I got. It adds 17 melee and protection. 1.1.1, but I'm not certain it's the latest 1.1.1.

Depends on when you downloaded the buggy 1.1.1...Was it on Jan 3rd? If you downloaded this in February, that 'torch bug' has been fixed, AFAIK.

[Patashu]

Found a bug with a torch I got. It adds 17 melee and protection. 1.1.1, but I'm not certain it's the latest 1.1.1.

Wow! I want that torch :O

[Psi]

I may be wrong, but it didn't feel like my rapid attacks were administered to the monster I aimed at (V in this case) whilst I was raging. It was only once rage had worn off that I was able to damage him sufficiently. Bug?

[debo]

Found a bug with a torch I got. It adds 17 melee and protection. 1.1.1, but I'm not certain it's the latest 1.1.1.

Must have fell through a dimensional portal from Halls of Mist

[T-Mick]

Found a bug with a torch I got. It adds 17 melee and protection. 1.1.1, but I'm not certain it's the latest 1.1.1.

EDIT: This was on the original version of 1.1.1, not the later fixed one.

[half]

In any case the idea would be to experiment with these parameters a bit and have a look at (and a play with) the results. This could be worth doing in case there are some gains available cheaply. Of course if it seemed to make gameplay worse overall we'd not follow through.

As Scatha said, we are definitely considering changes to level size. We're also considering the idea to make, say, exactly one up stair, one down stair, one up shaft and one down shaft on each level. We would do all of these changes at once (though might tweak some later in response to player feedback). We might also consider a few other dungeon changes, such as changing how monsters use stairs and making stairs more like walls than like floors (i.e. they are embedded in the walls and you bump into them to use them). A few such changes might make for a nice 0.0.1 release even without anything else. Global changes like this change all games in a way that adding a new ability or changing an artefact or special type do not, so they are potentially a very good use of development time.

I like the way that the levels currently get bigger, darker, and full of more fantastical creatures the deeper you go. As you will know, there are currently three sizes of level (3x3, 4x4, 5x5), and the larger ones are more likely to be generated the deeper you go. I think the largest is the size of a regular Angband level. Obviously it could be possible to do a progression that starts smaller and ends smaller than the current progression. They also don't have to be multiples of the 'panel size' of 11x33 grids. We could also tweak the room size down further, the monster density etc.

I like the current 'epic' feel of the deepest levels, especially as it feels different to the earlier game. However maybe they would still feel like this in comparison if all levels were smaller. I also think that the ability to use a large main window has made all levels feel smaller. There is something about having to scroll around that makes things feel more out of control.

[bron]

Recently, I've been using a number of Sprinting/Flanking/Controlled-Retreat characters. This style of fighting needs space run in, and rooms with more than one entrance/exit. I would not object to making the deep levels the same size as the current "mid-sized" levels, but I would not want to see them reduced to the small early-level size.

[Scatha]

Feedback on level generation is definitely appreciated.

It sounds like there are two issues interacting here:
- Unless you take steps to counteract it, smaller levels tend to have lower connectivity (in particular more rooms with only one exit); this is something we'd want to keep a careful eye on.
- Having fewer staircases on the level can make things more awkward. Easier to get off from escapes, and perhaps harder to find.

I'm not actually sure whether staircases ought to be harder to find on small levels. The staircase/room density is about the same (I think! Should check this), so at a first pass you might think it would be much the same. However:
- If there are just 2 staircases, you know about 50% of them when you start the level. You only know about 25% of the staircases on the mid-sized levels (however, the incidence of up or down staircases in particular should be about the same).
- You might think there's a central spine of the level which tends to be explored quickly, and cul-de-sacs off that get missed. The chances of all staircases being in cul-de-sacs goes down as the number of staircases goes up. I'm not sure how valid this model is.

On the staircase front, perhaps we should consider having more staircases on small levels, or make shafts appear right from the start? Note that dropping level size without changing the number of staircases would increase staircase density.

In any case the idea would be to experiment with these parameters a bit and have a look at (and a play with) the results. This could be worth doing in case there are some gains available cheaply. Of course if it seemed to make gameplay worse overall we'd not follow through.

[clouded]

It was mentioned in one thread or another that you are contemplating making levels smaller, I have to give my view on this. I really like the size of the later levels. The early levels are definitely the most frustrating for pacifists, because you very often get cut off from the stairs, and since there is only one it can be a real pain to find sometimes. Similarly with the ascension, I dislike the last few levels the most because there is only one stair and you run into dead ends with Morgoth behind you. Exploring and playing in the big levels is more enjoyable because these situations are much rarer and you've (almost) always another way to go.

I would actually like for the early levels to have their stairs generated close to each other... Would make pacifists less painful to start and allow faster diving to 250' or so otherwise.

[Starhawk]

They are not rounded, but instead take the 'floor' so 3.9 is the same as 3. I think that the criticals might be the only thing in the entire game where a fraction is rounded to the nearest integer. In almost all cases we take the floor (and often make the wording reflect this on a careful reading).

Yeah, I've been playing for months assuming the critical system took the floor. Hmm. Food for thought I guess.

[half]

Are weights rounded for sides as well? Does a .8 dagger give +1 side with no skills and +2 sides with momentum, or 0/1?

They are not rounded, but instead take the 'floor' so 3.9 is the same as 3. I think that the criticals might be the only thing in the entire game where a fraction is rounded to the nearest integer. In almost all cases we take the floor (and often make the wording reflect this on a careful reading).

[HallucinationMushroom]

Also, while I'm here... For a STR 2 player with no skills:

1 lbs dagger gives +1 side
2 lbs sword gives +2 sides
5 lbs hammer gives +2 sides

With momentum:

1 lbs dagger gives +2 side
2 lbs sword gives +2 sides
5 lbs hammer gives +2 sides

Right? All correct.

Are weights rounded for sides as well? Does a .8 dagger give +1 side with no skills and +2 sides with momentum, or 0/1? 0/1

No. It has to cross the lb threshold to get the extra side. You've got a 1.9 sword with your above example of 2 str, only 1 damage side.