ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e

On 2008-01-04 08:32:19, Eddie Grove <eddiegrove.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:

> aeneas writes:
>
> > On 2007-12-07 19:55:21, Eddie Grove wrote:
> >
> > > I've put together a bunch of changes to V that I hope improve the game.
> > > My underlying goals are to improve squelch, remove any need for taking notes,
> > > and to reduce the impact of identify. I've also included a few requests.
> > or sale
> >
> > I've been trying out your game... I was a bit skeptical about the lack of
> > selling, but it seems to work well. You can see my current dump here:
> > http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=7340. Character was basically a true
> > power-diver until around 2300'- I'm afraid I slowed down a bit there though,
> > after a near-fatal surprise encounter with Adunaphel with less than 300 hp. Then
> > went very fast from 2500 to 3500, where I am now. Recently finished with !Con,
> > but am in a quandary as to which rings to wear- will probably soon find a big
> > enough Speed ring to moot the question, but...
> >
> > Anyway, thought you might want to see someone playing your patch... next time i
> > will try for a pure diver.
>
> I've read that people think there is too much money !?! I think I figured
> that for me the extra gold dropped was less than the amount I could sell
> dungeon spellbooks for [ignoring all other sales], but my playstyle is unique.
> I turned down the gold factor from 4 to 3 and I'm finding gold a bit tight.


Well, the money is OK early, _if_ you are really diving. Like I said I only
stopped once, to kill the yeeks (working on Cliff's theory that you have to get
lucky, so you should get at least one good drop before 1000') But, who plays
that fast? You, me, and Cliff... all I care about is that I can buy _tele
anyway.

Also, I would normally find it too boring to buy out the BM. If I have unlimited
?tele_level the game loses interest- I can do (almost) anything I want, as long
as I don't let myself get nailed in one turn. Until I bought out the BM to get
that the game was interesting- I had to husband ?tele_level, as I got only 3 or
4 before 3500'- using one was a grave decision. There are only a few ways to fix
this- stop the BM from selling them is one... stop the BM from being bought out
is another. I'll add that I used almost no !Speed getting there... !speed
should not &#48814;to 50', I think.

> There is a bug Pete reported that makes a big difference with monsters being
> able to track you down. If you can compile your own, you might want to change
> defines.h.
>
> /*
> * Maximum flow depth when using "MONSTER_FLOW"
> */
> #ifdef EFG
> #define MONSTER_FLOW_DEPTH 30
> #else
> #define MONSTER_FLOW_DEPTH 3
> #endif

Hmm- I noticed that some monsters were not aggressive enough- in particular
there was a minotaur that I was, surprisingly, able to restrict to one room...
bad Minotaur, bad , while I fought some trolls... his actions were really
weird.

Anyway I did in fact compile your version, so I will recompile when my current
game is done, with that change.

> I'm working on generalized squelch now, so things are too unstable even for an
> alpha release. No bugfixed version until I get it semistable.

I'll be interested to see the next iteration- I think the no-selling may be too
radical for V, but I am inclined to think it makes a better game. But yeah- too
much money, particularly later on... in the spirit of Bill G, no-one should ever
need more than 20k GP...
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

