No searching

[Estragon]

I don't know, I think the current changes have *increased* the flavor of the various classes at least in some cases. Paladins for example feel much more like holy warriors enhanced by magic than they did before the spell changes. Before the changes, they were warrior-clerics who warriored slightly worse than the cleric, but clericed much better than the warrior, and clericed slightly worse than the cleric, but warriored much better than the cleric. They feel more like their own class now.

I totally agree with this. In my experience, the class and spellbook reworks resulted in distinctly defined classes that are thematically more consistent, with more of their own flavour. A more concise set of spells, with less overlap between unrelated classes really helps this.

[Sideways]

The thing about drastic changes and time-tested gameplay is that while a great many people consider [insert Last Good Version here] the last good version or the last true Vanilla Angband, all of those versions (down to 2.4.frog-knows) already had drastic changes in them that someone else didn't like. Angband started as a drastic change compared to Moria; and that early development was rapid, but it didn't stop there! 2.8.1 allowed floor grids to hold more than one item instead of just making the new items disappear (though, yes, floor stacking did originally get introduced as an option). 3.0.0 was a massive rebalancing that started the move towards faster progress and the current diving meta; and the versions that followed it took that direction even further with non-cumulative paralysis, fractional blows, the removal of bad items and ego types, toning down summons and pack sizes, reducing monster generation rates, allowing multi-pval objects, etc.

Drastic changes aren't new, they have always been happening; and one person's time-tested gameplay is somebody else's pet peeve. Many new concepts were introduced, and many old concepts removed or radically reshaped, long before Nick took over as maintainer.

[mrfy]

This sounds like the game should be stripped down to fewer features just to make it easier and quicker to maintain, even at the cost of gameplay options. It also sounds like there's a need for quick releases, even though the game is three decades old freeware.

I find this is exactly opposite to what I think. The game should not serve the maintainer. Instead, the maintainer should serve the game.

The game has changed quite a bit in those three decades.

Actually, the maintainer should serve the game's community. All of these changes were discussed at great length, tried out in a branch version, playtested and incorporated with approval of the community.

If there's a situation when the maintainer doesn't have enough time and resources to maintain the game, a new maintainer should be chosen. The game itself should be the very last thing to be compromised and stripped down because of these considerations.

This is not what has happened. The trap mechanism has changed, but it has not been stripped from the game.

Regarding older versions - they don't get any bugfixes anymore. They really get nothing. If you play them, you deal with the bugs as well.

This is true, but it also allows you to play the game with the features you want.

Considering drastic changes to vanilla, I also think they should not be done. Instead these should be done in a variant. This maintains backwards-compatability and time-tested gameplay. In addition to searching, an example of this is the new spell system of five instead of nine books.

From what I've seen, so much less spells dramatically cut down the flavour of the classes. For example spell-based enchanting is AFAIU removed. There's plenty of threads, too, where people discuss what spells have utility and what should just be thrown out.

This kind of approach naturally cuts down on the roleplay, and aims for Angband less as a RPG and more of a numbers game. It's another gameplay style and not wrong as such. Here again, it's about options. Flavourful spells, even when they're not often used, are entirely optional. A player doesn't have to use them if s/he doesn't want to.

Disagree completely. We need continual improvement in the game. The reason we keep playing is because there are changes which keep it interesting and fun to play.

[DavidMedley]

Something I didn't see anyone mention: There's almost no cost of a turn in game-terms (if you're not being dogged by monsters). So all this talk of user choice and agency is not applicable. You're either doing something that's annoying IRL but nigh-free in the game world, or you're setting yourself up for a very deflating "oh, why didn't I remember to do the annoying thing???" moment.

[Estie]

The meticulous trap detecting throughout the game, as described by Nick, I remember from ToME where traps are deadly, not so much from vanilla. I would only detect when there was a good reason to stay on the level; the occasional stat drain or other annoyance wasnt a big enough deal.

Searching is not necessarily related to this scenario; in any case, it was mostly an early game procedure as everyone eventually gets detection utensils.

There have been 2 changes that might be enough of a solution to stop an excess of detection:

1. no traps in rooms
2. introduction of the trap immunity property on items.

The latter, if distributed a bit more frequently (for example by making a basic early magic item with the property and adding it to some existing egos) could act as a kind of cutoff, similar to ESP. Once you have it, theres no more need to detect (monsters or traps, respectively).

[fph]

It is interesting that we regularly see complaints about abandoning the 'old way', yet no one ever forked the game or created a variant OldWayBand that keeps the flavour of the old versions and introduces only minimal changes (interface improvements and bugfixes, I presume?)

(Don't look at me; I like RuinedByNickBand, personally. )

[sffp]

The thing about drastic changes and time-tested gameplay is that while a great many people consider [insert Last Good Version here] the last good version or the last true Vanilla Angband, all of those versions (down to 2.4.frog-knows) already had drastic changes in them that someone else didn't like. Angband started as a drastic change compared to Moria; and that early development was rapid, but it didn't stop there! 2.8.1 allowed floor grids to hold more than one item instead of just making the new items disappear (though, yes, floor stacking did originally get introduced as an option). 3.0.0 was a massive rebalancing that started the move towards faster progress and the current diving meta; and the versions that followed it took that direction even further with non-cumulative paralysis, fractional blows, the removal of bad items and ego types, toning down summons and pack sizes, reducing monster generation rates, allowing multi-pval objects, etc.

Drastic changes aren't new, they have always been happening; and one person's time-tested gameplay is somebody else's pet peeve. Many new concepts were introduced, and many old concepts removed or radically reshaped, long before Nick took over as maintainer.

Who remembers leading the almost-dead AMD into the middle of a room for the coup so that the drop forms the classic cross rather than lose treasure to walls?