Crown of Eternal Torment

[File200]

I mostly just have to defend the crown because if no one stands up for it they're going to remove the hat of pondering next, which is an amazing hat and needs to stay

Don't even joke about that.

[tasonir]

lol right, how could I forget the worst hat of them all

hilarious

You laugh but my naga megazig character would be amazingly more powerful with that hat. It's probably my most desired unrand after wucad Mu, and the +10 mana would make it even more unlikely that I'd need to recharge mana anyways (I already don't recharge very often, due to having 90 mana). While I generally consider hat of the alchemist better, for this particular character, hat of pondering would be stronger (I have no need for any more rf/rc/rE/MR/rCorr; it'd just be -5 ac and rMut).

Items with interesting tradeoffs should be encouraged. If they're death traps, that's even better: You die, you learn. That's the general crawl process, and usually players dying is celebrated (by everyone except the player themselves).

[gammafunk]

Pretty sure I went through the effort to contribute to crawl and join the dev team so I could think about what's fun and not fun and apply that to the game, and I'm definitely not alone there. Players have fun doing all sorts or weird things for no particular reason in games like Nethack and Tome4, but we don't have to put things like that in crawl. Most game developers try to make a game they enjoy playing, which is much more important than adhering to some weird ideal that we need to be all things to all people. Certainly some things like Chei and Xom that are bad for players to use exist in crawl, and it's ok to have some of that. We just generaly prefer to make things that are good for players to use. The Too Many Cooks comment was about how having so many contributors, good design can be unevenly applied. People who contribute well-thought-out patches are welcome. Devs are generally happy to help people who are patient and receptive to feedback improving their designs. That's how many of us became devs ourselves, after all.

Singularity was problematic because it was like a more broken firestorm in a school that's really not about dealing direct damage. The out-of-LOS damage it did was much more prevalent per-cast compared to other spells that do that, and reducing out-of-LOS damage doesn't fix that problem.

[gammafunk]

what you guys seem to be forgetting is that Crawl's just the honeypot for the real game: the Tavern MMORPG, where everybody loses.

You win the Tavern MMORPG if your thanks / posts ratio > 1.

[Pollen_Golem]

When we introduce new items/spells/monsters/gameplay in crawl, we generally start from the standpoint of what happens with correct play,

I cannot even figure out what this part means. How do you assume correct play as your starting point? If correct play is assumed on the part of the player, then the player is not actually making decisions, since correct play trumps any other option a priori. It's not really a game if the player doesn't make decisions.

If you mean "reasonable play", well, yah, when introducing something, you try to think about what players will generally do with it.

because it leads to a game with a better design.

...as opposed to what approach? Not thinking about what players will do with a new mechanic? Is that even possible?

File200's posts, etc. are bigger than the Crown, might as well be a new thread, or retitle the thread.

[Lasty]

From my perspective the crown needed to go because if it was buffed to a level where it was good, whatever level that might be, that would be bad for crawl. Crawl needs fewer things that neutralize torment, not more. In my view, endgame threats like hellfire and torment are meant to be scary things and players should have to use good tactics to avoid getting destroyed by them, not just put on an item or cast a spell. Having this be true reinforces crawl as a game where tactics are necessary to prevent bad things from happening, rather than a game where you wear equipment that negates everything scary that could possibly happen.

I know there are players who enjoy the part of the game where they basically cannot die without trying to, but the less trivial that becomes, the better for everyone, including the people who enjoy doing it.

If the crown stayed at -50% hp and never, ever got a buff, I'd be fine with it staying in the game as a way of saying, "yeah, you're going to get tormented. Deal with it."

[Sar]

the crown was never at -50% HP

I'd be fine with it being removed for cheapening torment (even if it's an item you see once in 10-50 winning games, like with most fixedarts)

it's the "it's objectively awful and we must protect our stupid players" reasoning that triggered me

[Lasty]

My memory is that the very first proposal for it was 50%.

FWIW, I don't agree with the premise that "we need to protect our stupid players" either generally or in this specific case. I do think that this iteration of the crown is generally a bad item, but I don't have any interest in arguing about it. It being merely bad wouldn't be a reason for me to urge its removal. I'm a big fan of arguably-trap items that have the potential to teach someone a lesson, as you might guess from the current alchemist's hat.

