New mechanics for ammo destruction

[dpeg]

Klown & WalkerBoh: To achieve which differentiation from spellcasting?

[crate]

I'd be in favor of ammo always mulching, DoomRL-style (with of course an accompanying increase in the amount of ammo you find and decrease in how much it weighs), but ammo does have some effect on the game so it staying is good.

[Mulzaro]

Ammo always mulching would indeed be fine. The most tedious thing for me when playing a ranged character is the fact that I have to loot my precious ammo back.

[WalkerBoh]

Klown & WalkerBoh: To achieve which differentiation from spellcasting?

I don't really see any overlap with spellcasting. If anything ranged combat is more like casting now in the sense ammo functions in the same role as MP (once you run out you have to rest/pick up arrows to keep attacking). So the change only differentiates it more, while also making it less tedious to play.

[DracheReborn]

Actually, I think always-mulch ammo steps on wands rather than spellcasting. There will still be differences of course, since you can reduce the delay of launchers with training and you also get ammo brands. Did someone already mention how strong ranged combat is?

Ammo always mulching would indeed be fine. The most tedious thing for me when playing a ranged character is the fact that I have to loot my precious ammo back.

Well, there's an auto-loot proposal that if implemented will address that problem, at least.

[Mulzaro]

Actually, I think always-mulch ammo steps on wands rather than spellcasting. There will still be differences of course, since you can reduce the delay of launchers with training and you also get ammo brands. Did someone already mention how strong ranged combat is?

Ammo always mulching would indeed be fine. The most tedious thing for me when playing a ranged character is the fact that I have to loot my precious ammo back.

Well, there's an auto-loot proposal that if implemented will address that problem, at least.

I don't think so. Taking extra steps is one reason, but the other one is that sometimes during a tough fight I have crapload of ammo just lying around the floor which I cannot access at that time. I would much rather have a bigger ammo count that always mulches because of these two reasons.

[1010011010]

Ammo and ranged weapons have been discussed before (here and here are a couple of example), not to say this discussion is pointless, but to speed it along some.

[galehar]

the other one is that sometimes during a tough fight I have crapload of ammo just lying around the floor which I cannot access at that time.

To me, that sounds like a reason to keep ammo mulching. What you describe is a tactical sitatuation which sometimes happen when the feature mechanism is working properly.

[tasonir]

well this took an interesting turn I generally try to keep my proposals small and modest in hopes of getting them in quickly, but if there's will to revamp missile mulching entirely then by all means I'd be for that too. Arrows/bolts break 1/8th of the time, does that mean that multiplying ammo by 8 would be equal (on average)? Not sure if the probabilities are more complex but that should at least be close even if I'm technically wrong. Not really feeling like thinking about combinatorics right now

Just don't forget my original recommendation that if we do multiply arrows/bolts by 8, then hunters would currently start with 160; let's give them 400 instead!

[dck]

You are being crushed by all of your possessions.

[and into]

If people are interested in hashing this out again, there was a good deal of discussion about ammo reform earlier in this thread:

https://crawl.develz.org/tavern/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=9437&hilit=ammo

[Timbermaw]

Myself, i only think there is a problem with crossbow hunters, specifically. They can't live with the starting bolts until yaktaurs show up (which is a long time until, beyond lair, orc and possibly after their first rune).

How about a guaranteed ammo shop in the early D: ?
Or perhaps we can add a puny dwarf (!?) enemy to the beginning D that uses crossbows?

In other words, early crossbow ammo supply (which is nonexistant) needs to stay a bit more competitive with other ranged weapons ammo supply in the starting areas.

(Should i make a new topic on this?)

[Klown]

In other words, early crossbow ammo supply (which is nonexistant) needs to stay a bit more competitive with other ranged weapons ammo supply in the starting areas.

How about slings? There is a -chance- of an early monster or two having one, and if you run out you get stuck with stones, a worst-than-default ammo. They don't really have their version of the centaur/yaktaur to give them goodies later on.

