Poll: do you want to change combat mechanics for heavy weapons?

[Magnate]

Since there were a few replies in the O-combat section of the "making it harder" megathread, I thought I'd separate this issue out.

First, this poll is about 3.3, not 3.2. I will leave it up until after 3.2 is final.

Second, it is orthogonal to the issue of fractional blows. O-combat doesn't treat num_blows differently from the way V used to, except that the minimum is usually 2 rather than 1. So fractional blows could be used with or without the main change of O-combat.

So what is the main change of O-combat? It's really very simple: +dam does not add actual points of damage, it adds a percentage to the weapon's dice roll for damage. The percentage is one of diminishing returns, starting at +5% for +1dam and maxing out at +255% damage for +101dam.

If you think about this, it's an instant and perfect change to reflect the importance of weapon size (i.e. damage dice). +1 dam when wielding a 1d4 dagger (average damage 2.5) gives you +0.125 points of damage per blow. That same +1 dam when wielding a 3d5 lochaber axe (average dam 9) gives you +0.45 damage per blow - over three times as much, and in exact proportion with the damage dice.

(There are other differences in O combat, like the treatment of critical hits and the actual damage dice on weapons, but this is the main one.)

So, those of you who find it offensive that a beefy warrior picking up a 2d5 longsword is actually worse off than with a 1d5 main gauche - do you want to see something along these lines in V? Could those of you who like V the way it is cope with a change this radical?

[EpicMan]

I vote for the change to +damage. I think the new fractional blows mechanic will still be better than the old method, so in my opinion V-combat would then be superior to o-combat.

[d_m]

I am neutral right now, so I didn't vote. I'd want to put this feature in a branch and give it a lot of play testing before merging it into V (if we decide to try it). While the feature is certainly mature, I'd want to see how it shakes out in V.

[bio_hazard]

Sorry to be dense about this, but how exactly do fractional blows work? I haven't made it far enough with the rc yet to figure this out.

Also, how do fractions of an hp work? Would the game keep track of each extra 0.125 hp from each blow?

[Derakon]

My big problem with O-style combat is that it's not very easy to calculate your damage. Introducing percentiles is bad enough, but then you get into diminishing returns and it just becomes very hard to tell what steps you should take to improve your damage without trying them all and seeing what the computer says. I would prefer all formulas in V to be simple and transparent. That in mind, what do you think of this set of changes?

1) Cap max enchantment of weapons at some fraction (e.g. half) the weapon's max damage roll. For example, 1d4 daggers max at +2,+2, 6d5 blades of chaos max at +15,+15. Make it hard for the game to generate non-artifact weapons that break this rule. Functionally this means that on-weapon enchantments can increase your damage by ~50%.
2) Reduce off-weapon damage boosters (mostly, rings of slaying/damage halved or removed outright).
3) (and this is the big one) apply slays after adding damage bonuses to the dice rolls. Damage = crit * slay * (dice + to-dam). Reduce slay multipliers to compensate (e.g. 2x => 1.25x, 3x => 1.5x, 5x => 2x).
4) Screw around with weapon dice until things are balanced again.

This makes the dice on weapons (which tends to correlate with weapon weight) be the most important factor in determining your damage. Lightweight weapons will typically be less powerful than heavy ones. The huge emphasis on wearing damage-boosting equipment is reduced. Slays aren't all-but-useless on half the weaponry in the game just because the weapons have small dice. Above all, damage calculations are very easy to perform.

[Sirridan]

In any case it would be interesting if we could code up an in-game tool (knowledge menu?) which would allow one to screw around with things, such as increasing +damage to gear and such to see improvements, or to mess around with different pieces of gear contained in the home and pack and floor under you to see what best suit you can get.

[nppangband]

I voted yes. I do think damage be a percentage of damage dice is an improvement. The only part of O combat I was not crazy about was the # of blows per round (2-4).

In an ideal world, I would like to see # of blows different by class, so hobbit warriors gets lots of blows from small weapons (kind of like Yoda when fighting Count Dooku, and troll warriors have less blows but get massive critical hits from heavy weapons. But (he says ironically) maybe that last bit is a little experimental should be tried out in a variant first....that idea is slowly moving up on my desired changelist towards the top.

[Magnate]

My big problem with O-style combat is that it's not very easy to calculate your damage. Introducing percentiles is bad enough, but then you get into diminishing returns and it just becomes very hard to tell what steps you should take to improve your damage without trying them all and seeing what the computer says.

I don't agree with this. There is now a wealth of knowledge available on Inspecting your weapon, and it would be pretty simple to work out which change of kit would give you a greater boost to damage.

That's not to say I don't like your ideas - they're all fine - but I don't think that opacity is a problem with O-combat. I say this even though the original author of O was obsessed with making his games opaque and mysterious. If anything, O-combat mechanics are far more intuitive than current V, so being able to calculate them exactly is less important.

[Timo Pietilä]

O-combat is a big change, but if made properly can be very good. IIRC Sangband uses o-combat model and it definitely works there very well.

That said, I voted "fractional blows is enough" because it is enough. O-combat model is a HUGE change. It would require rebalance of every single weapon and enormous time to playtest to get it right. That's something that would need to be maintained as parallel to current vanilla quite a long time, like a sister project, before accepting it as working combat model.

