Plans for 4.1 - 4.3

[Nomad]

Just had my first potential winner in the nightlies, so I've had a chance to playtest all the gameplay changes more thoroughly, and I think they're all looking pretty good so far. So, various rambly thoughts:

• I really like the newest iteration of the trap system. I feel like it's a great compromise to still avoid the tedium of obligatory detection while still allowing for surprise traps sometimes. The frequency of stumbling into unexpected traps seems well-balanced (for warriors, at least). Vault traps might need to be made a bit more frequent and/or the actual vault templates rejigged a bit - some of the big greater vaults look kind of empty in places due to the disappearance of most of the traps.

• I absolutely love all the changes to dungeon generation and terrain - makes exploring much more interesting. (And I think non-passable rubble should stay alongside the new type - they're both different sorts of obstacle.) Is it currently possible to add new dungeon profiles and/or vault designs on the fly without making code alterations? I'd definitely like to have a fiddle around and have a go at designing some.
  
  (I also think maybe there needs to be a clearer distinction between "interesting rooms" in the vault.txt file vs. room templates - seems like a number of the smaller interesting rooms fit within a standard room size and are just layouts without any terrain/permawalls or specific designated monsters, and so could be easily transferred over to room_template.txt? Maybe just add an equivalent of the "1 - monster, object or trap" symbol to the D: lines in room_template.txt, which would be useful for me to rejig some of the other designs as well.)

• Not on Nick's list, the randart changes - working well, I think. New randarts seem fine (well, aside from the bug with finding duplicates). I absolutely love being able to find, say, multiple Phials in the same game - makes kit decisions much more interesting than the very similar knockoffs of the standart lights you'd always get before.

• Also not on the list, curses: I really like the curse system too, though I think it could use more tweaking with regard to frequency and identification of curses - in my current game I'm hanging around levels 97-98 and still tripping over new curse types I haven't ID'd yet. (Changes I would make: cut the "burning up/chilled to the bone"/"steelskin" ones from the curse list - they're hard to discover and completely non-obvious - allow using Remove Curse on an unknown curse to identify it, reduce the odds of having multiple curses on the same item, maybe also slightly boost the frequency of ID scrolls.)

Re: the issues with introducing new monsters, maybe moving Rods of Probing much earlier in the dungeon would be a good compromise? I've always thought they occur too late and infrequently to be useful to the newbie players who most need them, in any case.

ETA:

I have played with the lava version now for a long time, and for the life of me I cant find anything positive about it. If thats my shortcoming, could someone possibly explain why they like lava and how it enhances their enjoyment of the game ?

And yes, I like the lava! I think it's neat having an obstacle that only some types of monsters will cross, that the player can cross safely with fire immunity, and that it's possible to shoot spells/missiles over the top of, which allows for new and different tactical situations. Plus it just adds a little more interest to the level maps to discover one of the new special rooms with lava in it.

[Nick]

J So, various rambly thoughts

Thanks for that. I will up the rate of traps in vaults (the current rate was kind of a guess), and remove those two curses - I'm extremely open to further additions, subtractions or changes to curse types, too.

Is lava going to stay ?

I have played with the lava version now for a long time, and for the life of me I cant find anything positive about it. If thats my shortcoming, could someone possibly explain why they like lava and how it enhances their enjoyment of the game ?

At this point I'd say it will stay. Not trying to pick on you, but you do seem the only to really not like it so far

If you want to remove it from your game, it's pretty simple - go to lib/gamedata/terrain.txt, remove the lava entry, then make a second copy of the open floor (or rubble, if you like) entry and rename it "lava". A reminder for anyone wanting to make data file changes, too: you can leave the original unchanged, and drop the edited one in your user directory if that's more convenient.

[Estie]

At this point I'd say it will stay. Not trying to pick on you, but you do seem the only to really not like it so far

If you want to remove it from your game, it's pretty simple - go to lib/gamedata/terrain.txt, remove the lava entry, then make a second copy of the open floor (or rubble, if you like) entry and rename it "lava". A reminder for anyone wanting to make data file changes, too: you can leave the original unchanged, and drop the edited one in your user directory if that's more convenient.

All right; I will remove it, thanks for the instructions.

Somehow I suspect that Nomad is theorizing about lava and hasnt actually done much playing with it. The tactical possibilities he describes are occuring very rarely if at all and also can be achieved with something that doesnt burn your scrolls when you accidentally step on it, whereas the slowing down of the play to prevent misstepping is prevalent.