[Wahaha]

Myself, i only think there is a problem with crossbow hunters, specifically. They can't live with the starting bolts until yaktaurs show up (which is a long time until, beyond lair, orc and possibly after their first rune).

Crossbows are the best starting ranged weapon (I have to mention that I'm not including large rocks because a smartass will surely reply with "large rocks") so I don't think there's a problem. A crossbow is very powerful in the early D levels and stays good after that. There are bolts on the floor sometimes too.

But really I think that if you picked hunter you intentionally wanted to play a class that uses a shitty melee weapon most of the time while putting points in a ranged skill and avoids using that skill as much as possible. That seems to be the design goal so there's no problem there.

[njvack]

Rather than lock this topic, I've merged it into the old one. May Ely have mercy on my soul.

FWIW, both that thread and this one have quite convinced me that ranged weapons are working properly now.

[damiac]

But really I think that if you picked hunter you intentionally wanted to play a class that uses a shitty melee weapon most of the time while putting points in a ranged skill and avoids using that skill as much as possible. That seems to be the design goal so there's no problem there.

While this is obviously a gross exaggeration, I feel it still makes a point.

Reading the discussion on ammo and ranged, I see the same old roundabout going on that usually seems to happen with these sorts of issues.

I don't get enough ammo as a hunter
Well, you're supposed to also melee as a hunter
But then why play hunter?
Shut up. Anyway, there's more than enough ammo to shoot everything.
Besides, ranged is overpowered.
It's required for balance for rangers to run out of ammo.
etc...

First off, how the hell is ranged OP? Ever played a firestorming mage? I have played both, and firestorming mage is no questions, hands down better.
Secondly, as has already been circled around a few times in this thread, how does it help game balance if I need to kill super easy stuff with a melee weapon vs my ranged weapon?
People keep pointing out that "This has already been discussed to death". Maybe that's a sign if this particular issue keeps coming up?

As it stands, playing a hunter means a few things.
It means you are very dependant on the RNG for the first 8 floors or so. Maybe you'll find 50 arrows on D1, maybe you won't get a single arrow till lair.
Very early on, you have a very powerful, but limited (depending on how the RNG is feeling) weapon.
After the early game, you have pretty much unlimited ammo anyway, at least for a very long time.
Then, if you don't get lucky and find tons of slaying, you end up with a mediocre end game weapon that really can't stand up to OOFs and ALiches.

I just don't understand how it would upset game balance if hunters started with 50 ammo, ironing out the extremely random early game that only hunters have to worry about (mages don't have to find mana, and start with a spellbook. Warriors start with a weapon that never runs out).
After that point, the whole point of limited unbranded ammo becomes questionable. Why not just have infinite unbranded ammo, and only limit the branded stuff?
What interesting choice is presented by making me lug around 150 arrows, and keep another 500 in my stash?

Is the problem just specifically centaur kiting? Because I could roll up a centaur conjuror and do that with magic missile too. And I thought the harsh hunger clock was supposed to be the cure to centaur kiting. Also, to go back to an earlier example, my DEFE kited EVERYTHING with haste and firestorm.

[crate]

Adjusting ammo isn't entirely about balance, really. It's about keeping ranged combat different from melee and spells: melee has unlimited uses and no cost; spells have unlimited uses long-term but a short-term limitation; ranged has limited uses long-term but effectively unlimited uses per fight.

If you do not run out of ammo, then ammo is not actually doing its job and it should just go away entirely (and then ranged becomes unlimited uses with no cost, like melee). You can argue that that might be better, but it's certainly not obvious. Personally I would actually argue that there is too much ammo in the game, if anything, since right now it is awkward in that you only ever run out of ammo early on and then later it's unlimited (for bows and xbows, at least).

Launchers are not "mediocre end-game weapons", by the way, especially when you account for the xp investment compared to melee or conjurations.

