Proposal: Balance overhaul.

[khalil]

As we all know, it is best to remove something that is overpowered instead of changing it, no matter how fun if might be.(Such as the evaporate spell)
Thus, I have a suggestion:
Remove all classes other than the wanderer. After all, having a predetermined skillset is objectively OP compared to the alternative.

[Davion Fuxa]

That just encourages people to repeatedly start and restart a character until they can do whatever they plan to set out to do.

[khalil]

That just encourages people to repeatedly start and restart a character until they can do whatever they plan to set out to do.

I was being sarcastic.
I was trying to make a comment about how I dislike the Devs' approach to balancing things.

[yogaFLAME]

Suggestion: we ignore your dumb thread and instead talk about cheese.

[nicolae]

oh boy another thread complaining about the evaporate removal

[TwilightPhoenix]

Not every decision to handle something that is OP is to remove it. And not everything that is removed is OP.

[Davion Fuxa]

I was being sarcastic.

It was obvious.
However I figure threads opened in GDD deserve a little more thought to them, so why not reply so here?

[khalil]

As we all know, it is best to remove something that is overpowered instead of changing it, no matter how fun if might be.(Such as the evaporate spell)

I am astounded to see anyone claim they found Evaporate fun. Evaporate was almost as stupid and annoying as you.

Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo,
min pathice et cinaede may,
qui me ex versiculis meis putastis,
quod sunt molliculi, parum pudicum,
non dico pueris, sed his pilosis
qui duros nequeunt movere lumbos.
Vos, quod milia multa basiorum
legistis, male me marem putatis?
Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo.

And now that the ad hominems are over, I found potions of water to be useful in cutting of line of sight from orc priests. Now there's just scrolls of fog which are nowhere near as common as monsters with smite targeting spells.

[khalil]

Not every decision to handle something that is OP is to remove it. And not everything that is removed is OP.

The two reasons for removing it were:
You lugged around a bunch of potions and

it was way too strong for its spell level

[khalil]

I was being sarcastic.

It was obvious.
However I figure threads opened in GDD deserve a little more thought to them, so why not reply so here?

Why not. Here, have something more eloquent than my usual fare.
This isn't really about evaporate. Rather, this is about the way the Devs make decisions. They choose whether or not to remove something based on if it is overpowered/grindy/whatever.
I think a better metric would be 'Does it make the game less fun?'
Almost all the things the devs state they want to do (reduce grinding, avoid cheap deaths) boil down to 'make a roguelike that's actually fun.'
Thinking about things solely as 'does it encourage grinding' or 'is it overpowered' is missing the forest for the trees.

[BountyHunterSAx]

@Khalil:

I really am confused what it is you're being snarky/raging about. Firstly, it's the wrong forum for this thread (go to CYC). Secondly, as others have pointed out, the "issue" you brought up -- that all very powerful things are removed -- is not true.

Proof of that? Minotaur Berserkers are still in this game. Deep Elves are still in this game with +aptitudes to EVERY spell school. Stabbing can still deal lethal damage to endgame-level threats with just a dagger. Any and all items can still spawn in pandemonium. FIrestorm is still smite-targettable.


Now, I can understand to a degree the sense of annoyance/rage when something you felt was a good/fun/viable tactic gets pulled from the game. But there's a really simple solution to that: Keep playing the version you like until the number of good changes (eventually) outweighs the bad. I can tell you right now I didn't upgrade from v0.9 to v0.11 for more than a year. And given the direction of the new Abyss, new vaults and a variety of other sundry changes I'll probably hold off on switching to v0.12 for a good long time too.

-AHMAD

[nicolae]

Why not. Here, have something more eloquent than my usual fare.
This isn't really about evaporate. Rather, this is about the way the Devs make decisions. They choose whether or not to remove something based on if it is overpowered/grindy/whatever.
I think a better metric would be 'Does it make the game less fun?'

By the definition of "fun" the devs use and describe in the philosophy guide, things that are grindy and overpowered are, by definition, unfun.

[BountyHunterSAx]

Honestly; the idea that "balance" is a serious design consideration has always baffled me. I mean, there are challenge races that are known to be strictly harder to play than other races. There are playstyles that are inherently more luck-based and difficult to run than others. Clearly balance in the classic sense of the word -that is to say, that all options should be equivalently viable- was never a design goal.

