Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutDownloadVariantsLadderForumCompetitionSpoilersComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Vanilla

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 28, 2010, 20:40   #41
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 2,598
fizzix is on a distinguished road
I would eagerly accept Eddies quiver suggestion with a limit on quiver slots anywhere 35+ or Timo's suggestion of only one quiver with a 99 arrow capacity. However, I'd really really like the same behavior to appear in the home...

Right now putting in a home quiver is silly powerful. But if slot size was 35 or even 50, it wouldn't make *that* much difference.
fizzix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 28, 2010, 21:06   #42
bron
Swordsman
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Saratoga, California (in the midst of Silicon Valley)
Posts: 354
bron is on a distinguished road
My opinion: the idea of the quiver is to allow the player to hold multiple small stacks of arrows, e.g. the half-dozen or so slay undead arrows leftover after killing the Witch King or whatever. To that end, I think that the quiver should only hold a total number of missiles equal to one inventory slot (right now 99, but maybe less in the future). There should be no "expansion": you get max one quiver (only) and it occupies max one inventory slot (only). The number of slots in the quiver itself isn't too much of an issue as long as the total capacity of the quiver is restricted. To serve what I see as it's intended function, more slots is better, so I like 10 more than 5. But 5 is certainly workable.

As for generically reducing slot capacity from 99 to (say) 50: its darn rare for me to be carrying more than 50 of anything other than missiles. (Usually (+0,+0), although after getting Tenser's I've been known to carry a lot of (+9,+9) branded missiles.) I don't think it would affect me at all, and is probably a good thing to reduce abuse. But I frankly don't consider it to be a big deal either way.
bron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 28, 2010, 21:12   #43
ewert
Knight
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 516
ewert is on a distinguished road
My thoughts:

slot size 50 - definitely could live with it. Applies to quiver "slots" too. Thing is though ... I would not really lose anything by it, so it would be a moot change (I use archery so little, with any char, as I for some reason dislike ranger at the moment with the extra shots class ability so much I haven't played one for ages).

slot size 20 - would change some for me. I very very rarely carry anything over 15, id scrolls and sometimes ccw come in mind, and definitely for final fights if needed. Since I feel the max should be the same for both "quiver slots" and normal slots, I would feel this is bit too low

slot size 30-40 - probably the compromise size for me. 30 would sometimes matter. It would also definitely matter for final fights a bit, no more stacks of "infinite" ccw unless sacrifice some more slots. For quiver ... sounds okayish, but then again I am an archery deviant and don't really use it (have a *slay undead* crossbow randart with my pally now, tempted to use it on undead uniques ).

So, 30-40 would prolly be a nice point in my opinion.
ewert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 28, 2010, 21:18   #44
d_m
Angband Devteam member
 
d_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
Age: 33
Posts: 1,497
d_m is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by bron View Post
My opinion: the idea of the quiver is to allow the player to hold multiple small stacks of arrows, e.g. the half-dozen or so slay undead arrows leftover after killing the Witch King or whatever. To that end, I think that the quiver should only hold a total number of missiles equal to one inventory slot (right now 99, but maybe less in the future). There should be no "expansion": you get max one quiver (only) and it occupies max one inventory slot (only). The number of slots in the quiver itself isn't too much of an issue as long as the total capacity of the quiver is restricted. To serve what I see as it's intended function, more slots is better, so I like 10 more than 5. But 5 is certainly workable.
Even if we wanted to limit the "compression" capacity of the quiver to only 99 pieces of ammo, I agree with Eddie that I don't want to have to play the ammo shuffling game constantly. I would want to compress as many small ammo stacks as possible up to 99 into one slot, and then have each quiver slot map directly onto the pack. This way all the ammo can still live in the same place.

I don't really see this as "expansion" so much as being more friendly.
__________________
linux->xterm->screen->pmacs
d_m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 28, 2010, 22:31   #45
PowerDiver
Prophet
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,588
PowerDiver is on a distinguished road
If you have more avg arrows than fit into a slot, they go into two slots. E.g. if you carry 140 arrows currently, they automatically merge to use 2 pack slots even if you pick them up 20 at a time. I view the quiver as simply meaning that all ammo can merge, instead of requiring the same sval/tval/ego/plusses. So how ever many slots are taken up using X average arrows, the quiver allows any combination of up to 10 types of ammo cumulatively counting X to fit into the same number of slots as the average arrows would take up.