[File200]

Pretty sure I went through the effort to contribute to crawl and join the dev team so I could think about what's fun and not fun and apply that to the game, and I'm definitely not alone there. Players have fun doing all sorts or weird things for no particular reason in games like Nethack and Tome4, but we don't have to put things like that in crawl. Most game developers try to make a game they enjoy playing, which is much more important than adhering to some weird ideal that we need to be all things to all people. Certainly some things like Chei and Xom that are bad for players to use exist in crawl, and it's ok to have some of that. We just generaly prefer to make things that are good for players to use. The Too Many Cooks comment was about how having so many contributors, good design can be unevenly applied. People who contribute well-thought-out patches are welcome. Devs are generally happy to help people who are patient and receptive to feedback improving their designs. That's how many of us became devs ourselves, after all.

Different things are fun to different people, ultimately. I personally think that a little more weirdness would benefit Crawl. I hate Nethack but like ToME 3, partly because of the crazy factor. Sometimes I played optimally (Zombie Rohanknight of Melkor), other times I just tried to take over The Watcher in the Water's body so I could use all of my swords at once. Of course, playing a Possessor is suboptimal if you want to win consistently, but "Winning Consistently" is an alien concept for other Roguelikes. Except Angband, of course.

Singularity was problematic because it was like a more broken firestorm in a school that's really not about dealing direct damage. The out-of-LOS damage it did was much more prevalent per-cast compared to other spells that do that, and reducing out-of-LOS damage doesn't fix that problem.

As far as I know, nobody has a problem with portal projectile, a translocation that does damage but uses another skill. And Gell's Gravitas is in. Tornado is a fun that spell that wrecks Zigs and its still allowed. The theming problem (if it really is a problem) can be fixed by adding another school to it. If the ability to hit things from safety is too much, add a condition that stops you from just dropping a Singularity and running away. Shorten the range and make it difficult to leave the "Event Horizon." If it's still too powerful after that, nerf the damage. Two of those changes are trivial to implement.

FWIW, I don't agree with the premise that "we need to protect our stupid players" either generally or in this specific case. I do think that this iteration of the crown is generally a bad item, but I don't have any interest in arguing about it. It being merely bad wouldn't be a reason for me to urge its removal. I'm a big fan of arguably-trap items that have the potential to teach someone a lesson, as you might guess from the current alchemist's hat.

Yeah, it's the philosophy behind the removal that people are objecting to.

[tabstorm]

Why is this a trap item? The only things that will kill you in extended if you aren't playing extremely poorly are large amounts of hellfire, named demons, or lucky rolls by a Hell Sentinel - all of which are more likely to kill you after you've been tormented once or twice. Coincidentally, I bet players who don't mitigate torment properly largely overlap with players who manage to die to causes other than the aforementioned ones.

Is it really sensible to call an item bad if it makes a bad player more likely to not die in extended (as opposed to increasing the chances for a good player to die from "nearly 0" to "a tiny bit more than nearly 0"? I think it is sensible to not call an item "bad" if it increases a character's fault tolerance.

Maybe items like the Crown are like the metaphorical ladder that must be thrown away when you get good, I don't know. But I think a not-very-good player doing extended will probably be more likely to not die if he uses it.

[Wahaha]

I would use it on any character without rN+++ or torment immunity except maybe spriggan/felid. By the way maybe you should remove shield of the gong because it's only used by people who overvalue SH?

[Pollen_Golem]

what you guys seem to be forgetting is that Crawl's just the honeypot for the real game: the Tavern MMORPG, where everybody loses.

You win the Tavern MMORPG if your thanks / posts ratio > 1.

He who calls the rules wins the game. I say you win if you have 741 posts.

Maybe items like the Crown are like the metaphorical ladder that must be thrown away when you get good

Sorry, what is the metaphor you're referring to?

The theming problem [of Singularity] (if it really is a problem) can be fixed by adding another school to it.

Like conjurations, duh - like the couple summoning/translocations spells that also do damage.

[duvessa]

so why didn't blowgun of the assassin get this much drama

[radinms]

tasonir,
Statue Form+that crown was a powerful combo.
very easy math: HP*1.3*0.8=HP*1.04

If you play Chei+statue form char, it was a big buff item.
One step and Triple torment?? Hah, No problem about torment!

