Any way to check 'exact' monster stat in-game (or out-game)?

[nordetsa]

Seems like a new monster called 'juggernaut' got added to the recent trunk version. I want to know its stats-hp, movement speed, AC/EV/whatever numeric values the game is not showing. Is there any way I can get access to the information?

[gammafunk]

Yes, you can query the Gretell bot in the ##crawl channel on IRC with a query prefix of '@??', like this:

  Code:

<+gammafunk> @??juggernaut
< Gretell> juggernaut (C) | Spd: 15 (atk: 450%) | HD: 20 | HP: 158-185 | AC/EV: 20/10 | Dam: 120 | doors, fighter, see invisible | Res: magic(120), drown | XP: 7224 | Sz: Giant | Int: human.


There's a web-based IRC client for freenode, where the channel is hosted, that you can use here

[Berder]

  Code:

<+gammafunk> @??juggernaut
< Gretell> juggernaut (C) | Spd: 15 (atk: 450%) | HD: 20 | HP: 158-185 | AC/EV: 20/10 | Dam: 120 | doors, fighter, see invisible | Res: magic(120), drown | XP: 7224 | Sz: Giant | Int: human.


Wow, that's just awful. So much damage that AC is useless, also 20 HD and fighter flag so ev is almost as useless. Something you better kill at range or with summons. Fast, nearly unhexable, sees invisible (up yours too, stabbers!) And the patch says they appear in... Depths??

At least they don't rPois. That's a reason to keep carrying those curare needles.

[Hurkyl]

What does the 450% mean? It has an attack delay of 3 auts? (or 30 depending on how you measure)

[Berder]

Yes, 30 auts.

This thing is almost orb of fire danger level for stabbers that may not have an effective way to kill it or escape it when they are entering depths.

[Sar]

I thought you were gonna love those. Look at that lack of elemental resistances, it's a clear caster buff!

[mps]

lol, looking forward to seeing one of these in the wild.

[Berder]

Yeah, blaster mages and summoners will have an easier time dealing with these than most. It's clearly a nightmare for stabbers though.

I guess a lot of evo and a sack of spiders would also be pretty effective against it.

I mean, this looks so dangerous that it's not a question of what you do when you meet one, it's a question of how to build your character specifically to prepare to meet one.

[mps]

Yes, 30 auts.

This thing is almost orb of fire danger level for stabbers that may not have an effective way to kill it or escape it when they are entering depths.

Watch out, Chei statue stabbers...

[Berder]

What about melee felids? This could potentially one shot them from full health, and can outrun them.

[mps]

Oh wait, I misread. Okay, if these are actually fast, that's p dangerous.

[Sar]

buff caster buff

[Berder]

In terms of average damage output, this is slightly worse than an orb guardian if you have 30/30 defenses, and it has twice the average HP. Then when you account for the huge spikiness of damage which means you have to quit fighting if your HP drops below 120, meleeing this thing is easily like fighting 4+ orb guardians in succession, depending on your max HP. The bottom line is, you probably cannot melee this without incurring a risk of instant death.

[Sar]

The bottom line is, you probably cannot melee this.

is that a challenge

[Berder]

yes

[Sar]

accepted

btw I've just read somebody died to a zombie jugg on D:9

they probably shouldn't appear this early even in undead states, unless it was some kinda evil vault

edit: it was actually D:15, I've been misled

[onget]

need hell juggernaut

[nago]

The bottom line is, you probably cannot melee this.

is that a challenge

I've tabbed one yesterday with a char who found it backtracking from depths:5 . I choose to haste just because it's fast and I didn't want to risk in my first encounter, but I suffered very little damage and risked practically nothing - from my first impression he doesn't look much different for a tab char from an ettin who's harmless until doing 100+ hp dmg in one turn except you need like much more time to kill it, so he's kinda riskier to tackle because there is certainly more space for bad rolls.
They seriously need some ranged form of attack, eventually even limited - large rocks would suit them fine I think - otherwise they're going to be helluva annoying tab fodder most of times.