From this point of view quiver "expansion" is equally as natural as 140 avg arrows currently using 2 slots given the current max slot size of 99.
PowerDiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30, 2010, 06:22   #46
Pete Mack
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,399
Donated: $40
Pete Mack is on a distinguished road
I tend to agree with bron on this one: the quiver should have a maximum capacity, somewhere in the neighborhood of 150. (That's a generous estimate of the number of arrows that you can pack (with hexagonal packing) into an actual 6" quiver. It's also a reasonable estimate of the number of arrows it takes to kill Morgoth.)

(I would set it at a round number of pack slots, so if pack slots have a max of 99, use 198. If pack slots have a max of 75 or 30, use 150.)

Alternatively, you can use an UnAngband like model: you have a single "bag" in which you can keep a set of 5 object types and up to (say) 100 objects, each of 0.5 lb or less.
(ie: scrolls, potions, jewelry, and ammo.)


This means you can always carry a few scrolls and potions of choice, but you can't carry a crazy excess of ammo.

The details of how many objects in the "quiver" correspond to a single pack slot is left as an exercise for the beta tester.
Pete Mack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30, 2010, 18:39   #47
bron
Swordsman
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Saratoga, California (in the midst of Silicon Valley)
Posts: 354
bron is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerDiver View Post
I view the quiver as simply meaning that all ammo can merge, instead of requiring the same sval/tval/ego/plusses.
I have to admit, I find this a compelling argument. So I find I now agree that the "right" way to reduce the power of the quiver is to reduce the slot capacity, keeping the simple and consistent paradigm, rather than introduce some arbitrary limitation as I proposed earlier.

But while I think the proposal is good, I also think that it is essentially an attempt to tweak something that has more fundamental problems. It would be better to figure out what's going to be done to nerf archery first, and then try to tweak that. But since that is a longer and more difficult road, this might be a reasonable interim thing.
bron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30, 2010, 20:06   #48
TJS
Swordsman
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 360
TJS is on a distinguished road
Any plans for the home to work in the same way as the quiver?
TJS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2010, 00:10   #49
PowerDiver
Prophet
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,588
PowerDiver is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJS View Post
Any plans for the home to work in the same way as the quiver?
I'm in favor of an unlimited home, but I would not be surprised by a consensus against a home quiver based on peripherally related comments I've read in the past.

There is also a development issue involving a home quiver. The strange noun-verb inversion in stores means that the number chars '0' through '9' are already being used. While it is possible to make use of letters 'C' and above, that's the sort of extra special casing that will make things take longer, and developers may prefer to put off even considering it until after the next time stores are redone.
PowerDiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31, 2010, 09:19   #50
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 4,988
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate Send a message via Skype™ to Magnate
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerDiver View Post
I'm in favor of an unlimited home, but I would not be surprised by a consensus against a home quiver based on peripherally related comments I've read in the past.

There is also a development issue involving a home quiver. The strange noun-verb inversion in stores means that the number chars '0' through '9' are already being used. While it is possible to make use of letters 'C' and above, that's the sort of extra special casing that will make things take longer, and developers may prefer to put off even considering it until after the next time stores are redone.
While I accept the rationale for the noun-verb inversion (easier for non-keyboard input), I don't like the scrolling in stores/home. IMO a sequence of pages would be much better - and would also solve this problem.

I don't know what I think about expanding the home - I can think of arguments both ways. To help my thinking, can someone explain why we should expand the home but not the pack?
Magnate 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
Reduce variance on dispel* spells Derakon Vanilla 6 June 22, 2010 00:16
FA 3.5 Wielding bug? - extra equipment slot buzzkill Variants 4 September 21, 2008 07:35
Dungeon window size Bodkin Vanilla 2 March 30, 2008 04:48
Dungeon Size ? lugonn Vanilla 5 September 2, 2007 12:11
Attachment size limit Magnate Oook! 2 July 30, 2007 11:26


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:12.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.