Missile weapons overpowered or not

[dhegler]

Has anyone mentioned that some monsters are less damaging in melee? If they reacted to melee with their own melee, it may encourage that more than picking them off with missiles. Some monsters I would rather have melee me to death rather than cast plasma bolts, mana storms, and the water-based spell that I hate and cannot get a resistance for...

Would it be easier to balance if monsters were smarter in how they acted - i.e. if they are next to you, they have a greater chance to melee than to cast (unless a mage, sorcerer, etc), and vice versa if they are at a distance? I think someone once said the code did not support intelligent attacks like that.

Maybe I am not thinking right, but tweaking how the monsters acted could balance the game to more melee than range missile in the endgame.

Talking about balance, I have a lvl 35 rogue with a lance he gets 4 blows with averaging up to 150 damage per hit (randart). Tell me that isn't unbalanced - branded with poison, 7d8, *slay undead*, slay evil, etc... I can just picture my little rogue wandering about holding a lance and getting 4 blows per turn. I think limiting classes to using certain types of weapons may help *balance*... Give a missile weapon penalty to a mage or priest, give a bonus to a ranger or warrior. Don't let my dwarven rogue going about killing uniques in 2 rounds with a special lance...

[takkaria]

It will, Oscar, it will. The thing about nightlies is that they get whatever people feel like working on at the time. It just so happens that d_m felt like adding the quiver before anyone felt like tweaking missile weapons, that's all.

There's also the fact that although lots of things on the to-do list can be done by anyone who cares to make a patch, there are a specific few that Takkaria has indicated he's personally keen to do. Balancing missile damage is one of these, which is why nobody else is doing it. (FWIW, overhauling curses is another.)

Hey, anyone is welcome to make an attempt at those issues too if they want to, I won't complain.

[pav]

Like I said, I'd like to avoid the complexity of using "placeholder quiver items" in inventory slots and keeping them in sync with the quiver.

Since everyone is voicing his opinion, so do I.

I really like the NPP style quiver -- so you should do it for V.

<re-lurk>

[fizzix]

No worries - I see now why people are describing it as unbalancing, if it gives free slots for ammo. I don't think it's worth worrying about until we see what Takk wants to do with missile damage though. By the time he's finished the free slots might be necessary!

While I generally like the idea of a quiver, one thing that makes Angband fun is the difficult choices that are made on what to take and what to leave behind. Since the quiver alleviates some of this, I hope there's some correspondingly difficult addition.

Also, I have a slight fear of 'quiver creep.' There is no intuitive reason why 20 frost arrows and 20 acid arrows should be treated differently than 1 rod of frost bolts and 1 rod of acid bolts. So while I like the quiver it definitely leaves some dissonance in my mind.

[Magnate]

Clearly I missed that aspect of implementing a quiver!

Currently it works more as a facility for "free" slots. Like I said, I'd like to avoid the complexity of using "placeholder quiver items" in inventory slots and keeping them in sync with the quiver. That said, if it is decided that it must work that way then I guess I'll get cracking...

I do think that reducing the number of quiver slots can make the feature more balanced than it currently is, if that is a concern.

No worries - I see now why people are describing it as unbalancing, if it gives free slots for ammo. I don't think it's worth worrying about until we see what Takk wants to do with missile damage though. By the time he's finished the free slots might be necessary!

[d_m]

I haven't got far since it was introduced: does it not occupy one slot per 99 items, like the NPP one? IMO that's the best implementation - as Will said, it doesn't add inv space, it simply facilitates a kind of stacking of non-identical ammo.

Clearly I missed that aspect of implementing a quiver!

Currently it works more as a facility for "free" slots. Like I said, I'd like to avoid the complexity of using "placeholder quiver items" in inventory slots and keeping them in sync with the quiver. That said, if it is decided that it must work that way then I guess I'll get cracking...

I do think that reducing the number of quiver slots can make the feature more balanced than it currently is, if that is a concern.

[Magnate]

If there's a consensus on how many backpack and/or quiver slots should be removed it will be trivial to do so. I would rather not do anything more complicated (e.g. having the quiver use up mulitple pack slots) because I think the resulting code would be really buggy. (it is already still buggy, although I'm working on it!)

I haven't got far since it was introduced: does it not occupy one slot per 99 items, like the NPP one? IMO that's the best implementation - as Will said, it doesn't add inv space, it simply facilitates a kind of stacking of non-identical ammo.

