Minor 3.3.0 feedback

[buzzkill]

I don't think that {good} weapons becoming obsolete is a problem. My beef is that altering the definition/vocab will insure that they become obsolete earlier. Cursed weapons don't even exist anymore. This means that {average} items are next on the chopping block. Do we really need them, or should we redefine then as {poor}. Why not? They are inferior to everything else in the game?

I was just pointing out the contemplation of the inflation of the power curve once again. Every time something is deemed inferior to something else, something gets boosted. I presume because it's a quicker, easier fix (to inflate) and not some grand behind the scenes conspiracy by the maintainers to ruin the game. IMO, it's just a little short sighted. Everything is relative.

It matters not whether you chance the definition or the word itself. The end result is the same.

[Magnate]

I don't think that {good} weapons becoming obsolete is a problem. My beef is that altering the definition/vocab will insure that they become obsolete earlier. Cursed weapons don't even exist anymore. This means that {average} items are next on the chopping block. Do we really need them, or should we redefine then as {poor}. Why not? They are inferior to everything else in the game?

I was just pointing out the contemplation of the inflation of the power curve once again. Every time something is deemed inferior to something else, something gets boosted. I presume because it's a quicker, easier fix (to inflate) and not some grand behind the scenes conspiracy by the maintainers to ruin the game. IMO, it's just a little short sighted. Everything is relative.

It matters not whether you chance the definition or the word itself. The end result is the same.

Hmmmkay. Thanks for the clarification - I see where you're coming from now. I'd actually like to make the early game longer - make people use +0 stuff for longer (trading up to bigger dice, say), then using non-ego "good" stuff for longer, and have egos and powerful items show up much later than they do now.

The devteam is now at least aware of the risk of unintentionally inflating the power curve, so we can make conscious efforts to avoid it when we make changes.

[Nomad]

Hmmmkay. Thanks for the clarification - I see where you're coming from now. I'd actually like to make the early game longer - make people use +0 stuff for longer (trading up to bigger dice, say), then using non-ego "good" stuff for longer, and have egos and powerful items show up much later than they do now.

Definitely in favour of this. I almost never find, say, high AC armour before it's been rendered obsolete by armour with resists, and the high-end base types like mithril boots/gloves etc. drop way after you've stopped caring about anything but the better types of ego.

It seems like the progression through the dungeon levels ought go something like this:

1-25: using average and enchanted items
25-50: finding low-end egos
50-75: finding high-end egos
75-100: finding artefacts

Whereas currently, you seem to pass through all those stages before you even hit the halfway mark, and then it's just trading up for steadily better artefacts.

[Magnate]

Definitely in favour of this. I almost never find, say, high AC armour before it's been rendered obsolete by armour with resists, and the high-end base types like mithril boots/gloves etc. drop way after you've stopped caring about anything but the better types of ego.

It seems like the progression through the dungeon levels ought go something like this:

1-25: using average and enchanted items
25-50: finding low-end egos
50-75: finding high-end egos
75-100: finding artefacts

Whereas currently, you seem to pass through all those stages before you even hit the halfway mark, and then it's just trading up for steadily better artefacts.

I agree. I think this would be quite a shock for experienced players though - it's basically a complete recalibration of the power curve through the game. Monster depths/stats would need to be adjusted to compensate, or nobody will ever get past about dl30 ...

[d_m]

It seems like the progression through the dungeon levels ought go something like this:

1-25: using average and enchanted items
25-50: finding low-end egos
50-75: finding high-end egos
75-100: finding artefacts

Whereas currently, you seem to pass through all those stages before you even hit the halfway mark, and then it's just trading up for steadily better artefacts.

I think when we speak of these things we shouldn't just speak of averages (mean) but standard deviation also.

I agree with Timo that flattening things into a predictable power curve is going to make the game less exciting, and remove one of the best things that roguelike/pcg design gives us: the chance of something strange/unexpected/exciting happening.

If we say the average depth you'd find your first speed ring is DL70, consider the difference between these standard deviations (using normal distribution):

5: chance to find by DL50 is 6 in 100,000
10: chance to find by DL50 is 4,500 in 100,000 (4.5%)
20: chance to find by DL50 is 31,700 in 100,000 (31%)

These same chances also describe "the possibility that you won't see a speed ring until DL90". So as you can see increasing the variance makes for a more unpredictable game.

The only reason I bring this up is that I don't think averages are what we need... many of us have relatively good ideas about these. Rather, the important thing is to decide how much variability from those averages we are comfortable with. This applies even more to things like dungeon books and other dungeon essentials.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm not asserting that anything item generation is (currently) a normal distribution, or that it should be, but just trying to show the effects of variance on an average.

[Derakon]

I wouldn't necessarily say that we need a strict "average goes here, good goes here, ego goes here" type of division. I will agree that artifacts take over the game earlier than they need to, though. But we should be focusing on giving equipment a chance to shine, not on giving quality categories a chance to shine.

