The Buyout Button (tm)

[Nick]

One point that I think has been missed - shops are a great source of information to the new player as to what items exist in the game.

Here's a suggestion (which I don't know if I like or not):

1. Remove the Black Market;
2. All other stores have fixed inventory (so no egos in the armoury, etc).

I think I probably think it's too boring.

And as for the vote, I guess it should be apathy, but I can't be bothered deciding.

[PowerDiver]

So my response to that is, why do people think that a "buyout" button is a better fix for this model than de-randomising the prices? Why not make ?+dam available for a fixed price?

The buyout button is not a fix. It is a bandaid until someone produces a fix. I proposed eliminating store randomization in rgra over 4 years ago. Not even a hint of progress in that time. Maybe *negative* progress when you consider the general store could have been changed to carry infinite arrows but it was chosen to carry only a fixed amount until you restock.

The time has passed to wait for a store fix.

[Pete Mack]

Because fixed prices don't reflect reality. In reality, prices go up and down with supply and demand. The buyout algorithm is a surprisingly good first approximation to this in angband, because it means you have incomplete knowledge about the cost of any strategy. For a while, I liked the predictability of the store services in NPP, but after a while I got bored with them. I prefer the buyout method; I just wish the UI were less tedious.

Edit: in effect, buyout is the real 'minigame' in store purchasing, because there's actual strategy involved; this is very different from store haggling, where there is just a standard script by which you play.

I prefer to think of angband as an exercise in practical economics, where the real score is reflected in your game turns. Up to a point. I don't enjoy reducing game turns by improving the efficiency in which I move around town. That's even less interesting than predictable storekeeper behavior.

[Magnate]

Shop stocking is only "random" in the black market. In the other shops, it can be controlled by restocking. The only requirements are
1. A sufficiently large stock of money
2. Discipline about where you resell stuff. (That is, never in the temple and the alchemist.)
Given that, there's very little randomness left in store restocking, just a whole lot of tedium in buying them out. I have always assumed buyout was a feature not a bug, or why would it have been included as an option? That being the case, why not make the UI better?

It may be that there's a better model out there, but until said model is implemented, I don't see anything wrong with fixing the UI on the model we already have.

What you're essentially saying is that the stock is not random, but the price is. You can always get ?+dam from the alchemist, if you have enough money for the required number of buyouts.

So my response to that is, why do people think that a "buyout" button is a better fix for this model than de-randomising the prices? Why not make ?+dam available for a fixed price?

[Pete Mack]

Shop stocking is only "random" in the black market. In the other shops, it can be controlled by restocking. The only requirements are
1. A sufficiently large stock of money
2. Discipline about where you resell stuff. (That is, never in the temple and the alchemist.)
Given that, there's very little randomness left in store restocking, just a whole lot of tedium in buying them out. I have always assumed buyout was a feature not a bug, or why would it have been included as an option? That being the case, why not make the UI better?

It may be that there's a better model out there, but until said model is implemented, I don't see anything wrong with fixing the UI on the model we already have.

[Magnate]

I can tell you have a trollish nature, how 'many' people have won full ironman ? 2 ? Also, please do troll more as to why you think shops exists.

I like debating, but I don't think that makes me a troll. I accept that ironman seems to have fallen out of fashion in recent years, but ISTR quite a few ironman winner posts for 2.8.x and 2.9.x

IMO shops in Angband should be there to guarantee access to essential consumables. Any random element in shop stocking leads to a tedious shopping metagame which detracts from the game of dungeon exploration. IMO.

Reductio, shops would not be necessary if consumables dropped in the right amounts - but that, I will admit, is hard to fix.

[Magnate]

Then perhaps it's time to decide what the *real* purpose of the shops is. If RNG balance isn't it, then I don't know what to say. You buy ?phase because the RNG can't be relied upon to give them to you. Rinse, repeat for everything else you buy there. Or did you mean it shouldn't balance out the RNG for anything save consumables? I don't really see the distinction. And the buyout button is chiefly used to get consumables anyway (at least that's what I've forced restock to get).

Sorry, yes - I was distinguishing between consumables (which is what shops are for IMO) and equipment (which is what I meant by shops not being there to balance the drops).

In any case, I think there would true benefit in rebalancing dungeon item generation to benefit ironman games (whether they're ironman games or not).

Agreed.

