PDA

View Full Version : Looks like a new Angband Dev Blog is up. (17.8.2011)


CJNyfalt
August 17, 2011, 22:37
A new Angband Dev Blog was just posted, and it covers economy.

http://angband-dev.blogspot.com/2011/08/some-thoughts-on-angband-economy.html

As for my reactions:
- I am worried that adding money weight would increase annoyances in the game.
- I am fine with reducing money drops and lowering prices.
- Requiring money for the home might hit beginner players too hard. However, a slot based model where the first slots are very cheap or free, and later ones increasing in price might work.
- I agree that food right now does not really add anything to the game.

PowerDiver
August 17, 2011, 22:48
There was a single comment in the thread about why people dislike no_selling that seemed like something I might want to address. The idea was that there should be an ebb and flow to the game, with a natural incentive to return to town now and again.

I was thinking about adding a money belt, akin to the quiver, with a slot counting the number of coins of each money type you carry. It would use no inventory slots, but each coin type would have a weight and a value, and the weight would encumber you. When you return to town, all money is immediately put into your bank account, and the merchants charge the bank.

Then I decided it's just not worth the effort for what would be at best a small improvement, and most likely would just be annoying.

EpicMan
August 17, 2011, 23:42
Maybe the town (and Angband) are a prison where all the monsters and evil creatures have been banished to. The player is there because he/she is insane and kills everyone he/she sees for no apparent reason. The hope is that the prisoners take care of each other, and so the town is supplied with weapons, one-size-fits-all armor, etc to encourage the imprisoned "adventurers" to go get themselves killed, and all money is shipped out whenever the players are all downstairs. That would account for the zero inflation.

As to the money not weighing anything, all adventurers carry a magic debit card that activates to teleport money to your bank account. And when you die, that money is appropriated by the state to pay for maintenance, shopkeepers, new store stock, etc.

The town/dungeon is enclosed in 'permanent' rock to keep the prisoners in, and the townfolk are prisoners too weak to make it downstairs.

It's all a conspiracy, I tell you!

chris
August 17, 2011, 23:43
Angband needs a Central Bank, complete with ZIRP. That way, next time I see PDSM at the BM, I won't sweat the fact that I am 1.3 M gp short. I'll just borrow and payback later :)

And what about all those home mortgages. Silly players buy houses then die. What happens to the debt?

bio_hazard
August 18, 2011, 00:01
invisible super-donkeys carry your coins...

Not sure I see a reason to add realism to the Angband economy, but I could think of less obtrusive ways to do it than adding weight to coins.

Why not eliminate found money completely? Make "bounties" for monsters killed. Players can kill monsters or collect and sell items to get money.

PowerDiver
August 18, 2011, 00:57
Not sure I see a reason to add realism to the Angband economy, but I could think of less obtrusive ways to do it than adding weight to coins.

It has nothing to do with realism. It would be meant as a gradual increasing push to return to town, implemented as a response to a fairly eloquent explanation why someone thought that was a good objective in game design. I didn't agree much with the arguments in the blog, but they reminded me of this particular idea.

takkaria
August 18, 2011, 01:05
A new Angband Dev Blog was just posted, and it covers economy.

http://angband-dev.blogspot.com/2011/08/some-thoughts-on-angband-economy.html

As for my reactions:
- I am worried that adding money weight would increase annoyances in the game.
- I am fine with reducing money drops and lowering prices.
- Requiring money for the home might hit beginner players too hard. However, a slot based model where the first slots are very cheap or free, and later ones increasing in price might work.
- I agree that food right now does not really add anything to the game.

I should probably add, as a quick disclaimer, that I'm not advocating (yet) that this is a blueprint for V - I don't think realism is a particularly good target in game design, but I think it can provide interesting ideas that may or may not improve gameplay. I'll hack away at it in a separate branch for a while and see how it plays, then put it out and see what other people think.

Thoughts on food would be most welcome - I know a few of us devs have been wondering for a while whether to nuke it or to make something of it.

bio_hazard
August 18, 2011, 01:40
I'm not sure this [needing gentle reminders to head back to town] would fit in with how I play the game. I usually pick up almost any piece of equipment I come across until I hit my encumbrance limit, then only pick up new things if they are more valuable or more efficient resale/weight value than what I already have in inventory. As long as I'm holding enough to pay for 2 or 3 ?WoR and any !CCW I might have used I'll consider it a successful trip.