[gammafunk]

There's also the following interesting phenomenon:

  Code:

<Gretell> juggernaut skeleton (Z) | Spd: 13 | HD: 20 | HP: 128-156 | AC/EV: 14/3 | Dam: 116 | undead, evil, unbreathing | Res: magic(26), cold++, poison+++, drown, rot+++, neg+++, torm | Vul: holy++ | XP: 1426 | Sz: Giant | Int: brainless.

<Gretell> juggernaut zombie (Z) | Spd: 13 | HD: 20 | HP: 154-188 | AC/EV: 18/5 | Dam: 116 | undead, evil, unbreathing | Res: magic(26), cold++, poison+++, drown, rot, neg+++, torm | Vul: holy++ | XP: 1600 | Sz: Giant | Int: brainless.

<Gretell> spectral juggernaut (Z) | Spd: 15 | HD: 20 | HP: 108-136 | AC/EV: 22/5 | Dam: 116 | undead, evil, see invisible, fly, unbreathing | Res: magic(immune), cold, poison+++, drown, rot+++, neg+++, torm, napalm | Vul: holy++ | XP: 1638 | Sz: Giant | Int: brainless.

<Gretell> juggernaut simulacrum (Z) | Spd: 13 | HD: 20 | HP: 48-76 | AC/EV: 18/5 | Dam: 116(cold:20-59) | undead, evil, unbreathing | Res: magic(26), cold+++, poison+++, drown, rot+++, neg+++, torm | Vul: fire, holy++ | XP: 958 | Sz: Giant | Int: brainless.


Note the lack of (atk: 450%) in all of those, so the derived forms are generally more dangerous than the original. We'll have to fixed that.

There's been two deaths to juggernaut skels/zombies in my depths entry vault on D:15 (it shouldn't be generating skels/zombies from that deep in Depths due to an unrelated bug). But there was also this unfortunate soul on cwz:

  Code:

<gammafunk> .jugged x=dam
<Sequell>3. [dam=83] Dazguss the Sorcerer (L22 DEFE of Vehumet), slain by a juggernaut zombie (kmap: hangedman_screamer) on Depths:3 on 2015-09-02 10:24:24, with 424817 points after 61670 turns and 4:02:21.


[byrel]

So this is a shield buff right? It's AC is unfortunately high for 1-handers, but shield's aren't damage dependent, and don't care about the fighter tag. On top of that, kiting with poison and haste sounds straightforward (and stabbers without blowguns by depths are mildly insane.) It's just another consumable-burner in depths. Which is fine. And hey, maybe shrikes and the sadism of the layouts won't be the only scary-as-hell things in depths. I like it when some monsters are actually scary.

[bel]

I haven't encountered this yet (not much time to play recently), but if the intent is to add more caustic shrike-like monsters in Depths, that is fine. The main problem with shrikes I have is that they are wildly out of whack with the rest of Depths. If that is supposed to be more near the normal, I am fine with it. Having more consumable usage in Depths is a good thing, you have too many consumables at that point.

[Sandman25]

Stupid question. Why do we have the data in sequel and not in the game? I mean why do devs put it in sequel if they don't want players to see it in the game for making decisions? Even as an option for advanced players so it will not affect new players.

[nordetsa]

Stupid question. Why do we have the data in sequel and not in the game? I mean why do devs put it in sequel if they don't want players to see it in the game for making decisions? Even as an option for advanced players so it will not affect new players.

This has come up number of times, but for some reason people keep saying it's never gonna be implemented...

And reading https://crawl.develz.org/wiki/doku.php? ... ng:wont_do this page certainly doesn't help. Maybe I'm dumb, but I for one think crawl can benefit from these data. Even the fact that this new monster can deal up to 120 damage would help a lot for many players.

[Sandman25]

This has come up number of times, but for some reason people keep saying it's never gonna be implemented...

And reading https://crawl.develz.org/wiki/doku.php? ... ng:wont_do this page certainly doesn't help. Maybe I'm dumb, but I for one think crawl can benefit from these data. Even the fact that this new monster can deal up to 120 damage would help a lot for many players.

