Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

[DoomRL] Design Questions

Tags:
  • Development
  • Games
  • Video Games
Last response: in PC Gaming
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 2:20:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Hello,

Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered before the
next release.

1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?
4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
ommision of some (different paths)?
8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?
10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz

More about : doomrl design questions

January 27, 2005 2:20:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered
> before the next release.
>
> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
None

> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
Just about right. Unlike the other roguelikes, I really don't think this
game should aspire to become a player killer... difficult yes, but winnable.

> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?
Gets increasingly difficult (as it should)

> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
No, other than it's probably used for the secret ending (and/or suiciding on
the cyberdemon)

> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
Listed in my other posts ;) 

> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
The Doom feel, and 'canon' that you've adapted so well

> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
> ommision of some (different paths)?
Following the structure of the games, with the ability to go and
independantly explore each complex (with a few objectives barring you from
reaching the ending structure/area) would be super neat (ie, instead of ep
1-1 - 1-8, you have 8 levels in ep 1, each of which can be explored, but at
least X number must be cleared/buttons pushed/keys found to reach the last
level and finish that ep)

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
None, ditch that assault shotgun :p  Modified weapons should allow for plenty
of variance... failing that, there are lots of tools and other goodies. I
actually went and replayed Doom and wrote down a list of stuff, then decided
it was too extensive and stuck it on the shelf.

> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?
*blink* Helmets, night vision/thermo goggles

> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
More! More areas, more features, more tweaks, more episodes. And Hell on
Earth :D 
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 3:24:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:

> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)

In my 5 or 6 games it took me to win the latest version, I found none. I
did find some of the other modification, like faster reloading, mode
damage, more ammo.

> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?

I think it's just right. It's easier than other roguelikes (I'm still
getting clobbered by Crawl, which is sort of nice after getting
reasonably proficient in Nethack) but that's ok, since it's not like
other roguelikes. Like I've said before, it's a nice game for a quick
play, and those shouldn't be _too_ hard. If you can win in 5-10 games, I
think it's good.

> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?

I've found that near the end, the game gets more difficult. Especially
if you don't have a BFG, rooms with multiple Hell Barons or some such
are pretty tough. However, in the beginning, a shotgun can quickly take
care of most humans, imps and such. I'm not sure this is a bad thing though.

> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?

Winning while killing yourself, sort of a devalued win if you're
desperate/almost dead? Or maybe kill everything on the level, while
destroying your armour and bringing you to 1 hp?

> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?

The lack of travel commands, both 'go in that direction until something
happens' and 'travel to that spot'. If you decide to implement the last
one, you can probably get some code from e.g. nethack or crawl.

Also, I'd like some 'special rooms'. Maybe something with switches that
release goodies and monsters at the same time, or some small puzzle
element, or a random barrack somewhere, things like that. I'm not sure
what exactly I want, but right now, the random levels have some
pointless features sometimes, and other times they have unavoidable lava.

Maybe the blast from the rocket launcher should be decreased a bit,
since it's pretty large in relation to the level size. On the other
hand, once the 'rockets pull you in' bug is fixed (reversed), this might
not be a concern.

The monster AI isn't that good, but I think if it were as good as in
crawl, the game would be *much* more difficult. A little better wouldn't
hurt, but I guess it's hard to make.

> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?

That great Doom feeling! :)  Despite the suggestions above, the game is
pretty good at being what it says it is: Doom, the Roguelike.

> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
> ommision of some (different paths)?

Maybe, although that would make the game much more complex, and one of
its charms is the simplicity. I like the special levels, though, so
maybe a branch or two can't hurt.

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

Hmm, not sure. Maybe a grenade thrower: uses rockets, you toss them some
distance and they explode after a short delay. That's the only one I can
come up with. But I don't think the game needs many more weapons.

> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

A helmet? ;)  Maybe a helmet with a light, allowing you to see further in
the direction of you last move?

> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

Auto-unload weapons, like in Doom... ;) 

Regards,

Erik
Related resources
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 3:27:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote::

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

I didn't play, so maybe they are in there already. Mind you, adter doom
I played a lot of Duke Nukem 3D and mods, so that's where they are from

- the shrink ray: shrinks you target so that it can be squished
underfoot. Shrink yourself and runn through small tunnels that you can't
enter in your original size.

- the freezer: freezes the target, target can be smashed to shards while
frozen, but will thaw with 1HP left after a while if not smashed

- the devastator: blew out a stream/cload of small granade like projectiles


Some more

- Gravoshocker: project a gravomechanical shockwaves, smashing
unprotected targets

- Movator: speed up/slow down your own time on comparison to the world

- Gauss rifle: magnetically propelled heavy impact shells

- Teleport grenades: instant hit, no chance to dodge

- Remote control rockets: after launching your get a split screen to
control the movement of the rocket as well as your PC

- Fire thrower: boring, but well ...

- Stun grenades: shock/paralyce opponets for a while

- Flash grenades: blind the opponents for a while

- Traktor beams: push/pull/throw oppenets all over the palce

- Lasers + mirrored armor

- A fusion cannon: higjly catalyzed deuterium fusion effect, projet
plasma by force fields -> a bit liek a flame thrower, but more like a
msall thermonuclear bom in effect. Heast up the environment tremendously.

- Acid bombs

- Molotov cocktails

Lunch break, sorry.

--
c.u. Hajo
January 27, 2005 4:29:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz .-- .-. --- - . ---...

> Hello,
>
> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered before the
> next release.
>
> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)

0, but played only 4 times the last release.


> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?

With current complexity (number of monsters, dungeon longitude) the
difficulty seems to be ok. Now, what will happen if you will fix the
shotgun, reduce the armour effect for chaingun and plasma rifle, add some
features and so on - it's unsure.


> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?

Nope. There is a moment when greater monsters appear with danger. Aside of
that I dunno what will happen if you will fix the shotgun. ;-)


> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?

Apart from killing the boss - no.


> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?

Lack of realism in weaponry treating, meaning damage ratios, armour
penetrating ratios, lack of own damage from BFG(this is Doom heritage but a
very illogical one). Switches are useless. Too little monsters. Special
levels are fixed == boring.


> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?

Eeee... no such thing, except general idea and climate maybe.


> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
> ommision of some (different paths)?

Sure, that adds more possibilities. The paths should be different however.


> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

Sniper rifle? Automatic pistol? Double pistols? Auto\single shot triggers
for shotgun and chaingun?


> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

Helmet surely, night vision device, hearing support device, camouflage?


> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

Reduce the size of BFG and induce own damage from it. Increase monster
intelligence and ferocity, make them react to sound. Make a balanced
weaponry\armour system. Reduce the need for inventory decisions, especially
ammo. Increase the time of weapon change to be equal or slower than weapon
reloading (to eliminate shotgun changing trick). Fix the traits to be of
similar power. Add traps and traps detecting?

--
Loonie
---------------------------------------
Respondit Pilatus quod scripsi scripsi.
http://www.crawl.webpark.pl
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 5:52:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

quoting Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl>:
>Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered before the
>next release.

I haven't had a chance to play the most recent release, so...

>7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
>complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
>ommision of some (different paths)?

It should always be possible to explore everything. The only branching in
Doom is whether or not you go to the secret levels.

>9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

Helmet for armour; light-amp goggles (extend vision range); motion
tracker (detect monsters close-in through walls).

>10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

Change the shotgun!

Maybe one or two of the smaller ID level layouts could be represented as
homage to Doom itself...
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is Gouday, January.
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 5:55:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz w wiadomo¶ci news:ctaf8j$hls$1@inews.gazeta.pl pisze,
co nastêpuje:

> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?

For a roguelike, it's very easy. Whether this is "too easy", is a matter of
taste.

> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?

No. 7th level is usually almost as easy as the 1st. There is a considerable
increase in difficulty level when first hell knights show up. Cyberdemon
seems very powerful in comparison to monsters on the last regular level.

> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?

Not yet.

> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?

I often feel like I don't have much to say - I shoot at them, they shoot at
me, RNG says who won. It's particularly painful when fighting strong
monsters. There is often no point in running, because enemies' weapons are
usually ranged, and those who fight in melee are faster than PC. Pistol is
too weak, rocket launcher is too strong, and cells need to be conserved.
In most cases I have to use either a shotgun or a chaingun, so there is not
much choice.

As a partial remedy, I would really, really like the dodge feature from the
original Doom. Almost all the projectiles, though powerful, were relatively
slow, so it was possible to avoid them. One could treat them as very fast,
and very stupid monsters.

Explosions are too strong. I think blast radius shouldn't exceed 2 or 3
tiles. This applies to both barrels and rockets.


> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
> ommision of some (different paths)?

I think you should keep this simple. If you add nonlinearity of any kind,
the next logical step will be shops and non-hostile NPCs. :-)

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

I would add a new property to existing weapons. In the original Doom, when
enemy was shot, it couldn't move nor shoot for a (very) short time. It was
an important advantage of chaingun and plasma rifle, which had high rates of
fire (in terms of game mechanics, it meant that delay between two subsequent
hits was shorter than the recovery time).

I liked the magical crossbow in "Heretic" much, but it was basically a
shotgun with different looks, and it wouldn't fit the setting. ;-)

> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

- secondary piece of armour (armour class bonus)
- vision enhancement (allows to see in dark, if you implement dark rooms)
- binoculars (improved sight range)
- targeting assistant (improved chance to hit, detailed information about
target's properties)
- motion detector (reveals monsters behind obstacles)

> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>

Bigger levels.

I had a crazy thought about implementing Doom-esque "third dimension". Rooms
in Doom differed in height and elevation, but they were never located one
above another. Doing it in a roguelike would require a bit of effort, but I
think it can be done.

These two features combined would make it possible to implement remakes of
the original levels.

And, uh, well, how about a level editor? :-)

Pozdr.

--
Jacek "Zillameth" Weso³owski
zill@jimp.neostrada.pl
FAQ grupy prgk.rpg - http://faq.prgk.net/rpg.txt
"If you back up, it won't matter if you screw up."
January 27, 2005 7:29:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered before the
> next release.
>
> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)

i never saw an "advanced <foo>", if that's what you mean. i saw some
fastload rocket launchers, a fastload chaingun, and an extended pistol

> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?

a bit on the hard side. hell knights are a bit too tough, i think.

> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?

no.. the middle section is harder than the beginning or end.

> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?

no..

> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?

too many barrels! (or as i call them, dungeon pox) much of the time
detonating them is unavoidable.
plasma rifles seem a bit too rare in this release as well.

it's a bit short on replay value...

> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?

pass - i'm not dogmatic

> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
> ommision of some (different paths)?

could be nice, but how would you scale the difficulty to do things in
different orders?

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

railgun!

> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

hmm.. you want to give people trade-offs
helmet (extra armour) vs visor..
extra vision range vs extra accuracy
x ray vision..

> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

fewer barrels!
weapon skills would be nice, and allow you to sutomise your character
more flexibly.
a stealth stat of some kind, perhaps.

--
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 8:13:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

"Kornel Kisielewicz" <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl> writes:

>Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered before the
>next release.

My first game hasn't ended yet, but I'll answer on the basis
of what I've seen so far. I think I'm on Phobos level 14 or
something. I really like the game!

>1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)

Not yet, I think. But I've got two of those BFG thingys.

>2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?

I think the balance is quite good. The beginning was quite
easy, especially since I found a double-shotgun. But Hell
barons are challenging.

>3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?

I think the beginning was easier than the stage when you meet
the B's and O's. But I think it is good this way.

>4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?

I haven't yet seen one.

>5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?

That the levers don't seem to do anything useful... but maybe
I just haven't figured them out. Also, whenever I find
Invulnerability, I've already killed all the monsters nearby :) 

>6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?

I like the traits.

>7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
>complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
>ommision of some (different paths)?

It could be fun, adding a tactical element of choosing where
to go next.

>8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

It would be a choice between a sniper rifle, smoke grenades or
hand grenades.

>9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

A telepathic device that gives information on the location of
monsters

>10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

A key that automatically picks up a weapon, unloads it and drops
it.

-Jukka
--
Jukka Kuusisto
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 8:19:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:

>
> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)

1) None. (what are they?:) 

> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?

2) It is okay. Certainly it is not an uber-challange like winning a
*band with a half-yeek nose-picker or whatever, but for the kind of
rougelike it is (fast, easy-to-learn and fun) the difficulty level is
adequate.

> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?

definitely gets harder from 10 on.

> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?

well, as a 3rd grade student of physics, you bet I do! but I wont say
them coz people would call me a terrorist and send the navy after me.

> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?

well, at least 3 people said it before me, but having to
pickup-unload-drop is plain silly. it should happen automatically once
you step on a weapon you already have in your inventory. (well, you
shouldnt auto-pick it up, but the weapon on the ground should become ammo)
Also I dont get why it would be wrong to save at just any given point.
Is it trouble-some to store the level in the save-file?

> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?

The coffee-break rougelike style. It is unique and the biggest strength
of your game, imho. We have an army of rougelikes with 80 pages of
documentation, 15,000 skills, 900.5 races and multi-classing. It is very
nice to have one that you can get into in 5 minutes and have a quick
game-session anytime without "mentally-preparing" yourself. Simplicity
is bliss.

> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
> ommision of some (different paths)?

Yeah, increasing replayability is a good thing. Though it only make
sense if the complexes are actually different, and I am not quite sure
how you'd manage that. Maybe some "paths" to the boss would be faster
(less levels) but more dangerous, some would be longer but less
lethal...i dunno.

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

Anything with a *slay demon* brand and evil ESP:) 
on a more serious note, I'd like mines that would blow up when a monster
steps on them. With the smart use of barrels it could lead to some funky
chain explosions.

> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

Sunglasses?

> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

Honestly, aint much. Maybe the ability to dump while still alive. (not
really important though)
Difficulty levels would be nice. Some (birth) options tweaking monster
ai/aggressivity level.
And a ladder maybe.

> regards,
> Kornel Kisielewicz
>

regards,

Artagas
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 4:07:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
advanced shotgun, once.

> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
difficulty seems well adjusted to the game longevity.

> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?
yes and no:
Monster population and thoughness increase gradually, I can feel it more or
less (But when monsters are killed by switches you can't count the corpses
to
know exactly what was there, this gives one random variation)
Each new weapons "tech" (chaingun, then RL, then plasma) gives a sudden
boost
to the player, and these "jumps" are controlled, always in the same maps :
Well, sounds good to me.
Then, life depends on item generation for health items. In my opinion, in
the
later maps, when there's no health items for 2 or 3 levels straight,
something
is wrong. The player storing medkits can even a bit the random variation,
but
still, difficulty will depend immensely on health generation (and
destruction
by hazards) in the maps.
One other random thing is: Depending on if the supercharge is next to the
exit
or very far, the player will end the map with 198% or 100%. This item
placement
can sometimes make more difference than the number of enemies in the map.

> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
no, though I value it for a proud "I won't die alone". This is enough reason
for me to always carry one.

> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
Barrels as the the player's worst nightmare
Having to face one monster at a time, all game long, if you want to live.
(but I can live with it, no problem)

> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
The concept :) 
The "reload" system, whatever the actual implementation details.
Personnally, I
don't care if it's not faithful to the original game, it gives some game to
play with, and induces the emotional element of fear.

> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
> ommision of some (different paths)?
There are already the "side quests". Like them, this feature would slightly
increase replay value. But when players will determine the most efficient
route, they will almost always use this one.

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
Not really a "weapon-of-choice", but before the chaingun, the player could
find
an assault rifle (after all, the character sprites for Doomguy and zombies
all
have one) It could be a small-clip version of the chaingun.(25)
The player would junk it as soon as the chaingun is available, but it could
provide a technology step between "age of shotgun" and "age of chaingun".

> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?
All has been said already...

> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
None I can imagine with the current technology. DoomRL is consistent, has
enough game contents for its simplicity and game length, and enough
surprises
in store for those with the patience to give it a second try. You've done
the
best you could with the current map generator, player-vs-monster gameplay
(with time management), slot-based inventory, etc.
I can't imagine how you could do better without rewriting one or several of
the
things that already work.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 4:19:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered
> before the next release.

Oh my god! What a feedback :-D. DoomRL is more popular then I thought :-).
I'll try to answer everybody, but this will be hard ;-). If you see in
someone's post something you disagree with, please comment on that. Well,
let the replying begin...

warm regards to everyone,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 4:33:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Marcus wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered
>> before the next release.
>>
>> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
> None

Seems as the random chance is broken or too low. Will fix that for the next
release.

>> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
> Just about right. Unlike the other roguelikes, I really don't think
> this game should aspire to become a player killer... difficult yes,
> but winnable.

A "coffee break game" -- I like that description/

>> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
> No, other than it's probably used for the secret ending (and/or
> suiciding on the cyberdemon)

That's two uses ;-)

>> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
> Listed in my other posts ;) 

I know ;-).

>> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
> The Doom feel, and 'canon' that you've adapted so well

:-D
Yes, this is my main concern. I try to keep the features enclosed in the
Doom feel, but sometimes it's difficult to control the temptation to add
something (like tn bomb and phase device)...

>> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
>> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
>> ommision of some (different paths)?
> Following the structure of the games, with the ability to go and
> independantly explore each complex (with a few objectives barring you
> from reaching the ending structure/area) would be super neat (ie,
> instead of ep 1-1 - 1-8, you have 8 levels in ep 1, each of which can
> be explored, but at least X number must be cleared/buttons
> pushed/keys found to reach the last level and finish that ep)

Hmm, I see what you mean.

>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
> None, ditch that assault shotgun :p 

And make the standard shotgun behave like the assault shotgun, but load one
bullet at a time, is that okay with you?

> Modified weapons should allow for
> plenty of variance...

True. What other modifications would you propose?

> failing that, there are lots of tools and other
> goodies. I actually went and replayed Doom and wrote down a list of
> stuff, then decided it was too extensive and stuck it on the shelf.

Hey, I want that list! :-D Really I need some ideas for future releases!

>> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?
> *blink* Helmets, night vision/thermo goggles

True.

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
> More! More areas, more features, more tweaks, more episodes. And Hell
> on Earth :D 

Ok, I get the idea ;-)

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
January 28, 2005 4:33:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Marcus wrote:
>> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
[advanced weapons]
> Seems as the random chance is broken or too low. Will fix that for
> the next release.

Yah, would be nice to check them out, they never seemed to show up.

>>> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
>> Just about right. Unlike the other roguelikes, I really don't think
>> this game should aspire to become a player killer... difficult yes,
>> but winnable.
>
> A "coffee break game" -- I like that description/

It feels appropriate - I mean, I can (and just did!) run through Doom on
Ultraviolent/Nightmare in one go, not taking especially long - and it is
_still_ fun. I spent literally years playing 4 player lanned doom, designing
custom levels, playing with friends, tournaments, the works... Straying, but
regardless. Fun, fast, challenging, but not impossible. A fundamentally
different feel than most other roguelikes - and that's a good thing!

>>> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
>> No, other than it's probably used for the secret ending (and/or
>> suiciding on the cyberdemon)
>
> That's two uses ;-)

True :)  Personally, I think it's a funny/cool item.

