v4 now available

[Magnate]

I'm not sure it needs to encapsulate every single property so much as it needs to not encapsulate some properties with no indication there are others. I don't need to read everything from the name, but I need to be able to see that "A Small Shield of Resist Acid" is distinct from "A Small Shield of Resist Acid". (One of those just has Resist Acid. The other has two additional resists and a sustain. Guess which!) With the side issue that displaying only one of a set of equivalent affixes is weird behaviour: I might consider it reasonable that an item of Resist Cold has a hidden sustain as well, but I'd be surprised to find a hidden base four resist, because why should rCold merit a mention and another resist of identical importance not?

This is very well put - I remain very happy to receive a pull request for a naming matrix that fixes this! Or perhaps we just add a * to indicate the presence of other affixes to start with - ugly but effective.

...But anyway, as for slays, I'm not sure the exact value does need to be shown outside of Inspect; the indication of the slay is enough to prompt you to look, and you need to do that to compare the damage of two weapons anyway - the odds that your Slay Dragon values of 1.8x and 2.4x are going to be on two weapons that otherwise have identical dice and bonuses are really pretty small.

That's a good point too, made also by kaypy. So in fact we don't have to use pvals at all, but can use an array of slay mults that is shown in the Inspect screen but not in the name. Cool.

[Nomad]

Just thinking aloud here really. If you don't use pvals, how do you *display* the value of a slay on an object? I've been surprised by how much people care about not having the name of the object obviously encapsulate every single property - but I can see that I would care about whether my Slay Dragon weapon was doing 1.8x or 2.4x ....

I'm not sure it needs to encapsulate every single property so much as it needs to not encapsulate some properties with no indication there are others. I don't need to read everything from the name, but I need to be able to see that "A Small Shield of Resist Acid" is distinct from "A Small Shield of Resist Acid". (One of those just has Resist Acid. The other has two additional resists and a sustain. Guess which!) With the side issue that displaying only one of a set of equivalent affixes is weird behaviour: I might consider it reasonable that an item of Resist Cold has a hidden sustain as well, but I'd be surprised to find a hidden base four resist, because why should rCold merit a mention and another resist of identical importance not?

...But anyway, as for slays, I'm not sure the exact value does need to be shown outside of Inspect; the indication of the slay is enough to prompt you to look, and you need to do that to compare the damage of two weapons anyway - the odds that your Slay Dragon values of 1.8x and 2.4x are going to be on two weapons that otherwise have identical dice and bonuses are really pretty small.

[kaypy]

but I can see that I would care about whether my Slay Dragon weapon was doing 1.8x or 2.4x ....

Wait, you're thinking about damage and not going to just go straight to the I view and check the average damage listings vs whatever?

[Magnate]

Here is the original comment from O:

 * Most slays are x2, except Slay Animal (x1.7), and Slay Evil (x1.5).
 * Weapons of *slaying* now get a larger bonus.  All brands are x1.7.  
 * All slays and brands also add to the base damage.
 *
 * Examples:  (assuming monster is an orc)
 * Dagger of Slay Orc:    1d4 * 2.0 + 10:   Average: 15 damage.
 * Dagger of *Slay Orc*:  1d4 * 2.5 + 15:   Average: just over 21 damage.

Note that the added bit is (multiplier - 1) * 10.

It is essentially still like this in FA, but the multiplier is given in the edit files:

B:SLAY_DRAGON[20]

is a x2.0 multiplier (and a +10 addend).

Interesting - thanks. ISTR that Leon changed it slightly in S, though I could be mis-remembering that. So do you store the slay mult on the object itself, or is it only a member of the ego struct, or what?

The advantage of using pvals is that we don't need to mess with the object structure again. But since all slays would use a pval over 10, we're into the realms of two different types of pval (because with the exception of very rare speed boosts, pvals are always under 10). Pval is definitely the right concept - pvals are the numbers which quantify variable properties of items, which this is - but the pval-handling code is going to get ugly on items with three or four different slays and a couple of stat boosts besides. But then again other changes are going to cause this too, like variable-range ESP, so maybe it's time to get to grips with it.

Just thinking aloud here really. If you don't use pvals, how do you *display* the value of a slay on an object? I've been surprised by how much people care about not having the name of the object obviously encapsulate every single property - but I can see that I would care about whether my Slay Dragon weapon was doing 1.8x or 2.4x ....

[Antoine]

Do we need to present slays to the player as multipliers? Can't we just abstract out the multiplier and say "+2d6 fire damage" or whatever?