"The Wanderer" <inverseparadox RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
news:oNidneKCWoqEuOPanZ2dnUVZ_vTinZ2d@comcast.com...
> Eddie Grove wrote:
>
>> Has your mindset changed so that, when you pick up an object, you
>> think "how can I use this?" rather than "how much will this sell
>> for?" ? Does it still annoy you to pick up something valuable and
>> squelch it?
>
> (Note: I have not played this patch, and for various reasons am unlikely
> to do so soon. However, this sparked a comment.)
>
> For me, in the game as I've played it so far and at the depths I've
> reached so far, there are already an immense proportion of items which I
> cannot use myself, and a reasonable proportion of those which could sell
> for a fair bit. It is a comparatively rare level - and for that matter a
> comparatively rare trip into the dungeon - on which I find a new piece
> of equipment which is really worth using, and practically usable
> inventory items (potions not of the use-immediately variety, wands,
> rods, staves) are not that much more common; however, on just about
> every level there is at least one item which could sell for enough to be
> arguably worth picking up.
>
> By removing the ability to sell items, every single one of that vast
> proportion of items which are not something I can directly use becomes
> entirely useless - becomes, in other words, junk. In this way, removing
> the ability to sell items effectively increases the TMJ problem by a
> considerable factor.
>
> Admittedly, items which are useful only to be sold are not terribly far
> from useless themselves, but in addition to being at least somewhat
> realistic they do help guarantee the ability to buy anything interesting
> which might show up - with much less chance of ruining my budget for
> more normal purchases (!CCW, arrows, food/light while those are
> relevant, replacement spellbooks, etc.).
>
> I will grant that the lack of a need to burden oneself down with things
> to sell (in order to keep up in terms of money) would make faster diving
> more practical, but I'm not convinced that it is worth increasing TMJ.
>
> (There's also the "ID items by selling" aspect, which I at least make
> extensive use of in the early game before I get routine access to
> Identify, but ISTR you were against that as well so I doubt it would
> carry much weight with you.)
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Refutations? Things I've forgotten which render the
> above completely moot?

It's an illusion. After a certain point fairly early in the game you have
all the ?WoR, !CCW and ?tele you need, and money is of no further use at
all. I welcome the removal of selling, because it will allow the truly
useful items to stand out much more easily from the junk (which is all it
was anyway, whether you could sell it or not). I'm looking forward to trying
Eddie's patch. I don't think it will result in a net increase to TMJ. Quite
the opposite.

CC
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

"Magnate" <contact.me DeleteThis @some.other.way> writes:

> "The Wanderer" <inverseparadox DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:oNidneKCWoqEuOPanZ2dnUVZ_vTinZ2d@comcast.com...

> > (There's also the "ID items by selling" aspect, which I at least make
> > extensive use of in the early game before I get routine access to
> > Identify, but ISTR you were against that as well so I doubt it would
> > carry much weight with you.)

I think the game is better if people try to use things. How radical!

How about using things to identify them? It is fun once you get into it.
That pit is a chance to check FF, and after you are poisoned you can see
if that potion you failed to learn earlier is !slowPoison.

It sucks to lose ?*REMOVE_CURSE trying it out, but maybe the uber-items should
just come with an ESC-to-abort to fix that.

> > Thoughts? Comments? Refutations? Things I've forgotten which render the
> > above completely moot?
>
> It's an illusion. After a certain point fairly early in the game you have
> all the ?WoR, !CCW and ?tele you need, and money is of no further use at
> all. I welcome the removal of selling, because it will allow the truly
> useful items to stand out much more easily from the junk (which is all it
> was anyway, whether you could sell it or not). I'm looking forward to trying
> Eddie's patch. I don't think it will result in a net increase to TMJ. Quite
> the opposite.

I only use wands like sleep and slow when playing with store selling off.
With selling on, it is a mistake to use wands to test them. You are better
off saving every charge for a few more bucks to buy one more ?+damage or that
first _teleportation. Once the gold doesn't matter, you are deep enough they
are ineffective.

For an early character, it is stupid to read an exotically early ?acquirement.
In fact, it may well be better to sell an early stat potion than to use it.
I'd rather see the player use those items.

Once you get your weapons up to +7 or so gold is an illusion. It speeds the
game up to be able to buy =FA, but if you want that effect you could just
change its depth so people find it earlier. It is helpful, don't get me
wrong, but it is not necessary and is a mask for other problems in the game.


But none of this matters. At all. After a few games playing without selling
you realize that you feel freed from mercantilism. It is simply more fun!
The improved feel of the game trumps all.


Eddie
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

The Wanderer <inverseparadox DeleteThis @comcast.net> writes:

> > But none of this matters. At all. After a few games playing without
> > selling you realize that you feel freed from mercantilism. It is
> > simply more fun! The improved feel of the game trumps all.
>
> The only benefit I see from not selling things is that you never need to
> cut a dive short to go sell things and reduce your burden to avoid
> being slowed. I am quite willing to accept that you see more benefits,
> and that it is more fun for you; I might even grant that, all else being
> equal, it could be more fun for me. However, the tradeoffs are IMO just
> not worth it.