>>> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
>> The Doom feel, and 'canon' that you've adapted so well
>
> :-D
> Yes, this is my main concern. I try to keep the features enclosed in
> the Doom feel, but sometimes it's difficult to control the temptation
> to add something (like tn bomb and phase device)...

This is something that will have to fall squarely on your shoulders. eg, I
complained about the assault shotgun (more on that below), but 'modified'
weapons makes sense (adds more variety, without changing the core). What
does and doesn't break canon, but still adds to the game is ultimately up to
you. Similarly, boots/helmets make good sense (heck, the armor 'shards' in
Doom were little helmets)

>>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
>> None, ditch that assault shotgun :p 
>
> And make the standard shotgun behave like the assault shotgun, but
> load one bullet at a time, is that okay with you?

Yes, this was actually one of the things I had written down. It was part of
the reason I was suggesting the move-and-fire behavior. You'd never 'reload'
per say, but the basic Shotgun would have a distinct advantage over the DB -
you could move into a hall, fire, backup to reload, move back, fire, etc.
Which is just how you'd handle stuff while playing Doom with the sg.

>> Modified weapons should allow for
>> plenty of variance...
>
> True. What other modifications would you propose?

I have a list of mods in mind, could you post a list of the existing
modified/advanced weapons you've put in the game so I can compare and make a
consolidated post?

>> failing that, there are lots of tools and other
>> goodies. I actually went and replayed Doom and wrote down a list of
>> stuff, then decided it was too extensive and stuck it on the shelf.
>
> Hey, I want that list! :-D Really I need some ideas for future
> releases!

Haha ok. Let me go and replay the last two episodes, I was playing through
Knee deep writing stuff down. Do you want anything from Doom 3? (I've played
through that on highest difficulty + Nightmare as well repeatedly). Arguably
the machinegun from there is canon... but really the chaingun fills that
role. Though it could be a different weapon... hmm. Thoughts. I'll mull this
over and give you a full list of stuff that occured to me while playing the
game.

Are you planning a patched/updated release soon, or are you working on some
major feature additions? I was wondering, since it's been a week or two
since your last group activity.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 4:41:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Erik Hesselink wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>
>> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
>
> In my 5 or 6 games it took me to win the latest version, I found
> none. I did find some of the other modification, like faster
> reloading, mode damage, more ammo.

M'kay.

>> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
>
> I think it's just right. It's easier than other roguelikes (I'm still
> getting clobbered by Crawl, which is sort of nice after getting
> reasonably proficient in Nethack) but that's ok, since it's not like
> other roguelikes. Like I've said before, it's a nice game for a quick
> play, and those shouldn't be _too_ hard. If you can win in 5-10
> games, I think it's good.

I'd say I'll go for the 10-game average limit.

>> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?
> I've found that near the end, the game gets more difficult. Especially
> if you don't have a BFG, rooms with multiple Hell Barons or some such
> are pretty tough. However, in the beginning, a shotgun can quickly
> take care of most humans, imps and such. I'm not sure this is a bad
> thing though.

Easy beginning, hard ending -- that's what it's supposed to be.

>> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
>
> Winning while killing yourself, sort of a devalued win if you're
> desperate/almost dead?

True. Try and see it for yourself ;-).

> Or maybe kill everything on the level, while
> destroying your armour and bringing you to 1 hp?

I think you would get killed if you would use the tnbonb on a level and not
exited it immidately. Unless you... ;-)

>> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
> The lack of travel commands, both 'go in that direction until
> something happens' and 'travel to that spot'. If you decide to
> implement the last one, you can probably get some code from e.g.
> nethack or crawl.

This is a quite common RFE -- I'll try to make it for a near release.

> Also, I'd like some 'special rooms'. Maybe something with switches
> that release goodies and monsters at the same time, or some small
> puzzle element, or a random barrack somewhere, things like that. I'm
> not sure what exactly I want, but right now, the random levels have some
> pointless features sometimes, and other times they have unavoidable
> lava.

I'm designing a new level generator (that will substitute the old one, that
will take better care of such things.

> Maybe the blast from the rocket launcher should be decreased a bit,
> since it's pretty large in relation to the level size. On the other
> hand, once the 'rockets pull you in' bug is fixed (reversed), this
> might not be a concern.

It is fixed already, it waits for the 098 release ;-).

> The monster AI isn't that good, but I think if it were as good as in
> crawl, the game would be *much* more difficult. A little better
> wouldn't hurt, but I guess it's hard to make.

No it's not. DoomRL has a full-blown need-based AI for arena mode that could
probably be plugged into regular play. I will have to try.

>> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
>
> That great Doom feeling! :)  Despite the suggestions above, the game is
> pretty good at being what it says it is: Doom, the Roguelike.

:-D

>> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
>> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
>> ommision of some (different paths)?
>
> Maybe, although that would make the game much more complex, and one of
> its charms is the simplicity. I like the special levels, though, so
> maybe a branch or two can't hurt.

I have an idea that will keep the game simple, but add a sense of
achievement and change between levels. Will release that as a "test release"
in the future.

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
> Auto-unload weapons, like in Doom... ;) 

No way ;-). Still not satisfied with the unload command? ;-) You will be
able to unload from ground in the next release.

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 4:45:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote::
>
>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
>
> I didn't play, so maybe they are in there already. Mind you, adter
> doom I played a lot of Duke Nukem 3D and mods, so that's where they are
> from

I see that very clearly in the weapon list ;-).

> - the shrink ray: shrinks you target so that it can be squished
> underfoot. Shrink yourself and runn through small tunnels that you
> can't enter in your original size.

This would be a hell to implement.... not to mention representation/

> - the freezer: freezes the target, target can be smashed to shards
> while frozen, but will thaw with 1HP left after a while if not smashed

Hell froze? Nah ;-).

> - Gravoshocker: project a gravomechanical shockwaves, smashing
> unprotected targets
> - Movator: speed up/slow down your own time on comparison to the world
> - Gauss rifle: magnetically propelled heavy impact shells

These three seem to advanced compared to Doom-world technology...

> - Remote control rockets: after launching your get a split screen to
> control the movement of the rocket as well as your PC

This would reduce the pace of the game :-(

> - Fire thrower: boring, but well ...

Well this one is interesting if implemented well ;-).

