Not exploring fully

[Utis]

I've been harbouring a nagging feeling that exploring each and every level fully isn't actually such a good idea. What I've read from better players than me seems to confirm this. The way I figure it, you don't actually loose that much experience, because the monsters down there give more xp. And you don't miss out that much on equipment, because the gear down there is better. And you don't miss that much on consumables, because there are fewer opportunities that force you to spend them.

I've been too lazy to break the habit, though, and moreover I don't have any guidelines on when to do dive deeper. (Aside from the trivial case that a level is to hot to bother, so skipping it is the obvious thing to do.) So, my question is: do people who don't explore fully on a regular basis have any rules of thumb on when to go deeper? (E.g.: "In <branch> I usually explore only until I find the second stairs/until I explored roughly half of the floor." or something.)

I'm religiously using autoexplore, though. Currently, this is strictly optimal: My biggest danger is developing a secret death wish because of boredom. Autoexplore helps a lot in this department. Though, I don't autoexplore after getting shafted, and I actually enjoy the more careful and attentive play then, for a change. Not sure if this would carry me through a whole ascension, but I'd like to give it a try.

FWIW (and that's probably not much), here are my thoughts on the matter:

• D1, D2 and maybe D3 are special in that with each xl you make a big jump in power while the threat level stays the same. Also, a fast weapon of draining/venom/electricity makes live until Lair easy and provides strategic opportunities. So I explore fully.
• Orc has guaranteed shops, and I don't want to miss any of them. So, I explore fully.
• With many of my builds, I experience the first level of some Lair branches (most notably Snake and Shoals) as a jump in difficulty, while the deeper levels have even more dangerous monsters. So I explore level 1 and 2 of Lair branches fully to get the XP for rounding out my character. Though, that's probably because most of my chars that interest me enough to get that far are rather experimental and somewhat spread thin in skills. So, Idk.
• I'm always rather scared of V:5 and of Slime and Depths provides a lot of XP. So I explore Depths fully, although that's the part of the game that I would love to shorten the most.
• (Not really relevant, but for the sake of completeness:) I never do Crypt or Elves. (Unless the gear I have is so crappy that the possibility of a quick death looks less frightening than the prospect of a drawn out endgame.)

If that's correct, that still leaves a lot of levels to be partly skipped. But how much? Going down the first stairs I see, seems a little extreme. But, again, I don't know.

Thoughts?

[BabyRage]

I don't really see why you shouldn't explore whole levels outside of the endgame, unless you are speedrunning or something. I always dive slime, pan, hell and zot. Sometimes I can skip depths floor if it's some huge full floor vault. But I don't see a reason to dive lair branches. You still need xp and items at that point IMO.

[VeryAngryFelid]

I've been harbouring a nagging feeling that exploring each and every level fully isn't actually such a good idea.

It is a good idea.

What I've read from better players than me seems to confirm this.

It depends on what you mean here. You must avoid autoexplore for turn speedrunning, you must dive for real time speedrunning, but you must autoexplore everything for streaking.

The way I figure it, you don't actually loose that much experience, because the monsters down there give more xp.

They give the same XP no matter your XP so it is optimal to be as powerful as possible before fighting them (to reduce danger of dying).

And you don't miss out that much on equipment, because the gear down there is better.

As far as I know there is no difference between D:5 and Zot:5.

And you don't miss that much on consumables, because there are fewer opportunities that force you to spend them.

I believe you get more consumables than you expend. At least I have more consumables on Zot:5 than on D:1 (or even than on D:15) with all characters

[Utis]

Yeah, maybe, I'm not sure. It's just that aside from the cases I mentioned (the beginning of Lair branches being one of them), exploring often feels more like going on a sightseeing tour where it doesn't really matter which of the numerous ways I choose to kill things. So, most of the time I play to have something to do for my eyes and fingers while my mind is occupied with work related stuff. That's right until either inattention or plain statistical probability get me into a situation that is dangerous. It seems to me that exploring each and every level increases both inattention and the number of dangerous situations, increasing the probability of death. But, again, I'm not sure. That's why I'm asking.

[Psieye]

My biggest danger is developing a secret death wish because of boredom.