But...this problem is, if you find that crown, you can use blade hands all time.
High-HP race and that crown combination made statue form complete meaningless.

[Arrhythmia]

Maybe items like the Crown are like the metaphorical ladder that must be thrown away when you get good

Sorry, what is the metaphor you're referring to?

English-Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, in one of his earlier works, claimed to have "solved philosophy", part of which involved declaring many branches of philosophy, such as ethics, as nonsense, i.e., literally impossible to talk about while also making sense. A lot of examples he uses to elucidate this conclusion, however, are senseless under the conclusion. So, they serve as a ladder to reach a higher level, but once you've reached that higher level you're required to throw the ladder away. Anyways, he recanted a lot of these views later on his career, saying that his earlier results were based on prepositions which couldn't capture the many ways that we use language.

Apologies if I got any of this wrong, I wrote it off-notes.

e: "My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them... He must so to speak throw away the ladder..."

[Sar]

so why didn't blowgun of the assassin get this much drama

because I didn't make a thread about it, duh

[Serpent of Hell]

...as opposed to increasing the chances for a good player to die from "nearly 0" to "a tiny bit more than nearly 0"? I think it is sensible to not call an item "bad" if it increases a character's fault tolerance.

...I knew I remembered you from somewhere! I think the first time I devoured you, it was after midnight and I was rummaging around Tartarus, positively starving for a player snack! Then I saw you again in Gehenna. To tell the truth, I don't really like grey draconians that much, but trust me you were a lot better meal than that dried up spriggan I'd been munching on. That last time I ran into you in Dis, I was positively stuffed and didn't think I could eat another minotaur, but in the end I couldn't help myself! I regard you as a delicacy! Please do stop by any time you'd like to have your fault tolerance checked.

[Sar]

You know they nerfed you too, baby? It's such a shame. We had so much fun together.

[duvessa]

You know they nerfed you too, baby? It's such a shame. We had so much fun together.

It's not the end of the world, there's always some way to overcome these things. I remember when they killed minmay, I was so worried, but he just turned into a mummy. Nowadays I don't even think about it, we still frolick in the meadows just like we did back in high school. And our dinner dates only cost half as much now.

[tabstorm]

...as opposed to increasing the chances for a good player to die from "nearly 0" to "a tiny bit more than nearly 0"? I think it is sensible to not call an item "bad" if it increases a character's fault tolerance.

...I knew I remembered you from somewhere! I think the first time I devoured you, it was after midnight and I was rummaging around Tartarus, positively starving for a player snack! Then I saw you again in Gehenna. To tell the truth, I don't really like grey draconians that much, but trust me you were a lot better meal than that dried up spriggan I'd been munching on. That last time I ran into you in Dis, I was positively stuffed and didn't think I could eat another minotaur, but in the end I couldn't help myself! I regard you as a delicacy! Please do stop by any time you'd like to have your fault tolerance checked.

So how bout that MiBe score gammafunk?

[bcadren]

I have to say the primary reason I think an item like Eternal Torment is useful was an incredibly unlucky run in with ONE Shadow Fiend where I had bad rolls (kept missing) and it had lucky ones [FoMo^Ash]. (All items cursed except weapon. Mindelay skill for Lajatangs and Quick Blades.)

Same character had killed multiple (2-3) Shadow Fiends at a time before with no issue; but this time. Walked up to it in Lichform, missed an Iron Shot and got hit by Dispel Undead 3 TURNS IN A ROW; My HP at that point was low enough it could have one shot me with another dispel...so I used End transformation and on the turn I end my transformation it uses Torment...so at this point I have like 20 HP left and think another unlucky roll and it might finish me with either of it's Bolts, since without Necromutation I only had one pip each of rC and rN...so I evoke heal wounds and use a phantom mirror; cast swiftness and walk out of LoS; then dig a hole where I can only see one space...cast regen and start evoking a staff of energy. That scare was a "I've had it with being here" moment. (Was searching the vaults other than the rune vault for Annihilations for LCS before that). So I shattered into the rune vault, cast Necromute and Aura of Abjuration (Eresh doesn't have dispel herself, only her summons do; so abjuring he summons works well); fired a stack of paralysis needles at her and stabbed her to death with a QBlade [I went on to 15 rune that character and continued to use Necromute heavily (unlimited channeling is nice); though after that I stopped using an effect that could miss versus Shadow Fiends (Evoked the Staff of Dispater on them).]