If you want reasons to head back to town, require that spells be learned in town, and maybe wait to apply level-dependent increases in abilities (stealth, fighting, bows&throws, etc) until the player visits town. Doing so just to put money in the bank doesn't sound that great.

I guess if I was going to make Hunger (and thirst?) more interesting, you'd want to get rid of the guaranteed food sources, and make food something you are more likely to have to find in the dungeon.
-Remove the provisioning spells and scrolls
-make most elemental attacks have a better chance to spoil rations (acid, poison, fire, whatever makes sense).
-make hunger=stun
- increase food drops somewhat


- maybe add a thirst counter as well as hunger (thirsty = stun, very thirsty = heavy stun).
- assuming we won't be adding water features to the terrain in V, players would replenish their hydration counter by drinking potions (including potion of water). So those !CLW or !Bold or !Infravision will have a use throughout the game.

Anything more complicated will probably drift toward something like Crawl, where food is generally available but not super-abundant, and food is spent for abilities like casting spells, going berzerk, etc. Your Minotaur Berzerker may devastate enemies when he goes on a rampage, but he'll pretty quickly run out of food if he uses that ability every time he goes into melee.

CJNyfalt
August 18, 2011, 02:01
I guess if I was going to make Hunger (and thirst?) more interesting, you'd want to get rid of the guaranteed food sources, and make food something you are more likely to have to find in the dungeon.
-Remove the provisioning spells and scrolls
-make most elemental attacks have a better chance to spoil rations (acid, poison, fire, whatever makes sense).
-make hunger=stun
- increase food drops somewhat


If I wanted to play Nethack, then I would. The food issue is why I prefer Angband.

bio_hazard
August 18, 2011, 02:20
I agree, just trying to anticipate what could be changed...

fizzix
August 18, 2011, 05:04
If I wanted to play Nethack, then I would. The food issue is why I prefer Angband.

I agree with this statement. Making food more interesting does not necessarily mean making it harder to feed yourself. Food items can have healing effects, stat restoration effects and other similar things. That being said, I wouldn't mind removing the spell from all classes but priests and removing satisfy hunger from the stores. Let the general store be the source of food.

One change I would propose is to change 'slow digestion' to 'remove hunger' meaning that you're always well satiated, no gorging or fainting. Remove the amulets and the rings and put the effect on bodykeeping/soulkeeping rings.

Derakon
August 19, 2011, 00:44
One change I would propose is to change 'slow digestion' to 'remove hunger' meaning that you're always well satiated, no gorging or fainting. Remove the amulets and the rings and put the effect on bodykeeping/soulkeeping rings.

Would this then mean that regeneration would have no negative side-effects?

Jungle_Boy
August 19, 2011, 01:08
Just thought I would throw in my two cents here. I think most people are looking at the Angband eceonomy and thiking it should be a stable economy, it's not. The town is more like a boomtown, a la california goldrush, dungeon diving is the middle earth equivalent of a get rich quick scheme. All the merchants are there to take advantage of the flush adventurers bearing all that valuable loot. They take it off their hands and then sell it elsewhere for ten times what they paid for it. Adventurers are just happy to get rid of it so they can get back to the dungeon and hope for that big score. Dungeon diving is an addiction as I'm sure you all know. The townspeople are the dregs of society that gravitate to that kind of town or broken down adventurers that can't afford to go anywhere else.

Anyway, that is the way I look at it. It's a boomtown where everything is more expensive than normal and stuff that is rare and valuable elsewhere is nearly commonplace.

fizzix
August 19, 2011, 14:45
Would this then mean that regeneration would have no negative side-effects?

Sure. The negative side effect is pretty damn useless anyway.

buzzkill
August 19, 2011, 15:14
I actually notice the difference in food consumption while wearing regen. If I was looking for something quick and easy to make food more of a factor, I'd scale everything back by 1/2, or in other words, double the consumption rate. It's not an end, but a start.

Food is never going to be very interesting, nor should it be. The point of food is that you have to carry it (or find it) and eat it occasionally to prevent starvation. Right now these things don't happen often enough to make food even mildly interesting or a concern of minor consequence.

Derakon
August 19, 2011, 16:14
How about this as a modified food mechanic? Run out of food, and you don't regain anything by resting anymore, even if you have regen. You can't starve to death, but finding food is still important if you don't feel like relying on potions to keep you going in the dungeon.

Nomad
August 19, 2011, 16:53
I actually notice the difference in food consumption while wearing regen. If I was looking for something quick and easy to make food more of a factor, I'd scale everything back by 1/2, or in other words, double the consumption rate. It's not an end, but a start.