That's what everyone [OK -- sample size of 8 or so] says until they try it for
a few games. Then, universally, they change their minds. You might be the
exception, but I wouldn't bet on it.


Eddie
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

in another thread

The Wanderer <inverseparadox.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> writes:

> Losing the item by using it is not remotely my problem with that method;
> by the time I'm getting such items, I have Identify anyway. The negative
> effects of the items themselves are my problem with it, and that is a
> strong enough downside to completely remove ID-by-use as a generically
> viable strategy for me.

Are there lots of people who think that cursed objects, e.g. potions of
weakness, are good for the game?

All they do is to cause people to want to id everything before use.
After a few trips, you just carry a stack of ?id scrolls.

Having cursed items adds an interesting decision a few times a game, when
worrying about inventory slots. The cost is that hundreds of time a game it
makes testing by using non-viable. Is that tradeoff really worth it?

I'm in favor of mixed-blessing items. A ring with int+3 and wis+3 and str-3
could be interesting to an early spell-caster. IMO flavors without benefit
should be removed.


Eddie
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

Eddie Grove wrote:

> "Magnate" <contact.me RemoveThis @some.other.way> writes:
>
>> "The Wanderer" <inverseparadox RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:oNidneKCWoqEuOPanZ2dnUVZ_vTinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>>> (There's also the "ID items by selling" aspect, which I at least
>>> make extensive use of in the early game before I get routine
>>> access to Identify, but ISTR you were against that as well so I
>>> doubt it would carry much weight with you.)
>
> I think the game is better if people try to use things. How radical!
>
> How about using things to identify them? It is fun once you get into
> it.

Maybe for you; not for me. I am temperamentally highly averse to risks
over which I have no control; using an item whose effect is unknown is a
pure roll-of-the-die risk of a negative effect.

I do, admittedly, use wands to identify them in the early game - but
only on either weak critters, which I can kill easily regardless, or on
jellies/molds which can't move and so are not a threat.

Without the ability to routinely identify types of items (to the point
of ruling out the bad/worthless ones) in the early game prior to ready
ID, I'm likely to simply not bother identifying - or even picking up -
any such things at all until I *can* identify them, whether by purchased
scrolls or by having an Identify spell. All this would accomplish is to
make the early game longer and more frustrating.

> That pit is a chance to check FF,

By the time I have an item which might give Feather Fall, I'm far enough
along (and, since I play exclusively mages so far, have ready enough
detection) that it's almost completely irrelevant; the only time I fall
into a pit or trapdoor is when I'm teleporting into unexplored areas on
the run from something dangerous, or because of a mis-keystroke.

> and after you are poisoned you can see if that potion you failed to
> learn earlier is !slowPoison.

....which is useless anyway... the more so because by the time I'm far
enough along to risk getting poisoned badly enough to worry about (aside
from the possibility of wood spiders while still CL1, at which point the
character is easily replaceable anyway), I have the Cure Poison spell.

The primary thing I use "sell items to ID them" for is to rule out the
comparative flood of bad-effect items, which seems particularly heavy
right at the beginning of the game. After the first dive or two, and
having sold all those useless/worthless items, I have enough money to
start buying ?ID and identifying everything that way - then later
graduate to _Perception plus Lesser Recharging, and then just to
Identify itself.

> It sucks to lose ?*REMOVE_CURSE trying it out, but maybe the
> uber-items should just come with an ESC-to-abort to fix that.

Losing the item by using it is not remotely my problem with that method;
by the time I'm getting such items, I have Identify anyway. The negative
effects of the items themselves are my problem with it, and that is a
strong enough downside to completely remove ID-by-use as a generically
viable strategy for me.

