Spider Stomper
Posts: 200
Joined: Sunday, 11th May 2014, 11:26
Although the central place for design discussion is ##crawl-dev on freenode, some may find it helpful to discuss requests and suggestions here first.
Spider Stomper
Posts: 200
Joined: Sunday, 11th May 2014, 11:26
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
sdynet wrote:This limits the growth potential of the player. More easily, future players mean that they cannot be stronger than the current player when they have all the resistance one by one. This makes their victory *more* difficult.
Spider Stomper
Posts: 200
Joined: Sunday, 11th May 2014, 11:26
VeryAngryFelid wrote:Exactly opposite is true. Instead of using rings of slaying/AC/EV/Str/Dex new players choose extra rF+ and rC+ because they see that their resistances are not maxed yet.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
sdynet wrote:You're right in the early game. However, in Elven Halls, Vault, Depth, Realm of Zot(not to mention in Pandemonium, Hell), the fire/ice damage is more fatal. ac? is it always guaranteed to reduce damage by 17%? 2pip is guaranteed. 3pip guarantees a 30% reduction in damage. hmm... If the number of AC/EV/Str/Dex is 8-10, I will seriously think about it. If the item has that level, it might be worth thinking about wearing it. Otherwise, I would choose a guaranteed 17-30% reduction in damage.
Blades Runner
Posts: 616
Joined: Thursday, 25th October 2012, 03:19
VeryAngryFelid wrote:sdynet
Did you miss OP? It will be easier for new players to win if they stop paying so much attention to second and especially third pip.
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Saturday, 10th December 2016, 15:38
VeryAngryFelid wrote:Exactly opposite is true. Instead of using rings of slaying/AC/EV/Str/Dex new players choose extra rF+ and rC+ because they see that their resistances are not maxed yet.
Scuka wrote:VeryAngryFelid wrote:sdynet wrote:Exactly opposite is true. Instead of using rings of slaying/AC/EV/Str/Dex new players choose extra rF+ and rC+ because they see that their resistances are not maxed yet.
As a casual player who occasionally plays on weekends and doesn't want to scrounge wiki articles in search for damage calculation formulas, how do I make an educated decision between two pieces of gear that occupy the same slot?
How do I make a decision between an EV ring versus an rF+ ring?
How do I make a decision between a +1 flail or a +3 mace?
How do I make a decision between leveling up Str vs. Dex?
I can pose 20 other questions in a similar vein.
The problem is not the resistances or the amount of pips you can have on your character. That's just a minor symptom of a much larger problem.
The overarching problem in this game is that it tells you fuck all about your character and the equipment you're wearing.
For the most part, all you get are vague qualitative descriptions that help you in no way whatsoever to make decisions.
Blades Runner
Posts: 593
Joined: Tuesday, 11th December 2018, 19:14
VeryAngryFelid wrote:sdynet wrote:You're right in the early game. However, in Elven Halls, Vault, Depth, Realm of Zot(not to mention in Pandemonium, Hell), the fire/ice damage is more fatal. ac? is it always guaranteed to reduce damage by 17%? 2pip is guaranteed. 3pip guarantees a 30% reduction in damage. hmm... If the number of AC/EV/Str/Dex is 8-10, I will seriously think about it. If the item has that level, it might be worth thinking about wearing it. Otherwise, I would choose a guaranteed 17-30% reduction in damage.
Percentage reduction is not a big deal unless we are talking about orb of fire. Let's take fire giant, Bolt of Fire (3d25). That's about 37 damage on average without rF, 19 damage with rF+, 8 damage with rF+++. In many cases you can completely avoid damage due to EV or AC, then extra rF++ is useless.
Abyss Ambulator
Posts: 1131
Joined: Tuesday, 4th January 2011, 15:03
Blades Runner
Posts: 593
Joined: Tuesday, 11th December 2018, 19:14
sanka wrote:I think that OOF is currently balanced for rF+. At least they are way too easy with rF+++.
Blades Runner
Posts: 616
Joined: Thursday, 25th October 2012, 03:19
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
Blades Runner
Posts: 593
Joined: Tuesday, 11th December 2018, 19:14
VeryAngryFelid wrote:Note that we don't have any items which make iron giants or other very scary monsters suddenly deal just 20% of their damage. Such suggestion would be rejected as ridiculous and yet this is what we have with fire/ice monsters.
