Comments on: Trunk updates, 15 June 2014

By: DaStockMan

DaStockMan — Sun, 29 Jun 2014 18:40:41 +0000

In other news, DCSS now simplified to the level of a 7DRL. DCSS keeps losing complexity, it has been for years, and it is now to the point that I’m no longer interested in playing it. And no you cannot compare it to improving the UI for dwarf fortress. Instead it would be like removing the preferences of the dwarves in dwarf fortress, or removing the granularity of stockpiles. I would now recommend DCSS only for beginners of the roguelike genre, which is fine. But I prefer deeper roguelikes and DCSS no longer qualifies.

By: avis

avis — Sat, 28 Jun 2014 21:02:33 +0000

As someone who has played this game for some time (0.9) and never won, I’d say that removing complexity probably does make the game more accessible and easier. I wouldn’t object to removals or additions which made the game more difficult (reduced numbers of potions and scrolls or other balancing measures).

Dying is what keeps me coming back….

By: warren

warren — Fri, 27 Jun 2014 19:06:13 +0000

Additions are not inherently good. Removals are not inherently bad. The developers ARE dumbing the game down. They are also making it more accessible to a broader audience. The most important question is whether those changes are good or bad. All the feedback here is valuable, including the critical feedback.

By: saemon

saemon — Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:19:20 +0000

I don’t see why the words “removals” and “simplifications” have negative implications. A good roguelike doesn’t need to be unnecessarily complex or unwieldy. Dwarf Fortress could upgrade to a better UI with mouse support, and while that would be simplifying it, I don’t think anyone would consider it to be a bad thing.

Regarding the comments of cuteverything and Not_A_Happy_Crawler: why not suggest alternate ideas for the design issues the patch is addressing? Stating the developers are “dumbing the game down” doesn’t serve any real purpose. This is a small enough community that if you have a better design choice, others might agree and it could be implemented in the game.

It must be disheartening for people to put a lot of work into something only to have its community make senseless, negative comments. Making senseless complaints rather than suggestions will not bring back the aspects you wanted (if any), but it might just make a developer less inclined to do you the favor of keeping the game you enjoy relevant. In that case, sure you’ll keep all the obscure mechanics you enjoy, but the game will slowly die out.

By: cuteverything

cuteverything — Mon, 23 Jun 2014 16:10:20 +0000

This has just gone to far. So many removals and simplifications that its turning into a coffee break style game rather than an epic quest.
Please rethink some of these changes and bring back some of the complexity we play DCSS for!!!!!

By: TehRei

TehRei — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 21:27:06 +0000

What’s with all the negative comments? o_O
With all the quality-of-life additions in trunk I might actually consider trying Beogh out. Removing all monsters’ ability to pick up items is certainly simplifying the game, but having to lug around all distortion weps and dangerous wands wasn’t exactly an interesting complexity…

Huge thanks for removing anti-training and merging +Acc/+Dam as well!

By: Update

Update — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:55:20 +0000

I cool update! You’re just stupid!

By: Not_A_Happy_Crawler

Not_A_Happy_Crawler — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 00:43:38 +0000

And here we see more proof of the devs dumbing the game down. Don’t go saying this on the forums though, oh no, they’ll rip you apart for even suggesting that perhaps the devs haven’t been making the best decisions for the past….3 years.

By: PleasingFungus

PleasingFungus — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:35:42 +0000

Chunk sublimation was removed as part as an ongoing cleanup of chunk mechanics. The spell remains quite strong.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:33:11 +0000

Why was sublimation of chunks removed?

By: kek

kek — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 18:14:17 +0000

why do enemies not pick up seen items?

By: muxecoid

muxecoid — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 04:59:48 +0000

Removal of item mass also feels like needless oversimplification. Now ogres can carry 50 large rocks for ammunition. And deep elves suddenly can carry lots of swappable gear and consumables.

By: PleasingFungus

PleasingFungus — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 03:34:56 +0000

The reasons vary from case to case.

Cross-training was reworked because the old system was unintuitive and encouraged training skills to very specific breakpoints for optimal xp use; anti-training was removed as part of that change, for what I understand to be technical reasons. Depths replaced the bottom 12 floors of Dungeon because they were, well, boring & unchallenging. I’d argue that was a complication rather than a simplification, to be honest!

The slaying change is the one I’m best qualified to speak for, since that was my decision. Essentially, the old +acc/+dam split didn’t lead to any real decisionmaking; +acc, in particular, was not very relevant in most circumstances outside the very early game. (And of course there aren’t many slaying bonuses in the early game!) All it did was confuse players who thought that a “+10/+1″ weapon might be good. (It wasn’t.)

It might have been possible to make +acc relevant (e.g. by increasing enemy EV), but not only would that be very frustrating to play, it’d still not make +acc a good mechanic; we really don’t need more mechanics to encourage tactical weaponswapping. It just really didn’t have any reason to exist.

Weapon base accuracy still exists because accuracy is relevant in the early game.

By: Fizar

Fizar — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 02:54:53 +0000

I feel like a lot of things are being simplified…. the slaying bonus change, the anti training bonus, the way cross-training was reworked :\, all that after dungeon was changed to 15 floors, etc. any reason for all these simplifications?

By: Twister

Twister — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 13:05:36 +0000

Next update, DCSS name will be “refined” to Basement Crawl …

By: Pablo

Pablo — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 11:03:02 +0000

So basically, this means that stashes can be made even in levels full of enemies?

Nice

By: Teco

Teco — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:43:33 +0000

It really would’ve been more preferable to make accuracy more useful.. Rather than merge it to make it more useful, this will probably bump the worth, rarity and costs of a scroll of enchant weapon. Maybe the only high EV enemy shouldn’t just be butterflies?

By: Andro

Andro — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 20:18:06 +0000

I have to disagree. Anti-magic is the best brand for the extended game.

By: warren

warren — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 18:41:47 +0000

The best melee class weapon brands for 15-rune endgame are holy wrath and vorpal. Vorpal used to be acquirable consistently using brand weapon scrolls. Now vorpal only has a 10% chance from brand weapon scrolls. Since Holy Wrath is only brandable consistently for worshippers of The Shining One, it means that neither one of the best two endgame brands can be intentionally placed on a specific weapon for non-TSO worshippers. TSO was already the easiest choice for melee endgame, thus just makes all other choices even less desirable. Please add in a way for non-TSO worshippers to add Holy Wrath to a specific weapon, or at least make vorpal more acquirable than a 10% chance from brand weapon.

By: muxecoid

muxecoid — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:18:16 +0000

I feel like the game is being dumbed down. Monsters no longer picking up weapons is a huge hit to complexity and to game’s overal feel.

By: Andro

Andro — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:16:39 +0000

Would it be too much to ask for an updated OSX Tiles build, please?

By: Andro

Andro — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 04:53:40 +0000

Cheers!

By: PleasingFungus

PleasingFungus — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 04:14:23 +0000

They’ve been tweaked in various ways – Fencer’s Gloves are currently {EV+3 Dex+6 Slay+2}, for example.

By: Andro

Andro — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 04:11:55 +0000

What will happens to artifacts with Acc bonus, like Fencer’s gloves Acc +8?

By: Curio

Curio — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 21:53:22 +0000

On the contrary, single enchantment is a step up. +acc was quite irrelevant comparing to +dam. Now it does not matter – everything is more simple.
PS. It seems that halflings gonna be axed pretty soon. Good riddance.

By: Phalen

Phalen — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 21:44:43 +0000

Not really a fan of the single enchantment number, but all other changes seem p alright