Yes, I even submitted a patch that displayed AC/EV in monster description if there is a non-default option in RC file.
I remember a dev (dpeg?) saying that then experienced players would tell new players to use the setting and it is bad for new player (I don't know why). Note that currently new players ask for the same info and get a link to sequel from a dev. I have several versions:
1) devs want to punish players for playing offline without internet connection.
2) devs enjoy watching big number of players in #crawl
3) devs want to create some elite club of players who play better because they use sequel and don't die to unknown monsters ("Caustik Shrike? It should be weak, it's only Depths 2 but let's check it in sequel anyway").
4) devs hate players and enjoy that they must use alt-tab and type unnecessary commands
Not sure about last one of course, mostly kidding.

[byrel]

("Caustik Shrike? It should be weak, it's only Depths 2 but let's check it in sequel anyway").

Isn't that more like 'It's something new to Depths? What irreconcilably evil thing did the devs invent this time?'

Like, who thinks of depths as 'only'? It's a step up in difficulty from vaults, and it's more dangerous than Zot1-4. It's also the most fun branch for me, so I'm not complaining, but who thinks that monsters should be tame there?

More apropos to your post as a whole, I don't think the devs are 100% agreed on everything. So they seem a bit inconsistent because there's some compromising going on.

[Sandman25]

("Caustik Shrike? It should be weak, it's only Depths 2 but let's check it in sequel anyway").

Isn't that more like 'It's something new to Depths? What irreconcilably evil thing did the devs invent this time?'

Like, who thinks of depths as 'only'? It's a step up in difficulty from vaults, and it's more dangerous than Zot1-4. It's also the most fun branch for me, so I'm not complaining, but who thinks that monsters should be tame there?

More apropos to your post as a whole, I don't think the devs are 100% agreed on everything. So they seem a bit inconsistent because there's some compromising going on.

Come on, it was just an example. There is no way for player to know that Antaeus has 200% HP of Ereshkigal, and both guard Hell runes.

[nordetsa]

Come on, it was just an example. There is no way for player to know that Antaeus has 200% HP of Ereshkigal, and both guard Hell runes.

  Code:

stone giant (C) | Spd: 10 | HD: 16 | HP: 72-105 | AC/EV: 12/2 | Dam: 45 | items, doors | Res: magic(80), drown | XP: 1423 | Sz: Giant | Int: normal.

  Code:

caustic shrike (b) | Spd: 20 | HD: 18 | HP: 101-135 | AC/EV: 10/18 | Dam: 36(acid:7d3) | see invisible, fly | Res: magic(80), fire, cold, blind | XP: 4916 | Sz: tiny | Int: animal.

Or that a shiny metal bird has actually more hp than a huge buffed stone man.

Honestly, if the game removed certain things such as secret doors for being too 'spoilery' then I don't understand why adding actual numerical values for monsters would be considered bad. Having to look up to crawlwiki/learndb or ask help on the forum seems like an ultimate spoiler for me.

[Sandman25]

Also note one of the most important info - monster damage is hidden in the game, there is no even bar like for AC/EV. Those Dam: 45, Dam: 36(acid:7d3) and we even have executioner with multiple attacks who is almost harmless to player with high AC but there is no way to know it except by getting attacked (or using sequel/wiki, of course).

[byrel]

Don't get me wrong; I 100% agree with displaying AC, EV and attack numbers. I just think the inconsistency between handing the info out in one place, but refusing to add the info elsewhere is due to dev disagreement more than anything else.

[bel]

Of the stuff which the OP sought, only HP is not visible in any way. AC/EV are available as bars, resistances are shown, speed (and also attack speed in general, I don't know about this particular monster) are also shown vaguely.

I read the OP as wanting exact numbers, which is a different story, this is why they were directed to gretell.

[Sandman25]

Of the stuff which the OP sought, only HP is not visible in any way. AC/EV are available as bars, resistances are shown, speed (and also attack speed in general, I don't know about this particular monster) are also shown vaguely.

I read the OP as wanting exact numbers, which is a different story, this is why they were directed to gretell.

Do you know how those AC/EV bars work? Are they linear or similar to spell power?

Spoiler: show

I learned how they work only while working for my patch, before that I didn't know that both are linear with 5 AC and 6 EV step.

[byrel]

Lol. I thought they were logarithmic. If I actually care about AC, I go to the wiki.

[ThreeInvisibleDucks]

I read the OP as wanting exact numbers, which is a different story, this is why they were directed to gretell.