[damiac]

Adjusting ammo isn't entirely about balance, really. It's about keeping ranged combat different from melee and spells: melee has unlimited uses and no cost; spells have unlimited uses long-term but a short-term limitation; ranged has limited uses long-term but effectively unlimited uses per fight.

If you do not run out of ammo, then ammo is not actually doing its job and it should just go away entirely (and then ranged becomes unlimited uses with no cost, like melee). You can argue that that might be better, but it's certainly not obvious. Personally I would actually argue that there is too much ammo in the game, if anything, since right now it is awkward in that you only ever run out of ammo early on and then later it's unlimited (for bows and xbows, at least).

Launchers are not "mediocre end-game weapons", by the way, especially when you account for the xp investment compared to melee or conjurations.

Well right now ranged combat is differentiated by melee by the fact that it's ranged, and weaker. That's a good differentiation by itself, without considering ammo.
Ranged combat is different from magic in a lot of ways. Ranged combat is just 1 skill, magic is realistically at least two. Ranged takes ammo, a practically unlimited consumable in much of the game, magic takes mana, limited in the short term, unlimited long term. Magic has a hunger cost, ranged does not (or it's very minimal at least).
Ranged combat is physical, affected by EVA, Shields, and aC. Depending on the spell, magic can ignore some or all of these. Spells can be elemental, ranged can be elemental with the right ammo.

So ranged vs melee is already quite well differentiated, without even thinking about ammo.
Ranged Vs Spellcasting is differentiated in quite a few ways. Branded ammo actually makes ranged more similar to spellcasting, but with a limited resource, so that remains an interesting differentiation. What I don't see is how unbranded ammo is important to this distinction. All unbranded ammo does is let the RNG determine whether or not you'll be able to use your primary weapon early on, and then way way later during the extended game. Unbranded ammo is meaningless in the mid to late game.

So I really think just flat out removing unbranded ammo, and allowing bows to shoot unbranded arrows on their own would not affect game balance significantly, but would remove so much of the annoyance of ranged characters. As people keep saying, what difference does it make to game balance if I kill rats and bats with my 0 skill short sword, or with my bow? It makes no difference to game balance, but it makes a big difference to me, the player. Is it that important that when I play a hunter that I might have to fight my way to D8 or so with a 0 skill short sword?

[galehar]

Why do you keep ranting about balance? crate already told you already that ammo is about differentiation, not balance. Ranged without ammo is just like spellcasting with unlimited MP. Ammo is what makes ranged combat. If you don't like managing ammo, maybe don't play a hunter. If you remove ammo, you might as well remove ranged combat as unlimited ranged combat would be quite broken and boring. There may be issues with ranged and ammo, but removing ammo would just make it worse. Reducing it could help though.

[njvack]

Well right now ranged combat is differentiated by melee by the fact that it's ranged, and weaker.

Except the "weaker" part, yes.

So I really think just flat out removing unbranded ammo, and allowing bows to shoot unbranded arrows on their own would not affect game balance significantly, but would remove so much of the annoyance of ranged characters. As people keep saying, what difference does it make to game balance if I kill rats and bats with my 0 skill short sword, or with my bow?

Rats and bats aren't the issue. Adders, ogres, orc priests, and uniques are. There are (or can be) way too many "somewhat threatening" things in the early dungeon you wouldn't like to poke with your sword (also you are supposed to train your melee weapon) to arrow all of them -- so which do you choose? That's what ammo is for.

As to the late-game ammo issue: what if monsters didn't drop ammo (and their ammo always mulched)? Ammo spawns could be increased in levels where 'taurs and elves hang out. Then the devs can change total game ammo quantities without affecting monster balance.

I agree with crate -- once monsters shooting your ammo of choice start to pop up, the answer to "what do I shoot" is "anything remotely threatening."

[Klown]

If you remove ammo, you might as well remove ranged combat as unlimited ranged combat would be quite broken and boring.

