FA vs Vanilla

[Derakon]

Oh, a quick note regarding monster AI: everyone should play a few games of Crypt of the Necrodancer, or at the very least (since the game isn't free, though IMO it's absolutely worth the money) watch a video of the gameplay. Necrodancer has very simple, downright trivial AIs, but every single monster type (discounting palette swaps) has a different set of rules for movement; combine that with having a good mix of monsters instead of tons of the same monster over and over, and you get nice, varied gameplay.

Of course, if we wanted something similar for Angband then we'd need to make things a little more complicated -- Necrodancer gets away with extreme simplicity in part because it has a strict realtime element (if you don't provide your input at the right time, then you miss your turn), and of course Vanilla wouldn't have that...right?

[fizzix]

Necrodancer has very simple, downright trivial AIs, but every single monster type (discounting palette swaps) has a different set of rules for movement; combine that with having a good mix of monsters instead of tons of the same monster over and over, and you get nice, varied gameplay.

So there are two ends of the spectrum here, and we can choose where to go. One option is that monsters are scripted, you can see (or know) exactly what a monster will do, and the gameplay is to figure out how to deal with the monsters in the most efficient way. I'm not sure of CotN fits that, but other roguelikes, like Invisible Inc. (not free) or some roguelike-like games. Darren Grey's Mosaic, or the Android game Ending fit this.

On the other spectrum, the monster AI is completely random. You might know what options a monster has, but you have no idea what it will do on each turn. In this style of game, the challenge is one of odds calculation and estimation.

Angband is very close to the random end of the spectrum. Monster movement direction is forced, but monster action choice is completely random. Adding smarter AI, unrelated to movement moves it towards the scripted side of the spectrum. If you are able to, say, rule out the possibility of the dragon breathing on this turn, it changes the tactics. A 1% possibility of death is not much different from a 2%, but is very different from a 0%. Similarly, if you know that an enemy will do something, like breathe on its first chance, then you can plan accordingly. (ToME4 fights are mostly determinable, and can be heavily tactical because of it.)

My gut instinct is that the scripted-puzzle idea won't work with infinite levels, but I could be wrong.

[Derakon]

Well, to pull up another not-free roguelike, Hoplite has completely nonrandom everything except for the level layout. Theoretically, on entering the level (which also gives you full vision of the level; Hoplite levels are small), you could "solve" the level, though in practice there's far many steps between starting and ending a level for that to be practical. There's only four enemy types -- grunts, archers, mages, and bombers -- and each has its own entirely deterministic AI. I wouldn't say Hoplite has a ton of depth to it, but it works well and I think it could be readily scaled up.

Not that I'm saying that Angband should have deterministic enemies...well, at least most of the enemies shouldn't be deterministic. But I do think there's a lot of room for adding more varied behaviors. For example, we could have:

* Enemies that move quickly and have powerful melee, but also always move along the walls. Thus, trivial to deal with on their own in an open room, but watch out for them in corridors!
* Enemies that are constrained from moving in the same direction two turns in a row (or even must turn at least 90 degrees in each movement turn)
* Enemies that can move quickly through walls, but very slowly in open space. And vice versa.
* Enemies that have no direct attack but instead make nearby enemies stronger (or are primarily dangerous in that they enhance nearby enemies -- Shrieker Mushroom Patches are an extant example)
* Enemies that have a prescribed attack cycle, e.g. alway do move, attack, cast, move, attack, cast in that order

Et cetera.

[Scatha]

Monster mana

You could have spells that cost different amounts, but I'd just use a couple of levels. The different amounts thing can bite if the monster is needing to save up mana to cast a big spell and keeps getting tempted by small ones.

If I wanted spells with different costs in a system like this I'd have a single threshold required to cast any spell, but have them drain you by different amounts below that level.

For instance, a searing summoner could start with 5 mana (=max) , regenerate 1 mana per turn, and be allowed to cast any spell whenever their mana is positive. Spells: fiery ferret (2 mana), blazing badger (4 mana), exploding elephant (8 mana).

Then if they started with a ferret or badger they could cast another spell immediately, but if they started with an elephant they couldn't. Later in the fight the spell they choose would determine how long they have to wait before casting anything else.

If you didn't want to allow negative mana numbers obviously you could move the start value and threshold up.

[wobbly]

I think I'm mostly in agreement with Derakon. But there are a few differences.

Abilities: I don't like these (sorry HM) mainly because they steepen the learning curve greatly. The only way I'd get behind it, is if you also had a class or two, where the abilities were set. Honestly, if we were to put this in V, I would rather have it done through a new equipment slot, rather than innate. You still get to choose, but you also get to try things out before committing.

