This started as a post in the "junk" thread but deserves a new thread as it's not about junk. It started off as being a reply to d_m about the ID proposals for 3.3:
So are we doing both instant strong pseudo at clev 20 (as per ticket #1094), *and* instant-ID at clev 40 (as per ewert)? For all classes?
That's a massive change. I'm not saying I'm against it, but we shouldn't underestimate how much it will "make the game easier" by effectively removing the ID minigame. It is possible to reach cl20 in minutes of play (I play slowly and even I can do it in under an hour), and instant pseudo will automatically reveal any cursed items (unless we introduce Sangband-style "hidden curses", which people will hate). Given the sophistication and speed of ID-by-use now there's not much difference in impact between the pseudo at cl20 and the full ID at cl40.
Why do I describe it as making the game easier? I think it essentially equates to giving all chars an extra inv slot.
I don't mind trying it, but I think we are going to have to think quite hard about how to make the game harder again, especially the mid-game. Fewer good/great drops? More monster hp or speed? Giving a whole bunch of monsters +3-5 speed might help. Undetectable traps?
Angband has always been a game you could win if you were slow and careful enough (c.f. Moria with AMHD offscreen instadeaths). The "difficulty" in Angband was simply that it severely punished risk-taking. The last two years of development have really toned down that punishment a lot, and I'm not sure that simply cranking it back up is what we want.
But I am sure that most people don't want instadeaths either. There was an interesting debate about OOD monsters a while back, when we increased the range of OOD monsters that could be generated on a level. I remember Timo saying that the occasional instadeath, to a massively OOD monster, is actually part of the excitement of the game. But a lot of people don't agree with that, and think that instadeaths are inherently wrong.
NPP is often held up as a positive example. It seems to have retained the "balance and danger of the old Angband", while delivering a better UI, better information to the player and more interesting features. I think a lot of its success is based on more severe punishments for diving/risk-taking: monsters are tougher, and you really can't fight hydra pits if you dive too fast etc. Nor can you do as much sneaking around out of your depth as you can in V, because of monsters with TELE_SELF_TO etc.
Personally I think it's probably a good thing if V is "easier" than most variants - much better than the other way round. But I'm just thinking aloud about the tension between making the game more challenging and making it a grind-fest where we all play like Neo and win every game in 5M turns.
So are we doing both instant strong pseudo at clev 20 (as per ticket #1094), *and* instant-ID at clev 40 (as per ewert)? For all classes?
That's a massive change. I'm not saying I'm against it, but we shouldn't underestimate how much it will "make the game easier" by effectively removing the ID minigame. It is possible to reach cl20 in minutes of play (I play slowly and even I can do it in under an hour), and instant pseudo will automatically reveal any cursed items (unless we introduce Sangband-style "hidden curses", which people will hate). Given the sophistication and speed of ID-by-use now there's not much difference in impact between the pseudo at cl20 and the full ID at cl40.
Why do I describe it as making the game easier? I think it essentially equates to giving all chars an extra inv slot.
I don't mind trying it, but I think we are going to have to think quite hard about how to make the game harder again, especially the mid-game. Fewer good/great drops? More monster hp or speed? Giving a whole bunch of monsters +3-5 speed might help. Undetectable traps?
Angband has always been a game you could win if you were slow and careful enough (c.f. Moria with AMHD offscreen instadeaths). The "difficulty" in Angband was simply that it severely punished risk-taking. The last two years of development have really toned down that punishment a lot, and I'm not sure that simply cranking it back up is what we want.
But I am sure that most people don't want instadeaths either. There was an interesting debate about OOD monsters a while back, when we increased the range of OOD monsters that could be generated on a level. I remember Timo saying that the occasional instadeath, to a massively OOD monster, is actually part of the excitement of the game. But a lot of people don't agree with that, and think that instadeaths are inherently wrong.
NPP is often held up as a positive example. It seems to have retained the "balance and danger of the old Angband", while delivering a better UI, better information to the player and more interesting features. I think a lot of its success is based on more severe punishments for diving/risk-taking: monsters are tougher, and you really can't fight hydra pits if you dive too fast etc. Nor can you do as much sneaking around out of your depth as you can in V, because of monsters with TELE_SELF_TO etc.
Personally I think it's probably a good thing if V is "easier" than most variants - much better than the other way round. But I'm just thinking aloud about the tension between making the game more challenging and making it a grind-fest where we all play like Neo and win every game in 5M turns.
Comment