Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Vanilla

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 21, 2010, 20:32   #11
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 3,002
fizzix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo Pietilš View Post
I'd say remove some of the GV:s. Notably the ones that are very long in vertical direction. Those are annoying and I suspect that they do not fit in the dungeon very easily, so it might prevent creating one.

I also think we need a mid-level vault between GV and LV. There was a bug at one point where CrownGV was marked as LV and that was fun. It is open vault where monsters can escape easily, the "8" spots had dangerous monsters and reward was good. We need to have more of that kind of vaults, not necessary the huge closed GV:s or open weak LV:s. Getting CrownGV at start of the stat-gain was...interesting. How to get that Golden Crown that that ghost couldn't pick up but not get killed by three times as fast as you Azriel next to it? Or wonder if monster in that "8" spot where you don't see a monster with detect evil is a white icky thing, drolem or maybe Azriel.

Seriously, that was seriously fun. We need more of such things in dungeon. Vast majority of current levels are just boring.

Also all other dungeon specialties needs to be a bit more common except pits. Pits I find very common.
I agree with you on almost all of this. I do think we need a guaranteed "great" specification and that every GV should have at least 5-10 items with that designation.

Changing the vault layouts are fairly easy, although I kind of like the wide variety of vaults. I'd be more inclined to flip vaults sideways rather than remove them. Remember for a standard player each vault will very likely be the first time the player has ever encountered that structure. I've had something like 15 winners or so, and there are vaults that I've never seen. That's good.

If I get the GV placement changes done that I want to, I'll see if that raises vault frequency. If it does, then difficulty of placing vertical vaults will be a moot point. The next step would be to beef up some of the weaker vaults. It's ridiculous to me that the easiest sectioned off vaults are full of 8s while other GVs have 1 or 2 only.

I also think the mid-level vault is a good idea. They could span from diagonal vaults up to some of the weaker GVs, like snake maze.

The vault placement algorithm I'm thinking of would be.

generate new level.

check for GV (if passes, make GV)

[if MVs exist, check for MV here, otherwise:]

begin current dungeon making scheme.
fizzix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21, 2010, 20:51   #12
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 8,943
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Switching '8' back to guaranteed-great would be a trivial change. I'm curious why it was changed to guaranteed-good in the first place. Though, not to the extent of trawling changelogs.

Therem: I don't agree with you that artifacts should always come from monster drops, nor that there should be uniques with guaranteed artifact drops. I wouldn't mind seeing a quality boost in the drop from unique monsters (their drops are currently bad proportionate to their challenge), something like "if unique, then treat monster as if their native depth were 25% deeper". But tweaking artifact generation like you suggest removes some of the random fun from the game.
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21, 2010, 23:44   #13
EpicMan
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 356
EpicMan is on a distinguished road
Perhaps great was changed to good to allow higher-level non-equipment?

I think we need a new classifier, say 'supurb item', that includes the big three weapons, the best egos,
DSM and mithril/adamant ego armors, as well as the best consumables and devices.
That way, while it is still random you know there is something great in that vault.
You could also add them to graveyards to make them more tempting.
EpicMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22, 2010, 00:02   #14
Therem Harth
Knight
 
Therem Harth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New England winter
Posts: 923
Therem Harth is on a distinguished road
If you want to make graveyards tempting, you have to make it possible for characters to tackle them without dying. Currently that... doesn't really work, IMO. Though I can think of a way to do it without unbalancing things, which I'll post elsewhere.

Last edited by Therem Harth; October 22, 2010 at 00:10.
Therem Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22, 2010, 01:23   #15
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 3,002
fizzix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo Pietilš View Post
I'd say remove some of the GV:s. Notably the ones that are very long in vertical direction. Those are annoying and I suspect that they do not fit in the dungeon very easily, so it might prevent creating one.
Checking the code, this actually does not matter. Room generation looks like this:

1. Select room type and location.

2. See if room fits on map (or overlaps other rooms)

3. If it fits, select specific room

4. Mark all parts of the room as filled

So at the point where it's checking if the room fits it's using the default size for GVs (66 x 44) which is friggin huge, much larger than any actual vault. It also forces LVs to fit in a 33x22 block, even if they're the tiny hidden vaults.

edit: One more thing that's kind of surprising to me. A GV is so big that it'll fail the 'fit-on-map' test 7/9 of the time! That's insane. edit the edit, this is wrong, it's actually closer to not fitting 2/3 of the time. (23/36 to be exact)

The only thing I'm really stuck on is how to scale the GV frequency with level... ideas for that?

more edit: testing the code out so far. GVs are created 15 times out of 100 randomly generated chances at dlevel 100. I calculated it should occur about 18% of the time, so things look right.

for scaling I'm thinking of some sort of geometric scaling where the GV frequency drops by 1/3 every 10 levels.

