![]() |
#11 | |
Apprentice
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Olympia, WA
Age: 42
Posts: 94
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Apprentice
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Olympia, WA
Age: 42
Posts: 94
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
True enough. Which is why I'm considering DSM armor right now. I just want to know the pros and cons of switching out of my current armor before doing so. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,780
![]() |
That you are a ranger doesnt factor in at all; all classes want armor for the same reasons. I dont know about persistent levels, I never played that way.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
Apprentice
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Olympia, WA
Age: 42
Posts: 94
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 2,424
![]() |
AC was raised across the board because armour class is not valuable. An interesting decision to say the least.
If something is not valuable and you give everyone more, does it become more or less valuable? If melee is not dangerous enough is the solution to make it safer or more dangerous? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,780
![]() |
Quote:
Not sure you grasp the issue here. The objective is to make AC value a consideration (and not only resistances or other modifiers). So yes, if AC protects more from melee, it will be valued higher compared to, say, fire resistance. If you reduce AC, players will certainly not take it more into consideration. The fact that melee damage plays a small role in the spectrum of dangers is a different matter entirely. While it might be a good idea to change that, it is not clear how that can be achieved without other (possibly unwanted) consequences. The first obvious idea is to make phasing less available, but then this has always been a feature of Angband and it is unclear if that, in the end, really would make players want to wear heavier armour. Back when Magnate made this change my idea was to make npc archers more impactful, effectively introducing physical ranged damge into the spectrum, against which armor class would help of course. As it stands, everything dangerous is magic and elemental. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Adept
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 146
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,351
![]() |
Am I the only one who values AC around here? I always find it very puzzling when I read posts saying how unimportant AC is. I've won this game many times and I can tell you AC is a key part to winning. Absolutely essential. Yes, I prefer melee classes, but there are enough of those in the game and enough great melee weapons in the game to make meleeing a popular way to kill high value targets. The longer you can stand toe to toe without phasing, the less likely you will phase into more danger. I just don't understand this argument that AC isn't important! The mind boggles....
![]() Sure, it's true I'm not going to give up a base resist in the end game to get more AC, but I will, and do, give up high resists for more AC and speed if I can afford to (I will take 20 base speed over 23 or even 25 base speed for an increase of 30AC every time; speed armors are overrated unless you are hurt up for speed; of the dozen+ ego speed armors I've found I think I've worn an ego speed armor exactly zero times; and I don't just mean in the endgame or final fight; I mean any time I find a speed armor at any point in the game, I always have something better or enough speed elsewhere to make such a choice an inferior one). As for why there isn't more ranged damage from missiles is a very good question and something I've wondered about from time to time. Sure seems like a good idea to at least try out some deep-dungeon enemies that fire 150 damage arrows repeatedly. You could have all sorts of different high level (native DL80+) ranged missile attack enemies, shooting all sorts of elemental missiles, even arrows dipped in chaos (that would be a seriously dangerous enemy if you don't have pConf where high AC could be super important). Missiles could even cause severe and mortal wounds. Could add a deep level Ranger unique that occasionally unleashes a barage of heavy hitting arrows. He could even have a special attack (and maybe @Rangers could get it as an end-game level spell, too). The spell would be called barage of arrows. Shoots three four or five arrows at once for like 80 mana. And for those who say Angband doesn't need anymore super dangerous monsters that are auto-TO'd, might be fun to make a unique Ranger that knows how to use the terrain to their advantage for hockey stick positioning against @ so that @ can't just easily TO him everytime. It's always been kind of frustrating that a high end ranger never gets 100% accuracy against low level monsters, and one of the more frustrating aspects of playing ranger. I understand mages are fragile and so they make up for that with 100% accuracy damage spells, but seems like rangers should at least gain 100% accuracy on lesser foes.
__________________
Detailed account of my Ironman win here. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 2,424
![]() |
Really? Because you listed a bunch of reasons why you don't value it, & I didn't see a lack of AC on the list. If armour is too heavy already it's still too heavy if you double the AC, triple the AC or quadruple the AC. Fact is that's helping the lighter armours more then the heavy armour. If light armour of rfire is sufficient AC already then that's even more the case if you raise the base standard. There's a reason the classes most likely to have use for an accuracy ring are the ones that had trouble hitting in the first place. The only way increasing the AC means decreasing the weight is if you can now get the same AC from a lighter set of armour.
Last edited by wobbly; April 15, 2019 at 18:14. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Prophet
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,024
![]() |
The old AC rescaling wasn't just "multiply the numbers on armor and then reduce the effectiveness of the numbers in the code." It actually changed the effectiveness of armor in terms of mitigating damage from melee.
Is it worth taking a -2 penalty to speed in the early game if you can become borderline immune to melee in consequence? Because I've had that happen, through a lucky drop of adamantine armor in the early game, before the AC rescaling happened. AC has three main problems, in my view. First is the fact that there are an awful lot of attacks that bypass AC's damage-reduction abilities (though IIRC it still helps in keeping you from getting hit in the first place). Not just spells and breath weapons: lots of melee attacks also do full damage regardless of AC. I think pretty much any attack that does not use the hit/claw/bite/kick/crush verbs ignores AC. Moreover, most attacks that have special effects on them ignore AC -- so that Greater Titan's ridiculously punishing hit-to-confuse melee gets through completely unabated. The second issue is that the community has a bad habit of viewing abilities in a very binary fashion. Does it prevent you from getting one-shot? It has value. If it doesn't, then it doesn't matter. In that lens, an AC boost that reduces the damage you take in melee from Morgoth by, say, 100 per round, isn't particularly meaningful. But if you go from needing to heal every 3 rounds to needing to heal every 4, that's a significant improvement in your action economy. And finally, it's just plain hard to tell what difference AC is making for you. The game doesn't tell you anything at all about the damage reduction it gives you, nor which attacks are affected by it. You can learn your chance to be hit, but it's hard to tell how much improving your AC would affect that. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mage armor encumberance | PowerWyrm | Vanilla | 32 | October 11, 2015 02:41 |
Level 31 Mage, which armor to use??? | Freddo | AAR | 7 | March 16, 2015 16:20 |
encumbering armor | quarague | Vanilla | 5 | July 15, 2012 18:21 |
Randart armor. | Faerandir | Vanilla | 3 | December 8, 2010 09:22 |
Test-Id for armor | Donald Jonker | Vanilla | 3 | May 20, 2009 11:00 |