>>> Thoughts? Comments? Refutations? Things I've forgotten which
>>> render the above completely moot?
>>
>> It's an illusion. After a certain point fairly early in the game
>> you have all the ?WoR, !CCW and ?tele you need, and money is of no
>> further use at all.

I've never used ?tele, and past the point where WoR and CCW are no
longer in short supply I still want money for interesting things (such
as stat potions or dungeon books) in the black market. Once the black
market can no longer produce anything deep enough to be of interest
(aside from the occasional *IDENTIFY* or the like), money probably does
become irrelevant, yes - but I have never gotten to that point, and the
stretch before it is long enough that I doubt it can be completely
ignored in this.

>> I welcome the removal of selling, because it will allow the truly
>> useful items to stand out much more easily from the junk (which is
>> all it was anyway, whether you could sell it or not). I'm looking
>> forward to trying Eddie's patch. I don't think it will result in a
>> net increase to TMJ. Quite the opposite.
>
> I only use wands like sleep and slow when playing with store selling
> off. With selling on, it is a mistake to use wands to test them. You
> are better off saving every charge for a few more bucks to buy one
> more ?+damage or that first _teleportation. Once the gold doesn't
> matter, you are deep enough they are ineffective.

I've never used _tele except as an emergency matter while carrying one I
picked up to sell; the weight and the extra slot are not worth the
initially-lower fail chance compared with the spell.

Wands like the ball-effect ones, at least, remain useful to me well
after the point where I more or less invariably have enough money to buy
anything any of the normal stores would have to offer; _tele-other is
also useful, though I don't carry it around as routinely (simply because
I have the spell).

> For an early character, it is stupid to read an exotically early
> ?acquirement. In fact, it may well be better to sell an early stat
> potion than to use it. I'd rather see the player use those items.

I would not read a Scroll of Acquirement found early, but I wouldn't
sell it either; I would save it in the home for somewhere deeper (and
probably use it at about the point where the home starts filling up).

I would not sell any stat potion unless the stat was already maxed; I
use them as soon as I know what they are.

> Once you get your weapons up to +7 or so gold is an illusion. It
> speeds the game up to be able to buy =FA, but if you want that effect
> you could just change its depth so people find it earlier. It is
> helpful, don't get me wrong, but it is not necessary and is a mask
> for other problems in the game.

Since I rarely use weapons other than bows (past the very early game,
anyway), this is not a very good or very relevant metric for me.

> But none of this matters. At all. After a few games playing without
> selling you realize that you feel freed from mercantilism. It is
> simply more fun! The improved feel of the game trumps all.

The only benefit I see from not selling things is that you never need to
cut a dive short to go sell things and reduce your burden to avoid
being slowed. I am quite willing to accept that you see more benefits,
and that it is more fun for you; I might even grant that, all else being
equal, it could be more fun for me. However, the tradeoffs are IMO just
not worth it.

--
The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

Eddie Grove wrote:

> in another thread

Actually, in this same thread, just with a different Subject line.
(Newsgroup threading is done based on the References: and Message-ID:
headers, which are set automatically when hitting Reply rather than
creating a message from scratch.)

> The Wanderer <inverseparadox.DeleteThis@comcast.net> writes:
>
>> Losing the item by using it is not remotely my problem with that
>> method; by the time I'm getting such items, I have Identify anyway.
>> The negative effects of the items themselves are my problem with
>> it, and that is a strong enough downside to completely remove
>> ID-by-use as a generically viable strategy for me.
>
> Are there lots of people who think that cursed objects, e.g. potions
> of weakness, are good for the game?

From a thematic perspective I like them (if only as a matter of
tradition), but from a gameplay perspective I don't think they add
anything and I might prefer the game with them removed.

> All they do is to cause people to want to id everything before use.
> After a few trips, you just carry a stack of ?id scrolls.
>
> Having cursed items adds an interesting decision a few times a game,
> when worrying about inventory slots. The cost is that hundreds of
> time a game it makes testing by using non-viable. Is that tradeoff
> really worth it?
>
> I'm in favor of mixed-blessing items. A ring with int+3 and wis+3
> and str-3 could be interesting to an early spell-caster. IMO flavors
> without benefit should be removed.