By mid-game, especially if you have oka/trog, you practically have unlimited ammo anyways.
Removing ammo, and nerfing the power of ranged attacks would differentiate ranged vs. magic by weak & quiet vs. strong with mana/hunger/etc. management.

[Sar]

Plenty of spells are relatively quiet. I'm not even sure ranged is quiet.

[TeshiAlair]

Here's an idea: Let's think about what makes the fantasy of playing a ranged character appealing, beyond its power level.

1. The idea of hunting monsters.
2. The idea of being a marksman rather than just bashing/blasting the hell out of things.

Suggestions with these in mind:
1. Allow for increased damage or accuracy if you stay still for a few turns before firing. This would create a tension between kiting versus lining up a great shot.
2. Make ranged weapons weaker, but allow them to stab- this would enable a "sniper" type playstyle distinct from magic or melee, and make a hybrid ranged/mage build viable.

[Sandman25]

Here's an idea: Let's think about what makes the fantasy of playing a ranged character appealing, beyond its power level.

1. The idea of hunting monsters.
2. The idea of being a marksman rather than just bashing/blasting the hell out of things.

Suggestions with these in mind:
1. Allow for increased damage or accuracy if you stay still for a few turns before firing. This would create a tension between kiting versus lining up a great shot.
2. Make ranged weapons weaker, but allow them to stab- this would enable a "sniper" type playstyle distinct from magic or melee, and make a hybrid ranged/mage build viable.

I like this approach. Perhaps it makes sense to increase accuracy if you shoot at the same target and the target is in the same tile, such second shot is more accurate in real life.

[damiac]

I've got to say, even with my winning CeHu of Oka, I had to use a triple sword of freezing for most of zot. Because ranged was just not powerful enough. This was with a +6 longbow of flame.

I realize when you get a couple of rings of slaying, all of the sudden ranged is very powerful, but without excessive slaying, it's too weak for serious ranged threats.

I had to switch to melee to win the game even though my bow skill was higher than my sword skill. I had to use swords very early on because I didn't have enough ammo for the popcorn. And sometimes (very early in the game) I just had to dance around a pillar, shoot off my 5 arrows, run around, and pick them back up and shoot them again. None of this was challenging, just tedious. That's what people are complaining about.

Ranged is OP with too much slaying. Ranged is rather weak without a lot of slaying. So maybe slaying should just be 1/2 as effective for ranged damage?
I really like Teshi's idea about increased damage for standing still for a few turns, because, done properly, this could be a great nerf to kiting, which is the biggest problem with CeHu's.

Why do you keep ranting about balance? crate already told you already that ammo is about differentiation, not balance. Ranged without ammo is just like spellcasting with unlimited MP. Ammo is what makes ranged combat. If you don't like managing ammo, maybe don't play a hunter. If you remove ammo, you might as well remove ranged combat as unlimited ranged combat would be quite broken and boring. There may be issues with ranged and ammo, but removing ammo would just make it worse. Reducing it could help though.

You know what's boring? Z, A enter X 50.

Ammo is what makes ranged combat? Ranged is broken? As is now, ammo is nearly unlimited for most of the game, with the exception of very early and very late.

Ranged needs a bow, and is heavily penalized for having a shield.
Magic needs no weapon, and has a shield penalty which can be mitigated.
Ranged does not use MP, and does not cause hunger.
Magic uses MP, and causes hunger.
Ranged damage is dependant on a weapon, skill, and str and dex stats.
Spell damage is dependant on boosters, skill, and int.
Ranged is single target (with a few special exceptions) and does less damage than a melee weapon with similar skill investment.
The good spells are multi target, and do much more damage than a melee weapon with a similar skill investment.

That's already a ton of differentiation, and ammo hasn't been mentioned once.
If you need differentiation, why not just make it so after casting a few spells, you have to pick up more "mana crystals" which may or may not be generated by the RNG. Then, if you don't find any, well, you should have invested in a different skill to support your magic. There! Different! That's good, right?

