Angband Forums

Angband Forums (
-   Variants (
-   -   [Announce] PosChengband 7.0.0 Released (

HugoVirtuoso September 5, 2017 17:42


Originally Posted by chris (Post 123699)
I will be dropping clouded's contributions from the next version.

Does this mean you're going to say goodbye to the awesome Lite Town you implemented?

clouded September 5, 2017 21:32

This is pretty funny. I have some changes I've never really mentioned like removing ambushes and dungeon guardians but I haven't changed anything with staves of healing. By the way, for years I have broadcasted my poschengband games on and an irc channel of people have watched me play, there are several people here more reputable than a scumlord like me who can prove my innocence.

Edit: Out of curiosity I went into devices.c and changed EFFECT_HEAL_CURING to a level 1 effect. What this seems to do is cause all DL1 staves to be cure wounds, and seemingly no DL80 staves to be healing. Pretty bad deal, why would I want to do that? Also, in the character sheet these level 1 healing staves aren't even listed as "Cure Wounds" in the item tallies. This display bug is present all the way back to 4.0.0 for me because that is when this item tracker was added to dumps. It also shows up on the one poschengband-r game I won, which I didn't modify at all.

debo September 6, 2017 04:25


Originally Posted by Mocht (Post 123710)
You are explicitly telling me to not play your game, I will comply with your request

I don't think we all need to start piling on chris because he showed one moment of human frailty after spending two straight years cranking out a variant that is arguably more popular than Vanilla (sorry Nick.)

I also think clouded has contributed a ton of stuff not just to poscheng, but many other variants as well. I've also learned a lot by watching him on said termcasts, although he probably still thinks I'm a total scrub. Yes, his online persona is a bit edgelordy sometimes but I'm very happy to have him around. I have also personally maintained changes in my own variant branches before, and I never felt the need to announce them every time. The oook ladder isn't a sacred place. Hell, I wasn't even that picky about that sort of thing when I was running the comps.

I'll note that people rarely had much of a leg to stand on when they argued about what they wanted in Sil, because it was such a huge departure (was not seen to have a heritage) and half clearly expressed what the design philosophy was up-front.

Porschengband is very clearly a hengband descendant with way cooler stuff added, and indeed most of the early versions of poscheng added a lot of zany things (possessors, rings, etc.) I would have described hengband as "super batshit crazy", and since poscheng appeared to be amplifying that in the first few releases, that's the philosophy I ascribed to it. Maybe it's time to make it clear somewhere central what poscheng's core intended flavor really is?

Anyhow, I think the idea of cutting all the options that are obscuring intent is a good one. At worst, someone will fork from 6.x or elli and go in a different direction, and maybe people will really get a chance to see if the direction poscheng is taking will work out. I do have my doubts about pitching a variant that discourages diving to the angband community, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

Nivim September 6, 2017 06:07


Originally Posted by chris (Post 123699)

This sounds like one of those things that should have been in private messages instead in the thread, but then debo's post might not have been quite as good or comprehensive— tradeoffs.

To corroborate, I'm one of those people that watched clouded's termcast enough to say; the reason clouded was annoyed with device changes was because he was already annoyed with the vanilla (6.*) level of hassle some characters had getting devices online.

So am I, for that matter, but I also think it's appropriate that brawn characters need +Md to use powerful tools they didn't train for; I'd probably just smooth out the device changes instead of getting rid of them... or make it so +Md can be found more reliably, since it usually means sacrificing [M with amulet slots or sacrificing +slaying/brands with glove slots, regardless. (Also now Free Action, I guess.)

Current theory for the display bug is that it has something to do with compiler differences or files leftover from previous versions that didn't update correctly.


Originally Posted by chris (Post 123700)
[1] "Super batshit crazy" was never my design intent. Quite the exact opposite, actually. I guess I really need to write something up on my goals and views. If people knew more about my intentions, they'd be less puzzled by changes. Also, they would understand that what they want to play might not be what I want to build. That's OK. I really think there is opportunity for forking this variant and doing something more crowd pleasing. I would actually encourage this.

Ah, yeah— you see— stuff like Sexy Android Berserker or "you can play as the One Ring! Not someone wearing it, but the Ring itself!" is kinda how a lot of people got introduced to the game, followed by getting hooked on how there's such a great variety of choices that if one interesting character dies you can immediately start on a new one with radically different mechanics and balance.

There's overpowered things like Psion, mid-power things like Diggermaster, or low-power things like Hexmage or (non-U-discounting) Warlock, and they all have completely different playstyles and perspectives on the game, thus collectively making most other variants look bland and over-balanced by comparison.

Then there's Possessor; one of the reasons Hugo played so many Possessors is because Poschengband has the best Possessors out of the few games that even have them— they offer plenty of variety each game, they aren't broken, buggy, or unfinished, they're strong, and they have plenty of silly little details that another variant would just... simplify away.

I would not be surprised if most players (were all of them to read your post) failed to reconcile your perspective and their brightest memories of playing.

You might not have intended the game to be so, but your work was successful enough that it took on some life of its own.

I could have guessed your original intentions, myself, but failed to; I thought 5.x, 6.x, and 7.x represented a slow but novel shift in your design philosophy rather than you attempting to return to your original goals.

PowerWyrm September 6, 2017 08:20


Originally Posted by debo (Post 123712)

Now I know what I want in the next version: cars!

debo September 6, 2017 11:19


Originally Posted by Mocht (Post 123716)

(and some characters to make the 10 character minimum)

Ha. I double-checked my post for autocorrects but missed that one, and I'm sort of glad I did.

wobbly September 6, 2017 16:10

Forum dramas & discussions about adding porsches to the game aside: Thanks for taking the time to explain some of the game design philosophy & as always for a new version.