You could argue that that's a bad thing. Me? I'm happy to keep on playing the most overpowered race/class/build combo I can find since I like winning .

-AHMAD

[khalil]

Why not. Here, have something more eloquent than my usual fare.
This isn't really about evaporate. Rather, this is about the way the Devs make decisions. They choose whether or not to remove something based on if it is overpowered/grindy/whatever.
I think a better metric would be 'Does it make the game less fun?'

By the definition of "fun" the devs use and describe in the philosophy guide, things that are grindy and overpowered are, by definition, unfun.

While I will agree with you on the grinding thing, I disagree on powerful things. It does not detract from the game, and no-one forces you to use them. Even grinding isn't a bad thing unless you're playing one of those games where the devs expect you to grind. (Those are bad games and you should never play them.)
Furthermore, if the process to decide if something is overpowered seems to be a bit arbitrary. The definition for overpowered is if something objectively better than other choices, but that's a bit silly because everything's objectively better than a Wanderer of Xom. That was actually the point of my original post: OP isn't always a bad thing. A Minotaur Berserker is OP in comparison to a Felid Fighter, but it's also more fun to play.

[galehar]

The fact that there are species and backgrounds of various difficulties doesn't mean we don't care about balance. This logic is flawed. For example, it's quite important to have spells balanced (among other things).

[khalil]

  Code:

Major design goals
  * challenging and random gameplay, with skill making a real difference
  * meaningful decisions (no no-brainers)
  * avoidance of grinding (no scumming)
  * gameplay supporting painless interface and newbie supports

Avoiding grinding is a huge part of the point of DCSS. It's not an attitude a few developers have. It's the reason the whole project exists!

WRONG.
The project was started to bridge the time while everyone waited for crawl 4.1. Furthermore, even if it was founded with the express purpose of removing grinding, it's still missing the forest for the trees.

[khalil]

The fact that there are species and backgrounds of various difficulties doesn't mean we don't care about balance. This logic is flawed. For example, it's quite important to have spells balanced (among other things).

Why?
Do note this isn't me trying to be rude or anything, I'm just curious as to what makes spells a bigger target for the nerf bat than races.

[BountyHunterSAx]

@Galehar:

Why? Objectively speaking, as long as there isn't an option that is *SO* powerful as to make the entire game a cakewalk (ie: non-challenging gameplay), nor an option that is so crucial that all classes must feel compelled to take it (like a wand of healing), then how does it ruin gameplay? I wouldn't ask except I had no idea you were a developer and so I'm really curious about your perspective.

I'll give you a simple example - one that I actually really do not understand and so I'd love to have it explained by a dev anyway. In v0.9, I could use the wizard starting book spell "call imp" to create imps that would do a variety of things including pick up weapons, blast my foes with ice/agony?, and animate dead. This made the call-imp spell both an incredibly good tactical option as well as a utility option. It enabled me to "survive" off of just the wizard starting book as late as Lair:6-8 at times in serious games (albeit with extreme difficulty) while waiting for a vehumet/sif gift or a lucky find. In fact, in both my 1-rune-find itemless spriggan runs I've succeeded primarily due to the utility I could milk from this spell.
Now all call imps does is . . . make imps. They dont raise the dead, they dont wield weapons, they dont attack outside my LOS, etc. They're a shell of what they used to be.

Now, I flatter myself, but I'm not a stupid person or a "subpar" gamer. I can name only a handful of skill games I've played for as many hours as I've played crawl. But even now, after all that, my total wincount is ~20 (I've got 2 wins in the tubes for whenever I decide to ascend them that aren't listed in my sig). I'm not playing esoteric builds, I generally play strong ones. If *my* winrate is so bad, then clearly Crawl is *HARD*. Crawl is DAMN hard. Crawl is so damn hard that imps being a little cooler or more powerful isn't going to break the game's difficulty.

If different races are at different power levels (or difficulties) and that's okay and balanced, then why can't different spells be at different levels? Why can't "Summons are just easier, and better than the alternative. If you want to challenge yourself, don't use them." Be applied equally well? The logic sounds the same to me.

-AHMAD

[jejorda2]

I am astounded to see anyone claim they found Evaporate fun.