Playing with lava nearby turns Angband into somthing akin to Shamus - an old scroller game where you have to move around and fight without touching the wall. Shamus had held my interest for a few days ages ago when it came out; but the game that has kept me interested for decades is not a fumblefinger test game, but a game where decisions are based on tactical situations.

There are two major features that prevent fluent play for me: the poison dot and lava. I have been going on about the dot for ages, and now theres is more of that. Aparently I have a singular playstyle.

[Nomad]

Somehow I suspect that Nomad is theorizing about lava and hasnt actually done much playing with it. The tactical possibilities he describes are occuring very rarely if at all and also can be achieved with something that doesnt burn your scrolls when you accidentally step on it, whereas the slowing down of the play to prevent misstepping is prevalent.

Nope, this is from gameplay. I've come across a couple of rooms with decent-sized lakes of lava where it came into play helping me pick off monsters. I guess I can see how it would be annoying if you fall in it a lot by accident, but I've never done that, and I'm not aware of it slowing me down at all trying to avoid it. (Admittedly I'm a pretty high-speed touch-typist, so I guess that helps me avoid hitting wrong keys without thinking too much about it.)

Maybe there should be a menu option to switch on "Are you sure? [y/n]" confirmation messages before ever stepping onto lava, or it should be impossible to do unless you use the 'W' command like when you deliberately walk into a trap?

[Estie]

or it should be impossible to do unless you use the 'W' command like when you deliberately walk into a trap?

Thats it. Excellent.

The amount of times you actually want to step onto lava is similarly rare as the times you want to step on traps, and the fumbling element is gone.

I still wouldnt _like_ it, as I find it highly unrealistic and gamey, but I can live with that.

[Pete Mack]

Query-walk is how it works in ToME, unless you have immunity. It also does a whole lot more damage--I mean, lava!

[Gwarl]

Lava and new rubble are both very logical terrain types to have.

blocks los, blocks movement - wall
doesn't block los, doesn't block movement - floor
blocks los, doesn't block movement - rubble
doesn't block movement, blocks los - lava

Having the extra two terrain types does an awful lot for tactical gameplay and the only wonder is that it took this long.

Looking forward greatly to 4.1

the main body of work to be done (if you disregard fixing a billion bugs) is the rework of the monster list I've been talking about.

I'll try and get back to working on the datafile editor I was talking about.

[Patashu]

Tongue-in-cheek feature request: Replace Lava with Sil Chasms

[fizzix]

What are the plans for the monster list that are still outstanding on 4.1

I ask, because I think I promised I'd help, and then I disappeared for a few months...

[Nick]

What are the plans for the monster list that are still outstanding on 4.1

I ask, because I think I promised I'd help, and then I disappeared for a few months...

To quote me from another thread:

introducing new monsters, adjusting the depths of current ones, changing movement (and maybe spellcasting) AI, introducing new spells (including some with combinations of damage types), and giving existing attack types extra side-effects when unresisted.

Basically I'm looking at an overhaul, with every monster having to justify its place on the list

[Antoine]

To quote me from another thread:


Basically I'm looking at an overhaul, with every monster having to justify its place on the list

Should look at what we did in Minimal

[fizzix]

I think this might be a good opportunity for a collaborative google docs.

I'm not sure how best to invite other people to edit, but at the very least people can view what I've done. So far it's just been parsing the monster list and uploading the data.

Antoine, do you have an accessible copy of the minimal monster list?

[Pete Mack]

not sure why github isn't enough for this? Also, replace Giant unique with Tolkien/Norse equivalents. Greek ones just don't fit. And we need a rodent unique: The squirrel, Ratatoskr.
Insult
Bite: confuse
Bite: confuse

Comes in group with unique eagle, Snake, and some deer....

[fizzix]

not sure why github isn't enough for this?

Personally I find it a lot easier to visualize things on a spreadsheet. But I'm not sure any of us (except for maybe antoine, since he's done this already) is at a stage where we know what we actually want to change. So it's mainly for theorycrafting reasons.

[Nick]

Antoine, do you have an accessible copy of the minimal monster list?

Here it is.

Just to clarify, too, I'm not looking to reduce the size of the monster list. Rather than removing a monster, I would look at making it more interesting. I think my basic yardstick is "Will this monster make life difficult for some character?"; if it fails, then it needs work.