Winning a slightly harder game

[fizzix]

http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=10893

I finished my trial test of my changes that included:

1: TO is a bolt not a beam
2: Monsters can save vs destruction. If they save they are either teleported far away (as in TO or banish evil) or teleported to just outside the destruction zone. (equal chance). Saves are level dependent, Morgoth can never be destroyed in destruction.

The game highlight was on my first trip to dlevel 100 where the palantir showed a Plain Gold Ring sitting in what looked like a nest on the other end of the level. Since I couldn't destruct Morgoth, he kept on harassing me as I made my way to the nest. Unsurprisingly, the nest turned out to be a graveyard, and trying to TO or kill all the nasties and having to deal with M each time he came back made for quite a challenge. I did get the ring, popped back into town to grap my consumables and then dropped down and killed Morgoth immediately.

The changes to TO and destruction required a different thought process for how to deal with things. I think the change was good overall, but it'd be nice if other people would comment on it. (I have a fork on github with these changes in them.) Biggest change is with summoners. I don't use ASCs, but I do use create doors a lot. Summoners are hard because the line them up in a corridor to TO them does not work. Another common trick of TOing a Unique and destructing the escort was also not possible. Solely these changes do not satisfy the 'make the game harder' desire, but they're a step in that direction.

[Estie]

The TO change is kindof big, but what about the *destruct* change. How often do you actually destruct in a normal game ?
I certainly devote a slot to it, its an excellent emergency break, but I find not much use for it on a regular basis even if I (eventually) have the spell. Maybe the biggest effect is to be able to keep the summons in check in a long M fight.

[Derakon]

I'd actually say that being unable to remove Morgoth by Destruction makes the game easier -- it means that when he summons, I can just destruct immediately instead of TOing him first and then destruct. Of course, most of the things he summons will also survive, so it may be a wash overall.

[fizzix]

Originally Posted by Derakon

I'd actually say that being unable to remove Morgoth by Destruction makes the game easier -- it means that when he summons, I can just destruct immediately instead of TOing him first and then destruct. Of course, most of the things he summons will also survive, so it may be a wash overall.

There are two easy fixes for this abuse. You can have monsters get healed some if they save vs. destruction. You probably won't destruct morgoth if he gets 2000 hp back. The other option is to always have a 10% chance to be removed entirely. Then you may be afraid of losing all progress. (I did not destruct Morgoth at all in the last battle, to avoid using this as abuse.)

I kind of like the fact that you have to continually deal with Morgoth if you want to scum dlevel 100.

@Estie: I don't use Destruction all that much, but I do use it. Here are some situations where it comes to use a lot.

A monster or unique I can't or don't want to handle is on the level and I want to remove it. Common examples are the unique angels. Time, gravity, aether and ethereal hounds. This is my most common use for destruction.

Creating terrain that's good for fighting. Mainly in the last battle. But also useful for some other uniques with rough summons, like maeglin or ancalagon.

Removing dangerous summons or escorts by TOing the unique you want to kill and destructing the rest.

Emergency escape (still works for this)

Removing all monsters from vaults but leaving the artifacts. I don't do this, but some other people do.

[Derakon]

Destruction shouldn't heal monsters. I'd go with the 10% solution.

[Fendell Orcbane]

Not that anyone will care but I don't know what people are aiming for with making the game harder. Are people trying to make the game more"realistic"? Quite frankly I think that exploiting things like ASC or LOS are just part of the game. Although once you beat the game a few times it does feel a bit "easy" during the end game, its still difficult to get there if you don't pay attention.

Honestly, I thought that V was fine, especially after missile damage was brought more in line with hand weapon damage.

If you want a harder game why not play a variant?

[fizzix]

Originally Posted by Fendell Orcbane

Not that anyone will care but I don't know what people are aiming for with making the game harder.

I think the goal is to create more situations where you have to think before acting. At least that's what I was going for.

Although, this isn't really the thread to discuss that, I think that was pretty much beaten to death in the 'making the game harder' threads.

[fizzix]

Originally Posted by Derakon

Destruction shouldn't heal monsters. I'd go with the 10% solution.

I think there's still some fiddling to do with this yet. I'm not entirely satisfied with the way it works now. Maybe remove the teleport long option. Then give a straight per monster level saving through and either move the monster outside the destruction zone or delete it entirely, with a lower bound of 10% for deletion.

The reason I added the teleport long part is I wanted some suspense as to whether the monster got deleted or not. This turns out to not be so interesting.

[ewert]

The "push or destroy" with saving throw sounds good for destruction.

[Magnate]

Originally Posted by fizzix

I think there's still some fiddling to do with this yet. I'm not entirely satisfied with the way it works now. Maybe remove the teleport long option. Then give a straight per monster level saving through and either move the monster outside the destruction zone or delete it entirely, with a lower bound of 10% for deletion.

The reason I added the teleport long part is I wanted some suspense as to whether the monster got deleted or not. This turns out to not be so interesting.

Good experiment though - thanks for the write-up. Have you put binaries of this test version up on github? You'll get a lot more testers that way - esp if they include a Windows binary.