The biggest issue with ranged combat is that it feels like the devs just want to get rid of it, and the game is punishing you playing a ranger. And now the devs want to reduce the amount of ammo in the game? So is ranged intended to just be a noob trap? It sounds good, but it's undependable, so you have to train another damage skill anyway. So why am I training ranged again?

[dck]

Plenty of spells are relatively quiet. I'm not even sure ranged is quiet.

I've noticed crossbows waking up things a couple of times but it didn't seem anything major (and since you're using ranged noise doesn't really matter because everything dies regardless).
Bows I wouldn't really know about.

[and into]

You know what's boring? Z, A enter X 50.

Which is why a ranged-combat version of auto-fight would be great. This has nothing to do with ammo.

The biggest issue with ranged combat is that it feels like the devs just want to get rid of it, and the game is punishing you playing a ranger. And now the devs want to reduce the amount of ammo in the game? So is ranged intended to just be a noob trap? It sounds good, but it's undependable, so you have to train another damage skill anyway. So why am I training ranged again?

If devs wanted to remove it they would have, obviously. Don't assume that just because something in Crawl doesn't work exactly the way *you'd* design it, those who did have a part in designing it must have horrible ulterior motives.

You train ranged for the same reasons you'd train evocations or many of the other skills in the game that you can't solely rely on to kill 100% of your enemies. Having some ranged damage capabilities is usually really important, that can come in the from of some combination of magic, evocations, launchers/throwing. Yes, you do have to think about what you use in each situation and (outside of extremely good equipment) you usually cannot just use one tool to take care of everything. That's good.

I agree TeshiAlair's "marksman" idea is interesting, I don't think it is necessary, but it certainly addresses some actual problems in the game (the usefulness of kiting) and if implemented well could further differentiate ranged combat and make it more dynamic.

By contrast, "Stuff in Zot is hard so I had to adapt and actually make use of what spawned in the dungeon and some awesome equipment drops" is not a problem. If you are aiming to win, you have to do this to some degree with every character.

Finally: triple sword of freezing is among the best weapons most species can use, so comparing a longbow to it is pretty silly. (You'll also find that, e.g., fireball's damage sucks compared to firestorm. However, fireball is much more common and requires far less training to use well.)

[dck]

Um I've only skimmed over those posts but ranged deals a crapload of damage (a real ton of damage) and a vorpal longbow with branded ammo is better than a triple sword of freezing because it's dealing maybe a bit less damage (assuming good ench and high skill) to ANYTHING in your LoS.
While with a longbow you don't really have any problem with anything in zot, with a crossbow you have even less problems with the most dangerous enemy that lives there as you have an ammo type designed specifically to blow them up.

Also slaying doesn't even affect ranged normally I think. Although who really knows with ranged code being as "special" as it is.

[Sar]

I remember reading that ranged slaying is like 4 times weaker than melee slaying. Maybe the problem was that damiac tried to shoot dragons and oofs with a longbow of flame? Elemental brands work really differently for ranged weapons (which is silly, yeah).

[duvessa]

Also slaying doesn't even affect ranged normally I think. Although who really knows with ranged code being as "special" as it is.

Ok I thanked this post for the first paragraph but I have no idea how you can possibly get this idea. Slaying affects ranged combat. It does do so differently from melee: launcher enchantment is completely different from melee weapon enchantment, so damage slaying doesn't have the same effect as enchantment, and if that entry is actually correct then damage slaying also only adds half as much average damage as it does for melee weapons. But it does have a (quite significant) effect.

[dck]

Oh, that's just bad wording on my side. I meant "who really knows how" since I forgot that entry existed and didn't remember how it differed form melee slaying off the top of my head.
Obviously slaying does have an effect on it (why else would there be ego gloves that give "just" +3 to ranged damage at the price of negative melee slaying?) and a noticeable one at that.