> - Stun grenades: shock/paralyce opponets for a while
> - Flash grenades: blind the opponents for a while

I somehow can't see grenades in the Doom world, it might be only me ;-/

> - A fusion cannon: higjly catalyzed deuterium fusion effect, projet
> plasma by force fields -> a bit liek a flame thrower, but more like a
> msall thermonuclear bom in effect. Heast up the environment
> tremendously.

I know! Maybe BFG 10k as a hidden supreme weapon!

> Lunch break, sorry.
Good appetite! (I know, I know, I'm a few hours latre :D )
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:03:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Zillameth wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz w wiadomo¶ci news:ctaf8j$hls$1@inews.gazeta.pl
> pisze, co nastêpuje:
>
>> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
>
> For a roguelike, it's very easy. Whether this is "too easy", is a
> matter of taste.

As a coffee-break roguelike I think it might be balanced.

>> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?
>
> No. 7th level is usually almost as easy as the 1st. There is a
> considerable increase in difficulty level when first hell knights
> show up. Cyberdemon seems very powerful in comparison to monsters on
> the last regular level.

It's because there's an alternate way to dispose of him.

>> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
>
> I often feel like I don't have much to say - I shoot at them, they
> shoot at me, RNG says who won. It's particularly painful when
> fighting strong monsters. There is often no point in running, because
> enemies' weapons are usually ranged, and those who fight in melee are
> faster than PC. Pistol is too weak, rocket launcher is too strong,
> and cells need to be conserved. In most cases I have to use either a
> shotgun or a chaingun, so there
> is not much choice.

True. I understand. I hope to do something about that -- any ideas?

> As a partial remedy, I would really, really like the dodge feature
> from the original Doom. Almost all the projectiles, though powerful,
> were relatively slow, so it was possible to avoid them. One could
> treat them as very fast, and very stupid monsters.

I saw a roguelike project which had slower-then-a-turn projectiles, and it
made a bad impression on me (but it might have been the fact that that
roguelike project was realy bad overall, remember FIR? ;-) ). Anyway dodging
missiles then would be so easy that it would completely unbalance the game!

> Explosions are too strong. I think blast radius shouldn't exceed 2 or
> 3 tiles. This applies to both barrels and rockets.

Hmm....

>> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
>> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
>> ommision of some (different paths)?
>
> I think you should keep this simple. If you add nonlinearity of any
> kind, the next logical step will be shops and non-hostile NPCs. :-)

Hell true ;-). There is a risk like that :D 

>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
> I would add a new property to existing weapons. when enemy was shot, it
> couldn't move nor shoot for a (very) short
> time. It was an important advantage of chaingun and plasma rifle,
> which had high rates of fire (in terms of game mechanics, it meant
> that delay between two subsequent hits was shorter than the recovery
> time).

Hmm, I will think about that. AFAIR chainsaw had this feature in the most
advanced state :-)

> I liked the magical crossbow in "Heretic" much, but it was basically a
> shotgun with different looks, and it wouldn't fit the setting. ;-)

Maybe as an easter egg ;-).

> - secondary piece of armour (armour class bonus)
> - vision enhancement (allows to see in dark, if you implement dark
> rooms) - binoculars (improved sight range)
> - targeting assistant (improved chance to hit, detailed information
> about target's properties)
> - motion detector (reveals monsters behind obstacles)

Hmm, all of these seem good! I would need to remodel level design and sight
code for 2 and 5 though.

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
> Bigger levels.

Hmm, this would break DoomRL's KISS principle :-). And would demand a quite
big overhaul of the whole engine...

> I had a crazy thought about implementing Doom-esque "third
> dimension". Rooms in Doom differed in height and elevation, but they
> were never located one above another. Doing it in a roguelike would
> require a bit of effort, but I think it can be done.

It can. But not in this production :-/.

> These two features combined would make it possible to implement
> remakes of the original levels.

Some guy on the doom foruims suggested that I implement iwad file reading
and import to doomRL, some people have sometimes realy scary ideas :-D

> And, uh, well, how about a level editor? :-)

Before being WADized, levels are in plain text. There isn't much one can add
though, cause the Doom Virtual Machine is absurdly simple (the most advanced
feature of it is it's name :D  ). If you'd want you could make a level or two
:D 

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:14:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

David Damerell wrote:
> quoting Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl>:
>> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered
>> before the next release.
>
> I haven't had a chance to play the most recent release, so...

You mean you've played 095? I guess it's because there's no Linux version
:-(. I realy hop to be able to fix that grave mistake in the future.

>> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
>> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
>> ommision of some (different paths)?
>
> It should always be possible to explore everything. The only
> branching in Doom is whether or not you go to the secret levels.

Hmm. Kind of true. But I would like the idea of choosing a path through
hell...

>> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?
>
> Helmet for armour; light-amp goggles (extend vision range); motion
> tracker (detect monsters close-in through walls).

Yes, people seem to all have a similar feel. Wouldn't it destrot the doomish
feeling? At least with helmet and goggles I think not...

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>
> Change the shotgun!

You mean throw out assault shotgun, and change the sg to have a magazine of
four, reloaded one by one, right?

> Maybe one or two of the smaller ID level layouts could be represented
> as homage to Doom itself...

Yes, I even had a draft of E1M1 ready ;-).

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:40:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Artagas wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
>
> 1) None. (what are they?:) 

Ooops ;-).

>
>> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
>
> 2) It is okay. Certainly it is not an uber-challange like winning a
> *band with a half-yeek nose-picker or whatever, but for the kind of
> rougelike it is (fast, easy-to-learn and fun) the difficulty level is
> adequate.

Yeah, coffee-break game ;-). (hell, I like that description, who was the
first to describe it like that?)

>> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
>
> well, as a 3rd grade student of physics, you bet I do! but I wont
> say them coz people would call me a terrorist and send the navy after
> me.

ROTFL ;-).

> Is it trouble-some to store the level in the save-file?

I think not. I was just lazy ;-). But it has some kind of neatness that I
like...

>> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
>
> The coffee-break rougelike style. It is unique and the biggest
> strength of your game, imho. We have an army of rougelikes with 80
> pages of documentation, 15,000 skills, 900.5 races and
> multi-classing. It is very nice to have one that you can get into in
> 5 minutes and have a quick game-session anytime without
> "mentally-preparing" yourself. Simplicity is bliss.

Hell true... I think that the game might benefit from horizontcal
development (more traits, more monsters etc) as opposed to vertical (kheh,
quite literaly, deeper complex :D ).

> Honestly, aint much. Maybe the ability to dump while still alive. (not
> really important though)

But easy to implement. And good for the community :-D

> Difficulty levels would be nice. Some (birth) options tweaking monster
> ai/aggressivity level.