Tomb Titivator
Posts: 853
Joined: Thursday, 29th August 2013, 18:39
sdynet wrote:I'm afraid this will make the game more difficult. Not everyone plays games like you play chess. Not everyone cares about the winning rate and the winning streak. Even now, DCSS is difficult. Don't make it any more difficult.
Always be mindful of newbies.
Swamp Slogger
Posts: 182
Joined: Monday, 2nd July 2018, 16:47
Location: United States
TheMeInTeam wrote:They can certainly still kill you at rF+++.
TheMeInTeam wrote:You need consumables to run (no guarantee of escape when using one either), are under constant threat of malmute, and a chunk of some of their magic ignores rF.
TheMeInTeam wrote:Let them do that much more fire damage and you greatly skew how blaster casters vs say stabbers perform against them for example. Considering the relative difficulty presented by them to these builds at present, if player nerf is a goal it would make more sense to nerf the blaster approach rather than the stabber, who struggles to have any answers aside from maybe maneuvering so an isolated OOF won't kill summoned mana vipers.
TheMeInTeam wrote:OOF is still much harder at rF+++ than even two ancient liches that are silenced also. Having a proper countermeasure that is significant and takes some sort of investment/tradeoff is a routine part of crawl.
TheMeInTeam wrote:Even beyond OOF, you have entire hell branches dedicated to damage types (fire, ice, negative in particular). Dropping these all to a single pip would also greatly impact what builds work in these areas.
TheMeInTeam wrote:If newbie trap is the problem in question that can be more easily mitigated.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 6454
Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06
stormdragon wrote:TheMeInTeam wrote:If newbie trap is the problem in question that can be more easily mitigated.
It's not the only factor that the OP's proposal would improve, but regardless, if you think it is easy to mitigate perhaps you could share your suggestion to mitigate it?
Snake Sneak
Posts: 111
Joined: Saturday, 10th March 2018, 18:00
Blades Runner
Posts: 593
Joined: Tuesday, 11th December 2018, 19:14
This is really hard to imagine. It's like getting killed - in zot - by a deep elf blademaster that drank a potion of resistance. Other than holding down the 's' key, the only explanation I can come up with is holding down the arrow key attacking with something like a rapier.
Malmutate is not a big deal in Zot. It's also MR resistible. Other than that, there is nothing an OOF can do that ignores rF.
I don't understand this. Regarding the premise, who is suggesting increasing the amount of damage OOFs do?
Yes, on the face of it a hasted cacodemon is a bigger threat than a shadow dragon; however, being silenced has inherent drawbacks on the player that rF+++ does not. Regardless, what is the relevance of the comparison? Are you suggesting that the game is better if for every enemy there exists a so-called proper countermeasure to not just manage but trivialize that enemy?
This is not true at all except possibly for Cocytus. Besides, extended is not subject to the same design philosophy as the main game - it's a set of optional bonus levels, it can and should be mercilessly hard, and it really doesn't belong in discussions that affect the main game.
It's not the only factor that the OP's proposal would improve, but regardless, if you think it is easy to mitigate perhaps you could share your suggestion to mitigate it?
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
TheMeInTeam wrote:VeryAngryFelid wrote:Note that we don't have any items which make iron giants or other very scary monsters suddenly deal just 20% of their damage. Such suggestion would be rejected as ridiculous and yet this is what we have with fire/ice monsters.
Your comparison example misrepresents the tradeoffs in crawl!
You have AC, GDR, blocking, and evasion for iron giant's physical attacks...even silence for iron shot. With these you could survive near an iron giant for a long time, your expected damage/turn compared to not having them can approach 20% or maybe even less. Reflection can actually cause damage to the iron giant. With enough of this stuff you have a reasonable chance of killing one by standing in one place doing nothing...not the best example of a situation to counter-example the utility of rF+++.
These are not all in play for some sources of elemental damage. AC can matter for example, but OOFs don't care about silence and their fireballs don't care about blocking. Hell effects don't care about these either. Some of them also don't care about evasion, another damage mitigation that is very relevant to your iron giant example.
The situation is actually the reverse of what you say; removing the higher pips of elemental resist would create a scenario where big damage is uniquely limited in mitigation. This may or may not be a bad thing, but it's best to keep the reality of this in mind. Right now there are more countermeasures to iron giants than OOFs or tormentors.