Now that's a suggestion I could get behind. You've made a number of
suggestions for changes to the game which I would not particularly like,
and some which I would oppose; as far as I remember, this is the first
one I think sounds like a good idea.

--
The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

On Jan 4, 6:14 pm, The Wanderer <inversepara....RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote:
> Maybe for you; not for me. I am temperamentally highly averse to risks
> over which I have no control; using an item whose effect is unknown is a
> pure roll-of-the-die risk of a negative effect.

Me too.

> I do, admittedly, use wands to identify them in the early game - but
> only on either weak critters, which I can kill easily regardless, or on
> jellies/molds which can't move and so are not a threat.

I foresee the EMFH putting in a new wand type.

It develops thick armor! -more-
It grows two legs! -more-
It becomes enormous! -more-
*ulp*

> I've never used _tele except as an emergency matter while carrying one I
> picked up to sell; the weight and the extra slot are not worth the
> initially-lower fail chance compared with the spell.

What about the ability to use it while blind or confused, when you
don't yet have one of the corresponding two resists?

Out of mana and escape scrolls simultaneously?

Mileage will also vary for non-mages, particularly warriors.

Same applies for _destruct.

> Wands like the ball-effect ones, at least, remain useful to me well
> after the point where I more or less invariably have enough money to buy
> anything any of the normal stores would have to offer; _tele-other is
> also useful, though I don't carry it around as routinely (simply because
> I have the spell).

That might also be useful when blind, if you saw where the threat was
before it blinded you.

> I would not read a Scroll of Acquirement found early, but I wouldn't
> sell it either; I would save it in the home for somewhere deeper (and
> probably use it at about the point where the home starts filling up).
>
> I would not sell any stat potion unless the stat was already maxed; I
> use them as soon as I know what they are.

Nobody's mentioned !Experience ...
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

On Jan 4, 9:33 pm, The Wanderer <inversepara....RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote:
> Actually, in this same thread, just with a different Subject line.
> (Newsgroup threading is done based on the References: and Message-ID:
> headers, which are set automatically when hitting Reply rather than
> creating a message from scratch.)

Actually, newsgroup threading seems to be done in either of those two
ways, depending on the news interface you're using. Most NNTP readers
(including Thunderbird) thread by references or have a toggle to
thread by either, though. Google Groups is a bit confusing: it threads
by references but any post with an edited subject (such as due to
topic drift) changes the name it uses to display the whole thread,
which can make a thread hard to find, or best found by looking for
"the purple one" instead of a particular name. Annoying. Especially if
a drifted topic subthread forks off and people keep posting under both
the original subject and the new one, or worse, under three or more
subjects. Then the thread's name as displayed in GG will change
schizophrenically every hour or two! It should really use the name of
the first ever post to the thread and keep that stable, when
displaying threads instead of made to show new posts to the group one
by one. Or perhaps that name and then, if it's different, the subject
of the most recent post, in parentheses. Or even break a subject
change off as a new thread, but with a link to the parent post in the
parent thread at the top just above its own first post so you can get
the context if the dimwit that forked the new subject didn't quote
properly or something like that.

As it stands, it's like having an interactive program guide that just
shows every CSI episode as "CSI", or, worse, shows all episodes from
all three series as "CSI" until the next all-new CSI: Miami, then all
episodes from all three as "CSI: Miami" until the next CSI: New York
airs, and then...

> > I'm in favor of mixed-blessing items. A ring with int+3 and wis+3
> > and str-3 could be interesting to an early spell-caster. IMO flavors
> > without benefit should be removed.
>
> Now that's a suggestion I could get behind. You've made a number of
> suggestions for changes to the game which I would not particularly like,
> and some which I would oppose; as far as I remember, this is the first
> one I think sounds like a good idea.