Hmm....

> And a ladder maybe.

You mean posting on-line?

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:43:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

ru wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
>
> a bit on the hard side. hell knights are a bit too tough, i think.

Ugh ;-).

>> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
>
> too many barrels! (or as i call them, dungeon pox) much of the time
> detonating them is unavoidable.

Yeah. A little less, and a little smaller radius.

> plasma rifles seem a bit too rare in this release as well.

Hmm.

> it's a bit short on replay value...

:( . Any ideas?

>> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
>> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
>> ommision of some (different paths)?
>
> could be nice, but how would you scale the difficulty to do things in
> different orders?

No, just different paths.

>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
>
> railgun!

Geeesh, I would love that one, but I think not many people here would :-).
It's rather not to Doomish ;-).

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>
> fewer barrels!

M'kay.

> weapon skills would be nice, and allow you to sutomise your character

I think about specific weapon traits.

> more flexibly.

?

> a stealth stat of some kind, perhaps.

Hmm. Would need to tweak the AI.

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:46:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Jukka Kuusisto wrote:
> "Kornel Kisielewicz" <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl> writes:
>
>> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered
>> before the next release.
>
> My first game hasn't ended yet, but I'll answer on the basis
> of what I've seen so far. I think I'm on Phobos level 14 or
> something. I really like the game!

:-D

>> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
>
> Not yet, I think. But I've got two of those BFG thingys.

Cool ;-). They're far to common now, though ;-).

>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
>
> It would be a choice between a sniper rifle, smoke grenades or
> hand grenades.

All of those seem unDoomish to me :-(

>> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?
>
> A telepathic device that gives information on the location of
> monsters

LOL, sounds very high-tech. Maybe an infra-red visor that can detect
monsters through walls instead?

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>
> A key that automatically picks up a weapon, unloads it and drops
> it.

A key to "unload from ground" would be satisfying?

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:53:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Yves Rizoud wrote:
>> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
> advanced shotgun, once.

Ha, so they *do* happen...

>> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?
> yes and no:
> Monster population and thoughness increase gradually, I can feel it
> more or less (But when monsters are killed by switches you can't
> count the corpses to
> know exactly what was there, this gives one random variation)
> Each new weapons "tech" (chaingun, then RL, then plasma) gives a
> sudden boost
> to the player, and these "jumps" are controlled, always in the same
> maps : Well, sounds good to me.

To me too.

> Then, life depends on item generation for health items. In my
> opinion, in the
> later maps, when there's no health items for 2 or 3 levels straight,
> something
> is wrong. The player storing medkits can even a bit the random
> variation, but
> still, difficulty will depend immensely on health generation (and
> destruction
> by hazards) in the maps.

Hmm...

> One other random thing is: Depending on if the supercharge is next to
> the exit
> or very far, the player will end the map with 198% or 100%. This item
> placement
> can sometimes make more difference than the number of enemies in the
> map.

I didn't think about that. But not much can be done about it.

>> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
> no, though I value it for a proud "I won't die alone". This is enough
> reason for me to always carry one.

OMG! That's the spirit! Hell, I am really happy that someone uses the bomb
the way I do :-D

>> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
> Barrels as the the player's worst nightmare

Okay, okay, this appeared enough times to be treated seriously.

>> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
> The concept :) 
> The "reload" system, whatever the actual implementation details.
> Personnally, I
> don't care if it's not faithful to the original game, it gives some
> game to play with, and induces the emotional element of fear.

You mean you also like the way the single shotgun works?

>> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
>> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
>> ommision of some (different paths)?
> There are already the "side quests". Like them, this feature would
> slightly increase replay value. But when players will determine the
> most efficient route, they will almost always use this one.

What if "the most efficient road" depends on what they have in their
inventories? Like "I have far too less rockets, I'll go to Hell's Armory".
Or "I need plasma, let's visit Blah instead", or " I'm low on armor..." etc
... Also "I don't have a double shotgun, I'll better skip Skull City", etc,
etc,

>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
> Not really a "weapon-of-choice", but before the chaingun, the player
> could find
> an assault rifle (after all, the character sprites for Doomguy and
> zombies all
> have one) It could be a small-clip version of the chaingun.(25)

Hmm....

> The player would junk it as soon as the chaingun is available, but it
> could provide a technology step between "age of shotgun" and "age of
> chaingun".

Yeah, I get it. I'll think about it.
But then all those guys from the shoot-one-chaingun-bullet and
change-firing-mode-key guys will start attacking me again, with a far
stronger argument :D 

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
> None I can imagine with the current technology. DoomRL is consistent,
> has enough game contents for its simplicity and game length, and
> enough surprises
> in store for those with the patience to give it a second try. You've
> done the
> best you could with the current map generator, player-vs-monster
> gameplay (with time management), slot-based inventory, etc.
> I can't imagine how you could do better without rewriting one or
> several of the
> things that already work.

I will rewrite at least the level generator though. And quite possibly the
sight code, and AI code.That's why I'm gathering ideas :-D

rgeards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:54:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered
>> before the next release.
>
> Oh my god! What a feedback :-D. DoomRL is more popular then I thought
> :-). I'll try to answer everybody, but this will be hard ;-). If you
> see in someone's post something you disagree with, please comment on
> that. Well, let the replying begin...

Uff I did it :-D

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 9:40:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

"Kornel Kisielewicz" <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl> writes:

>Jukka Kuusisto wrote:
>> A telepathic device that gives information on the location of
>> monsters

>LOL, sounds very high-tech. Maybe an infra-red visor that can detect
>monsters through walls instead?

Sure.

>> A key that automatically picks up a weapon, unloads it and drops
>> it.

>A key to "unload from ground" would be satisfying?

It would be much better, of course :) 

-Jukka
--
Jukka Kuusisto
January 28, 2005 10:33:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

My thoughts after a few games,

Great game - fun and replayable. It's very faithful to the original
Doom. I was amused to see a WAD file in the game directory. I also like
the quote "What a bloodshed!" from the initial screen.

My biggest problem with the game: Constantly things are exploding and
destroying valuable items and killing you - it is irritating. Too many
explosions.

The barrel explosion, and in fact all the explosive effects, have too
large an area of effect relative to your field of LOS.

Weapons on the ground shouldn't be destroyed by explosions - this is
very annoying.

Also, barrels seem too fragile. Wave a shotgun in their general
direction and they explode. In Doom, you needed to aim right at the
barrel to detonate it with a shotgun.