Blades Runner
Posts: 593
Joined: Tuesday, 11th December 2018, 19:14
Swamp Slogger
Posts: 182
Joined: Monday, 2nd July 2018, 16:47
Location: United States
TheMeInTeam wrote:Just need more than 1. They can still hit for ~20 with rF+++ (with one attack variant ignoring multiple usual defensive measures), and it is not trivial to run from them. This is still more DPS than anything else there for characters with good AC/EV/SH, barring ancient lich magic which has a few hard counters.
TheMeInTeam wrote:It usually isn't, but can end your run if you get teleportitis and can't be rid of it fast enough.
TheMeInTeam wrote:If you remove extra elemental resistance, you globally increase potential damage of monsters that rely on elemental attacks.
TheMeInTeam wrote:The purpose of my statement was to refute the mistaken notion from VeryAngryFelid that having 80% damage reduction against a particular enemy as a result of what is likely multiple pieces of equipment is an outlandish thing that should/would be rejected as a matter of course. The fact of the matter is that this is possible against nearly all enemies through one means or another, with torment being the most rare resist to get down to 20% damage (Kiku ability).
TheMeInTeam wrote:Note that rF+++ also has drawbacks. In fact it is implied to be a "newbie trap", which is impossible if wearing rF+++ did not have significant drawbacks.
TheMeInTeam wrote:That's silly. Virtually any mechanic change will influence the main game and extended. There is a difference between difficulty and changes to a game that centralize/trivialize decision making.
TheMeInTeam wrote:A core premise of the OP's reasoning was that +++ resists are unclear but are also beginner traps. This discussion has apparently shifted to the concept that +++ provides too much damage mitigation - a non-trivial change to reasoning! Something can't be both a beginner trap and too strong at the same time. It might be one or the other depending on context, but that suggests using it is a *meaningful choice* in the game.
TheMeInTeam wrote:If you reduce the +++ to +, it will trivialize gear choice to at least a degree...and despite initial assertions otherwise there is clearly some incentive to utilize +++ sometimes and not other times.
TheMeInTeam wrote:Have the UI provide sufficient information such that an unspoiled player can anticipate the relative benefits of gear in advance. This seems to go against some of the stated design intentions, and I disagree with those particular ones. Nevertheless, it's an option and would do more to mitigate newbie traps than what amounts to a rework of resistances and likely multiple enemies/areas.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 6454
Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06
stormdragon wrote:This would be nice, but unless you have a more specific idea, nobody has put forward a feasible way to improve the defense information given to the user.
Siegurt wrote:One alternate to the OP that I can think of that would mitigate extra pips being a newbie trap would be to display the net percentage reduction of damage rather than just showing pips.
Blades Runner
Posts: 616
Joined: Thursday, 25th October 2012, 03:19
stormdragon wrote:Ah, so that's what you meant when you said OOFs can kill you even with rF+++; you meant multiple OOFs. As you probably know, in crawl, fighting multiple depth-appropriate non-pack monsters is supposed to be a big deal no matter how prepared you are - it doesn't mean the monster is at the upper limit of difficulty.
And the rF+++ DPS is definitely not more DPS than anything else there. If you just look at fast enemies, most of them will usually hit harder: electric golems, death cobs, orb guardians, maybe storm dragons.
stormdragon wrote:I guess this is the core of your argument that you didn't mention before - gear decisions. I would say that the additional pips after the first have so little value that the gear decisions you perceive don't really exist to an experienced player. These "decisions" are what I and others are calling newbie traps.
stormdragon wrote:I see that you want to discuss the ramifications on extended in this GDD proposal and you think it is silly not to. Just so you know, new players don't make it to extended, and most old players choose not to go to extended; the players interested in extended are the middle players trying it for the first time or few times, and some highscore enthusiasts.
stormdragon wrote:This would be nice, but unless you have a more specific idea, nobody has put forward a feasible way to improve the defense information given to the user. The complexity of the damage and accuracy formulas are such that you can't accurately quantify a general benefit from defenses.
