## Proposal: Make Str better

Although the central place for design discussion is ##crawl-dev on freenode, some may find it helpful to discuss requests and suggestions here first.

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 6446

Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

Oh, and one thing I should point out is that the "20 weighted strength == current weapon speed effects" is functionally pretty arbitrary, the constant for what's considered "normal melee-er strength" is easily manipulable, if the perception is that this gives too much of a penalty to low-str users, the "is normal" number can be moved down, or if it's perceived to be too much of an advantage to high-str users, the "is normal" can be moved up.

Currently as-written I have the denominator for the divisor of the weapon skill for weapon speed reduction written as:

10+200/(current weighted strength)

where the 200 is (10*(normal str attribute))
and the 10 in there is 20-(the 10 to the left)

so if we wanted lower the "normal" point to 16 we could do:

10+160/(current weighted str)

or raise it to 22 with:
10+220/(current weighted str)

Or we could make it have 20% less impact with:
12+(8*(normal str attribute))/(current weighted str)

To put the formula in the general form its:

(20*(percentage unimpacted by Str)) + ((20*(percentage impacted by str)*(normal str attribute)) / (current weighted str attribute)
Spoiler: show
This high quality signature has been hidden for your protection. To unlock it's secret, send 3 easy payments of \$9.99 to me, by way of your nearest theta band or ley line. Complete your transmission by midnight tonight for a special free gift!

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 4055

Joined: Tuesday, 10th January 2012, 19:49

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

you should listen to this Wahaha guy, he's pretty smart imo

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 5832

Joined: Thursday, 10th February 2011, 18:30

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

Before an equal and open forum on discussing attributes can truly begin, one needs to list exactly what each attribute does and how they affect combat (offensively and defensively) and their additional applications.

edit: don't type from phone
Last edited by XuaXua on Monday, 24th June 2013, 11:55, edited 1 time in total.
"Be aware that a lot of people on this forum, such as mageykun and XuaXua, have a habit of making things up." - minmay a.k.a. duvessa
Did I make a lame complaint? Check for Bingo!
Totally gracious CSDC Season 2 Division 4 Champeen!

Zot Zealot

Posts: 1066

Joined: Tuesday, 4th January 2011, 15:03

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

I think that attributes should not have big effect on item choice. Attributes vary wildly between races and classes, and you have very few points to distribute. Usually by level 15 you want to decide the type of equipment, and you will have only 5 points to choose from. Therefore if the attributes has large effect, it will result in less choice for many many characters because certain items are simply won't be good for them.

The strength requirement for armor is one example. I do not think it creates interesting choices, but it certainly removes a lot. On many character finding an early plate armor may change my plans to develop the char - except that if I need to wait for level 18 to effectively use it, I won't. I think that strength requirement for armor should be simply removed.

Also, item choice and adapting your character to found items are interesting. Choosing stats are not so.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 4031

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37

Location: France

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

sanka wrote:I think that strength requirement for armor should be simply removed.

Good idea. It's been removed from trunk already.
<+Grunt> You dereference an invalid pointer! Ouch! That really hurt! The game dies...

For this message the author galehar has received thanks:
sanka

Dungeon Master

Posts: 3160

Joined: Sunday, 5th August 2012, 14:52

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

With encumbrance, strength is usually already better than int for characters wearing plate or heavier, unless they already have high strength. Up to the point of sharply diminishing returns, strength gets you about the same improvement in spell fail rates as int, along with (small) bonuses to EV, accuracy, and damage. Int only gets you small bonuses to spell hunger and spell power along with the failure reduction.

That said, I do like Siegurt's proposal -- it would make a Ring of Strength an actually exciting item to find sometimes, instead of pretty mediocre.

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 6446

Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

galehar wrote:
sanka wrote:I think that strength requirement for armor should be simply removed.

Good idea. It's been removed from trunk already.

Well, it was never a 'requirement' and now it's a smooth curve rather than a specific fall-off point.
that web page you pointed us to wrote:(2/5) * evp^2 / (str+3) instead of evp+max(0,3*evp-str)

Saying "it's been removed" leads one to think Strength no longer has an effect on body armour penalty, which isn't true.
Spoiler: show
This high quality signature has been hidden for your protection. To unlock it's secret, send 3 easy payments of \$9.99 to me, by way of your nearest theta band or ley line. Complete your transmission by midnight tonight for a special free gift!

For this message the author Siegurt has received thanks: 2
rebthor, XuaXua

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1500

Joined: Monday, 3rd January 2011, 17:47

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

In fact it has more of an effect than it ever had previously.

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 3163

Joined: Friday, 6th January 2012, 18:45

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

The "requirement" has been removed. It's a semantic argument. Previously you had a "minimum" strength to use a body armor of a particular EV penalty. Now, further increases in strength yield further reductions in encumbrance. Debating this in either direction is not useful.

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 6446

Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06

### Re: Proposal: Make Str better

Technically you *could* wear the armour without sufficient strength, it was just a very bad idea, also it gave you a message letting you know it was a bad idea.

All that being said, I think while having Strength having an ongoing defensive benefit is excellent, I still believe this proposal both makes sense and gives Strength a balanced role in melee combat.
Spoiler: show
This high quality signature has been hidden for your protection. To unlock it's secret, send 3 easy payments of \$9.99 to me, by way of your nearest theta band or ley line. Complete your transmission by midnight tonight for a special free gift!
Previous