But why is that? The most useful monster stat I could use in-game is max damage to know whether I run the risk of dying to a single blow. Sure, that info is available elsewhere, but it's tedious to break the flow and switch out of the game to look up something that crucial.

[dpeg]

This has come up number of times, but for some reason people keep saying it's never gonna be implemented...

And reading https://crawl.develz.org/wiki/doku.php? ... ng:wont_do this page certainly doesn't help. Maybe I'm dumb, but I for one think crawl can benefit from these data. Even the fact that this new monster can deal up to 120 damage would help a lot for many players.

Yes, I even submitted a patch that displayed AC/EV in monster description if there is a non-default option in RC file.
I remember a dev (dpeg?) saying that then experienced players would tell new players to use the setting and it is bad for new player (I don't know why). Note that currently new players ask for the same info and get a link to sequel from a dev. I have several versions:
1) devs want to punish players for playing offline without internet connection.
2) devs enjoy watching big number of players in #crawl
3) devs want to create some elite club of players who play better because they use sequel and don't die to unknown monsters ("Caustik Shrike? It should be weak, it's only Depths 2 but let's check it in sequel anyway").
4) devs hate players and enjoy that they must use alt-tab and type unnecessary commands
Not sure about last one of course, mostly kidding.

I am certain I actually explained this to you. It's okay for you to disagree with what I said, or to forget about it. I don't think it's okay to come up with a garbage list like this just because you couln't be arsed to ask again or look it up.

I believe that numbers distract from games. There is no question that seasoned players want all the information they could possibly use. That does not mean that the game should give away all this information, and it certainly does not mean that the information has to be numerical. (Because we're talking about a computer game, everything boils down to numbers. But because Crawl has not been designed with this level of clarity in mind, I don't see a feasible way to convey all, or even most, mechanics via numbers or formulas.)

As an example: whenever you provide a number (such as "monster has AC 20" or "your piety is 185"), you have to provide the reference frame. This is easy for piety ("185/200") but harder for other numbers -- whenever further functions come into play (like stepdown on spellpower) or the situation is not as symmetric as a player might guess (monster AC).

This is why I believe qualitiative feedback is generally superiour: do people really want to add up monster damage (which can be complicated, if it has several, randomised attacks and a funny weapon)? Of course, the answer is definitely a resounding Yes! for some -- but if we did that, we'd tell everyone, including our new players, that understanding and using these numbers is really important. It isn't. Not to play the game, and neither to win the game. It is important to eke out the last bits, but that affects only very few players (places like this forum probably give a skewed picture about how few players actually play on that level, I'd say). Those players resorting to the source code or Sequell is natural and not a problem at all. Myself, I don't want to chase numbers all the time, I want to chase dragons.


In an ideal world, a game would be designed in such a way that problems like this don't occur: sleak and simple mechanics etc. Brogue does it. Crawl is too old, it really sits on the other end of the spectrum. We are away of the issue, and we are chipping away at this: monster 'xv' gives so much useful information these days -- compare DCSS 0.6 or so to see what has happened. The more recent addition to display hex percentages should be very welcome: it is very clear to parse, and helps tremendously. Discussing pros and cons of new and old numbers is fine.

[Sandman25]

dpeg

Yes, I remember our conversation. But we didn't mention sequel at that time. How is using sequel different from using a new option which I suggested? New players don't know about sequel/option, new players can ask for detailed info and get a link to sequel OR a link to description of the option. The in-game description is much more user friendly, it is guaranteed to be up-to-date with version the player is playing (I am playing an old trunk version, can you guarantee that sequel shows relevant data?) and it makes the game EASIER for new players.

Garbage is when devs are hiding that Ettin can do 116 damage per attack (with 2 dire flails, with GSC it will be even more) or Azure Jelly can do 272 damage during 1 turn because "new player can be distracted by numbers". You have already confessed that you enjoy new players dying, please stop talking about caring about new players.

[mps]

Yo dpeg, not to tag team you or anything, but have you guys ever considered linearizing and/or otherwise simplifying some of the formulas that make the actual numbers so inscrutable?

[byrel]

Garbage is when devs are hiding that Ettin can do 116 damage per attack (with 2 dire flails, with GSC it will be even more) or Azure Jelly can do 272 damage during 1 turn because "new player can be distracted by numbers". You have already confessed that you enjoy new players dying, please stop talking about caring about new players.