The theme of evaporate was fun. I liked the idea of throwing bombs around. It helped to create an entertaining picture in my mind. I liked that the spell cost items from my inventory, because it made it feel more real than a simple MP cost. It wasn't fun deciding when to drop the big stacks of potions and when to run back to get more.

[pratamawirya]

It's already tough to explain stuff to people who don't understand, but add "snarky" and "stubborn" to the mix and it suddenly borders on the impossible. Props to everyone replying to the OP.

[One-Eyed Jack]

Choosing a race or background is qualitatively different than choosing a tactically or strategically superior/inferior option. For one thing, the choice is completely uniform because every player is presented with it exactly at the start of the game. This means that you don't have to adapt to what the character/dungeon throws at you, so it's not really an excercize of player skill.

For another, it structures the game in a very fundamental way; the gameplay of a mummy versus a spriggan are so different that it becomes a matter of choice and not of evaluation; the latter faculty is what determines actual skill and what, as a game, Crawl is designed to test.

In any case it's ridiculous to do some ad absurdum straw man attack against the devs because they removed some shitty spells that you happened to like, so that now if you want to play with those spells and the current updates that they provide you it's actually you who has to perform the coding (which they still provide openly) and create such a branch instead of being given it to you by other people for free.

[khalil]

WRONG.

If you don't believe the major design goals are goals, then I don't know what to say. Mainly because I've already called you stupid.

And if you don't realize the project was a disorganized thing made to keep people entertained while they waited for DC 4.1 with the design goals being made up retroactively once they realized that 4.1 wasn't going to happen, I don't know what to say. Mainly because I've already called you a cocksucker.

Choosing a race or background is qualitatively different than choosing a tactically or strategically superior/inferior option. For one thing, the choice is completely uniform because every player is presented with it exactly at the start of the game. This means that you don't have to adapt to what the character/dungeon throws at you, so it's not really an excercize of player skill.

For another, it structures the game in a very fundamental way; the gameplay of a mummy versus a spriggan are so different that it becomes a matter of choice and not of evaluation; the latter faculty is what determines actual skill and what, as a game, Crawl is designed to test.

In any case it's ridiculous to do some ad absurdum straw man attack against the devs because they removed some shitty spells that you happened to like, so that now if you want to play with those spells and the current updates that they provide you it's actually you who has to perform the coding (which they still provide openly) and create such a branch instead of being given it to you by other people for free.

While I am offended by the third paragraph, thanks for the first two. Never really understood why one is unbalanced and the other isn't, but your explanation actually makes quite a bit of sense.
Also, as far as adding the spell back in goes, that's on my todo list right under undoing all the damage I did to my copy of the code when I tried to add a new wizlab.

[twelwe]

As we all know, it is best to remove something that is overpowered instead of changing it, no matter how fun if might be.(Such as the evaporate spell)

I am astounded to see anyone claim they found Evaporate fun. Evaporate was almost as stupid and annoying as you.

Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo,
min pathice et cinaede may,
qui me ex versiculis meis putastis,
quod sunt molliculi, parum pudicum,
non dico pueris, sed his pilosis
qui duros nequeunt movere lumbos.
Vos, quod milia multa basiorum
legistis, male me marem putatis?
Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo.

And now that the ad hominems are over, I found potions of water to be useful in cutting of line of sight from orc priests. Now there's just scrolls of fog which are nowhere near as common as monsters with smite targeting spells.

The way to make a more idiotic and pretentious response to a legitimate insult (calling you stupid, which you are) is to quote a motherfucking passage in latin in lieu of having anything clever or interesting to say. You did, however, top the stupidity of origin in which minmay originally chose to mock you for, so there's that I suppose. I think this thread is done with now

[TwilightPhoenix]

Not every decision to handle something that is OP is to remove it. And not everything that is removed is OP.

The two reasons for removing it were:
You lugged around a bunch of potions and

it was way too strong for its spell level

I was not referring to Evaporate specifically, but rather every single feature modified or removed ever. I'm not going to explain the reasoning behind the reasons for Evap specifically because that's been done to death so much that the dead horse has been beaten, raised from the dead, and exorcised.

Also, how is this thread still unlocked? It hasn't been remotely near constructive since the first letter was typed.