Be prepared to see drastically reduced levels of !healing, ?tele, ?teleLevel, &c, unless you want to keep the BM, or make them guaranteed.

I agree that the drop rates for all those would need increasing, as well as ?enchant and a few other things (_tele and -telOther, _mapping etc.). But I think we could get a patch into trunk very easily and test it very easily before 3.1.1 - perfecting it may be a long and winding road, but getting started isn't.

[Magnate]

Those of us who want the buyout button will happily see it removed the instant stores are fixed.

I don't believe that. There will always be an argument for keeping it, once it's there.

If you're voting no, what you're really saying is that you want us to face tedium in the time before stores and/or dungeon drops are fixed.

But stores cannot be fixed without removing the random element from their stock lists. While there is a nonzero chance of any desired item showing up, scumming will still lead to tedium and this kind of argument.

Conversely, fixing stores is as easy as deciding what they will stock and what they won't. Donald thinks this is more difficult than I do, but we both agree we should start having the discussion. I think you only need one store, which sells food, torches, oil, ammo, !CCW, ?WoR and !res{stat} (and ?remCurse, if you're keeping sticky curses).

I'm voting no because this fix is much, much easier than removing the need for squelch.

[PowerDiver]

II don't think there is any need to add a buyout button to exacerbate the "game of shopping" problem, and in fact I think one would have the opposite effect, per Takkaria as quoted by Nolendil.

This is exactly the same as the old argument against squelch. We need a change that may come in a few years, but in the interim a UI change that has no gameplay effect whatsoever except to reduce tedium cannot be allowed, because maybe development will stop if the UI change is incorporated. Anyone who votes against this should be forced to play without squelch.

My deep rangers cannot get by on 99 arrows in the time it takes the general store to restock. I use them up that fast. More generally, rangers cannot get by on 99 arrows per trip unless you play them like a melee class with an occasional archery boost.

Those of us who want the buyout button will happily see it removed the instant stores are fixed. We will happily support store changes when the developers decide what they want to do. If you're voting no, what you're really saying is that you want us to face tedium in the time before stores and/or dungeon drops are fixed.

[konijn_]

I'm enjoying disagreeing with both of you. Angband isn't tiny, and the shops don't exist (and maybe never have) for the purpose of 'balancing out' the RNG. Many people have won Angband with the NO_STORES option (which is a sort of 'half-ironman' mode - many people have won full ironman, too).

I can tell you have a trollish nature, how 'many' people have won full ironman ? 2 ? Also, please do troll more as to why you think shops exists.


T.

[Donald Jonker]

I'm enjoying disagreeing with both of you. Angband isn't tiny, and the shops don't exist (and maybe never have) for the purpose of 'balancing out' the RNG.

Then perhaps it's time to decide what the *real* purpose of the shops is. If RNG balance isn't it, then I don't know what to say. You buy ?phase because the RNG can't be relied upon to give them to you. Rinse, repeat for everything else you buy there. Or did you mean it shouldn't balance out the RNG for anything save consumables? I don't really see the distinction. And the buyout button is chiefly used to get consumables anyway (at least that's what I've forced restock to get).

I will agree with Donald that the town does lend Angband (and Moria) some flavour, but I see no reason whatsoever for stores to have random inventories. If you have stores at all (and I still say you don't need them, but I accept that that may be a bit too radical for the moment), you need them for consumables - and this whole thread is an argument that (certain) consumables should be guaranteed, else tedium ensues.

I don't think we're all that far apart here. No town at all works, as evidenced by Ironband.. and just about every other roguelike ever made. It might even be more fun that way, but it might not be what we want Angband to look like. In any case, I think there would true benefit in rebalancing dungeon item generation to benefit ironman games (whether they're ironman games or not).

As for fixed shop inventories, I'm not philosophically opposed - though you would have to take care to make sure that the weapon & armorsmith would still be worth having. I remember an old thread either here or on rgra where folks shot down fixed shops on account of it removing cases of returning to the dungeon with less than an optimum set of gear. Cuts into randomness/replayability. I wasn't very convinced then and I'm still not, but it's something to consider.

I don't actually think that fixing store inventories (and ergo getting rid of the BM) would actually be such a big change (certainly not as big as Eddie's no-selling option, or as big as many other changes post-3.0.9).