Another way of handling it is having a default set of abilities for each class. So those learning can just use the defaults. In regards to the problem with taking the "wrong" abilities aren't they all just little bonuses? I haven't played O or Fa enough to know but it seems to me miss picking would be no big deal.

[HallucinationMushroom]

When I was talking about abilities I was really meaning in regards to FA. I think it'd be fun to have even more in FA, not so much adding any to V.

But Necrodancer, that is an *awesome* game. I got it a few weeks ago. I'm still trying to beat hardcore mode, but getting close.

I guess I could play Sil to a soundtrack and only move on the beats or something. That might be fun. I ought to figure out turncount per mindepth to find songs that time out just right based on # of beats or something... but I'm way too lazy for that.

[half]

I guess I could play Sil to a soundtrack and only move on the beats or something.

I'd actually thought about making a version like this, despite never having played a game like that.

[HallucinationMushroom]

That's cool. The reason I thought of Sil and Necrodancer is because when the song for the level is over, it drops you down to the next level if you haven't already taken the stairs.

[ranger jeff]

Two thoughts from recent play experience...

why don't dragons hardly ever breathe? seems like less than 1% chance. They should be 1/4 breathe, 1/4 cast (unless at deep levels and they only have weak spells, see below) and the rest move towards or attack.

and why do most spellcasters spam useless spells? I mean, at DL 60, they should figure I probably have rBlind and rConf and FA, so why try to slow/blind/confuse me??? This is probably a whole bunch of new code to suggest, but for spellcasters, look at their available spells, and adjust the probability of which spell to cast up to the more powerful ones at deeper levels, and if they have no really powerful spells to match the level, then just attack or summon or blink away.

And not sure about mana, but maybe figure casters in terms of probability, 1/1 casters, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, and maybe weak casters just 1 out of every 6 rounds. Yes, drujes will cast every round, most mages and sorcerers should cast every other round, and down on the line.

[Timo Pietilä]

and why do most spellcasters spam useless spells? I mean, at DL 60, they should figure I probably have rBlind and rConf and FA, so why try to slow/blind/confuse me???

If that bothers you there is option "monsters learn from their mistakes". One cast of blind, no effect, no more casts of blind. It's in birth-options.

[LostTemplar]

and why do most spellcasters spam useless spells?

Spells are not really useless, monster just don't know your resistances, there is an option to allow monsters to fully know player's resists. Also dragons don't breath if resistance is high, monster learn about resistance after first breath or elemental melee attack.

[Philip]

The reason players really like to have FA, Rblnd, Rconf by that point is that monsters have those spells, among other things. They are very damaging if used succesfully, and worth a try on the monsters part. If you use learn from mistakes, they won't waste time with them.

[Derakon]

Another thing to keep in mind with smart spellcasters is that they become massively more threatening. In fact, there used to be a "monsters cast spells intelligently" birth option, but it was taken out because it made any monster with a Heal spell effectively immortal. That kind of thing has to be combined with the addition of limitations on how often monsters can cast spells before it will be balanced.

Dragons breathe a bit rarely; I think the ancient dragons breathe 1 turn in 5, and anything younger than that is 1 in 10? I don't have the files handy right now. 1 in 10 is the rarest cast frequency, so certainly dragons aren't breathing only 1% of the time.

[bio_hazard]

I don't have enough experience with FA to comment on all of these, but my opinion for a few:

3) I notice this more playing xp bonus characters who are spellcasters since they get new spells so quickly. In the early game, the xp penalty races don't play that much different since they're usually stronger and can dive a little faster (at least for me). They can seem a little grindier mid-game. Don't really have too much of an opinion on this, but I think it does add a little bit to differentiate the races, although I'd not be surprised if there were a more fun way to do this.

4) Rubble just seems broken in V. More types of monsters should be able to bypass or destroy it.

5) Varied terrain- would love this, especially if monsters used it creatively, and or it allows players to play more tactically. Light/dark, line of sight, speed, attack penalties/bonus, etc. Also just more flavor, which I for one would appreciate in V.

11) I'd like a mix of randarts and the standard set.

12) summoning: Different monsters should do this differently. Human henchmen and maybe animals should appear at the caster's side. Q's should summon to the player. Super devious monsters should summon to block exits at the beginning of the fight, and to the player or between player and summoner if badly hurt.

[Nick]

Thank you all, this thread has some of the best comments ever. I particularly like the monster mana discussion.