Point-based stat distribution is too powerful

[Magnate]

I feel that the combat system is the bigger problem, it sure needs to be modified. However, modifying the combat system will take some time to design, implement, and balance. We are closing in on 3.3, so we do not have the time to do that now.

We do have the time to make a small change to starting stats though.

Besides, the starting stats being too good is also an issue, and it is important to adress this before fixing the combat system. If a new combat system is based on stats (which I assume it will be), it is much better that the stats have been balanced before the combat system is changed.

There is no dispute that the combat system needs some fundamental fixing - fractional blows was merely a step on a long road. As well as blows and stats we need to look at weapon weights, dice, plusses/brands/slays (on- and off-weapon), criticals and AC/to-hit. There is a branch called "AC" at http://github.com/fizzix/angband which people can playtest - this splits monster AC into separate components for evasion and absorption. IMO this is the way we should be going, if not in 3.4 then 3.5 or whatever is next. It will need a lot of development and balancing, of course.

I agree that the stat system needs at least thinking about in tandem with this - perhaps we should just move to a linear scale (3 to 40), perhaps we should do something else. We should strive to eliminate breakpoints where possible and make any impacts of stats smooth across the entire range. We should also revisit which things are affected by stats and which aren't, as there is scope for improvement there too.

All this is for 3.4 or later. I am not yet convinced that there is merit in changing the birth system for 3.3, though I could be persuaded that we should make a small change now (such as changing the point costs, or reducing the number of points available) and spend the next month testing it, not being afraid to revert it if it doesn't work.

[jens]

I'm not convinced starting stats need to be lessened. That probably adds another 10% to stat gain, and stat gain was one of the banes of 3.0 gameplay for many players.

This depends on how a nerf is implemented, and then on player choice. With the price increase I propose players will get a more interesting choice to avoid prolonging stat gain.

Would it also be fair to simply reduce the number of points available to buy stats with?

I came up with the points system, and not surprisingly I really like the way it does the tradeoffs. I think if you want to weaken it, it might be better to start with a base of 9 instead of a base of 10, and leave the points for improvements as they are.

Here is a comparison between some different nerfs.
0) Current system.
1) My proposed price increase.
2) Use current system, but all stats start out at 9 (instead of 10 that is used today).
3) Same price, but only 18 points to buy with (6 points less than today).

Base stats achieved in the different systems, (sum of stats allocated)

0) current system	1) price increase	2) base stat = 9	3) 18 points to allocate
18,18,10,10,10,10 (16)	18,15,10,10,10,10 (13)	17,17, 9, 9, 9, 9 (10)	18,16,10,10,10,10 (14)
18,16,16,10,10,10 (20)	17,15,14,11,10,10 (17)	17,15,15, 9, 9, 9 (14)	17,15,15,10,10,10 (17)
17,17,17,10,10,10 (21)	16,16,15,10,10,10 (17)	16,16,16, 9, 9, 9 (15)	16,16,16,10,10,10 (18)
16,16,16,16,10,10 (24)	15,15,15,15,10,10 (20)	15,15,15,15, 9, 9 (18)	15,15,14,14,10,10 (18)
15,15,15,15,14,10 (24)	15,15,14,14,14,10 (22)	14,14,14,14,13, 9 (18)	14,14,14,13,13,10 (18)
14,14,14,14,14,14 (24)	14,14,14,14,14,14 (24)	13,13,13,13,13,13 (18)	13,13,13,13,13,13 (18)

Both 2 and 3 have the problem that they hit stat gain very hard, at least in the sense that the player cannot choose to get a higher total of stats. In both 0 and 1 the player can choose to spread out his stats and thus gain a higher total of stats, shortening the stat gain grind. To me, a steeper trade off for this gain is more interesting. I believe more players would consider lowering the best stats to gain quite a few points in a less important stat, compared with the current system. Another smaller problem with both 2 and 3 is that you can conceivably roll to achieve better stats when spreading them (the roller can achieve 14 in each stat).

[jens]

Or, to get sidetracked only one post into the thread, even make that be an aspect of the race you play; high-elves start with good stats across the board but can't customize them very well, while humans have excellent customizability but a low starting point.

I really like this idea! In the birth code it's just one constant that sets that you have 24 points to play with. It should not be very difficult to have this set by race instead.

[jens]

You may really be opposed to the combat system, and are taking it out on stats instead of addressing the real issue.

It is stats that is the real problem, or is it the combat system?

I feel that the combat system is the bigger problem, it sure needs to be modified. However, modifying the combat system will take some time to design, implement, and balance. We are closing in on 3.3, so we do not have the time to do that now.

We do have the time to make a small change to starting stats though.

Besides, the starting stats being too good is also an issue, and it is important to adress this before fixing the combat system. If a new combat system is based on stats (which I assume it will be), it is much better that the stats have been balanced before the combat system is changed.

[jens]

Point-based stat distribution has the downside that all characters will be the same, like warriors will always have maximized str and dex, and a high con, while minimum on the other stats. That's boring.

Exactly!

Reducing the possiblity to maximise with the point-based system will force people to think more on what is important for them right now, and in the long run.

[jens]

What is wrong with skipping the first 20 levels of the game? IMO, the game isn't very interesting before stat gain (DL 30) to begin with. IIRC there has been sentiment before about an option to start CL20/DL20.

I disagree completely. I think the first part of the game can be the most exciting part. Spells are unreliable, devices are few and far between. Careless play can lead to death from an infestation you can't escape, or a slightly OOD monster. I find that much more compelling than constantly crushing the skulls of endless demons using a zillion blows from your weapon of uber-destruction.

