Angband 4.2.4

[tom]

Each of these steps is, imo, an improvement. Take the next step: make sure that strong @s always want a heavier weapon than weak @s. It is possible to do so without breaking anything.

One possible way is via the STR bonus to damage (adj_str_td table in player-calcs.c). This could be limited by weapon weight, ie min(weapon weight, adj_str_td[player strength]).

Playing around with minimum blows per round is also a good suggestion by @PowerDiver. Perhaps 1.0 for full casters, 1.5 for half-casters, 2.0 for warriors?

Also need to play with how blows per round are calculated. Warriors cap at 6 blows, which means they can't max their blows per round potential with many heavy weapons, leading to weird weapon choices.

[PowerDiver]

Playing around with minimum blows per round is also a good suggestion by @PowerDiver. Perhaps 1.0 for full casters, 1.5 for half-casters, 2.0 for warriors?

Actually, it is a bad suggestion. It's just less bad than wasting the amount of effort for integrating O combat. More importantly, O combat was designed assuming 2 blows to start.

Here is what I came up with way back when. I have a vague memory that weak mages found even a main gauche too heavy, but I don't remember if I ever modified that. I purposely required 18/200 for max blows. I'd guess most players would prefer full blows significantly earlier.

It is important to be quadratic in strength and square root in weapon weight given the silly weapon weights in the game.

        /* stat_ind of 0 corresponds to real value of 3 */
        str += 3;
        dex += 3;

        /*
         * We could subtract off current weapon str and dex bonuses, then
         * add bonusus from o_ptr, but for now o_ptr is guaranteed to
         * be the wielded item in calc_bonuses(...)
         */
/*
        printf("str %d, dex %d", str, dex);
*/

        /* give full benefits to 18/200 stats */
        if (str > 37)
                str = 40;
        if (dex > 37)
                dex = 40;

        weight = o_ptr->weight;
        /* baseline no weight penalty with dagger */
        weight -= 12;
        if (weight < 0)
                weight = 0;

        blows = 1.0 + ((MAX_TYPICAL_BLOWS - 1.0) * dex / 40.0);
        str_blows = (3.75 + (str * str / 40.0))/(3.0 + efg_sqrt(weight/10.0));
        if (str_blows < blows)
                blows = str_blows;

        /* adjust 20% if not a mixed caster */
        if (cp_ptr->max_attacks > MAX_TYPICAL_BLOWS)
                blows = 1.2 * blows;
        else if (cp_ptr->flags & CF_ZERO_FAIL)
                blows = 0.8 * blows;

        object_flags(o_ptr, &f1, &f2, &f3);
        if (f1 & TR1_BLOWS)
                blows += o_ptr->pval;

[PowerWyrm]

The problem is weapon proficience doesn't exist...

A mage should be able to use a dagger with ease while be absolutely unable to use big swords. Currently an early mage cannot use anything while a level 50 mage can hit mobs with Deathwreaker no problem.

Same goes with warrior: should be able to use any weapon at any stage. Currently an early warrior needs to use a dagger.

The solution is what TomE did: skill proficience in swords, axes, blunt... Each class gets different skill multipliers. A mage would have a good multiplier in daggers and staves while having zero in everything else. Warriors would have good multipliers for everything.

[PowerWyrm]

Ideal combat system:

I attack a monster.

Monster dies.

I move on to the next monster.

Ideal combat system: I attack a monster. I die if I make a mistake.

"YOU DIED"

[Estie]

Tome is actually worse than vanilla in this regard; first off, daggers and swords share the same proficiency. Inside it the unintuitive vanilla rules still apply. Second the @ that deals melee damage not only uses daggers like in V, they use the exact same dagger every game (Maedhros). In V with standarts there is at least a chance that you dont find an early *thanc before you move on to something bigger; Maedhros is guaranteed, its the best option early on regardless of what mastery you'll eventually pick.

[Pete Mack]

@PowerWyrm: RocketBand was made for you.

[PowerWyrm]

Tome is actually worse than vanilla in this regard; first off, daggers and swords share the same proficiency. Inside it the unintuitive vanilla rules still apply. Second the @ that deals melee damage not only uses daggers like in V, they use the exact same dagger every game (Maedhros). In V with standarts there is at least a chance that you dont find an early *thanc before you move on to something bigger; Maedhros is guaranteed, its the best option early on regardless of what mastery you'll eventually pick.

Yeah that's a problem. You need to separate daggers and swords. ADOM does that.

[archolewa]

Here's an utterly insane thought about combat: make your damage die (and swings) dependent only class and stats rather than weapon. So mages do 1d4, hybrids 1d6, warriors 1d8 base. Warriors gain swings fastest, mages slowest.

Weapon types only matter because of their properties (which honestly isn't that far from how Angband already works past the early game. You could make Anduril a mace, and it wouldn't affect gameplay one bit).

Daggers have a chance of slowing the target. Maces have a chance of reducing enemy AC, polearms do double damage to enemies who just moved (towards you? Not sure how implementable that would be). Axes do one swing to a number of adjacent enemies equal to your blow count. Mauls have a chance of stunning the target.

If you really wanted to be crazy, you could even remove weapon damage enchantments, and maybe let classes' damage die go up as they gain levels.

So weapon is purely a choice of modifying how you fight, and the additional properties they give. "Better" weapons tend to be weapons with more properties. So a *thanc would be nice early on because they have a brand, but that's it. Meanwhile, Doomwrecker is a big deal because it's got a list of properties as long as your arm.

Of course something like this would probably be as big a lift as incorporating Sil-style combat...

But that's what makes the idea insane!

[Pete Mack]

Minor bug: plural of 'main gauche' is 'mains gauches' not 'main gauches'.

[PowerWyrm]

Commit e723430:

File: option.c
Method: options_restore_custom()

In the while (file_getl(f, buf, sizeof(buf))) loop, I think a "++linenum;" was removed from the original code at the end of the loop, making linenum never increase.

[Nick]

Thanks, fixed.

[PowerWyrm]

Thanks, fixed.

Nope, the line is still misplaced
(sould be at the end of the file_getl() loop)

[Nick]

Nope, the line is still misplaced
(sould be at the end of the file_getl() loop)

*Sigh*

Fixed now, maybe.

[Nick]

Latest nightly release includes agoodman's updated borg as mentioned in this thread. Plan is to let that settle for a bit and then release 4.2.5.

[Estie]

Awesome. Where is the borg ?