I enjoy dying if I learn from it. Do I not care about myself? I think you're being a bit hostile Sandman... While I agree that a lot of numbers that aren't shown could be (just like hex percentages are now; that works beautifully!) it's also true that there can and is legitimate, sincere disagreement about what will and won't be confusing.

You imputed bad motives to the devs in both of your last two posts; it's far more likely they see a difference as significant that you don't, than that they are simply trying to bolster the number of IRC players or that they dislike new players.

On a slightly different topic, how is monster AC asymmetric with player AC? I though the calculations were effectively the same...

[duvessa]

Jeez, I thought gammafunk's first post in this thread was a made-up example and not a real monster that's actually in the game. What the hell is that thing supposed to accomplish other than making crawl look bad

[Sandman25]

I enjoy dying if I learn from it. Do I not care about myself? I think you're being a bit hostile Sandman...

Yes, I am hostile. Last time I used the word I wanted to use to describe some actions by devs I was asked to edit my message so I am not going to repeat that mistake. There are some narrow-minded or stubborn or evil actions of devs (all these words are ok, right?).
We have all the data in sequel/wiki, right? We can even add a link from the game to open browser with corresponding data to make it slightly easier for players who care, right? You know, user-friendliness, action time, error-prone etc. We can even add this data directly into the game without need to have a browser, right? You know, decrease server load, guarantee being up-to-date with game version, save electricity and resources for environment. But no, using sequel is ok and using in-game description is not ok.
It is especially angering me because they recognized the problems and improved description of player ghosts, added AC/EV bars but no, they don't want to make life of players too easy. So they will never add 66% chance to hit a goblin with Flame Tongue as DEFE, they will never add 45% chance to Control Skeleton Warrior, they will never add 70% chance to Mass Confuse an Ettin.

[Sar]

imo the solution is to nuke sequell

[Sandman25]

imo the solution is to nuke sequell

That would be awesome to stop hypocrisy. If devs want new players to play without spoilers, they should remove an easy way to get spoilers and probably balance the game around that. I suspect we can get HP bar for monsters and some monsters will be nerfed damage-wise.

[byrel]

Jeez, I thought gammafunk's first post in this thread was a made-up example and not a real monster that's actually in the game. What the hell is that thing supposed to accomplish other than making crawl look bad

Burn consumables. Also possibly kill people who don't, or don't have any due to too weak of a build or too many earlier mistakes.

Sandman, simply because the devs disagree with you about what user-friendly means isn't a good reason to be hostile. You can respectfully disagree, you know. You can even say that they're crippling the experience for new players respectfully. Hostility isn't warranted simply because they're wrong...

[Berder]

The bottom line is, you probably cannot melee this.

is that a challenge

I've tabbed one yesterday with a char who found it backtracking from depths:5 . I choose to haste just because it's fast and I didn't want to risk in my first encounter, but I suffered very little damage and risked practically nothing - from my first impression he doesn't look much different for a tab char from an ettin who's harmless until doing 100+ hp dmg in one turn except you need like much more time to kill it, so he's kinda riskier to tackle because there is certainly more space for bad rolls.
They seriously need some ranged form of attack, eventually even limited - large rocks would suit them fine I think - otherwise they're going to be helluva annoying tab fodder most of times.

You got lucky. Their average damage per 10 auts is higher than an orb guardian; it's not just about the unlucky spikes. They also have a much higher chance of dealing near their max damage than an ettin does, because they have only one attack instead of two, and it's reduced by AC only once, and their to-hit is almost double that of an ettin.

[byrel]

You got lucky. Their average damage per 10 auts is higher than an orb guardian; it's not just about the unlucky spikes. They also have a much higher chance of dealing near their max damage than an ettin does, because they have only one attack instead of two, and it's reduced by AC only once, and their to-hit is much higher.

I dunno. I had no trouble with them unhasted (only condensation shield up) on my MfVM, just tabbing them. I also have almost 80 total defense, so... that's pretty good. And a bardiche of freezing. I did berserk for the zombie I met in Crypt, thanks to this thread. I suppose it's possible I got lucky, but I suspect that they aren't that scary vs characters with awesome defenses. 35+ EV still makes orb guardians miss a lot in spite of the soldier tag.