Food is never going to be very interesting, nor should it be. The point of food is that you have to carry it (or find it) and eat it occasionally to prevent starvation. Right now these things don't happen often enough to make food even mildly interesting or a concern of minor consequence.

I found the food mechanic most interesting back in 3.1.2v2 (or was it 3.0.9?) before starting characters were automatically given a scroll of WoR. Back then I lost quite a few characters, especially trolls, to being unable to make it back to up to the town before starvation got me. Now, the only rare time I even notice it is when I forget to replace dumped food before recalling, and start to get hungry in the middle of clearing a vault.

Hunger's not a problem because food's readily available to anyone but Ironman players. I make a point of never using scrolls or spells of satisfy hunger, and still never end up in any danger. I think those should definitely be removed from the game, and food made more scarce/hunger more frequent. How about a monster attack that makes you vomit and faint like drinking salt water? And/or limiting the amount of food you can carry by some mechanism - making it much heavier, or non-stackable, or giving more monsters the ability to rot your rations.

You could also reduce the food stocks in the general store so it's not always so readily available, since, come to think of it, food is the one thing that you can't get away with scumming for.

CJNyfalt
August 19, 2011, 22:59
How about a monster attack that makes you vomit and faint like drinking salt water?

While nausea attacks sounds interesting, there is the risk of becoming another paralysis. That is, something that you need resist to. On the other hand, I would trade the need to carry food for another attack with a needed resist.

The idea is at least interesting enough to warrant further discussion.

Nomad
August 19, 2011, 23:22
While nausea attacks sounds interesting, there is the risk of becoming another paralysis. That is, something that you need resist to. On the other hand, I would trade the need to carry food for another attack with a needed resist.

The idea is at least interesting enough to warrant further discussion.

How about a hunger attack that knocks points off your satiation level, rather than triggering the full on vomiting effect right away. If it makes you hungry in stages, knocking you down from full to normal to hungry to starving, then you've got time to defend yourself by stuffing more food before you get to the danger level. So getting stuck in melee with a satiation-drainer could force you to chow through your whole stack of rations in succession just to make sure you don't reach the point of fainting.

CJNyfalt
August 20, 2011, 00:11
How about a hunger attack that knocks points off your satiation level, rather than triggering the full on vomiting effect right away. If it makes you hungry in stages, knocking you down from full to normal to hungry to starving, then you've got time to defend yourself by stuffing more food before you get to the danger level. So getting stuck in melee with a satiation-drainer could force you to chow through your whole stack of rations in succession just to make sure you don't reach the point of fainting.

I got the impression that you meant something more like Stinking Cloud in D&D. Still, both ideas has merits.

Nick
August 20, 2011, 01:06
How about a hunger attack that knocks points off your satiation level, rather than triggering the full on vomiting effect right away. If it makes you hungry in stages, knocking you down from full to normal to hungry to starving, then you've got time to defend yourself by stuffing more food before you get to the danger level. So getting stuck in melee with a satiation-drainer could force you to chow through your whole stack of rations in succession just to make sure you don't reach the point of fainting.

O has a hunger attack, but only gives it to one very weak ghost. I think it has potential.

will_asher
August 20, 2011, 03:24
O has a hunger attack, but only gives it to one very weak ghost. I think it has potential.

DAJ has it too, but only two or three monsters have it.

Magnate
August 20, 2011, 09:41
Just thought I would throw in my two cents here. I think most people are looking at the Angband eceonomy and thiking it should be a stable economy, it's not. The town is more like a boomtown, a la california goldrush, dungeon diving is the middle earth equivalent of a get rich quick scheme. All the merchants are there to take advantage of the flush adventurers bearing all that valuable loot. They take it off their hands and then sell it elsewhere for ten times what they paid for it. Adventurers are just happy to get rid of it so they can get back to the dungeon and hope for that big score. Dungeon diving is an addiction as I'm sure you all know. The townspeople are the dregs of society that gravitate to that kind of town or broken down adventurers that can't afford to go anywhere else.

Anyway, that is the way I look at it. It's a boomtown where everything is more expensive than normal and stuff that is rare and valuable elsewhere is nearly commonplace.Nice. I like this rationale.

Derakon
August 20, 2011, 17:46
I'd always personally assumed that was how the town operated as well. Why else would you have a town perched on top of a giant pit full of monsters? Thanks for putting it into words nice and clearly, though.