(ObAngband) It's also a suggestion that's been made time and again for
a decade or two but has not gained much traction with V's successive
maintainers or very many of the variant maintainers for some reason.
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

nebulous99 RemoveThis @gmail.com wrote:

> On Jan 4, 6:14 pm, The Wanderer <inversepara... RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Maybe for you; not for me. I am temperamentally highly averse to
>> risks over which I have no control; using an item whose effect is
>> unknown is a pure roll-of-the-die risk of a negative effect.
>
> Me too.

I will admit that I do use unknown items in absolute crisis situations,
where nothing else I have available to do is going to do any good and so
it's not like using the item can actually hurt anything. But that's
about the only time.

>> I do, admittedly, use wands to identify them in the early game -
>> but only on either weak critters, which I can kill easily
>> regardless, or on jellies/molds which can't move and so are not a
>> threat.
>
> I foresee the EMFH putting in a new wand type.
>
> It develops thick armor! -more-
> It grows two legs! -more-
> It becomes enormous! -more-
> *ulp*

I would simply not play that variant, or stop using wands to identify
them until after I had identified that particular wand by other means.

>> I've never used _tele except as an emergency matter while carrying
>> one I picked up to sell; the weight and the extra slot are not
>> worth the initially-lower fail chance compared with the spell.
>
> What about the ability to use it while blind or confused, when you
> don't yet have one of the corresponding two resists?

It may just be chance, but as far as I recall I have virtually never
been in that situation when I have had (or have been able to have)
_tele.

> Out of mana and escape scrolls simultaneously?

I teleport away by the spell before getting that low on mana, and I
don't use scrolls for escape except in the same kind of "I happen to
have one on hand" emergency case; ?phase is easily available from the
spell and so not worth a slot, and the others are rare enough that they
never form a big enough stack to be worth carrying (especially with the
risk of them being destroyed).

> Mileage will also vary for non-mages, particularly warriors.

I used to play warriors, but the lack of on-tap Identify bothered me
enough that I've never gone back after switching to mages. (Likely this
will change after a few wins, but seeing as I've never gotten past stat
gain...)

On that note: because of sell-to-identify, what bothered me most about
not having on-tap Identify as a warrior was not bad-effect items (which
can be identified class by class by selling them) but the risk of
putting on a cursed piece of equipment.

> Same applies for _destruct.

I think I've seen maybe two of these in my entire Angband career, and
I'd be reluctant to use them except as an absolute last resort anyway.

>> I would not read a Scroll of Acquirement found early, but I
>> wouldn't sell it either; I would save it in the home for somewhere
>> deeper (and probably use it at about the point where the home
>> starts filling up).
>>
>> I would not sell any stat potion unless the stat was already maxed;
>> I use them as soon as I know what they are.
>
> Nobody's mentioned !Experience ...

I've never gotten one, but would probably preserve it until just after
gaining a level - and/or, if I was going up levels rapidly at that
point, until the rate of improvement had started to slow.

--
The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

Eddie Grove wrote:
> The Wanderer <inverseparadox.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> writes:
>
>> Losing the item by using it is not remotely my problem with that method;
>> by the time I'm getting such items, I have Identify anyway. The negative
>> effects of the items themselves are my problem with it, and that is a
>> strong enough downside to completely remove ID-by-use as a generically
>> viable strategy for me.
>
> Are there lots of people who think that cursed objects, e.g. potions of
> weakness, are good for the game?
>
> All they do is to cause people to want to id everything before use.
> After a few trips, you just carry a stack of ?id scrolls.
>
> Having cursed items adds an interesting decision a few times a game, when
> worrying about inventory slots. The cost is that hundreds of time a game it
> makes testing by using non-viable. Is that tradeoff really worth it?
>
> I'm in favor of mixed-blessing items. A ring with int+3 and wis+3 and str-3
> could be interesting to an early spell-caster. IMO flavors without benefit
> should be removed.

We've had this discussion before. What I intend to do with 3.1.0 is
this: release the official version including flavours without benefit,
but greatly reduced in quantity over previous versions. Then I will
release a patched version which removes them, and see which one people
prefer.