For example, there's no point in delaying the appearance of Slay Orc weapons until after all the orcs have long since stopped being a threat. Likewise we don't want to force the player to dive through 40 dungeon levels' worth of dangerous ghosts before we let them get a helmet with See Invisible on it. What we don't want is for that Slay Orc weapon to be followed by a Westernesse, or for that helmet to be succeeded by Thranduil, until the player has had at least a few dungeon levels to appreciate their new toy.

It might be worth breaking the "magical is strictly worse than ego" setup we have currently, in favor of steadily increasing magical bonuses based on depth, and a level-based allocation scheme for ego abilities basically similar in mechanics to what we have now. Currently, pluses are king, and ego items have more pluses than magical items. Break that, and you can start introducing weak ego items early (when they'd see some use) without massively boosting the player's power level.

[Nomad]

It might be worth breaking the "magical is strictly worse than ego" setup we have currently, in favor of steadily increasing magical bonuses based on depth, and a level-based allocation scheme for ego abilities basically similar in mechanics to what we have now. Currently, pluses are king, and ego items have more pluses than magical items. Break that, and you can start introducing weak ego items early (when they'd see some use) without massively boosting the player's power level.

I think this is a very good point. Maybe apply the ego completely separately from the pluses, so at dlevel 5 you might find a Slay Orc but it's only on a (0,0) weapon.

So perhaps 'good' could mean hit/dam bonuses OR an ego OR a high-end base item, while an item with two out of three of those things would qualify as 'great', and an item with all of them would rate 'splendid' or whatever.

[PowerDiver]

For one I don't find them too powerful, quite opposite in fact. Only case where DSM breath is really useful is very early non-basic four DSM. Those are rare, and they are spice to the game.

I found basic four DSM before DL25 four games in a row, diving except to clear good+ levels. They are not rare.

[Antoine]

I wouldn't necessarily say that we need a strict "average goes here, good goes here, ego goes here" type of division. I will agree that artifacts take over the game earlier than they need to, though. But we should be focusing on giving equipment a chance to shine, not on giving quality categories a chance to shine.

To me it comes down to restricting the supply of super stuff.

If egos are not being used because everyone has arts, then there should be less artifacts early on.

If low-end egos are not being used because everyone has high-end egos, then there should be less high-end egos early on.

If normal DSMs are not being used because everyone can get ego DSMs... well, you get my point.

Of course it should be possible to occasionally get super items as a result of luck and/or daring...

A.

[Jungle_Boy]

I think this is a very good point. Maybe apply the ego completely separately from the pluses, so at dlevel 5 you might find a Slay Orc but it's only on a (0,0) weapon.

So perhaps 'good' could mean hit/dam bonuses OR an ego OR a high-end base item, while an item with two out of three of those things would qualify as 'great', and an item with all of them would rate 'splendid' or whatever.

I like this suggestion about separating egos from pluses. Would make things more interesting and create more choices for players.

[Timo Pietilä]

I agree with Timo that flattening things into a predictable power curve is going to make the game less exciting, and remove one of the best things that roguelike/pcg design gives us: the chance of something strange/unexpected/exciting happening.

Wow, someone agrees with me before I managed to say anything. Take off that helmet of telepathy and start acting normal. (I guess I have made my point enough of times).

[Magnate]

Wow, someone agrees with me before I managed to say anything. Take off that helmet of telepathy and start acting normal. (I guess I have made my point enough of times).

I enjoyed that exchange :-)

[Magnate]

I like this suggestion about separating egos from pluses. Would make things more interesting and create more choices for players.

+1. Thanks Derakon - very good suggestion.

[half]

I like this suggestion about separating egos from pluses. Would make things more interesting and create more choices for players.

This is what I've done in Sil:

good => (ego or pluses) + several levels out of depth
great => (ego and pluses) + more levels out of depth

[Bee Vortex]

A couple of thoughts from me:

Restore Stat Potions

Overall not a problem, the restore on level up is good early on, then the occasional Mushroom of Vigor will do the trick and after that the normal stat potions are common enough. The only problem I had was after finding a !Exp at a low level. My char was too weak to get to stat potions, did not find vigor and required too much experience for the next level, I was basically drained to death. Made me a bit more careful with stat drainers from then on though.

One final note: if char level drops because of Exp drain and is raised again, this also triggers the stat restore. Maybe this is intentional, but I'm not sure.


Enchant to Hit/to Dam

Not having these scrolls in the shop is a great relief. Gone is the nagging feeling that I should buy and try each and every single one of them because there is always a small chance it will work and make my weapon better. And it prevents too strong weapons early on.

The negative side effect is that liked using the scrolls to even out the bonusses on several stacks of ammo, so they would combine in the inventory or especially the house.

Also, uncursing Calris has become a rather masochistic task.

Daniel