[Magnate]

Sorry to be dense about this, but how exactly do fractional blows work? I haven't made it far enough with the rc yet to figure this out.

It's actually not very visible, the effects are quite small, but important. It goes like this:

There are two types of "turns" in the game - your actions (player turns) and the game's internal "ticks" (game turns).

Every game turn, you receive a finite amount of energy (usually 10, but modified by your speed). When you reach 100 energy, you get to take a player turn - an action, a command. Most commands take 100 energy (nothing takes more), so the game ticks on until you get back to 100 for your next turn. Monsters get to move when they hit 100, between your moves. Fast monsters get more energy per game turn, so could get two or more moves before you get to move again.

Traditional combat says that you spend 100 energy and get a certain number of blows. End of.

Fractional blows says that each blow takes a certain amount of energy - it could be 100, but it could be as low as 15 for warriors. You keep getting blows until either the monster dies, or your next blow would take you over the 100-energy limit for this player turn.

What this means is that unless your energy per blow divides exactly into 100 (in which case it's no different to traditional combat, apart from stopping when the critter dies), you will accumulate a small reserve of energy each player turn. This will eventually result in your next player turn arriving slightly earlier than it would otherwise have done.

That's about the best I can do at this time of night without ending up TL;DR.

Also, how do fractions of an hp work? Would the game keep track of each extra 0.125 hp from each blow?

No - all fractions are rounded. I was merely illustrating the comparison. To get a whole point of extra damage from a 1d4 dagger you would need at least +4dam with this system - but to get a whole point of extra damage on your 3d5 axe you would only need +2dam ...

[bio_hazard]

Thanks for the explanation. I think I'd like to get a better feel for how fractional blows play out before choosing one of the options. I like a lot of the possibiliites mentioned (O-combat, Crawl-like enchant limits, etc)

[Timo Pietilä]

Biggest difference you see when you have a good weapon, a lot of blows and go make havoc in pits. Warrior with 6 or more blows, a bit speed and "kill it with single hit" weapon can kill 6 orcs before orcs get a turn (some of them will move, but not all). You use more keypresses, but lot less game time to clear a pit.

Or same deal against out-of-control breeders. Enough blows and you can swim through them like they were not there. Something you could never do against fast-moving breeders in old system. It's like hit, hit, hit, hole, move, hit, hit, hit, hole, move etc.

Against single big opponent difference is not noticeable. You still use all your blows every turn against Drolem until the turn it dies.

Against group of hounds and other group monsters like that killing them one by one causes a "time dilation" -effect. Once you start to kill them you experience that they kind of "slow down". With fractional blows you have more time waiting them to move, and groups of faster-than-you easy kills like white wolves, blink dogs etc. suddenly slow down to crawl when you start killing them. It's Matrix bullet time.

[buzzkill]

I say leave it as it is (V3.2), fractional blows seems like plenty for right now. Let that settle in and then possibly consider other options afterward if necessary.

What I would like to see if DEX being the primary stat for light weapons and STR being the primary for heavy weapons. Average weight weapons, like a long sword, would require a bit of both. Thus the lightest weapon (a dagger?) would be able to attain MAX blows even with MIN STR and MAX DEX. Inverse for heavy weapons.

Probably not for V but, I also think it would be worth looking into having STR and DEX oppose each other somewhat at higher levels. IRL It's nearly impossible to be brutally strong and incredibly nimble. Also a first step toward not having every character WIN with all stats maxed.

Sorry for the off topic ramble.

[Estie]

.... IRL It's nearly impossible to be brutally strong and incredibly nimble. Also a first step toward not having every character WIN with all stats maxed.

Sorry for the off topic ramble.

Bruce Lee comes to mind

As for the topic at hand, I am undecided and havent voted (yet). On the one hand I like it that the best weapon for a level 1 character is different from the best weapon for the M fight. It adds complexity, and at some point youll have to transition to heavier weapons. On the other hand finding that rare ood weapon and not wanting to use it is bad. I dont see a way get the first without the second.
Currently, at the start weight dominates the damage while at the end its damage dice. With O-combat, it would be damage dice from the start.

Damage enchantment proportional to dice is good, but I dont like the %display. Id rather have a straight damage displayed, but that can be accomplished easily:

When the game picks a damage enchantment for a given weapon, modify the formula to multiply the average base damge into it. When weapons get enchanted by scrolls, modify the success chance similarly, by checking current enchantment against average base damage. If all sources of damage enchantment that exist in the game take base damage into account, it has the same gameplay effect as O´s %damage but the vanilla readability is preserved.

There had been another idea floating around, which I like very much:
namely to give everyone the priest/mage attack table (with 4 attacks maximum) and add 1 attack for halfcasters and 2 attacks for the warrior. If early game damage is too much (like, level 1 warriors getting 6 attacks with dagger ?), delay the additional attacks, maybe level 10/20 for +1/+2.

What I really would like to see is different optimal setups depending on stats; like the dextrous hobbit prefering daggers while the strong troll wants maces. However, with the current stat system that works only in the very early game (if at all), in the endgame everyone has the same str/dex. Untill/unless that gets changed, theres imo no point to differentiate.

[bio_hazard]

I haven't played it a whole lot, but I think the new ToME has weapon-specific boosts from str and dex (I think). Some weapons get boosted by one or the other, some by both.

I like where this is going.