[jejorda2]

so why didn't blowgun of the assassin get this much drama

I'd be fine with it being removed for cheapening torment (even if it's an item you see once in 10-50 winning games, like with most fixedarts)

it's the "it's objectively awful and we must protect our stupid players" reasoning that triggered me

[Cerekov]

I've certainly felt that proposing serious ideas was a powerful combo. I think this helmet would be necessary to prevent bad things from happening, rather than a game to only introduce unrands that are generally useful and to clean up the older ones that aren't, however. I remember when they killed minmay, I was positively stuffed and didn't think I could trivially win 99% of them all. I always weared that crown combination made statue form instead and consider statue form complete meaningless. But I think a not-very-good player doing extended will probably be more likely to be a reason. It would be situationally useful in Tomb, Coc, and when not around tormentors it didn't waste your entire amulet slot.

Hiding antlions produce disturbances just like we did back in high school. Apologies if I have to properly deal with torment.

[mps]

Looks like I got a new favorite poster.

[jejorda2]

Is that a word cloud generated from the threads on the first page of CYC?

[bel]

Even if people think it is good or bad, nobody seems to accept the logic that an item should be removed just because some players consider something bad.

There are other reasons given in the thread (too strong, too weak, too boring, too situational) and so on. This thread could have been avoided if they were present in the commit justification.

[KittenInMyCerealz]

These removals seem quite absurd.
but oh well, there is a reason why even /vg/ has stopped discussing crawl as a whole.

[KittenInMyCerealz]

You aren't in any danger period in extended if you play correctly, and that includes when tormenting enemies are nearby; that's the problem with crawl extended. But walking around with permanently 35% less HP in extended (or anywhere really) is certainly a good way to get in danger.

by this logic you should disable going anywhere but upstairs after picking up the Orb

[File200]

I've certainly felt that proposing serious ideas was a powerful combo.

It's been nerfed in Trunk.

I think this helmet would be necessary to prevent bad things from happening, rather than a game to only introduce unrands that are generally useful and to clean up the older ones that aren't, however. I remember when they killed minmay, I was positively stuffed and didn't think I could trivially win 99% of them all.

I think everyone was stuffed when they killed minmay.

Hiding antlions produce disturbances just like we did back in high school.

Hah, those were the days. I think you'll fit in just fine here.

[tasonir]

Is that a word cloud generated from the threads on the first page of CYC?

A word cloud would just be single words that are commonly used (generally done in a pretty arrangement with size differences for how common the word is). This looks more like the output from markov chains, which take phrases from posts and try to string together those phrases into complete sentences and paragraphs. And the poster's name is cerekov.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_ch ... generators

I don't know if they used a real markov generator or did it by hand, but with the general level of geekery around here I wouldn't be surprised if someone had one set up already and decided to run it.

[mps]

You haven't lived until you've stayed up one friday night writing a markov chain text generation script in perl, then cried and giggled yourself to sleep reading scrambled excerpts from the King James Bible.

[wheals]

but oh well, there is a reason why even /vg/ has stopped discussing crawl as a whole.

A single tear runs down my face.

[File200]

Fixed Crown of Eternal Torment: It keeps all of its properties except the problematic ones, which are reversed. Now it grants +30% HP and occasionally torments you. The Crown goes from rewarding bad play to a teaching tool for new players: you will always be tormented no matter what, and there's nothing you can do about it.

For undead players, it casts dispel undead on you instead of Torment.

[gammafunk]

Well, "you'll always be tormented no matter what, and there's nothing you can do about it" is pretty much the false line of thinking that makes new players overvalue rTorment, so I'm not sure we should try to teach people that.

[Pollen_Golem]

I'd be fine with it staying in the game as a way of saying, "yeah, you're going to get tormented. Deal with it."

[File200]

Well, "you'll always be tormented no matter what, and there's nothing you can do about it" is pretty much the false line of thinking that makes new players overvalue rTorment, so I'm not sure we should try to teach people that.