Need to be able to hotkey to the double-shotgun when you don't own the
ordinary shotgun.

The shotguns seem too powerful at long range.

Where is the spectre? (invisible demon).

When a lost soul rushes at you, it would be good to see it moving
square-by-square towards you, rather than disappearing and reappearing
next to you.

The level generation is good, but what I would really like to see is
'homage' levels based on the original Doom levels. Perhaps for the
special areas only?

The dark red text color in the Intro is hard to read on my screen.

Sometimes enemies don't seem to notice me. I am shooting them and they
just stand there and don't shoot back. A LOS issue?

I don't mean to criticise so much, it is a very fun game, just in a
spirit of suggesting improvements...

Oh yes, have you thought about adding sound effects? I know roguelikes
don't usually have sound, but imagine how much more atmospheric /
scarey it would be with roars, fireball sounds, explosions, screams...
A.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 10:55:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered before the
> next release.
>
> SNIP
>
> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

A linux port!

--
Mark A. Nicolosi
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 1:32:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Erik Hesselink wrote:
>
>>Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>
>>>4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
>>
>>Winning while killing yourself, sort of a devalued win if you're
>>desperate/almost dead?
>
> True. Try and see it for yourself ;-).
>
>> Or maybe kill everything on the level, while
>>destroying your armour and bringing you to 1 hp?
>
> I think you would get killed if you would use the tnbonb on a level and not
> exited it immidately. Unless you... ;-)

Hmm, I'll have to experiment with it a bit. I was always too affraid to
use it.

>>>10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>>
>>Auto-unload weapons, like in Doom... ;) 
>
> No way ;-). Still not satisfied with the unload command? ;-) You will be
> able to unload from ground in the next release.

Yes, I think that will be a perfect cross between roguelike and doom.
Since inventory management is an important part of the game,
autopickup/unload might be annoying, even.

The next version sounds good, btw! I can't wait to play it.

Erik
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:00:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Marcus wrote:
>>>> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
>>> Just about right. Unlike the other roguelikes, I really don't think
>>> this game should aspire to become a player killer... difficult yes,
>>> but winnable.
>>
>> A "coffee break game" -- I like that description/
>
> It feels appropriate - I mean, I can (and just did!) run through Doom
> on Ultraviolent/Nightmare in one go, not taking especially long - and
> it is _still_ fun. I spent literally years playing 4 player lanned
> doom, designing custom levels, playing with friends, tournaments, the
> works... Straying, but regardless. Fun, fast, challenging, but not
> impossible. A fundamentally different feel than most other roguelikes
> - and that's a good thing!

I managed to get through Doom Ep. 1 on nightmare (Doom95) and always
considered that something to boast about. Well, at least 'til I met a guy
who completed Doom II on nightmare.

>>>> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
>>> No, other than it's probably used for the secret ending (and/or
>>> suiciding on the cyberdemon)
>> That's two uses ;-)
>
> True :)  Personally, I think it's a funny/cool item.

There's more though ;-).

> This is something that will have to fall squarely on your shoulders.
> eg, I complained about the assault shotgun (more on that below), but
> 'modified' weapons makes sense (adds more variety, without changing
> the core). What does and doesn't break canon, but still adds to the
> game is ultimately up to you. Similarly, boots/helmets make good
> sense (heck, the armor 'shards' in Doom were little helmets)

Hell, that's the designers responsibility...

>> And make the standard shotgun behave like the assault shotgun, but
>> load one bullet at a time, is that okay with you?
>
> Yes, this was actually one of the things I had written down. It was
> part of the reason I was suggesting the move-and-fire behavior. You'd
> never 'reload' per say, but the basic Shotgun would have a distinct
> advantage over the DB - you could move into a hall, fire, backup to
> reload, move back, fire, etc. Which is just how you'd handle stuff
> while playing Doom with the sg.

Mkay, there may be a lot of sense in that. I will try the new shotgun and
see how it will work.

>>> Modified weapons should allow for
>>> plenty of variance...
>>
>> True. What other modifications would you propose?
>
> I have a list of mods in mind, could you post a list of the existing
> modified/advanced weapons you've put in the game so I can compare and
> make a consolidated post?

advanced -- +1 die "side" (4d4 becomes 4d5)
fastload -- decreased reload time
rapid -- decreased firing time
longshot -- increased "distance" (this one is yet to be implemented)
extended -- increased magazine

I also think about
tweaked -- (better name?) Just +1 to damage
accurate -- increases hit-chance

>>> failing that, there are lots of tools and other
>>> goodies. I actually went and replayed Doom and wrote down a list of
>>> stuff, then decided it was too extensive and stuck it on the shelf.
>>
>> Hey, I want that list! :-D Really I need some ideas for future
>> releases!
>
> Haha ok. Let me go and replay the last two episodes, I was playing
> through Knee deep writing stuff down. Do you want anything from Doom
> 3? (I've played through that on highest difficulty + Nightmare as
> well repeatedly). Arguably the machinegun from there is canon... but
> really the chaingun fills that role. Though it could be a different
> weapon... hmm. Thoughts. I'll mull this over and give you a full list
> of stuff that occured to me while playing the game.

Yes, I was planning to play Doom 3 myself, but hadn't had my hands on it
yet.

> Are you planning a patched/updated release soon, or are you working
> on some major feature additions? I was wondering, since it's been a
> week or two since your last group activity.

It's exam session ;-/ I plan on releasing a version in somewhere like a week
though (with at least one major feature).

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:01:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Erik Hesselink wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> Erik Hesselink wrote:
>>> Or maybe kill everything on the level, while
>>> destroying your armour and bringing you to 1 hp?
>>
>> I think you would get killed if you would use the tnbonb on a level
>> and not exited it immidately. Unless you... ;-)
>
> Hmm, I'll have to experiment with it a bit. I was always too affraid
> to use it.

:-D

>>>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested
>>>> feature?
>>>
>>> Auto-unload weapons, like in Doom... ;) 
>>
>> No way ;-). Still not satisfied with the unload command? ;-) You
>> will be able to unload from ground in the next release.
>
> Yes, I think that will be a perfect cross between roguelike and doom.
> Since inventory management is an important part of the game,
> autopickup/unload might be annoying, even.


Good ;-)

> The next version sounds good, btw! I can't wait to play it.

Neither can I :->

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:02:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Mark A. Nicolosi wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>
> A linux port!

I know ;-). That makes you the 5th person to mention that -- so seems a
linux port is unevitable.

