Proposal: Resistances overhaul

[hannobal]

I propose that all resistances (or at least elemental ones) would be reworked to work same way.

Reasoning: Currenly rF, rC, rN, rElec, rPois, rCorr and other resistances work differently and the mechanics behind them are not very transparent in the '%' screen.
I propose all resistances will be changed so that the damage taken will be:
Damage/(Rank+1)

This would result in following table, rounded to nearest full percent:
Rank / Dmg Taken / Dmg Resisted
1 50 % 50 %
2 33 % 67 %
3 25 % 75 %
4 20 % 80 %
5 17 % 83 %
6 14 % 86 %
7 13 % 88 %
8 11 % 89 %
9 10 % 90 %
10 9 % 91 %
etc.

In % screen, the amount of resistance in % would be shown next to number of ranks.
Immunity would be a special rank (X) that cannot be gained by stacking ranks, like now.
Monsters could use a different table, if necessary, or use the current system.
Vulnerability would work in inverse way: Damage would be multiplied by (1+Rank), so vulnerability rank 1 would give you +50% damage, like now.
Probably not more than 1 rank of vulnerability is not needed.

It could be used also for rMut,SustAb and rRot: Then the "dmg resisted" would be the chance to resist.
In that case items giving rMut/SustAb should give more ranks than just one (but less than 9, because you could stack several sources).
But this could probably be skipped for phase one, which would cover just rF, rC, rN, rElec, rPois, rAcid.

Current rF, rC:
Resistance Level / Damage Taken (Player) / Damage Taken (Monster)
1 50% 50%
2 33% 20%
3 20% 0%

Current poison (Sting and Venom Bolt):
Resistance Level / Damage Taken (Player) / Damage Taken (Monster)
-1 100% 150%
0 100% 100%
1 100% or 50%[1] 50%
2 - 20%
3 50% 0%

Current rElec:
Resistance Level / Damage Taken (Player) / Damage Taken (Monster)
1 33% 33%
2 25% 17%
3 17% 0%

Current rAcid:
Damage Reduction
Resistance Level / Damage Taken (Player) / Damage Taken (Monster)
1 50% 0%
2 34% 0%
3 27% 0%

The benefits would be:
- You could stack infinite amounts of resistances, but with diminishing returns (more rC and rF than just 3 ranks).
- It would be easy to calculate how much you would gain from one rank of resistance because of the 1/(rank+1) formula.
- All resistances would follow the same logic and would be easier to understand (especially multi-rank rPois, rAcid, rElec).

It would of course require changes to some items and species, to balance things out.

[Bart]

- You could stack infinite amounts of resistances, but with diminishing returns (more rC and rF than just 3 ranks).

Nobody really needs more than three levels of resistance. It is highly unusual to get more than three levels of resistance in the first place.

- It would be easy to calculate how much you would gain from one rank of resistance because of the 1/(rank+1) formula.

I am against changing mechanics only to have easy calculations. Current percentages work well and I do not feel that subsequent levels of resistances need adjustments. Also, weapon damage is calculated in a complex way and somehow we can live with that - why? Because it works. If anything, game manual could simply state how much damage reduction does each level give.

- All resistances would follow the same logic and would be easier to understand (especially multi-rank rPois, rAcid, rElec).

This would break certain aspects of game, i.e. electricity and acid branded attacks are relatively rare and the same goes for items providing resists. We should not complicate that for the sake of logic. Also poison resistance, with its unique system, appeals to me. Stacking multiple items with rPois would be annoying and make lair branches even more unpredictable based on the number of rPois items one could find.

Crawl dislikes symmetry. Crawl dislikes characters becoming overly strong (like they would in certain situations with tons of resists). Current system works fine in my opinion. If anything, I would consider presenting players with more detailed information about what their resists give them.

[dpeg]

Bart: Putting the percentages into the manual is a good idea. This system is simple enough to be covered with a single paragraph.