[Sandman25]

if that entry is actually correct then damage slaying also only adds half as much average damage as it does for melee weapons. But it does have a (quite significant) effect.

I am not sure I understand the post properly but rings of slaying do work in exactly the same way as for melee weapons. According to both wiki:

  Code:

Damage = 1d({Base damage - 2 + 1d8 + Racial bonus
         + 1d[Launcher enchantment - 1 + 1d(Ammo bonus) + strbonus]}×Modifiers + Slaying)

and source code:

  Code:

   // Dexterity bonus, and possible skill increase for silly throwing.
    if (projected)
    {
        if (wepType != MI_LARGE_ROCK && wepType != MI_THROWING_NET)
        {
            exHitBonus += you.dex() / 2;

            // slaying bonuses
            if (wepType != MI_NEEDLE)
            {
                slayDam = slaying_bonus(PWPN_DAMAGE, true);
                slayDam = (slayDam < 0 ? -random2(1 - slayDam)
                                       :  random2(1 + slayDam));
            }

            exHitBonus += slaying_bonus(PWPN_HIT, true);
        }
    }


For melee it is

  Code:

    damage_plus += slaying_bonus(PWPN_DAMAGE);

    damage += (damage_plus > -1) ? (random2(1 + damage_plus))
                                 : (-random2(1 - damage_plus));

and the second parameter of slaying_bonus (bool ranged) affects gloves of archery only:

  Code:

// returns bonuses from rings of slaying, etc.
int slaying_bonus(weapon_property_type which_affected, bool ranged)
{
    int ret = 0;

    if (which_affected == PWPN_HIT)
    {
        ret += you.wearing(EQ_RINGS_PLUS, RING_SLAYING);
        ret += you.scan_artefacts(ARTP_ACCURACY);
        if (you.wearing_ego(EQ_GLOVES, SPARM_ARCHERY))
            ret += ranged ? 5 : -1;
    }
    else if (which_affected == PWPN_DAMAGE)
    {
        ret += you.wearing(EQ_RINGS_PLUS2, RING_SLAYING);
        ret += you.scan_artefacts(ARTP_DAMAGE);
        if (you.wearing_ego(EQ_GLOVES, SPARM_ARCHERY))
            ret += ranged ? 3 : -1;
    }

    ret += min(you.duration[DUR_SLAYING] / (13 * BASELINE_DELAY), 6);
    ret += 4 * augmentation_amount();

    if (you.duration[DUR_SONG_OF_SLAYING])
        ret += you.props["song_of_slaying_bonus"].get_int();

    return ret;
}

[Siegurt]

What you're missing there is that "SlayDam" (Which was rolled once) is rolled *again* where the final damage is calculated in the generic "bolt/ray firing" code.

[Sandman25]

What you're missing there is that "SlayDam" (Which was rolled once) is rolled *again* where the final damage is calculated in the generic "bolt/ray firing" code.

Right, thank you!

  Code:

    pbolt.damage.size  = dice_mult * pbolt.damage.size / 100;
    pbolt.damage.size += slayDam;

[Klown]

My current game. Just reached D:8 and I've ran out of bolts completely. 203 more actions with the short sword.
I've saved the crossbow for scary guys(orcs pirests/warriors, centaurs, uniques, etc.) Yet I'm completely out. Not to mention it's been a boring game because I'm whacking stuff with a short sword instead of doing the archery I'd expect. Oka is at **** so he'll save the day soon, but nonetheless this is a good example of the issue.

[Sar]

You haven't found a better weapon than a +0 short sword yet?

[damiac]

[You train ranged for the same reasons you'd train evocations or many of the other skills in the game that you can't solely rely on to kill 100% of your enemies. Having some ranged damage capabilities is usually really important, that can come in the from of some combination of magic, evocations, launchers/throwing. Yes, you do have to think about what you use in each situation and (outside of extremely good equipment) you usually cannot just use one tool to take care of everything. That's good.

