What is up with level feelings?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • DavidMedley
    Veteran
    • Oct 2019
    • 1004

    #31
    Originally posted by Nick
    Code:
    (square of monster level x levels out-of-depth)
    for each monster, added together and divided by the dungeon level.
    If I'm reading this right, danger feeling is proportional to depth. 51^2*1/50 is just over 51, while 26^2*1/25 is a little over 25, both for a monster 1 level OOD.
    Please like my indie game company on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/RatherFunGames

    Comment

    • wobbly
      Prophet
      • May 2012
      • 2629

      #32
      Was the change that reduced odds of under depth monsters in 4.1? When was that added? The 7-? are usually pits in my experience.

      Comment

      • Estie
        Veteran
        • Apr 2008
        • 2347

        #33
        Originally posted by DavidMedley
        If I'm reading this right, danger feeling is proportional to depth. 51^2*1/50 is just over 51, while 26^2*1/25 is a little over 25, both for a monster 1 level OOD.
        It has always felt to me like that. So what about dividing the whole thing by dlvl and calibrating anew ?

        Comment

        • bughunter
          Adept
          • Nov 2019
          • 141

          #34
          Originally posted by Estie
          It has always felt to me like that. So what about dividing the whole thing by dlvl and calibrating anew ?
          I've spent the morning cogitating over this formula, hoping to have an inspiration for a specific suggestion, but don't have much yet.

          Some insights, though:

          - This is the formula I've deduced from the thread:
          Danger_level = SUM[(MLn^2 x (MLn - DL)) / DL, 1, N]
          where
          N is the number of monsters on the level
          n is the index number for each monster
          MLn is the nth monster's level
          DL is the dungeon level
          SUM is a function that sums the first argument evaluation starting with n = second argument and continuing through n = third argument.

          - The expression also evaluates to (MLn^3/DL - ML), meaning that the result is going to be proportional to the cube of the monster level.

          - For low levels, there are going to be few monsters below their depth, so that (MLn - DL) will almost always be positive.

          - At deeper levels, a lot of monsters will appear where (MLn - DL) is negative.

          - This negative term will offset the effect of DL on the resulting value.

          - There is clearly a missing normalization step... I'm guessing it's got a DL^2 or DL^3 term in it somewhere, and then scales to 1 through 9.


          I'm completely whiffing on any suggestions for changes, other than:

          - Instead of dividing by DL, maybe divide by DL^2 ?? I'd have to see this in practice before really endorsing it as more than anything but a brainstorm.

          - Perhaps add a scaling factor for proximity of high level monsters to other high level monsters, to weight pits higher than solitary roaming monsters.

          - This proximity factor would be something like (MLn / (MLi * SQRT(Xdistance_i^2, Ydistance_i^2)) for each monster n to each other monster i... needs more thought... this can become computationally intensive.

          - Perhaps filter out monsters in the above for which (MLn - DL) < 0 to reduce the calculation burden.

          Comment

          • Huqhox
            Adept
            • Apr 2016
            • 145

            #35
            After a mere few seconds of thought, my instant (and probably incorrect) reaction to this is: Do we care about under depth monsters at all? They don't necessarily make the level easier. What I am worried about is what OOD nasties I am going to encounter, not if there's the odd grey mold or jackal I'm going to mow down without even noticing
            "This has not been a recording"

            Comment

            • Werbaer
              Adept
              • Aug 2014
              • 182

              #36
              Originally posted by Werbaer
              Very rare, but possible.
              I just had a 1-6 level at 2450'. A very small cavern level (100 x 35), with a Demonic Q (2250') as the only monster native below 1500'.
              And now a 1-6 level at 4000'. Again a 100 x 35 cavern level, with a Glabrezu (from 2150') as deepest monster.

              Comment

              • Ugramoth
                Adept
                • Mar 2017
                • 124

                #37
                I agree that early 9-2 is probably a pit full of experience and late 9-2 is treasure packed unique lurching around on otherwise empty level.

                By the way, do mimics cause feelings? I swear several times I've gotten something like ?-8 on a level with literally nothing on it except potion mimic posing as augmentation or experience.

                Comment

                • Sphara
                  Knight
                  • Oct 2016
                  • 504

                  #38
                  Originally posted by Ugramoth
                  By the way, do mimics cause feelings? I swear several times I've gotten something like ?-8 on a level with literally nothing on it except potion mimic posing as augmentation or experience.
                  Again, without knowing how to code-dive, I dare to say: no.
                  I've seen a Ring of Speed on ?-2 level floor and I just attacked it afar knowing it's a mimic, without bothering to bump into it.

                  I've also had a rare situation, where I absolutely could not find the big feeling -item from early dungeon. For an item that monster can pick up, one rare occurrence is that Novice Rogue picks up a ring of speed or a potion of experience and Blubbering Icky Thing then tramples over him destroying the item in process

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  😀
                  😂
                  🥰
                  😘
                  🤢
                  😎
                  😞
                  😡
                  👍
                  👎