Wands deletion and mummy


If it doesn't fit anywhere else, it belongs here. Also, come here if you just need to get hammered.

Temple Termagant

Posts: 8

Joined: Monday, 7th March 2016, 22:32

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 13:46

Wands deletion and mummy

Now the mummies are officially the *far* worse version of VS. at leasy VS can drink curings!

+2 spellcasting CANNOT be a compensation for losing access to ONLY source of non-divine healing and haste. Mummies cannot use regen nor revivification, so when they're in low hp the only method to heal is resting.

Clarity removal was already a big loss for Mummies. Y'all know, that race rely heavily on god abilities and items to compensate their inability to drink. Item removal might work for other races which have access to many substitutes, but it's a big no-no for mummies.

Please don't say 'worship makhreb or something' - shouldn't the point of development focus on removing standariziation of gameplay, not enforcing it?

Just my little rants.
Last edited by Gaius on Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 13:57, edited 1 time in total.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 30

Joined: Wednesday, 14th December 2016, 08:56

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 13:54

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Just adapt or play older versions, there is no point in posting something here since devs are doing what they want without listening to feedback
Attachments
Screenshot_10.jpg
trunk is rather unpopular now
Screenshot_10.jpg (109.67 KiB) Viewed 6580 times
User avatar

Abyss Ambulator

Posts: 1194

Joined: Friday, 18th April 2014, 01:41

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 15:54

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Mummies are supposed to be extremely bad. Mummy nerfs are almost always good. It's possible that they aren't bad enough, if anything.
remove food

For this message the author tabstorm has received thanks: 3
Implojin, Lasty, VeryAngryFelid

Shoals Surfer

Posts: 268

Joined: Tuesday, 4th October 2016, 09:32

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 15:54

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

#MuGozagLife
User avatar

Swamp Slogger

Posts: 143

Joined: Friday, 24th July 2015, 23:03

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 16:02

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

If mummies are truly unworkable without wands (which I'm not qualified to judge), that's an argument for changing mummies not for retaining wands in the game. It's actually a rather strange argument when you think about it; you make a race with specific restrictions, and then you introduce items which do nothing but cover for those restrictions.

For this message the author Dioneo has received thanks: 7
Cimanyd, duvessa, Lasty, nago, Reptisaurus, Shard1697, ydeve

Slime Squisher

Posts: 395

Joined: Wednesday, 6th July 2016, 02:40

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 16:12

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Dioneo wrote:If mummies are truly unworkable without wands (which I'm not qualified to judge), that's an argument for changing mummies not for retaining wands in the game. It's actually a rather strange argument when you think about it; you make a race with specific restrictions, and then you introduce items which do nothing but cover for those restrictions.



The point is that except divine means all ways to haste are gone (spell, wand), AND ways to heal wound are gone (wand, elixir card)
AND amulet of clarity is gone (except fixdart gambles) -- these *synergy* altogether to completely castrate mummies nowdays.
http://crawl.akrasiac.org/scoring/players/papilio.html

Done 15-rune wins with all playable species, backgrounds, gods!

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 4432

Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 16:22

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Mummies are still fine, I remember one of Chei who found first wand of heal wounds in Zot 2. Heal wounds are not that useful when you don't have haste and mummies never have haste now (unless that "feature" with Gozag). Wand of tele/haste were much more useful late game.
Underestimated: cleaving, Deep Elf, Formicid, Vehumet, EV
Overestimated: AC, GDS
Twin account of Sandman25
User avatar

Swamp Slogger

Posts: 143

Joined: Friday, 24th July 2015, 23:03

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 16:27

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

papilio wrote:The point is that except divine means all ways to haste are gone (spell, wand), AND ways to heal wound are gone (wand, elixir card)
AND amulet of clarity is gone (except fixdart gambles) -- these *synergy* altogether to completely castrate mummies nowdays.


The point is that if a species is completely unplayable without certain item, then that species needs to be redesigned. There's no sense in simply introducing new items to "cover" up for such deficiencies, especially since those items will also be available to species without those deficiencies. If the mummy conduct is unworkable it should be removed or changed, not simply "patched up" by items.

If we felt that (for example) Trolls were made too difficult with their current armour restrictions, the sensible thing would be to allow them to wear armour, or to give them natural AC or something like that. Our response wouldn't be to introduce a "Wand of armour", which could then be used by every other race as well.