Spider Stomper
Posts: 200
Joined: Sunday, 11th May 2014, 11:26
stormdragon wrote:I see that you want to discuss the ramifications on extended in this GDD proposal and you think it is silly not to. Just so you know, new players don't make it to extended, and most old players choose not to go to extended; the players interested in extended are the middle players trying it for the first time or few times, and some highscore enthusiasts.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
Swamp Slogger
Posts: 182
Joined: Monday, 2nd July 2018, 16:47
Location: United States
svendre wrote:Orbs of fire on Zot5 are pretty difficult to not pull as a pack, and along with a lot of other things at once. Orc priests often come in packs, so would you say the only thing that matters is their individual danger when balancing them?
svendre wrote:I'd rather fight all those other enemies before an OOF for a variety of reasons. They blink, are damaged by various brands (vampiric, holy, etc.), you could blink and slam a door shut on a dragon... It's pretty limited what you can do to Orbs.
svendre wrote:I could care less about highscores, I've won many times, and I play extended almost every game.
svendre wrote:...Mutations can absolutely get you killed. How is that even in question? Slamming potions gives you no guarantee you won't make the set better and you might make things worse.
svendre wrote:I have plenty of experience and I don't consider additional pips to be worthless. An experienced player doesn't necessarily pick one set of gear and wear it for every branch and encounter. Experience teaches you the value of planning, preparation, and adapting as the game progresses. A good player can leverage strengths and minimize weaknesses dynamically.
svendre wrote:This isn't true at all. There are several displays in the game which can show numbers instead of ++++ symbols. Additionally, it has been suggested that because of the complexity of various formulae in calculating damage, that the game show the numeric amount of damage which is delivered or received and let players get a more refined notion from that.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 6454
Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06
stormdragon wrote:I saw Siegurt's suggestion about show elemental resistance numbers. The problem is that when choosing gear, you're mainly comparing resistances to AC/EV, and players don't know how much AC/EV are worth (unless using fsim or observing the game scientifically), so they don't have the information needed to compare. AC/EV/SH are the defenses I was talking about that we don't have any ideas on how to better convey to the user. You and Siegurt use "defenses" to include "resistances", so I guess I used the wrong word, sorry.
Blades Runner
Posts: 616
Joined: Thursday, 25th October 2012, 03:19
stormdragon wrote:To an extent, yes, it is location dependent. Let me give an example. suppose I had 4 leather armors, one at +0 and rF+++, one at +1 and rF++, one at +2 and rF+, and one just +3, and I had no other source of rF. In D and most places, it would be a close call between the latter two armors. In lair I would absolutely prefer the +3. I would consider wearing one of the former two in a volcano, but nowhere else. Tangentially, I would hold on to the rF+++ one for pseudo-tactical usage, so that if I see a sleeping fire enemy - fire elemental or something - I can take a step back, change clothes, and then fight it, then change back to whatever my regular armor is (this is not the kind of gear choice I was talking about, but since you mentioned different gear for different encounters, I guess this is what you refer to). To me, the only real (non-obvious) decision was between the +2 rF+ leather versus the plain +3 leather. That choice would not be removed by the proposal.
Before you say that I'm underestimating resistances, let me give another example, if I had four rings: AC+5, AC+5, AC+4 rF+, and rF+++, then I would usually wear the first two, I would drop the third, and carry around the fourth. In this case, the fourth is better despite having 4 less AC than the third, because rings are easily swappable; unlike body armor, I'll never be stuck at low AC, so I may as well use the most specialized option when I need it. But again, to me this is obvious and not a decision.
Would you choose differently?
Blades Runner
Posts: 593
Joined: Tuesday, 11th December 2018, 19:14
stormdragon wrote:Ah, so that's what you meant when you said OOFs can kill you even with rF+++; you meant multiple OOFs. As you probably know, in crawl, fighting multiple depth-appropriate non-pack monsters is supposed to be a big deal no matter how prepared you are - it doesn't mean the monster is at the upper limit of difficulty.
And the rF+++ DPS is definitely not more DPS than anything else there. If you just look at fast enemies, most of them will usually hit harder: electric golems, death cobs, orb guardians, maybe storm dragons.
You may be technically correct, I am not sure how low the minimum time is between contracting teleportitis and having it trigger. But considering the usual amount of time it takes teleportitis to kick in, the relative quickness of fighting an OOF, and the abundance of potions of mutation in the game, if that actually happened I would be really interested in seeing how.
That's only true for entities that would have had extra elemental resistance. The concern you raised about balance was that summons are not very effective against OOFs compared to other strategies and you didn't want the gap to widen. Obviously, it won't, because summons are not affected by the proposal. I think you knew this and knew that the concern was false when you decided to raise it.