...

By contrast, "Stuff in Zot is hard so I had to adapt and actually make use of what spawned in the dungeon and some awesome equipment drops" is not a problem. If you are aiming to win, you have to do this to some degree with every character.

Finally: triple sword of freezing is among the best weapons most species can use, so comparing a longbow to it is pretty silly. (You'll also find that, e.g., fireball's damage sucks compared to firestorm. However, fireball is much more common and requires far less training to use well.)

Well, fine. If that's the case, if rangers are supposed to be like artificers, and just start with a useful tool with the expectation of developing their REAL killing tool, maybe CeHu's shouldn't be recommended to new players. If ranged is intended to just be a shitty version of evocations with way more charges, then I guess it's almost working as intended, and you should reduce the amount of ammo in game as you said.

However, I think the issue being brought up time and time again is that the people who select CeHu or HaHu don't think they're just choosing to start with a tool they can't rely on. They think they're choosing a class that starts with the weapon type they're going to use to beat zot. Just like when I roll up a fighter, and select axes, I don't expect that I'm going to have to train up conjurations because my axes are going to stop working at some point.

And no, I wasn't shooting OOFs with flame arrows, I used venom or cold arrows to overwrite the brand. But even against the draconians it was rather weak. This was with 27 skill with heroism on.

[Sar]

Orbs of fire are cold resistant.

[ontoclasm]

You can rely on your ranged tool. But an Xbow in particular is crazy powerful in the early game, and a bow only a little less so. I dare you to find an enemy before Lair that can take more than 6-8 arrows, whereas tons of them take more than 6-8 melee attacks. And, importantly, those 6-8 arrows are fired in complete and total safety. The fact that you can't arrow down literally every single thing that threatens you does not mean you are not an archer. And once you get past the very early game you have plenty of ammo.

A good example: orc warriors. For a melee specialist, or even a blasty conjurer type, an early orc warrior in plate armour is hell to fight, and best avoided. With a crossbow, however, you can just vaporize him like it's nothing, and he'll never even get in melee range.

At the other end of the game, I have no clue how people are running out of arrows in extended. I took a HeHu through 15 runes (and then died in Zot), and when I checked before entering Zot I had around two thousand arrows stashed. That's after gunning down every demon I came across in Pan and the Hells with my holy longbow.

[and into]

Actual damage formula for ranged is really complicated and I won't pretend to understand it. From my own experience in the game, yes, longbow of flame will do noticeably less damage than triple sword of freezing, all else being equal. But longbow of flame can do it at a range, which is a major consideration. And the damage is not so bad that I would come close to calling it a "shitty version of evocations." (Evocations is good, but so are longbows.) And, as duvessa pointed out, if you stack branded ammo with a bow or xbow of velocity, the damage output is extremely good.

Maybe it is unclear that those stack in game and I do think there is a lot of opacity around ranged combat, that may be a fair criticism, but ranged combat is very good. You had one disappointing experience with ranged combat, which for all I know was compounded by all sorts of things (was longbow well enchanted? what was your skill? what was your strength—ranged combat gets a bigger boost from strength than melee, I think [don't quote me on that], etc.) I do know that many players across many, many games have plucked their way through Zot to very satisfying results, myself included. Ranged is not underpowered or something.

Also CeHu are extremely powerful and also friendly for new players, so why on earth aren't they a suitable tutorial combo for people just starting out? Even if what you said is true (I don't think it is), whether something drops off in power in Zot is about the last thing you should be worrying about on D1.

[some12fat2move]

Orbs of fire are cold resistant.

freezing ammo + flaming launcher = plain projectile, unless that's been changed

And no, I wasn't shooting OOFs with flame arrows, I used venom or cold arrows to overwrite the brand. But even against the draconians it was rather weak. This was with 27 skill with heroism on.