[galehar]

Now all call imps does is . . . make imps. They dont raise the dead, they dont wield weapons, they dont attack outside my LOS, etc. They're a shell of what they used to be.

And you use imps to kill monsters, just like any other summoning spells. Before, you used imps so that they can raise dead for them. It was tedious but allowed you to get the benefit of a L4 necro spell without knowing it or training necromancy. Or you would carry around weapons so that you can equip your summoned imps to buff them. Again, very tedious. The LOS change affects all summons. The reasoning behind it is that summons killing monsters out of LOS is both cheap (danger=0) and boring (stuff happening out of LOS isn't interesting).
Now, it's just a summoning spell but it's still quite versatile an can carry a wizard through the beginning of the game. By our definition of what is fun, the spell is now more fun to use because it doesn't encourage tedious behaviour.

[khalil]

Not every decision to handle something that is OP is to remove it. And not everything that is removed is OP.

The two reasons for removing it were:
You lugged around a bunch of potions and

it was way too strong for its spell level

I was not referring to Evaporate specifically, but rather every single feature modified or removed ever. I'm not going to explain the reasoning behind the reasons for Evap specifically because that's been done to death so much that the dead horse has been beaten, raised from the dead, and exorcised.

Also, how is this thread still unlocked? It hasn't been remotely near constructive since the first letter was typed.

That's actually a good question. I was trying to admit I was wrong back up there with

Never really understood why one is unbalanced and the other isn't, but your explanation actually makes quite a bit of sense.

[galehar]

The fact that there are species and backgrounds of various difficulties doesn't mean we don't care about balance. This logic is flawed. For example, it's quite important to have spells balanced (among other things).

Why?
Do note this isn't me trying to be rude or anything, I'm just curious as to what makes spells a bigger target for the nerf bat than races.

It's a design choice. Choosing a species/background combo is like choosing a difficulty level. You can play easy combo or challenging ones, it's a matter of taste. There are some limits, easy shouldn't be trivial.
Spells are different. If a level 2 spell is better than all other level 2 spells, then you will often want to use it instead of other spells, regardless of the combo you're playing. We don't want that. So we either nerf the spell, raise its level or remove it (if it has other issues, like being tedious to use for example).

[Mankeli]

As we all know, it is best to remove something that is overpowered instead of changing it, no matter how fun if might be.(Such as the evaporate spell)
Thus, I have a suggestion:
Remove all classes other than the wanderer. After all, having a predetermined skillset is objectively OP compared to the alternative.

Minotaurs are NOT forbidded to use headgear: they just can't wear helmets. Hats and caps are FINE.

(This was about mountain dwarfs, wasn't it?)

[sanka]

And you use imps to kill monsters, just like any other summoning spells. Before, you used imps so that they can raise dead for them. It was tedious but allowed you to get the benefit of a L4 necro spell without knowing it or training necromancy. Or you would carry around weapons so that you can equip your summoned imps to buff them. Again, very tedious. The LOS change affects all summons. The reasoning behind it is that summons killing monsters out of LOS is both cheap (danger=0) and boring (stuff happening out of LOS isn't interesting).
Now, it's just a summoning spell but it's still quite versatile an can carry a wizard through the beginning of the game. By our definition of what is fun, the spell is now more fun to use because it doesn't encourage tedious behaviour.

Your arguments are plausible, and I especially like the LOS nerf. However, I have never actively casted call imp around corpses or tried to equip my imps, but I really really enjoyed watching them as they do different things in battle. They made imps feel different from many other summons. I miss these, even if I understand the reasoning. These things did not encouraged me to grind, but made the fights more interesting.

I think that if grinding something does not actually worth it, that should not be top priority to remove from the game, if the feature is otherwise interesting.

Have you considered some way to bring back some of these features? Like these ideas:
1. Imps only resurrect corpses in high tension. You may mark the zombies to collapse when their master imp dies.
2. Imps only equip/use items that the player (their master) have never touched. If it was picked up/apported etc. by the player, the imp will consider it as her masters property, and never pick it up. Also, imps only equip/use items in high tension.

And Imps are strong even now, so maybe some nerf can happen: I think you should limit the number of them somehow, and/or limit their duration.

