Angband Forums (http://angband.oook.cz/forum/index.php)
-   Idle chatter (http://angband.oook.cz/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Resistances: additive vs boolean (http://angband.oook.cz/forum/showthread.php?t=4115)

 pampl February 9, 2011 07:11

Resistances: additive vs boolean

I've been thinking about resistances and I'm not sure which of two options is better: the classic Angband system, where you either have/don't have a resistance (complicated slightly with temp resistances and immunities and vulnerabilities), or the approach used by OAngband/EyAngband/FAAngband and most (all?) Diablo-ish games: each resistance on your equipment adds to the net total resistance. That doesn't have to be a percentile figure, e.g. in Torchlight resistance is a straight damage reduction. It's not a completely black-and-white situation, as there are sometimes resistance caps which render any additional resistance pointless- similar to already having a resistance in Angband's true/false system.

I think I prefer Vanilla Angband's system, because the boolean nature of it makes having a resistance vs. having a "hole" a stark difference that clarifies the consequences of equipment decisions. On the other hand, the granularity that's usually present in the additive system means more possible variety. I'm interested to hear all your opinions on it, even though we're probably slightly biased towards Angband's way of doing it ;)

 Philip February 9, 2011 07:18

I went with the O system because I think it allows for more variety and such, and it allows for more specialization. Have 60% chaos resist? Guess who you're going after.

 Storch February 9, 2011 08:25

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Philip (Post 48346) I went with the O system because I think it allows for more variety and such, and it allows for more specialization. Have 60% chaos resist? Guess who you're going after.
O system is obviously "better". Anyway I like boolean resistances more because O system tempts me to optimize ad nauseam and makes me perpetually discontent. What I don't like and understand in V system are high resistances - why they are random, why there are arbitrary damage caps etc.

 Philip February 9, 2011 09:14

Wait a sec. Are we all in agreement or do I just not understand the poll?

 Storch February 9, 2011 10:20

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Philip (Post 48351) Wait a sec. Are we all in agreement or do I just not understand the poll?
I don't know, I didn't vote :-)

 Philip February 9, 2011 10:35

OK, now I'm *very* confused, pampl seems to like the Vanilla system, but if I understand correctly I just voted for the O system. Maybe pampl hasn't voted either. To adress pampl's concern for the clear difference between holes and not holes I think it'll be still quite clear.

 pampl February 9, 2011 13:17

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Philip (Post 48355) OK, now I'm *very* confused, pampl seems to like the Vanilla system, but if I understand correctly I just voted for the O system.
I managed to mis-vote in my own poll. I should have waited until I got some sleep before trying to do such a complicated task

 buzzkill February 9, 2011 13:18

The additive FA/O system is better. It makes every resistance on every piece of equipment matter. It also provides some 'random' variability (just because you have rBase covered doesn't mean that they are covered equally). Furthermore, you can achieve higher levels of resistance without bothering with potions/spells (V-style double resists).

 Philip February 9, 2011 13:57

So to set the record clear, it's actually 8-2, right?

 pampl February 9, 2011 23:25

No doubt it was at the time you wrote it; as of now it's 9-5. Additive resistances are more popular than I would have predicted; I guess I should be considering them more seriously.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:05.