2011/3/25 Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 03:51:05PM +0100, Raphael Langella wrote:
> > Kilobyte thinks we should release 0.8 with the old Ash or without him
> > because there's not enough time to playtest the changes. What we've
> learned
> > from the past few months are what are the features we dislike about him
> and
> > how we'd like to fix them.
>
> Uhm, what I said is that we'd have little time before _0.9_ to reasonably
> balance a god. Any feature of this size requires a long time to get right.
> Over half a year the previous version of Ashenzari had was still somewhat
> dubious, yet at least roughly balanced.
>
> We get major _important_ (not just gimmicks) features added and removed a
> few times a day for the last few days. This is good for a larval stage,
> not
> for something just before a freeze.
>
> > Even if a month of playtesting is too short to make the god perfectly
> > balanced, it's enough to put him in a decent state
>
> We don't have a month, we have a few days. The idea of releasing the
> utterly broken state we have right now is beyond ridiculous.
>
> If 0.9 is slated for July, it would still be a risky idea but perhaps
> doable.
>
On march the 14th, dpeg sent a mail with the subject "0.8 Ash" with a list
of changes to be done. At that time, the schedule for 0.8 was already set.
You answered this mail by commenting why adding the full bounded tier would
make the gameplay very tedious. You didn't raise any objection appart from
this one, and even said that dpeg's proposed low skill boost might be a
candidate to replace the XP boost. If you thought it was too late to replace
the XP boost, why didn't you said so? What were you expecting?
The changes I pushed a week later were only the ones discussed in this mail,
and I didn't include the "full bound tier".
Now, if you want to release Ash with the XP boost instead of the skill
boost, I don't mind at all. I just don't understand why you didn't said
anything before.
Now, let's discuss what to release. The only "balance breaking" changes I
made are replacing XP boost by skill boost and adjusting piety. So:
* remove the passive skill boosts and bring back the XP boost.
* piety. Don't we agree that there's too much piety? I suggest we keep the
piety reduction (from x2, x4, x6 to x2, x3, x4). For reskilling, let's use a
more conservative raise : from 10 to 15. We can keep experimenting a cost of
25 in trunk.
All the other changes have much less impact on balance, so I suggest we keep
them, but if anyone oppose, I don't mind post-poning them. They are:
* reskilling: penalty raised from 10% to 20%. Fighting excluded.
* scrying: instant and fail proof.
* detection of monsters' equipment brand and wands.
* On-sight item identification.
* Autoexplore stops when there's a detected monster nearby, before it enters
LOS.
* Better passive mapping. Density and range scale with piety (was only
range).
* Cursed weapon meld on transform instead of falling off.
Raphaël
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Crawl-ref-discuss mailing list
Crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/crawl-ref-discuss