In other words, this thread isn't about exploration. It's about fighting tedium that comes from a long chain of lukewarm and outright-popcorn encounters that you auto-pilot through. You seek something to spice things up a bit - diving is just one possibility to do that. Harder starting combos/gods are other (non-exhaustive) possibilities.

It also helps to have something to look forward to. Like "this will be the game where I read a scroll of immolation and torment in V:5 just because I can".

[VeryAngryFelid]

Yeah, try harder combos (or hellcrawl fork). You will want to autoexplore everything because you will be really afraid of monsters on next floor.

[Floodkiller]

If you are turn count speedrunning, there are a lot of different factors to consider about exploration. If you are just playing to win, however, just ask yourself the following questions before fully exploring a level:

Is there little to no threat of death or permanent damage (rot/malmutation)?
Do you still need more experience/higher skills to win the game?
-This is subjective based on your previous wins and losses, and also depends on the amount of runes you are aiming for. If you aren't sure, then just assume you need more.
Are you looking for anything in particular (items, branch entrances, gold, rune, etc.) that can potentially be found on this floor?
-When you find it, ask this question again before continuing to explore.

If the level isn't mandatory, weigh your yes/no responses to figure out if it is worth exploring. If it is mandatory but not worth exploring, plan a route to spend as little time as possible on the level (and use magic mapping if the reason the level isn't worth exploring is because it is too dangerous).

[tabstorm]

Personally I just mash o/tab once I hit Lair unless there's a unique i really need to exclude.

[edgefigaro]

I like playing the game of travelling downstairs immediately upon finding the 3rd down staircase.

I do this when I want to play around, not when I want to win.

O-tabbing and fully autoexploring is a more relaxing crawl experience than either speed running or streaking. Fully autoexploring is better for winning too.

There is lots to be learned from playing crawl in different ways.

[Utis]

I'm not into turncount speedruns. I lack the dedication for that and I'm not competitive enough as a player by a large margin. This isn't really about making the game harder, either. What I enjoy most about crawl is build strategy and tactical situations where every turn counts but where I also have lots of meaningful options. AFAICS, challenge combos are mostly about being forced into a more circumstantial and laborious tactical routine. I think I'm incapable of ever winning an e.g. OpBe: frail and strategically boring? Not good for me.

I think, after all the input, maybe I'm able to explain a little better, what's going around in my mind. Still don't know whether it makes much more sense, though. It's based on three observations and a conjecture:

• My builds have a tendency to be a little thin-ish in their skilling, though not really in a detrimental way. That's because I tend to add spells, or other options, to my char's repertoire even when I fully know that I'm duplicating functionality or adding functionally that has too much overlap with already existing options to be economical. I do that often because I want to experiment e.g. with a spell. But lately I've been doing this most of the time, because I was too lazy to figure out which option is better. Because: why not? I'm ahead of the killing curve anyway and there's enough XP walking around already in early D. Putting more thought into it right now seems very much like pointless micro-optimization.
• In the past, I very often actually enjoyed getting shafted for three floors before Temple. I'm not saying that shafts are a good thing ... I don't like getting into near-death situations without being at fault any more than the next person. But if I have a few consumables and if I survive the time immediately after getting shafted, then I rather enjoy the careful play ensuing. And I find it amazing how quickly my char becomes much more powerful on his way up. I suppose that means that the monster's danger on deeper floors, modified by the options at my disposal, doesn't scale proportionally to the XP they give.
• The way XP works in crawl you get diminishing returns for killing monsters at the same threat level. Yes, I can farm each and every goblin for XP, leading to a situation where I actually have enough XP to waste it. But the only benefit is that I can afford sloppy thinking. I suppose I could, instead of spreading the XP, put it into the main skills. But for what? Those skill, being naturally the highest, benefit even less. So, what do I gain? That after an average fight my average HP is 2% higher? That's not even micro-optimization, that's OCD.
• (The conjecture:) Even when a floor is easy in general, there's always the possibility that you run into a dangerous situation (e.g. the wrong combination of otherwise perfectly manageable monsters walks in from unfortunate angles). Every dangerous situation, by definition, bears the risk of making a mistake and dying. The less time I spend leisurely walking around, the less I run the risk of this happening. (Inattention factors in, too.)