[KoboldLord]

The reason that rPois, rElec, and rN work differently than rF and rC is because rPois, rElec, and rN are relatively low-value resistances that would never be worth wearing if they didn't give more benefits faster than rF and rC. Then there are more useless resistances like SustAb, which is basically never worth using even with the binary toggle that we have now, and would be even more worthless if it got weakened to make it arbitrarily parallel with other, actually useful resistances.

Having them all follow the same formula would make the wiki page look pretty, but in actual gameplay itself it would mean that most of them are no longer worth having in the game at all. In addition to the raw reduction in damage from a damage type, you also have to consider how frequently that damage type comes up and how threatening it is when it does.

[TheDefiniteArticle]

I won Crawl probably a dozen or more times before I knew any of the exact resistance numbers because guess what? They don't matter! All you need to know is that the first rank of a resist is great, and diminishing returns after that.

Aside from that, I have no idea why you want to nerf all the already-bad resists. The third level of rF/rC is already practically useless, was that not useless -enough- for you?

[Sandman25]

I won Crawl probably a dozen or more times before I knew any of the exact resistance numbers because guess what? They don't matter!

Right, we don't need weapons other than spear because several players won with spears. Also we don't need spells because that was done without spells.

[johlstei]

I won Crawl probably a dozen or more times before I knew any of the exact resistance numbers because guess what? They don't matter!

Right, we don't need weapons other than spear because several players won with spears. Also we don't need spells because that was done without spells.

A stronger version of his argument would involve saying something like "in fact, presenting the numbers actively misleads new players into thinking about them when they should be thinking about anything but." Less is more, adding displayed information to the screen can actually do harm if attention is paid to it at the expense of something else. A paragraph in the manual sounds like a fine answer.

[Sandman25]

I won Crawl probably a dozen or more times before I knew any of the exact resistance numbers because guess what? They don't matter!

Right, we don't need weapons other than spear because several players won with spears. Also we don't need spells because that was done without spells.

A stronger version of his argument would involve saying something like "in fact, presenting the numbers actively misleads new players into thinking about them when they should be thinking about anything but." Less is more, adding displayed information to the screen can actually do harm if attention is paid to it at the expense of something else. A paragraph in the manual sounds like a fine answer.

I believe it is extremely important to know that rElec decreases damage to 33% while rF++ changes damage from 50% to 33%.

[tasonir]

This could work only if the "bad" resists like rElec gave you more than one rank. So finding a randart ring with rElec on it would give you 2 ranks of rElec, ie, rElec++, to keep it similar to the current value of 66%. An rPois ring would become the ring of rPois+++++++++, since that gives 90% resistance...I don't know what to even do with sustab.

Yes, writing out rPois+++++++++ is ridiculous, but the ranks could be scaled to be a bit less extreme. Or just say it gives rank 9 poison resistance.

[KoboldLord]

Or we could not do artificial symmetry just for the sake of having artificial symmetry. Taking things that are unlike each other and forcing them to be symmetrical is not necessarily going to be an improvement.

[Tedronai]

I believe it is extremely important to know that rElec decreases damage to 33% while rF++ changes damage from 50% to 33%.

How is this extremely important to know? With the information the game provides you know that when you put on rElec, this is the most resistant as you will ever become against electricity. If you have one pip of rF you know that you can become even more resistant against fire than you currently are. This is definitely enough information to properly adjust ones equipment.

[Viashino_wizard]

I believe it is extremely important to know that rElec decreases damage to 33% while rF++ changes damage from 50% to 33%.

How is this extremely important to know? With the information the game provides you know that when you put on rElec, this is the most resistant as you will ever become against electricity. If you have one pip of rF you know that you can become even more resistant against fire than you currently are. This is definitely enough information to properly adjust ones equipment.

The only thing the % screen doesn't do a good job of showing is that the first pip of Fire/Cold resistance is worth significantly more than the following two.

