DCSS' wikipedia page lists potentially incorrect information

[adityarajbhatt]

Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon_Crawl_Stone_Soup (the wikipedia page) and search for "current total". You will see this :

The development team has also expressed a desire to maintain the current total length of the game, and so as new areas are added to the dungeon, old ones have been shortened or even removed to compensate.

It cites the Patch notes for DCSS 0.6.0, for some reason. Is this true? It would be bad for the game if it is, since the developers would constantly have to keep removing potentially fun areas in order to add new ones. I asked on IRC (##crawl) and people told me that the statement is not true. So I am going to edit the page, just wanted some opinions from here. Having an accurate Wikipedia page is very important since most people first check out a game from there before joining (at least true for the gamers I know).

P.S - This is my first post on the Tavern.

[jpeg]

The development team has also expressed a desire to maintain the current total length of the game, and so as new areas are added to the dungeon, old ones have been shortened or even removed to compensate.

This is very much true, and I actually think the pendulum has started to swing into the other direction, i.e. the game is getting shorter.

1.) To compensate for the addition of portal vaults (and loot/xp heavy mini vaults in general), the devteam started shortening branches several versions ago. Later, this was kept up even though no new portal vaults have been added in a while and I also think their number is capped by now. The Lair, Vaults, Elven Halls (possibly others?) used to be much longer. The Hive branch was even removed completely. As far as I know, the only branch that got longer was the Abyss.

2.) New branches do get added but they usually replace another branch of comparable depth and difficulty, so that in any given game you may get one or the other but not both. This is the case for the Lair subbranches Shoals/Swamp/Snake/Spider, of which you may only get two in any given game. I'm saying "usually" because I'm not sure what the Forest branch is supposed to replace, so that might end up being the first ever straight addition of a new branch in DCSS development.

[adityarajbhatt]

So, the wikipedia page is right? This shortening is not listed anywhere in the game's manual - philosophy section, http://crawl.develz.org/other/manual.ht ... pas-de-faq. Why do they have to keep the game short? I am not talking about 100+ levels in the main dungeon, but if something revulutionary as the Abyss is added, is it necessary to compensate for it by removing other things?

[rebthor]

jpeg, is it truly fair to say that the Abyss got longer? I've been playing since the .4.3 days (although only "seriously" since ~.9) and it's always been infinite to the best of my recollection.

[reaver]

2.) New branches do get added but they usually replace another branch of comparable depth and difficulty, so that in any given game you may get one or the other but not both. This is the case for the Lair subbranches Shoals/Swamp/Snake/Spider, of which you may only get two in any given game. I'm saying "usually" because I'm not sure what the Forest branch is supposed to replace, so that might end up being the first ever straight addition of a new branch in DCSS development.

The Forest branch replaces the Crypt. I believe that when the Forest was first added, both of the branches appeared in every game for testing purposes (DracoOmega had just given the Crypt a bunch of new content), but it was never intended to be a permanent situation.

[adityarajbhatt]

I did not specifically mean an infinite area. But if a region with an awesome (really FUN) theme is added, or some new class/background, maybe even a new main dungeon level, then does the length really need to be pruned? We should be more concerned about the tactical gameplay rather than the time taken to complete the game.

[rebthor]

I'm happy about the reduced and reworked vaults. I'd be happy to see the hall of blades go away too. And the lair rune branches go down to ~3 levels instead of 5 (or 6 in the case of slime). Once you can ROFLSTOMP pretty much everything in the dungeon, it's just a waste of time which is why lots of people usually dive swamp, spider and to a lesser extent slime. And old vaults was just too boring with old city after old city. The devs have really done a good job refactoring the vaults.

About the only branch I've been sad to see go was hive but I totally understand why it went. It was thematically much cooler than spider in my mind.

[dpeg]

What jpeg said. When the first "new" branch was only discussed (it was Shoals), it was clear that new branches would only get it via rotation. The goal was to avoid the power spiral: more loot ==> more dangerous threats ==> diminishing previous threats etc.
Furthermore, it was also established that the game is too long. Not just in a temporal sense ("needs X hours to win") but also in the sense of "too much fluff" in the midgame. We have started to cut levels, and did it very slowly. I still think that's the correct approach.

Regarding lengths of Lair subbranches: I think it is nice if a branch can have a sense of progression (in terms of monsters, and layout). Not sure if three levels will suffice. The cut would also not help with the fact that players postpone branch ends until they're trivialised -- something more radical might. (I am not just thinking of the rune lock; also putting all items to the last level could work.)

Regarding hive: I think the branch was horrible. You cannot make a level -- let alone a three-level branch -- out of a single opponent. Hive might make a nice early portal vault. I'd call for one, if only there was some decent idea what the loot could be. Food it certainly isn't. (That was the flaw with the previous Hide idea I championed.)

[Grimm]

About the only branch I've been sad to see go was hive but I totally understand why it went. It was thematically much cooler than spider in my mind.

I too am in the tiny Brotherhood of People who Liked Hive.

[nicolae]

I'd call for one, if only there was some decent idea what the loot could be. Food it certainly isn't. (That was the flaw with the previous Hide idea I championed.)

the reward is a deeper understanding of these amazing eusocial insects and a greater appreciation of their role in our ecosystems

[dpeg]

nicolae: That is the reward for killing all of them?

[nicolae]

nicolae: That is the reward for killing all of them?

you only realize it after they're all dead so it's a very bittersweet ending, very emotional

[Grimm]

Colony Collapse Disorder: The Movie

[Jabberwocky]

brb pitching that idea to the overseer.
also why didn't the devs say they were removing hive to raise awareness for the plight of bees?

[adityarajbhatt]

I think the Hive allowed a lot of potential for scumming (not necessarily a bad thing) because once you got through it, you had *loads* of honeycombs. This was not necessarily a bad thing though. I would have liked a huge food supply so that I could focus on the tactical combat in the game.

[nicolae]

I think the Hive allowed a lot of potential for scumming (not necessarily a bad thing) because once you got through it, you had *loads* of honeycombs. This was not necessarily a bad thing though. I would have liked a huge food supply so that I could focus on the tactical combat in the game.

well, since the crawl design philosophy is against scumming, it would necessarily have been a bad thing