Your views wanted on artifacts in V

[Philip]

I found Elvagil, and in 3.1.1.1626 it is worse than a spear of slay evil. That is a weapon that needs FA, slay evil and come up earlier and more often.

[Magnate]

I completely agree and know that this is the main fault. Of course it's really hard to get a feel for dealing with summoners from an easily calculable sense. The only thing I can think of is pretty indirect and hackish, and it would involve including individual results for demon pits, dragon pits and graveyards at each level (where applicable). Those should be a good indication of the quality of drops of a large summoned group without bothering to actually estimate the number of summoned monsters, nonetheless actually dealing with abusing the Greater Draconic Quylthulgs or wands of clone monster.

I think this is going to need a monte carlo method, not a derivation from first principles. We write a script that takes two arguments: a dungeon level and an object. It then generates a level-full of monsters, then all their drops, a million times. It then tells you the chances of that object appearing at that depth.

This really should be a new thread. It's something Takkaria has been wanting for ages.

EDIT: Yes, some adjustment needs to be made to "level-full of monsters" to acknowledge summoning.

[fizzix]

That is also what I would suggest, but it still has the problem that it doesn't take into account summoners. A single demon explosion can yield enough deep artifacts to change your game. Any time I kill one of the great wyrms that summon, I expect it to summon at least once during the fight. Those summonees matter.

I completely agree and know that this is the main fault. Of course it's really hard to get a feel for dealing with summoners from an easily calculable sense. The only thing I can think of is pretty indirect and hackish, and it would involve including individual results for demon pits, dragon pits and graveyards at each level (where applicable). Those should be a good indication of the quality of drops of a large summoned group without bothering to actually estimate the number of summoned monsters, nonetheless actually dealing with abusing the Greater Draconic Quylthulgs or wands of clone monster.

[PowerDiver]

This is why I offered a suggestion that was based heavily on kills and dlevel, but still included results from the ground. It was the closest I could come up to one that should be reasonable for both divers and level clearers.

That is also what I would suggest, but it still has the problem that it doesn't take into account summoners. A single demon explosion can yield enough deep artifacts to change your game. Any time I kill one of the great wyrms that summon, I expect it to summon at least once during the fight. Those summonees matter.

[PowerDiver]

You seem to have Buckland sling. So that is five blows and four shots. I'm not sure why you don't use that sling instead of Bard, it is much better (x4 with two extra shots, +16 to dam compared to x5 with no extra shots +19 to dam).

I used the sling to kill things for the last clevel, but Bard with the +1 shot shield seems useful against Morgoth since I have a stack of slay evil arrows with decent plusses. I'm not going to bother enchanting sling ammo, so with that ammo Bard is superior.

[fizzix]

Personal experiences what is rare and what is not are not very reliable in Angband. When I started to play Angband I found Ringil about as often as Thorin for first few hundred games. It has then been slowly correcting that anomaly.

Gondor I find in nearly every game sooner or later.

We really should need some calculable method of determining what is "rare enough" and what is not. Problem is that, like Eddie says, for endgame-quality rare items it needs to be relative to kills needed to win the game, which is a lot higher number than what is needed to reach half-point of the game, and also monsters *and* DLVL is deeper for those kills.

One point of diving is that you reach dlvl needed for excellent loot much faster, and you kill relatively more monsters at those levels. So this rarity-balancing is partially dependent of playing style, which makes "balancing" again pain into b*tt.

This is why I offered a suggestion that was based heavily on kills and dlevel, but still included results from the ground. It was the closest I could come up to one that should be reasonable for both divers and level clearers.

[Timo Pietilä]

I think we need a calculable definition of rarity that we can relate to and then adjust things from there. Here's my stab at it. Rarity as a function of level is the probability of the item being either generated on the level or dropped by a creature on the level, assuming the player kills everything on the level and nothing spawns.

It's not ideal, but I think it's a starting point. This *should* be calculable from first principles. But I guess, it might be easier to be done via simulation.

note: I haven't found Gondor in...a long time. Either Eddie's lucky or I suck. I'm guessing the second.

Personal experiences what is rare and what is not are not very reliable in Angband. When I started to play Angband I found Ringil about as often as Thorin for first few hundred games. It has then been slowly correcting that anomaly.

Gondor I find in nearly every game sooner or later.

We really should need some calculable method of determining what is "rare enough" and what is not. Problem is that, like Eddie says, for endgame-quality rare items it needs to be relative to kills needed to win the game, which is a lot higher number than what is needed to reach half-point of the game, and also monsters *and* DLVL is deeper for those kills.

One point of diving is that you reach dlvl needed for excellent loot much faster, and you kill relatively more monsters at those levels. So this rarity-balancing is partially dependent of playing style, which makes "balancing" again pain into b*tt.

[Timo Pietilä]

The Haradrim shield now essentially turns a mage into a ranger [5 blows, 2 shots] with 0% failure rate and lower mana costs on a wider variety of spells. It's so overpowered I feel like I have to use it. I really think it is too much. Maybe if it had a [not currently supported] pval of 0.5 it might be ok.