(Also, for v4, is there any interest in allowing some limited stacking of slays and brands? How about the best applicable slay on a weapon stacking with the best applicable brand?)

A.

[Nick]

Actually, I thought slays and brands gave a flat damage boost in O-combat? I always thought that was rather clever - made them really important on light weapons and less unbalancing on huge endgame weapons. Have you changed that then?

Here is the original comment from O:

 * Most slays are x2, except Slay Animal (x1.7), and Slay Evil (x1.5).
 * Weapons of *slaying* now get a larger bonus.  All brands are x1.7.  
 * All slays and brands also add to the base damage.
 *
 * Examples:  (assuming monster is an orc)
 * Dagger of Slay Orc:    1d4 * 2.0 + 10:   Average: 15 damage.
 * Dagger of *Slay Orc*:  1d4 * 2.5 + 15:   Average: just over 21 damage.

Note that the added bit is (multiplier - 1) * 10.

It is essentially still like this in FA, but the multiplier is given in the edit files:

B:SLAY_DRAGON[20]

is a x2.0 multiplier (and a +10 addend).

[Magnate]

Saved my game from the previous V4 build, copied the save to this version, started, and 5 minutes later at 250' my level 9 kobold rogue found Nimthanc, dropped from a green ooze. Thanks Magnate!!

Hmmm - hope it hasn't gone too far the other way! Stats were at 17k runs at breakfast this morning - it's about 50% slower than 3.3.0, so it's not going to finish 50k until about midnight. So I get to spend today boning up on SQL ...

[Magnate]

What, like FA, you mean?

I should write a script to reply like this.

You mean you don't already ..?

Actually, I thought slays and brands gave a flat damage boost in O-combat? I always thought that was rather clever - made them really important on light weapons and less unbalancing on huge endgame weapons. Have you changed that then?

[Obsilium]

I have seen bows made out of Blackrock, I am not sure that would make a viable projectile weapon...

[BlueFish]

In other news, I just ran my first stats on v4 (after fixing the last stats-affecting bug, #1565). Boy is it mean!! So I've made some adjustments, so that "good" drops can't get "bad" affixes, and a few others. I've just kicked off 50,000 runs overnight, so tomorrow I'll have a good idea of how far v4's item distribution differs from 3.3.0. In the meantime, those of you currently playing might like to upgrade to the newest version, because the one you're currently playing really is ridiculously stingy.

Saved my game from the previous V4 build, copied the save to this version, started, and 5 minutes later at 250' my level 9 kobold rogue found Nimthanc, dropped from a green ooze. Thanks Magnate!!

[Nick]

Hey - how about we move slay and brand multipliers to a pval ...

What, like FA, you mean?

I should write a script to reply like this.

[sethos]

It would seem that most of the low level bugs have been squished, I didn't see any problems with my last run down the dungeon (save for my Warrior dying, of course. build was 79dfe36.

Also, IT did seem to be pretty stingy with the "Ego" types of items.

alas, superb treasures on a relatively safe level. Better start the next character.

[takkaria]

Hey - how about we move slay and brand multipliers to a pval ...

Take a leaf out of Ey's book and allow decimal multipliers. Ey had weapons that did 1.5x slay damage or 1.3x, sometimes (and I'm guessing Fay still has them). You get way more variability then.

[Magnate]

Maybe they don't need different names - they're both doing the same thing. They could just have different multipliers. Who says that some branding isn't more powerful than others? (The analogue being pval-modifying affixes: they're not called of strength, of lesser strength, of greater strength, etc...) I think this would probably make things a lot clearer than having different names.

Hey - how about we move slay and brand multipliers to a pval ...

[Magnate]

How about "of Lesser Venom"? I think that's pretty accurate.

I'm quite happy for someone to go through the whole of ego_item.txt and provide better names for any or all affixes. Personally I would prefer more flavourful names rather than "of Poison Brand" and "of See Invisible", but I'm happy to go with the preferences of whomever is willing to make the edits.

In other news, I just ran my first stats on v4 (after fixing the last stats-affecting bug, #1565). Boy is it mean!! So I've made some adjustments, so that "good" drops can't get "bad" affixes, and a few others. I've just kicked off 50,000 runs overnight, so tomorrow I'll have a good idea of how far v4's item distribution differs from 3.3.0. In the meantime, those of you currently playing might like to upgrade to the newest version, because the one you're currently playing really is ridiculously stingy.