I was asking you about your suggestion at the core of your argument: that having potential to trivialize select enemies is good for the game. Your answer is that you didn't mean to say that having it is good, you're just saying it exists in some cases and is not bad. Maybe my question was too vague, so let me be specific: Do you think it is good for the game if the player has the potential to trivialize any given enemy by wearing a specific gear combination, and if so, why?
The drawback of rF+++ (which is the opportunity cost of constraining your gear to get it, and usually manifests in the loss of some AC and/or EV) is significant but it is much smaller than the drawback of being silenced (not being able to use scrolls, god abilities, or spells). The reason that rF+++ is a newbie trap is because it presents itself to the player in a way that makes the benefits appear to be worth the drawbacks, when they generally are not. If there was a silence ego on body armor that presented itself to the player as a really great thing, then it too would be a newbie trap (of course, this is probably impossible because unlike rF+++, silence's drawbacks are obvious in nature and no one would believe that it's generally good for you). This is kind of related to what Siegurt and PseudoLoneWolf were saying about numbers - players can't know how much the loss of AC/EV to get those resistances matters, unless they wizmode test or pay long-term scientific attention to the variables in play. And as duvessa said, this is true even with a pip cap of 1.
I see that you want to discuss the ramifications on extended in this GDD proposal and you think it is silly not to. Just so you know, new players don't make it to extended, and most old players choose not to go to extended; the players interested in extended are the middle players trying it for the first time or few times, and some highscore enthusiasts.
Nobody said that wearing rF+++ gear was too strong of a strategy - it is generally a weak strategy, which is why it is a newbie trap (I say generally because sometimes you get it for no opportunity cost, such as if the game generates +5 boots of rF+++). This is because the set of monsters that it trivializes is very small, while the set of monsters it makes deadlier (because you usually have a high opportunity cost and give up AC/EV for those resistances) is very large.
The reason that the damage mitigation it provides may be too much is not because it's overpowered, but rather because it makes certain monsters boring/trivial, which is a bad thing when those monsters would otherwise be very challenging/exciting. OOFs and venom-dagger-Sonja are good examples, and there are many enemies with an ability duplicated in a different element (or an ability modified to do partial-elemental damage) to prevent this, such as Azrael, which is a lot of extra work in monster design for no real added depth.
I guess this is the core of your argument that you didn't mention before - gear decisions. I would say that the additional pips after the first have so little value that the gear decisions you perceive don't really exist to an experienced player. These "decisions" are what I and others are calling newbie traps.
This would be nice, but unless you have a more specific idea, nobody has put forward a feasible way to improve the defense information given to the user. The complexity of the damage and accuracy formulas are such that you can't accurately quantify a general benefit from defenses.
The OP's proposal would not need any enemies or areas to be reworked.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
TheMeInTeam wrote:- With rF+++, OOFs still do more damage than any other monster in Zot:5 in most practical 1v1 encounters.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 6454
Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06
VeryAngryFelid wrote:TheMeInTeam wrote:- With rF+++, OOFs still do more damage than any other monster in Zot:5 in most practical 1v1 encounters.
Can you please stop repeating this? Any monster in Zot 5 is way more dangerous than oof which deals 25 damage max to 0 AC character, it is weaker than hasted Death Yak (30 max damage per attack). That's not counting turns which are "wasted" on malmutate.Spoiler: show
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4478
Joined: Wednesday, 23rd October 2013, 07:56
VeryAngryFelid wrote:Killer Klown [...] can paralyse/distort etc. you
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
Sprucery wrote:VeryAngryFelid wrote:Killer Klown [...] can paralyse/distort etc. you
Are you sure about that?
Blades Runner
Posts: 593
Joined: Tuesday, 11th December 2018, 19:14
VeryAngryFelid wrote:TheMeInTeam wrote:- With rF+++, OOFs still do more damage than any other monster in Zot:5 in most practical 1v1 encounters.
Can you please stop repeating this? Any monster in Zot 5 is way more dangerous than oof which deals 25 damage max to 0 AC character, it is weaker than hasted Death Yak (30 max damage per attack). That's not counting turns which are "wasted" on malmutate.Spoiler: show
Barkeep
Posts: 4435
Joined: Tuesday, 11th January 2011, 12:28
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
TheMeInTeam wrote:I would rather see an orb of fire than two berserked orb guardians, but barring combo scenarios it's more trivial to fight or escape any single monster on Zot:5 compared to OOF, even at rF+++.
