Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

[All]How fast do you play?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
March 24, 2005 6:19:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

I've been inspired by Timo's Challenge, to take up power-diving again.
This made me think about the two different aspects to "speed of play" -
how fast you dive (ie. turns/dlev) and more fundamentally how fast you
play (ie. turns/minute).

I'm interested in measuring the second number. It's easy to measure -
save&exit your game, note the turn number, and then load up and play
for precisely 30 mins. Then save & note turn number again, and do the
maths. (It doesn't have to be 30 mins, it can be any number as long as
you measure it carefully - though a complicated game situation could
distort the results for short time periods, so it would be good if we
were consistent.)

If you think it's worth it, please reply to this thread with your
results - which variant/race/class, start & end depth, start & end turn
count, time period. Add any other info you want, but no need for a full
dump. Please feel free to post multiple results - the more the better.

I'll try to come up with some interesting analysis of the results -
presumably we will all play more turns in the first 30 mins of a new
char than as we go deeper, although maybe not if we're playing casters
who rest a lot.

CC
(If the thread gets too long, or you don't want to publicise your
results, send them in email to chrisc at terminalarrogance dot com)

More about : fast play

Anonymous
March 24, 2005 12:28:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

"magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> writes:

> I've been inspired by Timo's Challenge, to take up power-diving again.
> This made me think about the two different aspects to "speed of play" -
> how fast you dive (ie. turns/dlev) and more fundamentally how fast you
> play (ie. turns/minute).
>
> I'm interested in measuring the second number. It's easy to measure -
> save&exit your game, note the turn number, and then load up and play
> for precisely 30 mins. Then save & note turn number again, and do the
> maths. (It doesn't have to be 30 mins, it can be any number as long as
> you measure it carefully - though a complicated game situation could
> distort the results for short time periods, so it would be good if we
> were consistent.)

I don't think this question is well-posed. I recently (paladin)
decided just to cast all known spells for experience, and in less
than a minute used about 20K game turns.


Eddie
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 3:34:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

It's definitely situational with me, too. I may make several moves a
second while moving in explored territory equipped with ESP. I may make
one or two a second in a fight with weak monsters, or one or fewer a
second while fighting a dangerous foe (and making sure each turn that I
can attack next turn without risking death, rather than heal, escape,
etc). In some situations I may take quite a bit of time selecting one
move, usually when summoned at or suddenly "It breathes nether -- LOW
HITPOINT WARNING!". Also when a very dangerous monster is around that I
do not want attacking me at all I will be extremely slow and careful,
making less than one move a second, either avoiding LOS or forcing it to
use up its moves entering LOS so I get a clean shot at teleporting it away.

I'm also definitely playing faster than before -- although still tending
to explore full levels and limit diving if there's already significant
fear factor at my current depth, or key resists/etc. missing.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Related resources
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 5:17:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On 2005-03-24 12:19:40, "magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> I've been inspired by Timo's Challenge, to take up power-diving again.
> This made me think about the two different aspects to "speed of play" -
> how fast you dive (ie. turns/dlev) and more fundamentally how fast you
> play (ie. turns/minute).
>
> I'm interested in measuring the second number. It's easy to measure -
> save&exit your game, note the turn number, and then load up and play
> for precisely 30 mins. Then save & note turn number again, and do the
> maths. (It doesn't have to be 30 mins, it can be any number as long as
> you measure it carefully - though a complicated game situation could
> distort the results for short time periods, so it would be good if we
> were consistent.)
>
> If you think it's worth it, please reply to this thread with your
> results - which variant/race/class, start & end depth, start & end turn
> count, time period. Add any other info you want, but no need for a full
> dump. Please feel free to post multiple results - the more the better.
>
> I'll try to come up with some interesting analysis of the results -
> presumably we will all play more turns in the first 30 mins of a new
> char than as we go deeper, although maybe not if we're playing casters
> who rest a lot.
>
> CC
> (If the thread gets too long, or you don't want to publicise your
> results, send them in email to chrisc at terminalarrogance dot com)

I agree with Timo's point here, speed makes a huge difference. However, I can
say that playing a fairly standard warrior in a fairly standard variant I play
about 100,000 game turns every half hour on +0 speed.