So, what I'm wondering is: Maybe going deeper earlier actually is better when playing to win at the cost of having to put more thought into tactical and strategic decision? So, actually: win-win?

If you are just playing to win, however, just ask yourself the following questions before fully exploring a level:
[...]
Do you still need more experience/higher skills to win the game?

There's a thought. Maybe that could also apply to branches? E.g. once I know that my character can deal with Spiny Frogs and Black Mambas, maybe there's no point in hanging around D and I might just as well dive to Lair?

[njvack]

And you don't miss out that much on equipment, because the gear down there is better.

As far as I know there is no difference between D:5 and Zot:5.

I believe (though I am not sure!) that this is incorrect -- in particular, IIRC Acquirement sets a "depth" parameter when generating its item, which suggests to me that depth is somehow taken into account for normal floor item generation.

In addition, later on there are more vaults which generate explicitly better gear, and more monsters which generate with potentially useful items. You're gonna find a freezing battleaxe when you take down a frost giant, for example.

[VeryAngryFelid]

I believe (though I am not sure!) that this is incorrect -- in particular, IIRC Acquirement sets a "depth" parameter when generating its item, which suggests to me that depth is somehow taken into account for normal floor item generation.

In addition, later on there are more vaults which generate explicitly better gear, and more monsters which generate with potentially useful items. You're gonna find a freezing battleaxe when you take down a frost giant, for example.

Yes, probably there is some difference. Yet I think it does not change much, you don't need triple sword or fire storm on D3. The most important thing is to improve your character right here and right now and for that a scimitar of electro or +2 robe of rC+ can be very useful even if you won't use it in Zot.

[njvack]

Yes, you're right; the correct choice for winning is basically always "improve your character in the lowest-risk way possible", and that's generally the earliest floor you can be on unless there's something you can't handle there.

[edgefigaro]

[*] (The conjecture:) Even when a floor is easy in general, there's always the possibility that you run into a dangerous situation (e.g. the wrong combination of otherwise perfectly manageable monsters walks in from unfortunate angles). Every dangerous situation, by definition, bears the risk of making a mistake and dying. The less time I spend leisurely walking around, the less I run the risk of this happening. (Inattention factors in, too.)[/list]

So, what I'm wondering is: Maybe going deeper earlier actually is better when playing to win at the cost of having to put more thought into tactical and strategic decision? So, actually: win-win?

This conjecture is false.

A couple assumptions:
Exploring the black on an unexplored level is less dangerous than exploring the black on a mostly explored level.
Loot chance from exploring the black is constant across the level. (A potion of might has an equal chance to spawn across all floor spaces on a given floor.)

Vaults (non-random content) create outliers which can be ignored for this discussion.

Zot on certain characters (notably, felids, some others) is the only edge case where diving can be better than exploring. I think endgame dives are a bit different than what you are talking about.

[Utis]

I have to admit, it's giving me pause that I'm apparently the only one that wonders whether this might be a good idea. It's not what I expected.

Re: gear. I was always under the impression that deeper levels are weighted to generate weapons with better base type. Odd. If that's not true then that would be a strong argument against diving, at least until you are settled for your end game gear. Since then you'd want to see as many dungeon squares as possible in the least threatening circumstances possible.

Another thing that came to my mind is that without exploring fully, the upper floor isn't as safe a retreat as with.

Exploring the black on an unexplored level is less dangerous than exploring the black on a mostly explored level.

Even if that were true, you're still exploring the same amount of black of unexplored levels either way. I don't think that's true, though. Exploring near the stairs is what's least dangerous.

With regard to Zot: The common custom of diving in Zot is actually what made me think along those lines. I can see no other reason for this than 'avoiding exposure to danger' in situations where the character is already good enough to win. Otherwise the XP in Zot is good; Z:5 is more dangerous than the rest and e.g. maxing out fighting still provides a significant advantage in Z:5. If diving in Zot is a good idea, because the character is 'strong enough to ascend', then why not dive in D once the character is 'strong enough to survive Lair'?

What the heck, I'm going to experiment with this. The worst thing that can happen is that I become a better player by paying more attention to risk/reward when picking fights. And who knows? Maybe I'm going to conclude something like "No, diving just for the sake of it isn't a thing, but diving if a floor's terrain looks even slightly disadvantageous is a thing."