[Sar]

Is there any reason not to show the elemental resistances in percentages? The only positive thing I can think of is that a bunch of + and . looks neat.
Leave the current limitations and make the number change color when you hit the cap. The only one that might be problematic to express is rPois becasue of how it works, though I think 90% will be OK. Out of other stuff on that screen, cons is 90% (unless you have one of those weird conservations), rMut is 90% with amulet and whatever it is with rMut muts. See invis is "yes" or "no". MR should probably be kept as it is, though.

Hell, maybe some hypothetical newbie will see that going from rF++ to rF+++ will only improve his resistance by 10% (made up number, I still don't remember what the actual numbers are) and say "Hey, maybe I shouldn't wear that -7 cloak of Okawaru's Approval {rF+) in Zot!".

[Lasty]

If we change to a percentage-based view instead of a pip-based view, players may begin to think that the number is derived from something other than the exact number of pips of fire resistance granted by equipment and mutations and status effects, and we may start to see a lot of questions about what sorts of things affect the total rF value.

They also won't necessarily realize that each pip is of equal value. For example, say they are wearing FDA (rF++) and put on an rF+ ring, and see their fire resistance change by 10% -- some may well believe that the ring is only worth 10% rF, and assume that rings of rF are useless.

[Sar]

That can be a problem. Ideally both should be displayed, but there is probably not enough space.

[Sandman25]

I believe it is extremely important to know that rElec decreases damage to 33% while rF++ changes damage from 50% to 33%.

How is this extremely important to know? With the information the game provides you know that when you put on rElec, this is the most resistant as you will ever become against electricity. If you have one pip of rF you know that you can become even more resistant against fire than you currently are. This is definitely enough information to properly adjust ones equipment.

Because when you are fighting an OoF and Electric Golem, you are much more likely to die with rF++ and no rElec than with rF+ and rElec.

[Sar]

you are much more likely to die with rF++ and no rElec than with rF+ and rElec

I disagree. Well, unless you you have completely awful EV, maybe. Even then it's doubtful.

[dck]

If you are actively fighting an oof and an elec golem you must be past the point where any of these monsters (indeed any amount of zot monsters at all) could be a threat because else you would not be engaging in behavior so titanically careless and stupid.

[Sandman25]

you are much more likely to die with rF++ and no rElec than with rF+ and rElec

I disagree. Well, unless you you have completely awful EV, maybe. Even then it's doubtful.

rF++ and no rElec: Electric Golem has Lightning Bolt (3d20), Orb of Fire has Fireball (3d14) and Bolt of Fire (3d13)
rF+ and rElec: Electric Golem has Lightning Bolt (3d6), Orb of Fire has Fireball (3d21) and Bolt of Fire (3d20)

Maybe you are right, what is better is not obvious. Then change my initial argument to rF+++ and no rElec

[Sar]

In my experience (most of my characters don't have rElec in Zot and don't miss it), lightning bolt golems have is not very accurate, and they tend to blink around a lot. Orbs have fireball that never misses and are fast. Though ultimately dck is right and you probably should not fight two extremely dangerous monsters together, if it matters.

[Sandman25]

Sometimes you have to fight because the alternatives are worse. Though I suspect you know it

[ontoclasm]

you are much more likely to die with rF++ and no rElec than with rF+ and rElec.

Okay.

How is this not conveyed by "the first pip of a resistance is dramatically more important than the second and third"?

[hannobal]

Well from the discussion it looks like that the resistances itself don't need an overhaul.
But i still think it would be nice to have a possibility to see the percentage on the '%' screen.

Perhaps hitting ! could cycle between "simple mode" and "advanced mode"?
Simple mode would be current screen and "advanced mode" the same screen but with percentages instead of pips.
Seeing the percentage would help to understand the difference between + vs ++ and ++ vs +++.

[partial]

We should not complicate [resists (or anything really)] for the sake of logic.

[Sandman25]

you are much more likely to die with rF++ and no rElec than with rF+ and rElec.

Okay.

How is this not conveyed by "the first pip of a resistance is dramatically more important than the second and third"?

Yes, it is conveyed.