[Derakon]

I don't really like the idea of an item taking up multiple inventory slots, especially when the item is a semi-rigid container like a quiver. Granted that Angband doesn't track volume at all, but it doesn't make intuitive sense to me that the fuller a container is, the more volume it takes up. If we're worried about people being able to carry too much ammo, make the quiver be an equipment slot instead of an actual container; any ammo not in the quiver is treated as a normal inventory item. Unangband does this, for example.

[d_m]

If there's a consensus on how many backpack and/or quiver slots should be removed it will be trivial to do so. I would rather not do anything more complicated (e.g. having the quiver use up mulitple pack slots) because I think the resulting code would be really buggy. (it is already still buggy, although I'm working on it!)

Magnate hit the nail on the head: I was working on targeting and firing-related commands and got pointed in the direction of the quiver ticket so I implemented it. I haven't touched missile damage because Takkaria is planning on doing some work and I don't want to preempt him on it.

[PowerDiver]

I think a single quiver is fine having 10 slots of 99 ammo, since other variants offer multiple quivers. It's just that the number of available backpack slots should decrease by some function of the ammo carried, be it something like (#ammo + 49)/50 or (ammo weight + 9)/10 or whatever.

[edit] maybe other variants do not have multiple quivers, but just use the (#ammo+99)/100 thing and display it as multiple quivers on inventory screen.

[will_asher]

Don't mistake what the quiver does. NPP-style quiver (I haven't played with the quiver in V, but I guess it's pretty much the same) doesn't give you 10 extra backpack slots. Each 99 arrows or other ammo in the quiver still take an inventory slot. The difference is that you can have 10 arrows (+3 +5), 23 arrows (+9 +7), and 65 arrows (+0 +0) and have them take up one inventory slot all together as if they were in a stack of 98. It solves problems with ammo stacking, but it doesn't actually give extra inventory slots.

[Derakon]

Well, the tricky bit is getting the mechanics coded; now that they're done, it's a comparatively simple coding job to change how much they can store. I don't think you should consider the current 10x99 limit to be set in stone.

For my part, I think that the limit should probably be something like 50 arrows or bolts, or 100 shots, or some appropriate combination of the two.

[shawnosullivan]

With the quiver, the only real cost remaining is the weight of the ammo. That is relatively minor. Not nearly enough to counterbalance the advantage of being immune to melee-only opponents.

If the quiver stays in, ranged damage needs to come down to reflect the lower cost.

i haven't played much with the quiver yet, but it seems like it may be pretty seriously unbalancing - maybe it would be ok in another variant, but vanilla is a very carefully balanced game. you would never offer mages a quiver (err, a bookbinder i guess) for their spellbooks (or even magic devices), or warriors a portable armory, and for a very good reason. and even if ammo is seriously nerfed, 10 slots holding 99 each just seems ridiculously overboard. that's 10 free slots!! maybe 2 or 3 slots, or maybe just 99 arrows total (i thnk i saw that suggested somewhere)...
(that said, the quiver does seem to be very well designed and easy to use compared to similar features in variants i've seen)

[Magnate]

If the quiver stays in, ranged damage needs to come down to reflect the lower cost.

It will, Oscar, it will. The thing about nightlies is that they get whatever people feel like working on at the time. It just so happens that d_m felt like adding the quiver before anyone felt like tweaking missile weapons, that's all.

There's also the fact that although lots of things on the to-do list can be done by anyone who cares to make a patch, there are a specific few that Takkaria has indicated he's personally keen to do. Balancing missile damage is one of these, which is why nobody else is doing it. (FWIW, overhauling curses is another.)

[PowerDiver]

d) new one: either make shooting at point blank very very difficult or disallow it completely.

d is something that really should be done. No more point blank shooting. In reality you would not be able to hit anything if there is someone right next to you trying to hit you. This hinders shooter capability nicely.

I strongly disagree with this change.

IMO the thing that makes missiles overpowered is not facing side effects of melee attacks. If you are in melee range, that doesn't matter any more!

The @ can parry incoming blows with the shield on his third arm, or with the sword held by his fourth arm. Those items remain wielded when you fire ammo after all.

In any case, if you go this route due to some worry about realism, for consistency the penalties to mages casting spells should be astronomical when engaged in melee. It just screws things up, and is not needed. The gameplay penalty for point-blank shooting compared to shooting from a distance is already very large.