[VeryAngryFelid]

Zot diving is somewhat controversial. Some people say that diving is good because you meet less orbs of fire and thus minimize risk of entering Zot 5 with teleportitis and alike. Some people say that diving is bad because XP is good, items are good and you can avoid mutations via smart tactics. I would probably dive Zot if orb run didn't exist.

[Shard1697]

I think even considering orb run it's best to dive zot.

[VeryAngryFelid]

I think even considering orb run it's best to dive zot.

I don't remember dying on Zot 1-4 before picking up the orb but I do remember dying on Zot1-4 during orb run.

[Sprucery]

I remember two deaths on Zot 1 - 4 before picking up the orb but no deaths on Zot 1 - 4 during orb run :)

That said, I still clear Zot 1 - 4 because I like it.

[Odds]

Zot diving is somewhat controversial. Some people say that diving is good because you meet less orbs of fire and thus minimize risk of entering Zot 5 with teleportitis and alike. Some people say that diving is bad because XP is good, items are good and you can avoid mutations via smart tactics. I would probably dive Zot if orb run didn't exist.

While you can avoid most mutations through "smart tactics", I think orbs of fire are the big exception for many characters.

Personally, if low on cure mut and/or not keen to fight many Orbs of Fire, I:
- Try hard to go into Zot with 5xMagic Mapping
- Dive Zot down to 4, leaving a reasonably safe path
- Clear 4 as much as is necessary to make all 3 downstairs pretty damn safe.
- Clear 5 except Orb chamber.

[duvessa]

The thing with orbs of fire is they only appear in Zot and ziggurats, so mutations you get at that point don't really matter.

[dowan]

Unless you get teleportitis. Or berserkitis. Or slow reading. Or frail.

[duvessa]

I don't think any of those really matter in zot/orbrun.

[dowan]

You don't think getting teleported into a full zot lung matters? Or berserking around dangerous enemies?

Well, ok. If you're like duvessa and none of those things matters to you... somehow... then it's true that it doesn't matter how much you get mutated by orbs of fire.

Personally I pretty much agree with Odds' approach. Not that I usually do that, when I play everything must die, all squares must be explored! But that's obviously not optimal for winning.

[duvessa]

If you don't want to berserk on a turn then you can just not make a melee attack on that turn, since making a melee attack is literally the only way for berserkitis to trigger. Teleportitis isn't even detrimental if you're ninjaing the orb like you should, I suppose it's annoying if you're insistent on clearing a lung but I don't know why you would commit yourself to that.

Mind you, I'm not saying you should clear zot:1-4, in fact I think with the return of -cTele you definitely shouldn't clear zot:1-4 ever since it was already a waste of your real-life time that doesn't benefit your character, and now it's a waste of your real-life time that doesn't benefit your character and that also requires constant attention.

[edgefigaro]

Exploring the black on an unexplored level is less dangerous than exploring the black on a mostly explored level.

Even if that were true, you're still exploring the same amount of black of unexplored levels either way. I don't think that's true, though. Exploring near the stairs is what's least dangerous.

If you encounter a threat on a mostly explored floor, ?tele makes dealing with it trivial. This is not true "near the stairs" on unexplored levels, where ?tele can make your position worse.

On Staircases:
If playing very carefully, I will
1) Take down staircases when I see them and explore a small radius around the staircase to create a safezone or retreat back upstairs if the staircase is dangerous.
2) Go back upstairs and continue to explore the previous level, repeating the process as I find more down staircases.

This creates safe zones of both up and down staircases as you continue to explore the rest of the level. It is more important on the first levels of branches which only have 1 entrance, and I dislike having it being overrun. On the subsequent floor, you also have a better idea of the shape of the level (the locations of the other upstairs) which can inform you of useful directions explore.

This has some very minor downsides.
1) A timed portal may be on the lower floor, which becomes troublesome.
2) You are vulnerable when the second and third down staircase. The first down staircase you take you get a free move. Subesequent decents into the level that is not the case.

On Zot Diving:

I've had characters where the gains from exploring fully (exp, loot) do not outweigh the expense of fighting monsters (spent consumables and piety.) I haven't had these games for quite a while, and I may be a better player now. However, I definitely remember 2 felids where I was spending more resources killing mobs in depths (and subsequently zot) than my character was gaining by killing mobs and exploring.

