Enemy removal

[Greyr]

I couldn't find "come bitch about the game" in the index anywhere, so I'm posting here.

As the title says, what's with that? I understand certain enemies becoming obsolete with the removal of certain mechanics. I understand enemies being flat out broken. To a lesser extent I understand enemies being removed for being "boring". I guess what I don't get is the copious amount of holy enemies being removed. Their mechanics were a bit wonky, but so? They were interesting. Anyway, in general, a robust cast of baddies isn't ~~tedious~~ so, what am I missing? Someone please help me understand why perfectly deadly enemies are getting the shaft. To Zot:6.

Sorry if thats a bit incoherent or the tone is rough, it's past my bedtime. Appreciate the work being put into crawl, its still the best.


edit: got damn grammar

[Leafsnail]

I'm not sure which removals you're referring to exactly, but if you've ever done Holy Pan then you'd know that almost all holy monsters were fucking annoying and horrible. The resurrection gimmick just served to make trivial monsters take ages to kill, while the death curses and fire walls resulted in tonnes of waiting.

Beyond that there's nothing interesting about holy damage, all it does is screw over four races.

[crate]

Let's imagine that crawl has a million monsters. (It, thankfully, does not (yet) have that many.)

That is one million different monsters for a new player to learn about. This is obviously an enormous burden. How can you possibly remember what one million different monsters do? Crawl helps you out some with xv, but xv does not tell you everything about a monster, and having to use it on lots of monsters takes up time. (This post is not going to argue about whether xv should show more information, that's for elsewhere.)

I hope it's not hard to see that having one million monsters in a game that intends for you to learn about monsters at least in part by dying to them is not acceptable. (In addition, a related topic is that many of crawl's new monsters are particularly burdensome on players in this fashion, since many of them work in ways that no other monster does. Octopode crusher throwing mechanics, torpor snail slowing, etc.)

Ok, let's go the other way. Crawl has only one monster.

I hope I don't have to elaborate about this also being unacceptable. Nothing but hobgoblins might work for d:1 alone, but it certainly can't carry a game longer than that.

Obviously the correct number is somewhere in between these extremes. Personally I think the correct number of monsters is probably smaller than the number currently in crawl. But retaining monsters in the game has a real cost to players, so removing bad ones has real benefits.

[Greyr]

Crate, that all makes sense.

This question came from a place of genuine curiosity, so I appreciate the sensible answers.

[Bloax]

Most removals concern bad (examples being giant goldfishes and spiny worms), filler (eg. brown oozes) or both (pulsating lumps, rock trolls, gastropods) monsters, most of which weren't very recognizable and didn't serve any particular purpose besides just being there.

The only "deadly" monsters I can really recall being removed are giant eyeballs - and those still exist in certain vaults - simply because they were only very rarely a threat at all.

[Roderic]

I didn't noticed the removal of eyeballs

Does it mean they cannot be placed in designed vaults? I think that removal of certain enemies from the RNG is fine because random placement does not benefit them but I think some of them may be still useful if permitted to exist in dedicated vaults.

[Incarnal]

Eyeballs still can be placed in vaults, they just don't generate randomly anymore.

Which is good, because it was always kind of sad finding a lone Eyeball.

[Patashu]

I think having giant eyeballs exist in their current distribution is problematic, because when a random panlord or whatever busts them out on you you will have 0 prior experience and not know that their para is smite-targetted, irresistible, etc.

[Hirsch I]

their para is irresistible? damn.

[Patashu]

their para is irresistible? damn.

It doesn't check MR. Stasis/being a formicid is the only way to be immune to it. (Or breaking LoS or killing it obviously)

[Hirsch I]

lets add that to the list of things that took me years to discover. thanks.

[Bloax]

Did you in turn also know that invisibility makes them unable to affect you?

[PleasingFungus]

lets add that to the list of things that took me years to discover. thanks.

in the past, it was possible for giant eyeballs to give a "you resist" message... if you were already paralyzed (currently or within the last few turns), and therefore had 'paralysis immunity'.

this wasn't misleading & confusing at all!!!!!!!!!!

[Hirsch I]

oh boy
good thing the game is getting clearer and much less confusing.

[Patashu]

Did you in turn also know that invisibility makes them unable to affect you?

You're pulling my leg, come on now, really?

[tasonir]

How would they be able to see you? It's not like they're giant eyeballs or something, silly!