It's hyperbole that plays off the hyperbolic statements justifying the removal of the item. Still good training to show new players that their HP can be cut unexpectedly. It's also a joke about the idea that you can "Play Optimally" and never be threatened by torment, because I guess tormenting enemies are totally predictable. Of course, if they're so predictable that they can be trivialized by playing well, the enemies themselves are pointless. All the stupidity in this thread is centered around the hypothetical actions of hypothetical inexperienced players, who somehow overvalue protection from torment, while they simultaneously refuse to keep themselves from being tormented using this magical "Optimum Play."

My suggestion wasn't serious but you could replace "Torments the player" with "Summons a hostile tormentor" so it actually teaches players how to deal with situationally dangerous enemies showing up unexpectedly.

[bcadren]

"you'll always be tormented no matter what, and there's nothing you can do about it" is pretty much the false line of thinking that makes new players overvalue rTorment.

Uhh. Tomb, you kill a Greater Mummy; you get tormented. You let a Greater Mummy live; it will Torment you...I suppose you could run away; but how do you get the Golden Rune without getting Tormented? [Rest of Extended; I kinda see the point; with 27 throwing skill (Large Rocks) or 26 Crossbows (+9 holy wrath Triple Crossbow) you can one hit most tormenting creatures as soon as they come into LoS (Hell Sentinel is another exception).

[File200]

"you'll always be tormented no matter what, and there's nothing you can do about it" is pretty much the false line of thinking that makes new players overvalue rTorment.

Uhh. Tomb, you kill a Greater Mummy; you get tormented. You let a Greater Mummy live; it will Torment you...I suppose you could run away; but how do you get the Golden Rune without getting Tormented? [Rest of Extended; I kinda see the point; with 27 throwing skill (Large Rocks) or 26 Crossbows (+9 holy wrath Triple Crossbow) you can one hit most tormenting creatures as soon as they come into LoS (Hell Sentinel is another exception).

Optimal Play grants rTorment, rMut and precognition. Why is Optimal Play still allowed when it trivializes features that are supposed to be dangerous?

[gammafunk]

Probably the best way to teach players that they can be tormented by enemies would just be "place enemies that cast torment." If we want this to also happen in the 3-rune game, we could try "placing enemies that summon enemies which cast torment." The good news is that the former happens plenty in extended already, and the latter happens not infrequently in later portions of the 3-rune game. We even have rarer spells that are similar like Agony and Flay which monsters are happy to demonstrate to players!

These meta-discussions of "well what is playing crawl exactly, aren't we all just ghosts in the machine" are amusing, but crawl is designed for players who try to win (by escaping with the ORB). So we don't need to pretend that it's bad, confusing, or contradictory that Torment is a threat which can be mitigated with careful play. MPA mentioned how the item functions as a trap for new players, and people siezed upon this as insufficient justification, but its biggest problem is what Lasty wrote above. He brought that up at the time of removal discussion and the rest of us devs agreed (including MPA and wheals). Sometimes commit messages don't reflect all the reasoning put into changes, but I'm willing to forgive and forget in this particular instance.

[mps]

re: tomb w/o getting tormented, it's probably possible to get through tomb sneaking past everything that can torment you with death curses and/or keeping them out of LoS w/ darkness and fog, but more practically, with the silence/darkness combination, you can completely avoid torment except from death curses (i.e. results of your own actions) reliably. Torment damage is manageable in other ways too, e.g. via statue form or god abilities (kiku, makh, etc.). Hell, even regeneration does a good job of keeping you alive assuming reasonable play. The only place in the game where you stand to get tormented so much and on a sufficiently reliable basis that the crown really made sense is tomb, imo.

[File200]

I just don't understand this philosophy of obsessively controlling how people play and enjoy a single-player game. Some people play to win, others play to blow up the dungeon with firestorms and tornadoes. I understand taking out the things that are tedious, but increase your chance of winning. That's fine. The presence of those things makes the game less fun for the people who want to keep their win% up while not affecting the people who don't care about.

