The Future of Angband?

[AnonymousHero]

@Nomad: That's a grand idea.

Procedural generation is what roguelikes are and should be about.

[fizzix]

+1000.

... on the condition that labyrinth levels are removed entirely: They are the lazy game designer's choice and are incredibly annoying. Look, I agree that it's fun to write a labyrinth dungeon generator, but they're unbelievably annoying to actually play through[1]. This is one of the few places where T2 did the right thing: It has exactly one (completely optional) maze-level dungeon and you can dig through the walls. Mazes made of un-diggable walls is just annoying for no good reason.

[1] Hence the "skip labyrinth levels problem".

Yeah, labyrinth would and should never be a layout. However, I think we could have areas that are defined around specific unique monsters. So you can have a section of the specific level types where an unmappable, undiggable, labyrinth is generated, with Baphomet at the center. It would be a "one-time" thing, which means if you skip fighting Baphomet on the level it's generated on, you never see him again unless Morgoth summons him.

Other monsters that don't fit nicely in themes can also be treated similarly. The Tarrasque can spawn in desolate areas (cleared of all other monsters) that can't be detected or mapped. When you see that blank area on detection you know it's the Tarrasque and you can choose to deal with it or avoid it.

Other uniques that we can do this for include Bullroarer, Wormtongue, Nar, Mim and sons, Orfax/Boldor, draebor, beorn, bert/bill/tom, queen ant, kavlax, balrog of moria, phoenix, shelob, lernaean hydra, fundin, saruman, cat lord, omarax, ungoliant, qlzqqlzuup etc.

[Nick]

There are some really good ideas here. Keep it up

[Nomad]

I think we could have areas that are defined around specific unique monsters. So you can have a section of the specific level types where an unmappable, undiggable, labyrinth is generated, with Baphomet at the center. It would be a "one-time" thing, which means if you skip fighting Baphomet on the level it's generated on, you never see him again unless Morgoth summons him.

I always liked the idea of each unique or groups of uniques having a special room that can only occur on their native level. (Even Fang and Grip could have a mushroom field, Sméagol could have a cave with a pool of water, etc.) If you've killed all the resident uniques by the time you find it, the room could be found in a destructed state.

[MattB]

I don't understand why seemingly everyone is anti-labyrinth, I actually love them!
My little face lights up whenever I get one.

Maybe I'm just weird.

[Nomad]

Hey, I'm pro-labyrinth (and cavern levels too). Adds a bit of variety and more of an interesting navigational challenge to get to the stairs or reach any detected treasures. Sure, they're more frustrating to cross than regular levels, but I consider that to be pretty much the point. It wouldn't occur to me to skip them.

[MattB]

Yay! I'm not alone!

(btw, it's taken me a month, but I've finally read every post I missed after several months in the wilderness - I feel like I'm back in touch with the real world again.)

[Egavactip]

I don't understand why seemingly everyone is anti-labyrinth, I actually love them!
My little face lights up whenever I get one.

Maybe I'm just weird.

I think labyrinths are perfectly fine. I like them better than caves, that's for sure.

[Huqhox]

I think labyrinths are perfectly fine. I like them better than caves, that's for sure.

I find labyrinths pretty fun to play. I don't like cavern levels at all but I wouldn't want to get rid of them. More variety of levels is always a good thing

[fizzix]

Personally, I like labyrinths as a subsection of a larger level. I think that was actually the intended purpose anyway, it just never got there.

One of the issues is that having different dungeon styles is a very good idea, but it needs to be handled simultaneously with the monsters that inhabit it. A wide open layout does not interact well with lots of ranged breath monsters (although perhaps it's better now with cone-shaped breaths). Still groups of ranged casters and summoners are too difficult in large open levels. (Summoners happen to be a huge balance problem in all parts of the game...)

Similarly, a labyrinth level doesn't work well with monsters that travel through walls. It also has issues with monsters waking up too early because of the difficult of navigation.

If we're more careful about what monsters we put into different level designs, we can get both variety and avoid bad situations.

Furthermore, this opens the door a bit for some strategic gameplay (as opposed to tactical gameplay which really is what Angband heavily leans towards.) If you have an idea of what types of monsters you are going to face on the level, you can adjust your gear specifically for that level. I'm thinking of stuff beyond just equipping a fire resistance ring for a fire-based level.

[Nomad]

The dungeon_profile edit file could potentially be expanded to set more parameters for levels than it does now. You could use similar include/exclude rules to the ones we have in pit.txt to set types of monsters, traps and even treasures found in particular types of level - for instance, excluding monsters and traps that destroy walls from labyrinths, or only having animals and dragons in caverns.

ETA: it also might be worth considering tweaking the potential rewards for tackling less easy level types like labyrinths and caverns - say some sort of "level difficulty" modifier that boosts the depth of floor treasure, etc.

[fizzix]

ETA: it also might be worth considering tweaking the potential rewards for tackling less easy level types like labyrinths and caverns - say some sort of "level difficulty" modifier that boosts the depth of floor treasure, etc.

We've done this. Caverns are notably less dense monster-wise and more dense treasure wise than they originally were. Perhaps we haven't reached a level where it's worth exploring them, but that's probably due to changes that were too conservative.

[Derakon]

We've done this. Caverns are notably less dense monster-wise and more dense treasure wise than they originally were. Perhaps we haven't reached a level where it's worth exploring them, but that's probably due to changes that were too conservative.

The problem with caverns is that their layout is just too wide-open. I'm not going to venture into a cavern level past 1000' without perfect monster detection (i.e. able to detect non-evil invisible monsters) because it's just too dangerous. If the generator could be modified to greatly reduce the number of tiles in LOS at a time, and to add more 1-tile chokepoints, then it'd be more worthwhile to explore them.

[Estie]

With normal levels, when exploring I can make very good guesses as to the layout based on experience. I know the shape types and given a little information from mapping out a few squares, I can infer that this might be a circle room, which has exactly 1 exit, or that here should be a secret door.

With cave levels, gaining information locally says nothing whatsoever about the layout a few squares ahead. If a * is 10 squares away, it can be in LOS or reachable only by traversing an U shape that goes all over the height of the map or an inverse U shape, the only way to find out is to follow a random wall.

Thats why I find caves boring.

[AnonymousHero]

The problem with caverns is that their layout is just too wide-open. I'm not going to venture into a cavern level past 1000' without perfect monster detection (i.e. able to detect non-evil invisible monsters) because it's just too dangerous. If the generator could be modified to greatly reduce the number of tiles in LOS at a time, and to add more 1-tile chokepoints, then it'd be more worthwhile to explore them.

What, you don't like Q's? Heresy!