[galehar]

Have you considered some way to bring back some of these features? Like these ideas:
1. Imps only resurrect corpses in high tension. You may mark the zombies to collapse when their master imp dies.
2. Imps only equip/use items that the player (their master) have never touched. If it was picked up/apported etc. by the player, the imp will consider it as her masters property, and never pick it up. Also, imps only equip/use items in high tension.

You don't want to encourage players to lure enemy near corpses or dropped weapons, it's even worse. And I think that even without those 2 gimmicks, call imps is still more fun and varied than most summoning spells.

And Imps are strong even now, so maybe some nerf can happen: I think you should limit the number of them somehow, and/or limit their duration.

The same could be said for all summoning spells. Everyone agrees that there should be a limit, but we haven't reached consensus on how it should be calculated.

[njvack]

OK, this topic is fundamentally silly and moving to CYC where it belongs. kahlil, if you have comments on specific balance decisions, those should be their own topics. If you want to start a "how do the devs approach game balance writ large?" discussion, try it from a slightly less inflammatory angle, please.

[khalil]

The fact that there are species and backgrounds of various difficulties doesn't mean we don't care about balance. This logic is flawed. For example, it's quite important to have spells balanced (among other things).

Why?
Do note this isn't me trying to be rude or anything, I'm just curious as to what makes spells a bigger target for the nerf bat than races.

It's a design choice. Choosing a species/background combo is like choosing a difficulty level. You can play easy combo or challenging ones, it's a matter of taste. There are some limits, easy shouldn't be trivial.
Spells are different. If a level 2 spell is better than all other level 2 spells, then you will often want to use it instead of other spells, regardless of the combo you're playing. We don't want that. So we either nerf the spell, raise its level or remove it (if it has other issues, like being tedious to use for example).

This makes a lot of sence. Thanks for the explination.

[VargrVeum]

Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo,
min pathice et cinaede may,
qui me ex versiculis meis putastis,
quod sunt molliculi, parum pudicum,
non dico pueris, sed his pilosis
qui duros nequeunt movere lumbos.
Vos, quod milia multa basiorum
legistis, male me marem putatis?
Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo.

And now that the ad hominems are over, I found potions of water to be useful in cutting of line of sight from orc priests. Now there's just scrolls of fog which are nowhere near as common as monsters with smite targeting spells.[/quote]

The way to make a more idiotic and pretentious response to a legitimate insult (calling you stupid, which you are) is to quote a motherfucking passage in latin in lieu of having anything clever or interesting to say. You did, however, top the stupidity of origin in which minmay originally chose to mock you for, so there's that I suppose. I think this thread is done with now

I think his point was that slinging insults back and forth is a useless endeavour - we don't all enjoy these little online displays of faux-aggression. Incidentally - I don't believe Carmen 16 includes any reference to motherfucking - drawing the line at face fucking and sodomy.

[BlackSheep]

Can we, perhaps, drop the metadiscussion about stylistic insults?

[Confidence Interval]

You preferred the ad hominem attacks?

[rebthor]

You preferred the ad hominem attacks?

Well, personally this is how I feel about the OP:

[khalil]

You preferred the ad hominem attacks?

Well, personally this is how I feel about the OP:
SNIP

First, the idea was supposed to be bad. Sarcasm and all.
Second, I said I was wrong several posts ago. Don't you all have something better to do with your lives?
Oh, wait.

[yogaFLAME]

Use of sarcasm is not protection from anything, especially when it's not funny. It's just a puerile way to make an argument.

[pratamawirya]

First, the idea was supposed to be bad. Sarcasm and all.
Second, I said I was wrong several posts ago. Don't you all have something better to do with your lives?
Oh, wait.

First, check where you are right now (welcome to the hell hole of the tavern, you're no longer in the safe and respected (?) GDD).
Second, anyone who dares to create such OP... loses his rights to tell others to get a life.

[chukamok]

First, check where you are right now (welcome to the funniest, most thought-provoking, coolest part of the tavern, you're no longer in the boring and stodgy (?) GDD).
Second, anyone who dares to create such OP... loses his rights to tell others to get a life.

ftfy

[Grimm]

we

we

we

we

[chukamok]

And I thought you just had a mouse in your pocket!

[Confidence Interval]

No more ad hominem attacks, please!

[tcjsavannah]

Yes, we need more hominy attacks.