But there's absolutely no reason to take out the things opposite end of the spectrum: things that are fun, but probably decrease your chance of winning. People who don't play to win and people who aren't familiar enough with the game to win consistently will do suboptimal things. Some of these things include casting level 9 spells and using "Bad" items like the Shield of the Gong and the bad version of the Alchemist's Hat. See, those things are fun to a certain group of people, while not affecting the enjoyment of people who choose to not use them. Maybe Maxwell's Patent Armor lets a player see more of the Dungeon than they usually do, even though it decreases their character's viability from the perspective of "Optimal Play." It's a crutch. They'll find out that being able to teleport is more important than having lots of resistances if they keep playing. In the meantime, they can have fun lumbering around like a big invincible wall. Removing the Crown is no different from removing Maxwell's, except that one is more situational than the other.

Reading posts from the devs itt is kind of painful no matter how many times I look at them. (Not nearly as painful as duvessa's post about wanting to remove level 9 spells, but still.) Somehow people think that the game should be exactly the same as it is now, except better, all without changing anything meaningful. New players should learn the proper way to play as prescribed by the top-level players. Anything that gives them a workaround to the challenges of the game is actually bad for them and should be removed. It's for their own good, you see.

The painfully stupid thing is the idea that Torment and Hellfire are necessary for the game in the first place. Yes, they're the only things that threaten a high-level player. If everything else were kept the same, making them weaker would be a bad thing. That's a symptom of the bad design that permeates the postgame combined with the binary nature of resistances. Pan, the Abyss, and the early levels of Hell are a slog of time-wasting popcorn for the characters who reach the stage where they're ready to take them. I see Torment and Hellfire as a bandaid over the problem. In fact, they're a lot like the Crown themselves: keeping them as they are is a lazy way to balance the endgame, and their presence is preventing the underlying problems from being addressed. Unfortunately, before we can even have a discussion, we all need to admit that there IS a problem. Acceptance is the first step on the road to recovery.

[archaeo]

I don't know, File200, it seems like it'll be hard to cram that many words into the devs' mouths.

[File200]

Either you mean "Ears" or you think I'm misrepresenting someone. I don't care about whatever semantic runaround people will give me to discredit whatever parts of my post they don't want to address. I just want someone to accept that if players are complaining about a removed feature over a month later, a mistake has ALMOST CERTAINLY been made, regardless of the feature's individual merits. If a feature really needed to be removed, the majority of people would recognize that after playing without the offending feature. That isn't what happened with the Crown or with Singularity.

And people also need to admit that the postgame needs an overhaul.

[Arrhythmia]

I just want someone to accept that if players are complaining about a removed feature over a month later, a mistake has ALMOST CERTAINLY been made, regardless of the feature's individual merits.

There are people still complaining about the removal of Mountain Dwarves, literally years later.

[Wahaha]

...

I am under the impression that the devs changed the reason from "it was a bad item for bad players" to "it was too good because it ignored torment and ignoring torment is wrong because it's the only threat in extended". At least the new reason makes sense.

I have no problem with the extended game of avoiding hellfire and torment. But maybe extended can be made better. My suggestion for changing extended is to remove the weakest enemies from Hells and Pan. Then add top tier enemies that do more damage with melee or spells than any monster currently in the game. But I think I remember one or two conversations that went like this "Hellfire and torment are the only way to hurt player characters" "Maybe enemies should do more damage" "No nonono".

[rockygargoyle]

I would understand if a common item that protected you from torment were removed, but this was an artifact, something that would show up in 1% of the games, it's not like it would make a huge difference if it stayed in the game.

[archaeo]

I am under the impression that the devs changed the reason from "it was a bad item for bad players" to "it was too good because it ignored torment and ignoring torment is wrong because it's the only threat in extended". At least the new reason makes sense.

The reason wasn't "changed," it just that the commit message wasn't exhaustively crafted to justify the change for all those who might disagree. As gamma said,

MPA mentioned how the item functions as a trap for new players, and people siezed upon this as insufficient justification, but its biggest problem is what Lasty wrote above. He brought that up at the time of removal discussion and the rest of us devs agreed (including MPA and wheals). Sometimes commit messages don't reflect all the reasoning put into changes, but I'm willing to forgive and forget in this particular instance.

Whenever you feel like a commit message isn't enough, the ##crawl-dev logs are available, and they're generally edifying. Commit messages often are only the end of a longer conversation, after all. The c-r-d archives aren't hard to find either, or the developer wiki, or any of the other myriad ways the devs discuss the game.

I don't care about whatever semantic runaround people will give me to discredit whatever parts of my post they don't want to address.