For this message the author Dioneo has received thanks: 5
Cimanyd, duvessa, Lasty, nago, ydeve

Slime Squisher

Posts: 395

Joined: Wednesday, 6th July 2016, 02:40

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 16:28

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

+plus: Buff lichform: change its spell level to 7 or less.
Now it's never worth to put that much exp to learn that.
http://crawl.akrasiac.org/scoring/players/papilio.html

Done 15-rune wins with all playable species, backgrounds, gods!

Tartarus Sorceror

Posts: 1739

Joined: Tuesday, 13th March 2012, 02:48

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 19:31

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Dioneo wrote:you make a race with specific restrictions, and then you introduce items which do nothing but cover for those restrictions.


See also: DD and Dr
User avatar

Zot Zealot

Posts: 991

Joined: Monday, 15th April 2013, 15:10

Location: Augsburg, Germany

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 19:44

A slight buff to mummies and lichform would be to make both immune to confusion.

Spider Stomper

Posts: 241

Joined: Saturday, 29th October 2016, 17:41

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 19:48

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Clearly we need to give mummies an "empty bladder" cooldown based ability like Breathing that allows them to clear a "full bladder" effect that they get after drinking a potion. The "full bladder" effect makes them unable to drink until they squeeze one out.

Spider Stomper

Posts: 236

Joined: Saturday, 2nd July 2016, 13:16

Post Wednesday, 21st December 2016, 20:41

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Mummies were always supposed to be a peripheral/challenge species, and trunk is experimental. Wand removal is justified if it's good for the game as a whole. It might create some local problems, like with mummies, but these are best approached once it's clearer how wand removal changes the way most people play.

For this message the author luckless has received thanks: 2
Dioneo, PleasingFungus

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 8786

Joined: Sunday, 5th May 2013, 08:25

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 03:16

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

the fact that none of the people who know how to play mummies have complained about yellow wand removal should be enough indication that it's a complete non-issue

For this message the author duvessa has received thanks: 4
Doesnt, nago, PleasingFungus, Shard1697

Slime Squisher

Posts: 368

Joined: Thursday, 11th April 2013, 21:07

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 03:58

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Dioneo wrote:If mummies are truly unworkable without wands (which I'm not qualified to judge), that's an argument for changing mummies not for retaining wands in the game. It's actually a rather strange argument when you think about it; you make a race with specific restrictions, and then you introduce items which do nothing but cover for those restrictions.

I just 15 runed a Mu in current trunk and it seemed fine. The current version is no different than any other game in the past where you had bad luck with wand drops. Also, if players are uncomfortable taking a given character into extended, the option is always there to just go and ascend.

As usual, Tavern posters are blowing things entirely out of proportion.

For this message the author Implojin has received thanks: 2
Dioneo, nago

Slime Squisher

Posts: 395

Joined: Wednesday, 6th July 2016, 02:40

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 05:09

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

duvessa wrote:the fact that none of the people who know how to play mummies have complained about yellow wand removal should be enough indication that it's a complete non-issue


Don't say like that you're the chief justice of Crawl who knows everything.
Labeling complainers as idiots, whinners or the uninformed noob is rude and unpleasant.
http://crawl.akrasiac.org/scoring/players/papilio.html

Done 15-rune wins with all playable species, backgrounds, gods!
User avatar

Tartarus Sorceror

Posts: 1762

Joined: Monday, 14th October 2013, 01:05

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 06:40

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Implojin wrote:I just 15 runed a Mu in current trunk and it seemed fine. The current version is no different than any other game in the past where you had bad luck with wand drops. Also, if players are uncomfortable taking a given character into extended, the option is always there to just go and ascend.

As usual, Tavern posters are blowing things entirely out of proportion.
I will second that after going and completing 15 rune as Mu that winning as Mu in this patch(15 rune or no and even with my heavily suboptimal play) is still fine.

sound of a slide whistle

Spider Stomper

Posts: 241

Joined: Saturday, 29th October 2016, 17:41

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 18:50

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Shard1697 wrote:
Implojin wrote:I just 15 runed a Mu in current trunk and it seemed fine. The current version is no different than any other game in the past where you had bad luck with wand drops. Also, if players are uncomfortable taking a given character into extended, the option is always there to just go and ascend.