However, I had enough resources to take zot 5, so I dove zot instead of clearing floors.

[Airwolf]

The gods want you to fully explore every level and kill every monster!

[Utis]

The gods want you to fully explore every level and kill every monster!

I know they do. But I don't want to be the divine janitor anymore. The gods need to grow up and learn how to clean their floors after themselves.

[Utis]

Exploring the black on an unexplored level is less dangerous than exploring the black on a mostly explored level.

Even if that were true, you're still exploring the same amount of black of unexplored levels either way. I don't think that's true, though. Exploring near the stairs is what's least dangerous.

If you encounter a threat on a mostly explored floor, ?tele makes dealing with it trivial. This is not true "near the stairs" on unexplored levels, where ?tele can make your position worse.

You're still spending at least the same amount of time on mostly unexplored levels if you explore fully. However, I think I understand what you're getting at: The argument is that exploring mostly explored levels is a safer way to gain XP, so you're stronger when you go to the next unexplored level. Right? With the way XP works in crawl, I don't think that you're that much stronger to make a difference. Unless you're diving several floors. (Which is indeed what I suggested a couple of posts ago, so yeah ...)

I didn't play around with diving/not fully exploring in D-before-Lair enough to make the experiment really conclusive. But so far it does feel notably more dangerous if I just go down just for the heck of it. This is somewhat ameliorated by the fact that it's easier to stay attentive, but still. After the feedback here I doubt that unconditional diving/unconditional partial exploration is a good strategy.

I do however start to think that it's a good strategy to skip a level (or explore it only partially) at the drop of a hat. Like, already at "I don't like this terrain". Effectively playing a crawl where wide open spaces don't exist.

[re teleportitis, berserkitis, slow reading, frail]
I don't think any of those really matter in zot/orbrun.

Are you exaggerating or do you mean that literally? (I honestly can't tell. Sometimes what you write looks like hyperbole to me, right until careful consideration reveals it to be literally true.) On paper, it very much seems to me that slow reading hurts a lot while teleporting if you don't have a wand and that teleportitis hurts a lot while going up through an unexplored Z:4-1. AFAICS, the only way these 'don't really matter' is if diving Zot and ninja'ing the orb is still safer, even with these mutations, than exploring Zot and clearing a lung. Is that the case?

I never tried ninjaing the orb; I suppose I should. It's essentially: teleport around until you're in LoS of the orb, then apport and teleport until you're in LoS of a stair. Right? And I suppose doing the same for runes is even safer, then?

[VeryAngryFelid]

[re teleportitis, berserkitis, slow reading, frail]
I don't think any of those really matter in zot/orbrun.

Are you exaggerating or do you mean that literally?

No, he is trolling I believe. It's pretty obvious to everyone who experienced pan lords with paralyzing eyeballs or glaciate/fire storm during orb run.

[rentonl]

I often consider whether I should dive Zot or not. I always clear everything out though.

My mentality is that you have all the time in the world to patiently clear out Zot before the run. While I would rather not stumble upon 3 oof ever, I would be really, really angry with myself if I ran into them during the orb run. I think it's a case of instilling a bit of extra danger in your game to ensure you won't die a death you absolutely know you could have avoided with patience.

[Rast]

Teleportitis isn't even detrimental if you're ninjaing the orb like you should,

Actually you should be double-bribing zot 5 and then spamming summons (at 20 Evocations) from box and sack.

[VeryAngryFelid]

Wait, isn't Fedhas the best god? I don't think you should nonja the orb when you can lure everyone to oklob farm instead and teleportitis is really bad in this case.

[duvessa]

[re teleportitis, berserkitis, slow reading, frail]
I don't think any of those really matter in zot/orbrun.

Are you exaggerating or do you mean that literally?

I mean that literally.

AFAICS, the only way these 'don't really matter' is if diving Zot and ninja'ing the orb is still safer, even with these mutations, than exploring Zot and clearing a lung. Is that the case?

Yes, that's what I was saying in my last post. (Well, I don't think they make a significant difference if you're trying to killdudes zot:5 either, but their impact on stealing the orb is much more important since that's the much better strategy.)