[Berder]

Yeah, if you have a defense sum of 80 that's a diff story. I compared them to orb guardians. If you can melee an orb guardian while only losing a small fraction of HP, you probably will be ok against the juggernaut.

[Sandman25]

Sandman, simply because the devs disagree with you about what user-friendly means isn't a good reason to be hostile.

The problem is that user-friendliness is objective and can be measured, there is no such thing as "disagree about user-friendliness" as there is no such thing as "disagree about 5 ms being smaller than 7 ms". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usability

[byrel]

Sandman, simply because the devs disagree with you about what user-friendly means isn't a good reason to be hostile.

The problem is that user-friendliness is objective and can be measured, there is no such thing as "disagree about user-friendliness" as there is no such thing as "disagree about 5 ms being smaller than 7 ms". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usability

I have to disagree. Usability can only be measured by proxy, and is user-dependent. What's more usable for one user may be less for another. There is no objectively most-user-friendly interface for a given task, and there's no way of accurately measuring user-friendlyness (given that responses are governed significantly by the specific psychology of the subject.) I'll freely admit that useful and informative statistics can be obtained. But that's not the same thing as directly measuring it.

Edit: regardless, what I said still stands. Someone being wrong is not a very good reason for hostility.

[Sandman25]

I have to disagree. Usability can only be measured by proxy, and is user-dependent. What's more usable for one user may be less for another. There is no objectively most-user-friendly interface for a given task, and there's no way of accurately measuring user-friendlyness (given that responses are governed significantly by the specific psychology of the subject.) I'll freely admit that useful and informative statistics can be obtained. But that's not the same thing as directly measuring it.

Edit: regardless, what I said still stands. Someone being wrong is not a very good reason for hostility.

You can measure how much time it takes, how many actions user should do, how easy it is to do a mistake, how many resources it requires from software, how easy it is to support when adding/changing/deleting monsters, how it works with different version of crawl etc. Also I am not trying to find the most user-friendly layout or method, I am comparing 2 methods of getting the same info. I am IT specialist with almost 20 years of experience in software design and development, you can trust me here

About your edit. I tried to be nice, it didn't work. I suspect current method will not work either (it is hard for people to admit that a hostile person is right, I think I will be ignored) but I had to try. Sometimes it is useful to cause emotional storm to make people re-estimate something

[bel]

I read the OP as wanting exact numbers, which is a different story, this is why they were directed to gretell.

But why is that? The most useful monster stat I could use in-game is max damage to know whether I run the risk of dying to a single blow. Sure, that info is available elsewhere, but it's tedious to break the flow and switch out of the game to look up something that crucial.

I have managed to play so far without caring about whether the max damage is more than my HP, and plan to keep doing so. Crawl combat is too insanely swingy for such calculations to matter in general. I have a general sense of danger at any particular point, that is good enough for me. Maybe it isn't for you, so you are welcome to source dive or use wiki or whatever (I do both, but not for this purpose).

[byrel]

You can measure how much time it takes, how many actions user should do, how easy it is to do a mistake, how many resources it requires from software, how easy it is to support when adding/changing/deleting monsters, how it works with different version of crawl etc. Also I am not trying to find the most user-friendly layout or method, I am comparing 2 methods of getting the same info. I am IT specialist with almost 20 years of experience in software design and development, you can trust me here

Oddly enough, I'm a software engineer... And I agree you can measure all those things, and they're all proxies to usability. I also admit that I have one death due to taking 80 damage in one turn from an ettin when I didn't realize that was possible (a spriggan I think). I think having some idea of the melee damage potential would be good. But I also agree that simply handing them the maximum possible is probably misleading, since the chance of rolling that is quite low. I'm not sure what should be displayed; probably a 99th percentile damage or some such.

About your edit. I tried to be nice, it didn't work. I suspect current method will not work either (it is hard for people to admit that a hostile person is right, I think I will be ignored) but I had to try. Sometimes it is useful to cause emotional storm to make people re-estimate something

Sometimes. But that really doesn't stop it from being rude. And when you resort to inventing motivations which are almost certainly false for them, it's not really acceptable from my angle.