--
Andrew Sidwell
http://rephial.org/
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

Andrew Sidwell wrote:

> Eddie Grove wrote:
>> The Wanderer <inverseparadox.DeleteThis@comcast.net> writes:
>>
>>> Losing the item by using it is not remotely my problem with that
>>> method; by the time I'm getting such items, I have Identify
>>> anyway. The negative effects of the items themselves are my
>>> problem with it, and that is a strong enough downside to
>>> completely remove ID-by-use as a generically viable strategy for
>>> me.
>>
>> Are there lots of people who think that cursed objects, e.g.
>> potions of weakness, are good for the game?
>>
>> All they do is to cause people to want to id everything before use.
>> After a few trips, you just carry a stack of ?id scrolls.
>>
>> Having cursed items adds an interesting decision a few times a
>> game, when worrying about inventory slots. The cost is that
>> hundreds of time a game it makes testing by using non-viable. Is
>> that tradeoff really worth it?
>>
>> I'm in favor of mixed-blessing items. A ring with int+3 and wis+3
>> and str-3 could be interesting to an early spell-caster. IMO
>> flavors without benefit should be removed.
>
> We've had this discussion before. What I intend to do with 3.1.0 is
> this: release the official version including flavours without
> benefit, but greatly reduced in quantity over previous versions.
> Then I will release a patched version which removes them, and see
> which one people prefer.

One potential difficulty with this: there are some items on which
whether or not they have benefit is a matter of opinion (Summon
Monsters, Clone Monster, et cetera) and some items which may be useful
when used intentionally but whose side effects when used unintentionally
are potentially prohibitive (Destruction, Teleport Level, et cetera) -
the latter category are not directly related to "flavors without
benefit", but they are quite relevant to my point above about reluctance
to make use of ID-by-use.

What do you intend to do about those kinds of flavors?

I infer, since you didn't mention it and it would be a fairly
far-reaching change, that you do not intend to drop cursed items
entirely in the next version. (I'm not saying that you should, either.
At the least the matter would need significant discussion.) Since the
risk of encountering a cursed item is the primary reason why I do not
attempt to identify equipment by putting it on, this also relates to the
ID-by-use question; if there is going to be an attempt to address that,
cursed items would also need to be attended to in some way.

--
The Wanderer

My usual .sig is on vacation while I adjust to my new computer
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e 

The Wanderer wrote:
> Andrew Sidwell wrote:
>> What I intend to do with 3.1.0 is
>> this: release the official version including flavours without
>> benefit, but greatly reduced in quantity over previous versions.
>> Then I will release a patched version which removes them, and see
>> which one people prefer.
>
> One potential difficulty with this: there are some items on which
> whether or not they have benefit is a matter of opinion (Summon
> Monsters, Clone Monster, et cetera) and some items which may be useful
> when used intentionally but whose side effects when used unintentionally
> are potentially prohibitive (Destruction, Teleport Level, et cetera) -
> the latter category are not directly related to "flavors without
> benefit", but they are quite relevant to my point above about reluctance
> to make use of ID-by-use.
>
> What do you intend to do about those kinds of flavors?

I would remove those which are obviously bad; those in the gray area
would stay. I don't see what else I could do, really, though I do
understand your point about how the gray area items remove incentive to
ID-by-use.

> I infer, since you didn't mention it and it would be a fairly
> far-reaching change, that you do not intend to drop cursed items
> entirely in the next version. (I'm not saying that you should, either.
> At the least the matter would need significant discussion.) Since the
> risk of encountering a cursed item is the primary reason why I do not
> attempt to identify equipment by putting it on, this also relates to the
> ID-by-use question; if there is going to be an attempt to address that,
> cursed items would also need to be attended to in some way.

Curses are definitely up for discussion after the next release, but I
have already made the change of not automatically cursing every bad
weapon. I don't know if this will stay or not yet; I've not really had
a chance to play since I made that change. It is important to remember
that 3.1.0 will be put out as a definite work-in-progress, so if changes
turn out not to work, I have no problem with removing them.

--
Andrew Sidwell
http://rephial.org/
 >> Stay informed about: ANNOUNCE Eddie's patch V3.0.9e