It isn't a "semantic runaround." Your entire point rests on the premise that the devs don't care enough about the players, which is absolutely wrong. Let's try this instead of flippant one-liners: above, you said, "I just don't understand this philosophy of obsessively controlling how people play and enjoy a single-player game." Try replacing "play" and "single-player game" with "read" and "book," or "watch" and film."

Crawl is a hobby project being crafted by volunteers who care enough about the game to try and continually make it better. Of course they want to control the experience of players; that's what game design is. They listen to the concerns of players -- there are several here, directly addressing the criticisms -- but that doesn't have to mean they agree. That doesn't mean the conversation is over, of course, but having a conversation requires not twisting their words into absurdities like "It's for their own good, you see."

And people also need to admit that the postgame needs an overhaul.

I'll chalk this up to you not being around for that long, but literally no one thinks extended is good. But a) the devs rightly think that improving the part of the game that most people play is more important than catering to expert players who can steamroll endgame content and b) nobody has really come up with a significantly improved extended paradigm. Oh, and c) it's also an enormous amount of work, and since we're not exactly paying anybody (several devs spend their own money on crawl every year!), enjoying the game we all already like enough to bother posting on a forum devoted to it seems like a fine solution.

If you don't like it, you have the same options you have with any open source product: you can contribute ideas the devs find valuable, you can fork your own version, or you can leave. Quit gettin' mad about (free) video games.

[Wahaha]

The reason wasn't changed

Oh, I had regained a little faith but now it's lost again. "The crown is a bad item but it removes torment and that's just too strong because torment is one of the only dangers of extended and we wouldn't want players ignoring it, but it's still a bad item"

[File200]

I don't care about whatever semantic runaround people will give me to discredit whatever parts of my post they don't want to address.

It isn't a "semantic runaround." Your entire point rests on the premise that the devs don't care enough about the players, which is absolutely wrong. Let's try this instead of flippant one-liners: above, you said, "I just don't understand this philosophy of obsessively controlling how people play and enjoy a single-player game."

Oh hey, it's that thing I mentioned. The semantic runaround. Well, not quite a semantic runaround so much as it's you claiming that I said the exact opposite what I actually said. You even quoted the part that contradicts your idea that I'm implying the devs don't care enough. What I actually said, as you quoted, is that the devs care too much about certain parts of the playerbase. That's the entire motivation behind removing these features that some people want: the features are teaching them bad things and messing up the way they play the game.

Try replacing "play" and "single-player game" with "read" and "book," or "watch" and film."

I'm not sure what you're on about. Some artists think that their work should only be enjoyed a certain way, and they are always wrong.

I'll concede to your point that there's no reason to invest so much energy into debating the decisions that go into a free game. I'm having more fun with XCOM anyway, so I'll just play that in my free time. I was working on my own fork until recently, but this whole mess convinced me that it's a waste of time to push it. It would take a whole new dev team and significant player interest to make a successful branch. And all that might just split the playerbase and kill the game.

[duvessa]

The painfully stupid thing is the idea that Torment and Hellfire are necessary for the game in the first place. Yes, they're the only things that threaten a high-level player.

torment and hellfire don't threaten a high-level player

But there's absolutely no reason to take out the things opposite end of the spectrum: things that are fun, but probably decrease your chance of winning. People who don't play to win and people who aren't familiar enough with the game to win consistently will do suboptimal things. Some of these things include casting level 9 spells and using "Bad" items like the Shield of the Gong and the bad version of the Alchemist's Hat. See, those things are fun to a certain group of people, while not affecting the enjoyment of people who choose to not use them.

crystal ball of fixation was fun, but probably decreased your chance of winning. it's total bullshit that it was removed! oh wait no it's not because your argument is flagrantly stupid

Maybe Maxwell's Patent Armor lets a player see more of the Dungeon than they usually do, even though it decreases their character's viability from the perspective of "Optimal Play."

a player who thinks maxwell's patent armour is bad should probably not try to pretend they know optimal play

If a feature really needed to be removed, the majority of people would recognize that after playing without the offending feature. That isn't what happened with the Crown or with Singularity.

only because the majority of people don't know what singularity actually did, and the majority of people don't care about a useless item that they would never actually see anyway