Last edited by fizzix; October 22, 2010 at 04:58.
fizzix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22, 2010, 04:07   #16
Timo Pietilš
Prophet
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Climbing up from hole I just dug.
Posts: 4,096
Timo Pietilš is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therem Harth View Post
If you want to make graveyards tempting, you have to make it possible for characters to tackle them without dying. Currently that... doesn't really work, IMO. Though I can think of a way to do it without unbalancing things, which I'll post elsewhere.
You can empty graveyards pretty easily without dying. It just requires some patience to get all the monsters where you want them when you want them. Point with graveyards IMO is not to be "tempting" but "intimidating". Something to avoid in the dungeon. Same thing as Zoos.
Timo Pietilš is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22, 2010, 04:14   #17
Timo Pietilš
Prophet
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Climbing up from hole I just dug.
Posts: 4,096
Timo Pietilš is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzix View Post
Checking the code, this actually does not matter. Room generation looks like this:

1. Select room type and location.

2. See if room fits on map (or overlaps other rooms)

3. If it fits, select specific room

4. Mark all parts of the room as filled

So at the point where it's checking if the room fits it's using the default size for GVs (66 x 44) which is friggin huge, much larger than any actual vault. It also forces LVs to fit in a 33x22 block, even if they're the tiny hidden vaults.
If that is the order of doing things wouldn't it be fixed by using the actual vault size +1 to each direction instead of default value? Vault dimensions are IIRC into edit-files.
Timo Pietilš is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22, 2010, 05:04   #18
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 3,002
fizzix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo Pietilš View Post
If that is the order of doing things wouldn't it be fixed by using the actual vault size +1 to each direction instead of default value? Vault dimensions are IIRC into edit-files.
yes, that is indeed correct. However, I'm not sure how to do this without rewriting large chunks of the code. This is only an issue for GVs, I think an easier approach would be to treat GVs separately.

The next step, and it's very easy to do, is to change the place where GVs were generated in the normal code, and make them into Medium vaults. Make medium vaults 33x22 (current size for lesser vaults) Make all lesser vaults 33x11 or less. This is a more detailed project. I should have a working version of the code with better GV frequencies up by this weekend at the latest. Then I may try my hand at some vault construction.
fizzix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24, 2010, 00:58   #19
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 3,002
fizzix is on a distinguished road
I have a working version with different GV frequencies.

The algorithm looks like:

Make level

Attempt Greater vault:
At dlevel 100 or above vault probability is (devel/199)*(probability vault fits on level, about 37%)
Every 10 levels below (starting with 99) the probability goes down by a factor of 2/3

If GV is not attempted or fails go into the normal room generating loop with the exception that GVs have been temporarily placed with another attempt at LVs.

GV percentages have been tested and look like:

* Dlevel GV frequency
* 100 18%
* 90-99 10.8-12%
* 80-89 6.4 -7.2%
* 70-79 3.7 - 4.2%
* 60-69 2.1 - 2.4%
* 50-59 1.2 - 1.4%
* and less than 1% below 50 */

As soon as I figure out how to upload a new version to git I can post the code online. Unfortunately, the website is opaque to my meager intellect.


The goal, and I'll start working on this soon, is to create a new class of vault (medium vault). The lesser vaults will all fit in 33x11 blocks. The medium vaults will fit in 33x22, the current size for lesser vaults. These will probably include some of the more powerful lesser vaults (diagonals and turnabouts) as well as some of the weaker greater vaults (snake maze) along with several newly created vaults of my own design.

Lastly, some of the weaker GVs will be made more powerful. These are heavily weighted now to the end of the dungeon. Medium vaults will appear much earlier on.

edit: thanks to Nick's advice, version is now up on http://github.com/fizzix/angband

Last edited by fizzix; October 24, 2010 at 02:48.
fizzix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24, 2010, 19:53   #20
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 3,002
fizzix is on a distinguished road
I've added medium vaults, added two new (medium) vaults. Beefed up some of the flaccid greater vaults.

I adjusted the medium vault probability so that it's about right. At dlevel 40, a lesser vault has a 16% probability of become a medium vault. This jumps up to 24% at dlevel 60 and 32% at dlevel 80. (lesser vault frequency also goes up.)
fizzix is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Phail of Galadriel frequency diggerB Vanilla 36 September 26, 2010 19:42
Greater Vault Frequency d_m Vanilla 3 September 18, 2009 03:13
Feature Request: store restock, utility item frequency Pete Mack Vanilla 11 January 19, 2009 21:34


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:15.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.