And I suppose doing the same for runes is even safer, then?

The S rune levels are simple enough that most characters might as well just kill the monsters instead, since the game rewards you for that. Spider:4/snake:4/swamp:4 are pretty much the same as spider:3/snake:3/swamp:3, and you "cleared" those levels for xp and items, right?
There is no noticeable reward for clearing a lung of zot:5, since the only thing left in the game after that is to move to the D:1 stairs, and skills are essentially irrelevant for that.

Tomb and Vaults:5 work either way. Stealing the runes in Hell/Pan is nearly always better than fighting the lords. Abyss is Abyss.

[edgefigaro]

If you encounter a threat on a mostly explored floor, ?tele makes dealing with it trivial. This is not true "near the stairs" on unexplored levels, where ?tele can make your position worse.

You're still spending at least the same amount of time on mostly unexplored levels if you explore fully. However, I think I understand what you're getting at: The argument is that exploring mostly explored levels is a safer way to gain XP, so you're stronger when you go to the next unexplored level. Right? With the way XP works in crawl, I don't think that you're that much stronger to make a difference. Unless you're diving several floors. (Which is indeed what I suggested a couple of posts ago, so yeah ...)

I do however start to think that it's a good strategy to skip a level (or explore it only partially) at the drop of a hat. Like, already at "I don't like this terrain". Effectively playing a crawl where wide open spaces don't exist.

You are overconsidering XP and undervaluing loot as what you pick up while exploring the black. Each unexplored floor space has a chance to offer a cloak, book, wand, potion, item you don't have that makes your situation substantially better. You get more items more safely by exploring floors fully.

The game isn't a quest to become high enough level. The game is a quest to become kitted as soon as possible.

That being said, overly dangerous floors should be skipped. Terrain does play a factor in whether or not to skip a floor (i am reminded of irritating floors in spider on poorly matched characters). I think you are overstating terrain's importance, being willing to "skip at the drop of a hat" over it is excessive. However, terrain factoring in to your decision making process is good.

Most characters have reasonable tools to deal with >99% of the terrain that exists in a game, corridors are not -that- valuable.

[scorpionwarrior]

There is no noticeable reward for clearing a lung of zot:5, since the only thing left in the game after that is to move to the D:1 stairs, and skills are essentially irrelevant for that.

I'm not sure, I consider "not being surrounded by fast dangerous monsters the moment I pick up the orb and wait for excruciatingly slow teleport" as a reward. But I was never brave enough to try ninja even when teleport wasn't really bad in zot.

[VeryAngryFelid]

Most characters have reasonable tools to deal with >99% of the terrain that exists in a game, corridors are not -that- valuable.

I wanted to thank your post and then I got to last sentence
Most characters are interested in saving resources so corridors are that valuable.

[edgefigaro]

It is my experience that there are excellent places to fight in on most maps. I value picking good battlefields, I generally consider more than just corridors as good battlefields. The perk of cooridors is it makes it simple to be fighting exactly one thing at a time. Corridors that have internal corners are especially good as it can reduce the number of monsters in view to 1 or 2. These are good things.

I also have been playing with minions recently, where corridors, while still valuable, are less important in considerations of what is a good battlefield. Other backgrounds have conjure flame which, while useful in corridors, also allows you to create your own terrain outside of corridors.

Cooridors are valuable, however terrain usage varies by character, what point in the game you are at, and what kind of threats are dangerous to your character from the zone at the moment.

Picking good battlefields and using terrain is one of the most important overlooked skills in crawl. Corridors are frequently great battlefields. There are other, often trickier, but still good battlefields as well for the current threat and character.

[VeryAngryFelid]

I believe there are only a few situations when you don't want corridors:
1) You have multiple allies (summoner, necromancer, Yred, Beogh, Kiku)
2) You are afraid of LRD (Deep Troll Earth Magi) because you have low AC/HP (Fe, Op or Sp) and corridors will be destroyed anyway.

I don't know any terrain that is superior to corridors (except kill hole of course but then you need a wand of digging/disintegrate if you want to run away).
Like Utis I often skip a level if it has just open terrain (I learned it from my deaths of course: Centaurs, Ugly Things, Killer Bees etc. and teleport does not help much on unexplored levels).