I've played a bit more & apart from a few bugs: mentioned up-thread, also see no-phase screenshot & the device bug screenshots.
& some balance issues: Summoning being the main one.
I've been enjoying most of the changes.


Free Action changes: Agree in principle, as I find binary mechanics dull. In practice? Haven't noticed a major difference other then gear decisions being a little trickier. Sometimes I'll be paralyzed for small amounts of time, I'm yet to have a "that was close" or "that got me moment".

See Invisible/Telepathy Changes: Again in principle agree. In practice? It's been more of a hassle/annoyance than a gain

Summons: Seem out of control. I already mentioned Utgard-Loke. I'll add Gachapin & Scylla. I'll also add that crypt creeps for me have become instant teleport. Not dangerous, not interesting, just see crypt creep=teleport.

Poison: Seems an improvement. However the only character I've fought great venom wyrms with was a phase spider, so unsure how the balance is late game for anything else.

Turn loss for empty devices??: Why was this reverted? What does it achieve other then me constantly checking invenory menu for charges? Seems an added UI hassle, breaks immersion for me, slows down an otherwise smoth flowing combat.

Minor quibble about statues: Why do they now stack? Were people really hauling them back to sell? Dropped a fancy statue in my museum & it suddenly changed, must of secretly been a mimic.

Antoine September 6, 2017 16:40

I have never played poscheng but I think it is the best *band and I always read about it.

I came here to say that I hope chris and clouded are soon reconciled. I suspect that if all the facts were clear, they would find they had a lot of common ground.


wobbly September 6, 2017 17:00

I've broken my comments up in to 3? posts for easier readability. Also spoilered my virtue rant. Hope you don't mind my verbosity. At times it's unclear if you even get around to reading comments. Shrug. Your variant & your time. do what you want, I guess.


Originally Posted by chris (Post 123700)
In the future, I probably will remove a bunch of options. Consider this fair warning or, better yet, an inventation to step up now while there is still time. For example, vaults may be getting a *huge* adjustment sometime very soon. If you like the current vaults, better act fast! I only ask that any new fork not be posted under the Poschengband ladder, as it would confuse me.

I play mostly default options with partial randarts.

Easy Id: Id games don't bother me. *Id games don't bother me. Have played games with no id, find them less aesthetically pleasing. I think the changes to ego & id a few versions back were good. Just going to point out that what you're saying about "next time you play" assumes people use the same save. I don't. On the other hand I already know what egos have what & it's pretty irrelevant to me.

Easy Lore: Tried it on a magic-eater. Disliked being able to check every monster for it's resistance holes. Went back to playing with it off.

Virtues: Ambivalent about this. Play with it on. Mostly ignore them unless I'm a caster or a summoner. Are super annoying for nature casters, see virtue rant later on.

All this said I recognize I'm in the minority. I talk & read the comments of people who HATE id games WITH A PASSION. No amount of making the id game cleverer or sexier is going to change that. They'll feel like something that annoyed them is being forced on them, because to be blunt you are talking about literally doing just that.

Virtue Rant
I've been playing on-line on & talking to people who are new to the game. The most common question I see comes when someone uses an un-ided item & becomes "less knowledgable". You can almost sense the paranoia of a player who is learning the game & "done something wrong" & "lost something" that'll matter latter on but they have no idea what happened & why it matters or where it'll come back to bite them.

Nature Casters. Maintaining true neutral is super annoying. I know enough quirks to game it & it is gaming it. Feels artificial. Get hungry so many times to be good-er. Be a glutton so many times to be evil-er.
The nature virtue itself? Anything with the animal tag is natural. Hounds. Hydras. God-damn Nether hounds are natural.

wobbly September 6, 2017 17:20

Final comment/rant(for now :) )


Originally Posted by chris (Post 123700)
For example, I like Hugo ... he's rather entertaining! But I wouldn't say he is playing the game using the style for which it is designed. And if you think you can develop a variant without a target playstyle in mind, then you are "super batshit crazy" :) The most important decisions you make as a variant maintainer, imo, involve resource allocation and different playstyles need vastly different approaches. I assume a controlled descent approach, using ability to defeat uniques near their level as the controlling principle. I do not like "if you are getting you butt whooped on DL40, go deeper" as a playstyle, though it admittedly works much ... *much* better. And this is for *design*, not play. Play anyway you like. If I say a certain style is scummy, that is not a moral judgement and does not reflect in any way on the player or what they accomplish while playing. But don't expect design to change for any playstyle that differs from the intent. To repeat, you can and should play anyway you like. But it is impossible to vary the game design to suit all playstyles. Also, I feel it is OK for a VM to discourage certain actions such as stair skimming or what not. These tend to be things that I have all too much first hand experience with, having been a very "scummy" player myself. But they usually exploit some code weakness that is unnatural or unrealistic. For me, when I stopped doing these sorts of things, the game improved. My win/loss ratio, if I cared about it, certainly went down. My games became longer ... but more fun. I'm trying to do you a favor here :)

Ok, I get this & don't. Let's talk 2 different characters. 2 different gamestyles.

I play a big bad bruiser (Half-Giant Warrior?). Fight things. Get stronger. Fight bigger things. Get stronger etc. Works within the design philosophy.

I play a small sneaky guy with teleport games (say a Shrewd Sprite Sorcery Rogue). My whole stick is avoiding fights. My fun comes from playing where things are super dangerous. Where I have to concentrate & constantly detect because everything is dangerous. My fun does not come from fighting/killing a thousand things my own size because the game has enforced a brick wall on progression of which sections of the game I have access to.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:32.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.