--
Take Care,
Graham

Pos(0.3.0a2) Alpha "Natar" XX L:1 DL:50' !A R--- !Sp w:Short Sword +0,+0
Pos(V/T//NPP) W H- D+ c-- f PV+ s- TT? d P++ M+
C-- S+ I- So B ac GHB- SQ+ RQ+ V+ F:Better monster AI (Acting like decent
players without automatically knowing where the player is - randomly roaming
the dungeon etc...)
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 5:21:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

magnate wrote:
> I've been inspired by Timo's Challenge, to take up power-diving again.
> This made me think about the two different aspects to "speed of play" -
> how fast you dive (ie. turns/dlev) and more fundamentally how fast you
> play (ie. turns/minute).
>
> I'm interested in measuring the second number. It's easy to measure -
> save&exit your game, note the turn number, and then load up and play
> for precisely 30 mins. Then save & note turn number again, and do the
> maths.

There is a problem with that. Game measures game turns, not player
turns, so if you have haste-spell or have permanent speed items you use
less turns than without. Also if you use rest a lot then you use turns
much faster than you actually play.

IMO game should show player turns too, not just game turns. Player turns
is much more accurate way to measure your playing speed.

Timo Pietilä
March 24, 2005 6:20:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Well, yes. I was hoping that with a large enough population sample we
might get some meaningful averages. I never said the standard deviation
would be small.

Never mind, it served its purpose for me - I don't make anywhere near
two moves a second (at least, not on average - I might manage it
briefly with a warrior chewing through a corridor of snagas). As I
suspected, I play far slower than most.

CC
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 7:06:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

I make almost 2 player moves per second. I am somewhat
reckless playing so i have to play a character strong enough
to survive a mistake.
There is no dlvl > clvl rule; it all depends on your luck to
find key items to dive. Finding more key items allows
going deeper. I´ve had a char that could do dlvl 60 nicely
at clvl 30 due to good finds. I´ve had a char that died on
dlvl 30 clvl 35 without every low res covered.
Good rule is: If you have to avoid more than 20%
of the critters in the level, you should be shallower.
But LOOONG delays in certain game turns to evaluate
the situation, like after a summoning, or in the detection
of a vault or group of nasty monsters, or to think how
to change terrain to my side.
And i´m leaning towards playing faster:
first win - +5000000 game turns
second win - ~2500000 game turns
third win - ~1900000 game turns
Before i was very cautious playing, and even thu
now i play kind of fast and can make clvl 40 easy,
and admit that Eddie taught me a lot, i am kind of
against serious powerdiving, because it requires
*PERFECT* game play, and 99% of people
just are unable or don´t want to play perfectly.

--
I will hold the candle till it burns up my arm.
I'll keep taking punches until their will grows tired.
I will stare the sun down until my eyes go blind.
I won't change direction and I won't change my mind...
How much difference does it make?
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 1:10:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

"magnate" <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1111706459.567132.268540@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Well, yes. I was hoping that with a large enough population sample we
> might get some meaningful averages. I never said the standard deviation
> would be small.
>
> Never mind, it served its purpose for me - I don't make anywhere near
> two moves a second (at least, not on average - I might manage it
> briefly with a warrior chewing through a corridor of snagas). As I
> suspected, I play far slower than most.
>

I powerdive when playing *band, and play quickly. The key is not to try
and maintain some ``2 moves per second'' figure, but just to play as fast as
is safe given the situation. That's what (I believe) Eddie means when he
states that he will powerdive to keep his attention; powerdiving forces one
to be in situations where playing ``slowly'' (i.e. thinking more) is
required.

Just play as fast as you feel comfortable :) .