You sure we're talking about LONGbow, not bow? Because that is not at all my experience with longbows in zot (even without slaying).
PS: With okawaru you have no excuse for not using velocity, since all other launcher brands (including flame) are inferior.

[johlstei]

Strength even affects weapon delay for ranged weapons, despite melee speed only depending on weapon skill. Ranged combat is indeed opaque. I don't think it is weak though, longbow of velocity is solid.

[Mankeli]

Actual damage formula for ranged is really complicated and I won't pretend to understand it.

This is why we need CommanderC.

[Sar]

Oh wow, right, I completely forgot how elemental launchers and arrows work.

[damiac]

Orbs of fire are cold resistant.

freezing ammo + flaming launcher = plain projectile, unless that's been changed

And no, I wasn't shooting OOFs with flame arrows, I used venom or cold arrows to overwrite the brand. But even against the draconians it was rather weak. This was with 27 skill with heroism on.

You sure we're talking about LONGbow, not bow? Because that is not at all my experience with longbows in zot (even without slaying).
PS: With okawaru you have no excuse for not using velocity, since all other launcher brands (including flame) are inferior.

Yeah, longbow. I was having to do way too much kiting in Zot, and out of aggravation just switched over to my triple sword.
I actually have the ultimate excuse for not using velocity: it never generated.

Now, looking back, perhaps I should have picked up a non-branded longbow and used one of my brand scrolls on that, instead of turning my longbow of freezing into poison, then evasion, then flaming (I wanted velocity, but I probably could never get it that way).

I think I put most of my level up bonuses into str, with a few in dex and int. Maybe I spread myself too thin that way? I had a pretty well enchanted longbow (pretty sure it was at least +7), and it was just fine up until zot. It just really seemed to take too much kiting, especially when I had the triple sword. (I had picked up sword skill specifically for OOFs, mistakenly believing they would be weak to freezing damage) I don't really understand why my experience with longbows was so different from yours. I would have been slaughtered if I tried to take on ALiches with that thing.

Anyway, to get back to the main point, if you guys are saying you never run out of arrows, even in extended, then I have to ask. What is unbranded ammo accomplishing? I mean, if you had to play a game of simon says every time you shoot an arrow, it'd be different from magic, but it'd be really lame. I feel the idea of a (practically) unlimited ammo source that autoexplore will then force me to pick up after shooting is just the same thing. It's an unnecessary annoyance for the sake of "Differentiation". All limited unbranded ammo accomplishes is to occasionally screw over rangers in the early game.

Now, this is talking about ammo with launchers. If we're talking about javelins or large rocks, yeah, those things probably shouldn't be unlimited. But of course, those are more like wands anyway, since you can throw them without wielding a special weapon. If you make them always mulch, they will just be heavy wands that use a different skill for all intents and purposes.

[crate]

Yes, exactly, there is too much ammo in the game right now, which I said earlier.

[galehar]

All limited unbranded ammo accomplishes is to occasionally screw over rangers in the early game.

Yes, it's when it's sparse that it works well. If there's a risk of running out, then you have to manage it. We all know that starting from mid-game, ammo is virtually unlimited (well, at least arrows and bolts), no need to keep saying it over and over. And when that's the case, it becomes irrelevant, so it'd be better to reduce it. But I (and crate) have already said it, haven't we?
However, I disagree that ammo makes the game tedious. Picking it up is automated, now that ammo enchantment is gone, there's nothing especially tedious about playing a ranged character.

[Siegurt]

Picking it up is automated

Is there now an auto-loot command (I may have missed that memo)? Because auto-explore to pick up ammo is... sometimes suboptimal (I still do it, but then I try to hit a key to make sure I don't over-autoexplore.)

[crate]

Picking up ammo is still tedious, even with it on autopickup.

[Sandman25]

Shooting is tedious too, I started throwing stones after I had run out of bolts in the middle of some fight without realizing it. Yes, I know I could add !f or !q inscription to stones/javelins/darts etc but it is not very convenient.