As usual, Tavern posters are blowing things entirely out of proportion.
I will second that after going and completing 15 rune as Mu that winning as Mu in this patch(15 rune or no and even with my heavily suboptimal play) is still fine.

sound of a slide whistle


It was always possible to win without a WoHW. But as the first quote basically already admits every game is now a game with "bad luck". Can you win any species with "bad luck"? Sure. But even the people trying to say everything is fine are tacitly admitting this is a net negative for the species.

Fine. Make mummies worse, I don't care I almost never play them. But they were made worse, even this first quote by a "good mummy player" basically admit they are now pre-determined to have "bad luck" in comparison to previous version's mummies.

Temple Termagant

Posts: 8

Joined: Monday, 7th March 2016, 22:32

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 18:59

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

duvessa wrote:the fact that none of the people who know how to play mummies have complained about yellow wand removal should be enough indication that it's a complete non-issue


Two 15-runers, MuMo^Gozag and MuFi^Gozag under username crescens. (Mumo was played in downcrawl which is easier to take screenshots for community guide). Still ignorant about mummies, huh?

Tartarus Sorceror

Posts: 1739

Joined: Tuesday, 13th March 2012, 02:48

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 21:20

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

duvessa wrote:the fact that none of the people who know how to play mummies have complained about yellow wand removal should be enough indication that it's a complete non-issue


"The top one percent of players are OK with the devs making crawl harder"

For this message the author Rast has received thanks: 3
Cimanyd, Sar, VeryAngryFelid
User avatar

Tartarus Sorceror

Posts: 1762

Joined: Monday, 14th October 2013, 01:05

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 22:40

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

severen wrote:
Shard1697 wrote:
Implojin wrote:I just 15 runed a Mu in current trunk and it seemed fine. The current version is no different than any other game in the past where you had bad luck with wand drops. Also, if players are uncomfortable taking a given character into extended, the option is always there to just go and ascend.

As usual, Tavern posters are blowing things entirely out of proportion.
I will second that after going and completing 15 rune as Mu that winning as Mu in this patch(15 rune or no and even with my heavily suboptimal play) is still fine.

sound of a slide whistle


It was always possible to win without a WoHW. But as the first quote basically already admits every game is now a game with "bad luck". Can you win any species with "bad luck"? Sure. But even the people trying to say everything is fine are tacitly admitting this is a net negative for the species.
it's a net negative for mummies but not in a large way and they are still roughly the same power level as before. it is ok for a species which exists to be a low power challenge species to be slightly worse!

also not getting heal wounds wand is not "bad luck", getting wand of heal wounds is good luck. a game without wand of heal wounds was normal!

For this message the author Shard1697 has received thanks: 3
nago, PleasingFungus, VeryAngryFelid

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 4432

Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 22:56

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Rast wrote:"The top one percent of players are OK with the devs making crawl harder"


I think you shouldn't blame them for that. It's not their fault that crawl does not have explicit difficulty levels and they switch to speedrunning or doing crazy challenge games.
Underestimated: cleaving, Deep Elf, Formicid, Vehumet, EV
Overestimated: AC, GDS
Twin account of Sandman25

Temple Termagant

Posts: 8

Joined: Monday, 7th March 2016, 22:32

Post Thursday, 22nd December 2016, 23:56

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Why all of you presume the wand only could be obtained via floor drop? Scroll of acquirement was the main method I used until 0.19 to maximize the chance to get wand of HW before extended.

If the trunk update for acq is reflected on the 0.20 regular then the only viable method to receive the wand is from loots. Still, I would risk running for early tomb or slime pits(If I have clarity source) in that case.

Shoals Surfer

Posts: 321

Joined: Friday, 17th December 2010, 02:21

Post Friday, 23rd December 2016, 00:19

Re: Wands deletion and mummy

Shard1697 wrote:not getting heal wounds wand is not "bad luck", getting wand of heal wounds is good luck. a game without wand of heal wounds was normal!


Frankly, I disagree. Largely thanks to wand acquirement, I reckon I had at least one /hw in maybe half of my finished games (and I feel this a conservative estimate, tbh). Considering that most of my games in recent years were (bad) speedruns, I'm sure this percentage was higher for less dive-happy players who used to acquire wands most of the time like I did.

For this message the author asdu has received thanks: 2
nago, Sar

Return to Crazy Yiuf's Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 88 guests

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by ST Software for PTF.