Blades Runner
Posts: 616
Joined: Thursday, 25th October 2012, 03:19
VeryAngryFelid wrote:TheMeInTeam wrote:I would rather see an orb of fire than two berserked orb guardians, but barring combo scenarios it's more trivial to fight or escape any single monster on Zot:5 compared to OOF, even at rF+++.
I see, you either have no idea what you are talking about or you have some irrational fear of oofs like I had for fiends. 2 monsters when each deals 67 damage with speed 21 to you seem less dangerous than a single monster which deals 0-25 damage with speed 15. In any case it does not make sense to continue discussing this with you.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
svendre wrote:I think you just aren't understanding his point of view (which I happen to share). You're omitting a bunch of other factors in your assessment. I'll name a few:
Orb guardians are susceptible to a variety of tactics that OOF are more resistant to. For example you could use a simple wand of paralysis and get one stuck in a corridor then do whatever you like. They don't have an area of effect attack like orbs, so summons would be an easier method of escaping from them. You can use vampiric weapon against them, they have weaker resists so this includes a ton of different spells as well. Two berserked orb guardians does not mean they can both hit you at once if you are in a corridor. The fact that they are berserked also means that the berserk can wear off eventually, leaving them with a slow effect (and thus easier to kill).
Etc. etc. etc., I could go on and on...
Barkeep
Posts: 4435
Joined: Tuesday, 11th January 2011, 12:28
Slime Squisher
Posts: 405
Joined: Sunday, 27th January 2019, 13:50
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 4432
Joined: Friday, 8th May 2015, 17:51
Blades Runner
Posts: 593
Joined: Tuesday, 11th December 2018, 19:14
VeryAngryFelid wrote:TheMeInTeam wrote:I would rather see an orb of fire than two berserked orb guardians, but barring combo scenarios it's more trivial to fight or escape any single monster on Zot:5 compared to OOF, even at rF+++.
I see, you either have no idea what you are talking about or you have some irrational fear of oofs like I had for fiends. 2 monsters when each deals 67 damage with speed 21 to you seem less dangerous than a single monster which deals 0-25 damage with speed 15. In any case it does not make sense to continue discussing this with you.
Split things off if the individual aspects each deserve the attention. If a thread needs to exist about "the most dangerous enemy in Z:5", "(re)balance OOFs", "rX+++ makes these enemies trivial" - make one. Seriously, are you trying to get a lock on this?
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 5382
Joined: Friday, 25th November 2011, 07:36
sdynet wrote:sanka wrote:I honestly think that a one pip=50% reduction system would be easier for new players because for new players clarity is way more important. Crawl is not hard for new players because they do not play it like chess, optimizing every single command. It is hard for them because they have no idea what matters and what does not, they have no idea how the game actually works.
Well, Do you think Newbies lose between 100 and 500 games because they don't understand this system? Currently, players understand the concept that it is advantageous to gain resistance even if they do not know the exact number. When they win their first victory, do they win because they are fully skilled in tactics? Ladies and gentlemen, did you already have the ability to score Winning streak on your first victory? Of course you are better than you were at first. But I think many of the resistance you got lucky helped. You may not be aware of it, but your argument is very harsh on the Newbie.
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Thursday, 6th October 2016, 15:14
Newbies will do things like wear a +0 randart helmet with rF+++ when they already had rF somewhere else, rather than just getting a +2 helmet of intelligence, which would probably be much better for them. Newbies also tend to under value things like a +3-4 ring of evasion/protection, which are actually very strong rings (I tend to think a +6 ring is "splashy" enough that newbies realize they're good).
Swamp Slogger
Posts: 139
Joined: Saturday, 10th January 2015, 22:27
sooheon wrote:So isn't the real problem the opacity of defensive stats?
Swamp Slogger
Posts: 139
Joined: Friday, 13th March 2015, 13:33
Blades Runner
Posts: 616
Joined: Thursday, 25th October 2012, 03:19
gameguard wrote:All this talk about OOF damage and no one mentions their extreme tankyness. They are still quite dangerous with rf+++ as fighting one usually means you are fighting a bunch of other shit because they are loud af and you cant lure them very far.
As far as rf is concerned, you never want to make significant tradeoffs in offense/ac/ev for extra pips. Potion of resistance exists.
Return to Game Design Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 86 guests