--
Glen
L:p yt E+++ T-- R+ P+++ D+ G+ F:*band !RL RLA-
W:AF Q+++ AI++ GFX++ SFX-- RN++++ PO--- !Hp Re-- S+
Anonymous
March 27, 2005 1:42:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

In article <1111663180.021027.318390@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
magnate <chrisc@dbass.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>If you think it's worth it, please reply to this thread with your
>results - which variant/race/class, start & end depth, start & end turn
>count, time period. Add any other info you want, but no need for a full
>dump. Please feel free to post multiple results - the more the better.

You got me curious, so I started up Angband for the first time in I
forget how long, rolled up a hobbit warrior, and started going.

Got down to dlev 5. Could have got deeper, but the reascent is going
slowly. In half an hour, I got 96953 game turns in, so about 9695
player turns. (Only speed change was a dart trap or two.)
--
Julian Lighton jl8e@fragment.com
/* You are not expected to understand this. */
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 8:53:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Here's the record from the last npp game I started (also trying Timo's
challenge ;-) . Based on the timestamps, looks like roughly hour and a
half to play 100K turns.


Teldiren the Gnome Brigand
Began the quest to kill Morgoth on 03/26/2005 at 02:08 PM
============================================================
CHAR.
| TURN | DEPTH |LEVEL| EVENT
============================================================
| 4051| 100 | 4 | Killed Grip, Farmer Maggot's dog
| 22411| 50 | 5 | Reached level 5
| 35133| 200 | 6 | Killed Fang, Farmer Maggot's dog
| 36143| 200 | 7 | Killed Wolf, Farmer Maggot's dog
| 51104| 500 | 10 | Reached level 10
| 57234| 600 | 10 | Killed Brodda, the Easterling
| 62380| 700 | 12 | Destroyed Zombie
| 64790| 700 | 13 | Killed Mughash the Kobold Lord
| 74275| 750 | 14 | Killed Wormtongue, Agent of Saruman
| 86379| 750 | 15 | Reached level 15
| 94218| 750 | 15 | Killed Orfax, Son of Boldor
============================================================
| 95332| 750 | 15 | Killed by a Mirkwood spider.
| 95332| 750 | 15 | Killed on 03/26/2005 at 03:40 PM.
============================================================
============================================================


I think player strategy for resting probably as important, or more so,
than typing speed. If you rest to full health after every battle you
will go through turns very fast. I generally don't..

Murphy S.
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 2:56:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Murphy S. wrote:
> ============================================================
> | 95332| 750 | 15 | Killed by a Mirkwood spider.
> | 95332| 750 | 15 | Killed on 03/26/2005 at 03:40 PM.
> ============================================================
>
> I think player strategy for resting probably as important, or more so,
> than typing speed. If you rest to full health after every battle you
> will go through turns very fast. I generally don't..

And look where it gets you -- an ignominious depth only halfway to
statgain. :)  (Mages are exceptionally vulnerable, not only due to low
HPs but due to running out of mana if they don't rest, but even warriors
need to rest up after a tough battle before facing another tough opponent.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 2:31:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Twisted One wrote:
> Murphy S. wrote:
> > ============================================================
> > | 95332| 750 | 15 | Killed by a Mirkwood spider.
> > | 95332| 750 | 15 | Killed on 03/26/2005 at 03:40 PM.
> > ============================================================
> >
> > I think player strategy for resting probably as important, or more
so,
> > than typing speed. If you rest to full health after every battle
you
> > will go through turns very fast. I generally don't..
>
> And look where it gets you -- an ignominious depth only halfway to
> statgain. :)  (Mages are exceptionally vulnerable, not only due to low

> HPs but due to running out of mana if they don't rest, but even
warriors
> need to rest up after a tough battle before facing another tough
opponent.
>


Hehe good point, posting a character that met an early demise doesn't
do much to promote my strategy. But I thought it was a good candidate
for measuring turns per hour because I played it from beginning to end
without stopping.
!