I agree that today the first 20 levels are not very interesting, and I have (without knowing it has been discussed) thought about suggesting an option to skip them. But I, just like Nick, know I can get a lot of enjoyment from those levels. But to get there the starting characters need to be nerfed.

The main issue here is that before 1000' the game is pretty uninteresting. The monsters require no tactics beyond making sure to face groups one at a time, you have very few interesting options even as a mage, who is supposed to be the most varied and tactical class, and the loot is uniformly awful unless you find a *thanc or Forasgil...in which case you immediately dive to 1000' to start having more fun. The early game isn't terrible, but it's not as good as the rest of the game.

I'd be all for reducing character power if it made things more interesting, but my feeling is that it would just increase early sudden death, making a new character (and new players) less likely to get to the interesting floors.

We have now at least one new mechanic to help adress this (we can now soon allocate ego items to early dlvls, introducing new items that can be interesting at those depths, without cluttering the rest of the levels). We can do other design changes to make the early levels more interesting, without affecting the rest of the game. But all of these possible changes are moot if the starting characters can just plow through the first 20 levels.

[jens]

Incidentally, if you are someone who's interested in modifying Angband's source and can compile changes I strongly encourage you to sign up for a github account and submit pull requests.

It's more convenient for us developers to pull in someone's request than to do anything else (even for these little one-line changes, it's easier). Plus it also helps us (or at least me) keep tabs on who's working on what.

I actuall got a GitHub account a while back, it's the easiest way to keep track on what you guys are up to without having to wait for the nightlies

I've been thinking about contributing through pull requests. This was sort of a start, checking that I can actually make and see the results of a change.

I'm still working very primitively though. What I did here was to (after getting the latest source from GitHub) copy the contents to a new folder, change one line of code with notepad, and then compile with MinGW (I'm on Windows 7). Too much hassle for any serious work, but Eclipse does not cooperate when it's time to compile

[buzzkill]

anyway if u want to see real abuse of stat, try old autoroller~!

I actually go one step further and use the standard roller, where available. The problem as I see it is that point based has become the norm, and therefore the game will eventually be balanced to cope with the genetically engineered supermen, causing further 'inflation'.

[dos350]

blah blah cry cry , i want to ruin game more!

anyway if u want to see real abuse of stat, try old autoroller~!

please, no rage

[artes]

Yes, the first levels are very easy with melee characters that have multiple blows. Not as easy with mage. I'm not saying anything has to be changed though. That depends on what kind of game we want.

Most people like a character with optimized stats. Rerolling 100000 times with the auto-roller is kind of ridiculous though.

Point-based stat distribution has the downside that all characters will be the same, like warriors will always have maximized str and dex, and a high con, while minimum on the other stats. That's boring.

Recently I've played a couple of characters with completely random stats, but even then I've rerolled a few times.

Since most people seems to want to have optimized stats, I don't see a reason to take away auto-rolling or point-based stats, though of course the system can be adjusted if there is a need for the sake of balance.

[Jazerus]

The main issue here is that before 1000' the game is pretty uninteresting. The monsters require no tactics beyond making sure to face groups one at a time, you have very few interesting options even as a mage, who is supposed to be the most varied and tactical class, and the loot is uniformly awful unless you find a *thanc or Forasgil...in which case you immediately dive to 1000' to start having more fun. The early game isn't terrible, but it's not as good as the rest of the game.

I'd be all for reducing character power if it made things more interesting, but my feeling is that it would just increase early sudden death, making a new character (and new players) less likely to get to the interesting floors. Fewer blows wouldn't result in melee characters having to use more tactics but rather necessitate increased consumable usage to tank through longer fights.

I'm also not really sure why the game picks up at 1000', but the difference is fairly noticeable for me. Stat-gain depths are also a spike in the interest curve.

[Hariolor]

Aren't most of the arguments in favor of skipping (by diving or by birth option) the first few dozen levels actually arguments about those levels being too easy?

Making the game harder from the word "go" might add interest back into those levels, making the skipping argument moot?

What seems to have happened here is that a few disproportionately powerful mechanics introduced a long time ago have created an arms race of exploitation/patching that has led to the innumerable posts these days about X Y or Z being too powerful/too useful. I think dragging players kicking and screaming back a few notches down the power-scale might be a good thing for the game.

I, for one, certainly get the most enjoyment out of the first twenty minutes of the game - at least up until I am prepping a likely winner. This enjoyment comes precisely because those first few levels require caution, forethought, etc. Not that this ever goes away entirely, but certainly CL50/DL 98 plays much differently from CL1/DL 2.

[jevansau]

I think the idea of lowering the starting stats - whether by lowering the starting base, increasing the rate at which upgrades cost or lowering the number of points available would be good as long as it is combined with a way of speeding up stat gain. Maybe stat gain potions could increase stats by 2 or 3 points up to 18. That would keep the number of potions required similar but allow for more character growth.
Having varying customization amounts between races sounds neat.

[CJNyfalt]

It is stats that is the real problem, or is it the combat system?

[Philip]

I disagree completely. I think the first part of the game can be the most exciting part. Spells are unreliable, devices are few and far between. Careless play can lead to death from an infestation you can't escape, or a slightly OOD monster. I find that much more compelling than constantly crushing the skulls of endless demons using a zillion blows from your weapon of uber-destruction.

You might be thinking in terms of O with a shadow-fairy mage. In V you are constantly crushing the skulls of endless orcs, kobolds, yeeks and such using a zillion blows from your dagger of flame +5 +8.