You seem to have Buckland sling. So that is five blows and four shots. I'm not sure why you don't use that sling instead of Bard, it is much better (x4 with two extra shots, +16 to dam compared to x5 with no extra shots +19 to dam).

Anyway, I agree that shots and blows in shield like that is too much. If you want to make it usable just remove aggravation and lose some of the powers it has.

Same with Hammerhand. Aggravation is just pain in it. Remove it and it is usable as it was originally.

[fizzix]

You keep talking about how rare things are. Most are not that rare in the context of a winning game. They just take a large number of kills and/or vaults before you get them. Most winners have a *lot* of kills. A definition of rare should start by looking at the likelihood you have the object after enough kills for CL50. Gondor comes late in the game, but I believe it usually comes before the final fight for a CL50 char, so designing a hat for the final fight has to compete with it.

I think we need a calculable definition of rarity that we can relate to and then adjust things from there. Here's my stab at it. Rarity as a function of level is the probability of the item being either generated on the level or dropped by a creature on the level, assuming the player kills everything on the level and nothing spawns.

It's not ideal, but I think it's a starting point. This *should* be calculable from first principles. But I guess, it might be easier to be done via simulation.

note: I haven't found Gondor in...a long time. Either Eddie's lucky or I suck. I'm guessing the second.

[PowerDiver]

I think perhaps removing SHOTS is the answer here. Once aggravation is a spectrum, it might be possible to leave it with both and crank up the aggravating. We'll see.Hmmm. Other than Gondor (which is rare), which are your better choices?

You keep talking about how rare things are. Most are not that rare in the context of a winning game. They just take a large number of kills and/or vaults before you get them. Most winners have a *lot* of kills. A definition of rare should start by looking at the likelihood you have the object after enough kills for CL50. Gondor comes late in the game, but I believe it usually comes before the final fight for a CL50 char, so designing a hat for the final fight has to compete with it.

Oh, I don't know about the particulars. One change starts a cascade, and who knows what I threw away. Surprisingly this game the best crown of might I found before Hammerhand was only +2, but I found a couple of +3 soon after. You should assume the player has might+3 when deciding whether to use Hammerhand [anyway I typically do], so the question is whether rNexus plus (+9,+9) outweighs aggravation in the time before you find a better artifact hat.

My point is that I spent the game looking for a way to use Hammerhand, I really tried and never did, even though things were more tilted towards using Hammerhand than is true in a typical game. If I couldn't manage to use it this game ...

I used a few egos and several other artifact hats, Thranduil Numenor Celebrimbor Gondor and Holhenneth at a minimum. I was constantly swapping stuff around, but Hammerhand was simply never a competitive choice.

[fizzix]

I think perhaps removing SHOTS is the answer here. Once aggravation is a spectrum, it might be possible to leave it with both and crank up the aggravating. We'll see.Hmmm. Other than Gondor (which is rare), which are your better choices?

The last two standart games I played I wound up using Hammerhand (solely for the Con) Granted it was in DaJ and not V, but the artifact set is almost the same.

If I had a +3 crown of might I would use that instead, but I never found one.

[Magnate]

The Haradrim shield now essentially turns a mage into a ranger [5 blows, 2 shots] with 0% failure rate and lower mana costs on a wider variety of spells. It's so overpowered I feel like I have to use it. I really think it is too much. Maybe if it had a [not currently supported] pval of 0.5 it might be ok.

I think perhaps removing SHOTS is the answer here. Once aggravation is a spectrum, it might be possible to leave it with both and crank up the aggravating. We'll see.

Magnate did this at (+9,+9), and my mage found the Palantir so he aggravates, and I kitted for 7 blows/round, and I still am not using it. I really tried to use it, but cannot sensibly equip it even going all out for melee. Check out http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=9639.

Before you find the Palantir, aggravation means you don't use it. By the time you find the Palantir, you've got better choices.

Hmmm. Other than Gondor (which is rare), which are your better choices?

[PowerDiver]

The Haradrim shield now essentially turns a mage into a ranger [5 blows, 2 shots] with 0% failure rate and lower mana costs on a wider variety of spells. It's so overpowered I feel like I have to use it. I really think it is too much. Maybe if it had a [not currently supported] pval of 0.5 it might be ok.

Another option to make Hammerhand situationally useful would be to give it to-hit and to-dam bonuses - this is thematically consistent, too, if anyone cares.

Magnate did this at (+9,+9), and my mage found the Palantir so he aggravates, and I kitted for 7 blows/round, and I still am not using it. I really tried to use it, but cannot sensibly equip it even going all out for melee. Check out http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=9639.

Before you find the Palantir, aggravation means you don't use it. By the time you find the Palantir, you've got better choices.

P.S. While not using Isildur, my mage is still wearing plate mail -- Celeborn.

[Whelk]

Tunneling for stones would be pretty neat. You wouldn't have to litter the dungeon with stones in that case - slingers could just tunnel when they run out of ammo.

[d_m]

If this were anything other than Angband, I'd suggest a "gather stones" command that would create something like up to five pebbles inside your inventory. Different terrains might alter the number of pebbles found. You wouldn't want too many generated for weight reasons, and presumably it takes at least a few moments to find usable stones even in a rubble pile.

It seems like (T)unneling could easily produce small stacks of stones.