[WingedEspeon]

Multiple allies can be: Summoner, Yred, Beogh, Kiku/necromancer, early game IE ( ice beasts), Lamp, Phial, Sac of Spiders, Box of beasts, Nemlex, Trog/TSO/Mak (probably overkill here), Fedas, and enslavement wand. Somehow I feel like I an still forgetting something.

[VeryAngryFelid]

Lamp and Phial work better in corridors IMHO as you can hit all enemies with clouds/impact instead of just a few. Also the elemental (if it's still summoned in 0.19) can give you an easy way to retreat. Enslavement wand is better in corridors too, easy retreat or you are never attacked because you enslave the closest monster every time.

[Cimanyd]

Lamp of fire doesn't summon anything anymore, which means it's nearly useless outside of a corridor (if it misses it's done nothing useful and is now inert, and it usually misses), and very good in a corridor (it can't miss, so your enemy will be standing in a cloud of flame for the whole fight).

[dowan]

If you don't want to berserk on a turn then you can just not make a melee attack on that turn, since making a melee attack is literally the only way for berserkitis to trigger. Teleportitis isn't even detrimental if you're ninjaing the orb like you should, I suppose it's annoying if you're insistent on clearing a lung but I don't know why you would commit yourself to that.

Mind you, I'm not saying you should clear zot:1-4, in fact I think with the return of -cTele you definitely shouldn't clear zot:1-4 ever since it was already a waste of your real-life time that doesn't benefit your character, and now it's a waste of your real-life time that doesn't benefit your character and that also requires constant attention.

So, with the days of extra slow teleports and no controlled blinks in zot, how does one reliably ninja the orb without being horribly killed first?
After managing to get lucky enough to land in the orb chamber, and grabbing the orb, do you just assume your next teleport can't possibly land you in one of the two uncleared lungs?
And even if all that works, what stops your teleportitis that doesn't matter from sending right back into one of those lungs full of enemies?

I agree that ninja-ing the orb was a fantastic plan when you could just controlled blink your way to it, or POG your way to it. Now that you can't do those things, outside of a couple very lucky teleports, how do you figure ninjaing the orb is safer than clearing a path to it?

[Midn8]

And you don't miss out that much on equipment, because the gear down there is better.

As far as I know there is no difference between D:5 and Zot:5.

Minqmay wrote an article a while ago about how item generation and acquirement works. Basically, Acquirement value is 351 and base value is 1, and generation is affected by absolute depth, so D1 has an absolute depth of 1, and Depths 3 has an absolute depth of 25.

[Utis]

I do however start to think that it's a good strategy to skip a level (or explore it only partially) at the drop of a hat. Like, already at "I don't like this terrain". Effectively playing a crawl where wide open spaces don't exist.

You are overconsidering XP and undervaluing loot as what you pick up while exploring the black. Each unexplored floor space has a chance to offer a cloak, book, wand, potion, item you don't have that makes your situation substantially better. You get more items more safely by exploring floors fully.

The game isn't a quest to become high enough level. The game is a quest to become kitted as soon as possible.

That being said, overly dangerous floors should be skipped. Terrain does play a factor in whether or not to skip a floor (i am reminded of irritating floors in spider on poorly matched characters). I think you are overstating terrain's importance, being willing to "skip at the drop of a hat" over it is excessive. However, terrain factoring in to your decision making process is good.

Most characters have reasonable tools to deal with >99% of the terrain that exists in a game, corridors are not -that- valuable.

I've played with my 'avoid terrain at the drop of a hat' rule of thumb now. I'm convinced now that it's good play. Though, admittedly, there might be a misunderstanding here what exactly that means. I didn't mean corridors only. It's more a question of: If a (fast) monsters comes into LoS, can that char reach terrain in time that is favourable for its tactics? And: How far does noise travel in this terrain? How easy can additional monsters come into LoS by just beelining to the noise you make?

I grant you the importance of finding equipment. IMO, it's a question of risk management, though. Between my newfound willingness to avoid terrain and the necessity to find Temple, Lair, Orc, Vaults, there's still enough ground to be covered.

[WingedEspeon]

I think that avoiding terrain that you are not comfartable in is a great idea as long as you are willing to backtrack and clear it when you become stronger.