|
|
#1 |
|
Angband Devteam member
|
Stats
I thought people might be interested in an early comparison of stats between 3.3.0 and v4.
For artifacts, current v4 is actually slightly more generous for DLs 1 to 7, then significantly less generous for the rest of the game (the y axis is "artifacts per game at this dungeon level"). It's amazing that two such different algorithms produce numbers that are even the same order of magnitude, let alone vaguely the same shape. I was expecting it to be much more different. It may still be too stingy (it's about twice as generous as it was a few days ago), but let's see how it plays. The optimum distribution is probably between the two lines. For egos, the picture is significantly more complicated. First, we have to assume for the graph that each item gets three affixes or one theme (I haven't yet worked out how to calculate an average number of affixes per item, but I suspect 3 is not too far off). Second, we have to bear in mind that lots of affixes are nowhere near as good as the old egos - there are currently *no* bad or cursed egos in 3.3, whereas a number of affix items will be pretty much unusable because of Broken or Damaged. Third, I've added the themed items to the affix items, but they are only 1-10% of the total (<1% at shallower levels, rising smoothly to 9.7% at dl100). The stats don't tell us how many of the 3.3 egos are of the "high-end" variety now found as themes(*), but the overall impression is that v4 provides a higher quantity of ego items but with a smaller proportion being really good. Which was kind of the point. (It's quite possible that affixes will need toning down deeper in the dungeon, but nobody's got that far yet.) (*) Actually they do, but my SQL-fu isn't up to that yet. I've just noticed that the colours are reversed on the two graphs. Just to keep you on your toes. Sorry. EDIT: It's also worth pointing out that the affix items include all those non-egos which 3.3.0 would have termed merely "good", and will therefore not show up in the 3.3.0 counts. To enable a proper comparison I'd need to add "good" items from 3.3.0's stats. Off to work out how to do that ...
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila Last edited by Magnate; October 28, 2011 at 13:32. Reason: Ref to {good} items |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Angband Devteam member
|
So, I managed to construct the hideous query to extract the data on the 36 "high-end" egos from the 3.3.0 stats. (I also added the figures for MHDSM, Balance DSM and PDSM, so we can compare against all the themes in v4.)
The first graph looks pretty ugly, but it's not too bad - there's a reasonable correlation in about half of the cases. The big discrepancies are: More than 4x as common in 3.3.0: 85x *Slay* Orc (#26) 27x Magi cloak (#7) 24x PDSM (#39) 13x Lordliness (#10) 9.7x *Slay* Troll (#27) 9.6x BSDM (#38) 8.3x Blessed (#35) 6.9x Magi crown (#8) 6.1x Haradrim (#32) 5.7x Dwarven armour/shields (#5) 4.9x Might (#9) 4.9x Westernesse (#20) More than twice as common in v4: 3x Earthquakes 3x True Sight This threw up some very interesting factoids: PDSM appears approximately once every ten games in 3.3.0. You may well not see it, of course, but it's generated somewhere in levels 1-100. Balance DSM appears on average every other game! Using alloc_max is hugely effective in limiting the generation of dross. This is the reason for the lack of *Slay* Orc/Troll weapons in v4. The distribution curve of these items throughout the dungeon is astonishingly smooth in both cases (though something odd happens in v4 past dl90). Moreover, the relationship between the two curves is amazingly consistent, given their completely different routes to these items. See the second graph.
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila Last edited by Magnate; October 31, 2011 at 14:50. Reason: Added names to x axis and re-ordered data |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Adept
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In his house at R'lyeh
Posts: 113
![]() |
Diagrams are cool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 2,302
![]() |
These look cool!
I was thinking about reworking wiz-stats, and I may still at some point in the near future. However, the stats module is probably better suited at answering these questions, which I think are useful for the head to head comparison. Damage (and to-hit) is probably the trickiest thing to even out with affixes. What do the curves look like for? weapons with +5 to dam or greater (especially in dlevels 1-10) weapons with +10 to dam or greater weapons with +15 to dam or greater weapons with +20 to dam or greater weapons with +25 to dam or greater endgame quality weapons: needs +15 to dam or greater, big dice (average 18 or greater, 18 is BoC in 3.3.0) and slay evil. Obviously we have many more options with dice in v4, so this should be an interesting comparison. If you can't figure out how to SQL this, I'll try to put it in wiz-stats. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Prophet
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,755
![]() |
I don't think requiring 18 average from dice and slay evil is a requirement for an "endgame quality" weapon. What matters is your average damage/round against Morgoth; I'd say if you can manage at least 400/round (per the 'I'nspect screen, which of course ignores misses and monster AC damage reduction) then you're in good shape.
Of course, that's harder to craft a query around... |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 2,302
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Prophet
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,755
![]() |
Right, what I'm saying is that requiring 18 average from dice will exclude a lot of endgame-quality weapons. I'd say more like SUM(to-dam + (dice + dice * sides) / 2) > 50. That might be a bit high; I don't have a good estimate for how much damage comes from off-weapon sources at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Prophet
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Half way to grave
Posts: 2,713
![]() |
Quote:
Try 4d4: 4*2.5 = 10. 18 is way too much. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 2,302
![]() |
I specifically do not care about artifacts though. If we were testing the randart code, this would be important to consider. I maintain that BoC, SoS and MoD all have average of 18.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Angband Devteam member
|
Fortunately we do log the +dam of every item by kind, depth and origin, so this query will be doable (albeit syntactically difficult for a novice). I'll see if I can do it during my next dull day at work (Monday).
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Various graphs from stats | Derakon | Development | 15 | June 27, 2011 22:05 |
| Useless stats | ekolis | Variants | 4 | May 20, 2011 23:50 |
| Stats maxed? | Merlin | Vanilla | 3 | April 30, 2011 18:48 |
| diff between Fight stats and Melee stats? | fbas | Vanilla | 8 | November 3, 2010 23:31 |
| stats held down. | kroiz | Vanilla | 4 | November 5, 2007 21:14 |