But I think the conversation of "what gets guaranteed" in the new fixed shops is a bigger one than you realize. It means everything that's on the list is permanently included, which might not seem that difficult, but everything that isn't becomes a whole hell of a lot rarer. Non-equip in 3.1 doesn't exactly fall from the sky. Be prepared to see drastically reduced levels of !healing, ?tele, ?teleLevel, &c, unless you want to keep the BM, or make them guaranteed.

This isn't to say we shouldn't explore this avenue - we should. Just saying it's a big winding road. A quick UI fix in the meantime still seems like a no-brainer to me.

[Magnate]

What he says.

A bad analogy would be 'There should be no poor people', so there should be no option to feed them ( resulting in dead people ).

There is a real problem right now, a UI fix will fix at least the time consuming aspect of it and exarcerabate(sp?) the shopping problem so that people will be more motivated to rethink and fix the game mechanic.

What I would like to say about this is that in TinyAngband :

* There is no TMJ in my mind, almost perfect balance
* Because there is no TMJ, it might happen you do not find the 4 basic resists before level 15 ( trust me you need them after lvl 15 ), I find awesome other stuff but nothing to cover 4 resists

So here , as a designer you have 3 options :
* Allow shops to balance out the RNG with enough effort=cash (ok)
* Drop way more items (yuck)
* Cheat the RNG and purposefully drop armors of the elves or amulets of resistance (rly bad)

Think about it, what other options are there ?

If you dont add shops with random content, I think you will force players to scum even more or force them to dive without protection which limits game styles drastically or have fixed content with everything you need ( yawn ).

T.

I'm enjoying disagreeing with both of you. Angband isn't tiny, and the shops don't exist (and maybe never have) for the purpose of 'balancing out' the RNG. Many people have won Angband with the NO_STORES option (which is a sort of 'half-ironman' mode - many people have won full ironman, too).

I will agree with Donald that the town does lend Angband (and Moria) some flavour, but I see no reason whatsoever for stores to have random inventories. If you have stores at all (and I still say you don't need them, but I accept that that may be a bit too radical for the moment), you need them for consumables - and this whole thread is an argument that (certain) consumables should be guaranteed, else tedium ensues.

I don't actually think that fixing store inventories (and ergo getting rid of the BM) would actually be such a big change (certainly not as big as Eddie's no-selling option, or as big as many other changes post-3.0.9). I don't think there is any need to add a buyout button to exacerbate the "game of shopping" problem, and in fact I think one would have the opposite effect, per Takkaria as quoted by Nolendil.

[miyazaki]

I voted 'no' because I think that the whole idea of the buy out ridiculous: what shopkeeper would sit on a warehouse of merchandise because he has a single item in his showroom?

I think the basic items should always be for sale: torches, arrows, ?WoR, etc. This has been done in the general store and could be implemented in the other shops too. (Cue debate on "basic items", but at least that is a more interesting conversation!) Shops 1-6 could have permanent stock, with the BM rotating good stock at turn-designated intervals.

[Atarlost]

We're not talking about waiting out shopkeepers. Shopkeeper processing is done at restock intervals anyways IIRC. You can already wair out shop restocks. It's called townscumming. You go to DL1 and rest for several thousand turns. That's what a buyout button is supposed to replace once you have the cash to use it.

[konijn_]

I'll agree that while the town lends Angband a great deal of its unique flavor, it's probably also its greatest liability. But both of these are giant, long ranging reforms requiring massive rethinking, negotiation and/or recoding. The button is a short term measure that works with the game mechanics as is. Can't we have both?

What he says.

A bad analogy would be 'There should be no poor people', so there should be no option to feed them ( resulting in dead people ).

There is a real problem right now, a UI fix will fix at least the time consuming aspect of it and exarcerabate(sp?) the shopping problem so that people will be more motivated to rethink and fix the game mechanic.

What I would like to say about this is that in TinyAngband :

* There is no TMJ in my mind, almost perfect balance
* Because there is no TMJ, it might happen you do not find the 4 basic resists before level 15 ( trust me you need them after lvl 15 ), I find awesome other stuff but nothing to cover 4 resists

So here , as a designer you have 3 options :
* Allow shops to balance out the RNG with enough effort=cash (ok)
* Drop way more items (yuck)
* Cheat the RNG and purposefully drop armors of the elves or amulets of resistance (rly bad)

Think about it, what other options are there ?

If you dont add shops with random content, I think you will force players to scum even more or force them to dive without protection which limits game styles drastically or have fixed content with everything you need ( yawn ).

T.