3.2 release candidate is upon us!

[PowerDiver]

Just to be clear, you would be happy to see wearables drop by a factor of 4 while consumables/books/devices all stayed the same?

And can you confirm that this is for buying and selling, or just for selling?

Sure. I'm mostly thinking about buying. If you sell stuff to buy stuff, it makes no difference if everything changes proportionally. A dagger used to have a price of 10 according to lib/edit/object.txt. You could aim for that. Even 20 would be OK I guess, but it's much higher than that.

The thing to compare is what you can buy with gold drops. The question of the relative price of consumables vs weapons doesn't matter so much to me, but making boring weapons cheaper relative to rods or potions makes sense to me.

If after the price drop you decide that great stuff is too cheap, perhaps you should change to pricing according to the cube of value rather than the square. That would also fix negative values having positive prices.

Personally, I think price should be about production rather than value, so there's no reason my views should be consistent with what you're doing. I'm just looking at changes in gameplay since 3.0 that seem to me to be in the wrong direction.

[d_m]

I have compiled with "./configure --enable-gtk --with-no-install" ./angband -mtk crashes on startup x11 and gcu seem to work great. I just wondered if it was me.

Do you mean angband -mgtk? I don't think -mtk will ever work.

[Magnate]

Sure. I'm mostly thinking about buying. If you sell stuff to buy stuff, it makes no difference if everything changes proportionally. A dagger used to have a price of 10 according to lib/edit/object.txt. You could aim for that. Even 20 would be OK I guess, but it's much higher than that.

The thing to compare is what you can buy with gold drops. The question of the relative price of consumables vs weapons doesn't matter so much to me, but making boring weapons cheaper relative to rods or potions makes sense to me.

If after the price drop you decide that great stuff is too cheap, perhaps you should change to pricing according to the cube of value rather than the square. That would also fix negative values having positive prices.

Personally, I think price should be about production rather than value, so there's no reason my views should be consistent with what you're doing. I'm just looking at changes in gameplay since 3.0 that seem to me to be in the wrong direction.

Sure - don't hold back on those (have you checked the changes doc recently ;-)). Personally I don't think that basic armour and weapons being more expensive than they used to be in 3.0 is a bad thing, since it lengthens the period during which they are desirable, even if only slightly. e.g. Rangers now start with a shortbow rather than a longbow, and the latter is something they won't get for a little while.

Cubic prices are something I have thought about, and might try in 3.3. It might finally solve the pricing of +speed!

[tuppe666]

Do you mean angband -mgtk? I don't think -mtk will ever work.

Yes I meant -mgtk Basic X11 and Text Mode both work GTK not so much

[ekolis]

Sorry if someone's already reported this, but in the Windows build I just downloaded (f348296727), if I go into the options menu during character birth and hit "?" to get help on an option, then hit escape, I get fragments of the help screen all over the options screen...

[d_m]

Yes I meant -mgtk Basic X11 and Text Mode both work GTK not so much

Hmmm, ok.

I'm able run it fine both --with-no-install (as ./src/angband -mgtk) and with --prefix ~/angband/sandbox (as ~/angband/sandbox/games/angband -mgtk). Can you try running it with gdb (gdb --args angband -mgtk, then type "run") and post whatever backtrace you get?

EDIT: Also what distro are you running? Can you attach config.log?

[Magnate]

Sorry if someone's already reported this, but in the Windows build I just downloaded (f348296727), if I go into the options menu during character birth and hit "?" to get help on an option, then hit escape, I get fragments of the help screen all over the options screen...

Yes, that's ticket #1257 - spotted it last night. Should be easy to fix for someone who knows the menu code ...

Thanks for all the reports - keep them coming ...

[Derakon]

Regarding armor prices, I like that you can't afford to buy them right off, but the fact that a plain plate armor fetches huge amounts of cash from the armory is bad. Common items should not make for lucrative sales.

In other words, my advised solution here is to make the buy/sell prices for shopkeepers way more asymmetrical. I've said this before, and it's still true; shopkeepers shouldn't be willing to give you more than at most (i.e. with maxed CHA) 50% of the sale value of the item when they buy it from you. Heck, look at the bookstores around colleges in reality: buy for $15, sell for $90.

[buzzkill]

Heck, look at the bookstores around colleges in reality: buy for $15, sell for $90.

College book stores probably aren't the best examples of free market economics .

[Derakon]

Does the town look like a free market to you? Not much competition, is there?

[ekolis]

Heh, didn't someone years ago try to implement a free-market economic model in Angband or a variant? I always thought that was cool, and wondered why no one did it again... Or maybe I'm just nuts and I like economic games... Recettear anyone?

[tuppe666]

Hmmm, ok.

I'm able run it fine both --with-no-install (as ./src/angband -mgtk) and with --prefix ~/angband/sandbox (as ~/angband/sandbox/games/angband -mgtk). Can you try running it with gdb (gdb --args angband -mgtk, then type "run") and post whatever backtrace you get?

EDIT: Also what distro are you running? Can you attach config.log?

gdb --args ./angband -mgtk

Starting program: /home/robertr/Desktop/angband-angband-d1a64ee/angband -mgtk
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]

(angband:422): Gtk-CRITICAL **: gtk_toolbar_set_icon_size: assertion `icon_size != GTK_ICON_SIZE_INVALID' failed

(angband:422): Gtk-CRITICAL **: gtk_toolbar_set_icon_size: assertion `icon_size != GTK_ICON_SIZE_INVALID' failed
[New Thread 0x7fffdb7a3710 (LWP 425)]

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x0000000000440044 in init_angband () at init2.c:3612
3612            if (command_req->command == CMD_QUIT)

Sorry Gentoo

[d_m]

gdb --args ./angband -mgtk

I wasn't able to reproduce this but I think I saw what the bug was and wrote some code to handle it.

It's checked into master now, so if you want to pull it down and try rebuilding again it might work. If not, please include the new backtrace. Thanks!

[Dean Anderson]

Yes, those few lines about code changes (bitflags, parsers etc.) conceal a colossal amount of refactoring. The code looks very different from the 3.1.x series.

You're telling me!

Is the refactoring considered to be mostly "done" now, or is the next version likely to be as different to this one as this was to the last?

Because it's a hell of a moving target for variant makers to keep up with if the core code for things like selecting a spell to cast and the like is completely re-written between versions...

[takkaria]

You're telling me!

Is the refactoring considered to be mostly "done" now, or is the next version likely to be as different to this one as this was to the last?

Because it's a hell of a moving target for variant makers to keep up with if the core code for things like selecting a spell to cast and the like is completely re-written between versions...

It's not done yet, I'm afraid... there's a lot of old code to clean up. A lot of the cleanup has already been done and a lot of what is left is just finishing off what has been started, one way or another. I think things will have settled a lot more by 2013.