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:11:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote::

> Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:

>>- Stun grenades: shock/paralyce opponets for a while
>>- Flash grenades: blind the opponents for a while
>
> I somehow can't see grenades in the Doom world, it might be only me ;-/

You mean you don't want to have them, becuase the will affect the
playing style and the game balance? Or just because original doom didn't
have them?

What about this one:

A weapon that shoots darts of frozen poison or drugs. The frozen darts
can penetrate light armor and will thaw in-body, causing some effect.

They are non-lethal usually - if you should ever need that in your game.

c.u.
Hajo
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:25:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered before the
> next release.
>
> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)

only 'fastload' (fastload double shotgun really makes your day),
'extended' and 'rapid'

> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?

it's OK

> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?

IMHO it jumps around level 12; former humans get replaced by hell
knights/cacodemons, so you easily run out of ammo.

> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?

for a cheap win?

> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?

those inventory decisions, no shift-run command, no way to use medpacks
while standing on a summoning lever and the fact that it crashes on the
combination escape-direction (may be a Linux thing)

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

a survival knife to replace the axe; the axe looks quite un-doomish to me.

> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

IR goggles, lamps

> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

transparent demons :-), an AI that doesn't run straight into lava, a
backpack that doubles your stack sizes (so that now 200 10mm rounds fit
into a slot), a view at the source and a native Linux version.

Lars

>
> regards,
> Kornel Kisielewicz
>
>
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 3:15:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

"Kornel Kisielewicz" <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl> wrote in message
news:ctc2ut$lao$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Zillameth wrote:
>> Kornel Kisielewicz w wiadomo¶ci news:ctaf8j$hls$1@inews.gazeta.pl
>> pisze, co nastêpuje:
>>
>>> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
>>
>> I often feel like I don't have much to say - I shoot at them, they
>> shoot at me, RNG says who won. It's particularly painful when
>> fighting strong monsters. There is often no point in running, because
>> enemies' weapons are usually ranged, and those who fight in melee are
>> faster than PC. Pistol is too weak, rocket launcher is too strong,
>> and cells need to be conserved. In most cases I have to use either a
>> shotgun or a chaingun, so there
>> is not much choice.
>
> True. I understand. I hope to do something about that -- any ideas?
>

This is also my problem with DRL. The huge fun factor in doom, at least
for me, was taking on the hordes of hell barely taking a scratch through
sheer dodging power. The great thing about doom was that even a few
scratches could kill. This fact kind of ruins the doom atmosphere of DRL
(IMO).

>> As a partial remedy, I would really, really like the dodge feature
>> from the original Doom. Almost all the projectiles, though powerful,
>> were relatively slow, so it was possible to avoid them. One could
>> treat them as very fast, and very stupid monsters.
>
> I saw a roguelike project which had slower-then-a-turn projectiles, and it
> made a bad impression on me (but it might have been the fact that that
> roguelike project was realy bad overall, remember FIR? ;-) ). Anyway
> dodging missiles then would be so easy that it would completely unbalance
> the game!
>

The whole reason chaingun dudes were so bloody annoying is that they had
instantaneous projectiles. The doom feel is one of ranged combat. Most
missiles would be fine, implement a trail (like a smoke trail) to show where
the missile came from, and it won't look stupid. There really should be no
problem balancing this change; in the original doom dodging was easy, yet
the game still not so (on nightmare anyway). For example, make monsters
sneak up on you. Ranged attacks for doom creaturs really were just covering
fire to conceal their advances, whereupon they forced the projectiles down
your throat.

If you want to make things hard to dodge, make more monsters ambush you at
once. Make their aim like in the original doom; imperfect. Much harder to
dodge a bunch of imp fireballs when there are ten flying at you at different
angles.

> [..]

I hope you take this seriously :) .

--
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
January 28, 2005 3:20:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

"Glen Wheeler" <gew75@uow.edu.au> wrote in message
news:41f99246@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
> [..]
> I hope you take this seriously :) .
> [..]

I forgot to mention the most obvious balancing factor...make the faster
monsters able to dodge as well. Of course this is different to the original
doom, but still an option.

--
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
January 28, 2005 3:42:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz w wiadomo¶ci news:ctc2ut$lao$1@inews.gazeta.pl pisze,
co nastêpuje:

>
> True. I understand. I hope to do something about that -- any ideas?
>

Let's try and define the problem. In my opinion, this issue is caused by
following factors:
- many fights involve unavoidable damage,
- the optimal solution to most situations is often the same,
So, what I think needs to be done is:
a) introduce a way (or ways) to avoid damage,
b) implement tradeoffs between advantages (so that in different situations
different advantages are important and different tactics are optimal)

I think dodge would help a lot. Other possibilities I can think of:
- allow player to carry invulnerability globes, so that he can use them
when he really needs to.
- add invisibility globes; Invisibility could improve initiative (monsters
don't know player is there until he starts shooting) and reduce emenies'
chance to hit.
- if you reduce rocket blast radius, it will improve the safety of usage,
and player will have a broader choice of weaponry (you might want to
increase the amount of rockets carried in each slot from 10 to 15 or 20,
because with smaller explosions rockets are going to lose some power).
- if some of the stronger monsters spawn cells upon death, plasma rifles
will be less expensive to use; BFG might require rebalancing, though -
consider adding a delay between pulling a trigger and activating the BF
explosion (the oiginal BFG had this delay).
- increase chainsaw strength, so that it becomes another option in some
cases; at this moment it's pretty useless, because even a former human
sergeant need to be hit more than once; the original chainsaw wasn't very
strong either, by the way.


>
> I saw a roguelike project which had slower-then-a-turn projectiles, and
> it made a bad impression on me (but it might have been the fact that
> that roguelike project was realy bad overall, remember FIR? ;-) ).
> Anyway dodging missiles then would be so easy that it would completely
> unbalance the game!
>

Every new feature brings a risk of ruining the game balance. The question
is: is there something you can do about it? In this case I think the answer
is "yes".

First of all, note that there would still be many situations, in which dodge
would be useless:
- you can't dodge in a narrow corridor,
- it's difficult to dodge everything when you get caught in crossfire,
- it has limited usability against monsters with high rate of fire (such as
arachnotrons),
- you can't shoot when you move,
- you can dodge, but barrels cannot :-)
- monsters can dodge too (they didn't do that in Doom, but it was possible
in some cases, because plasma bursts and rockets were "slow projectiles"
too)

I think projectiles should be quite fast when compared to monsters - 2x, 3x
or even 4x player speed (this might depend on a monster - if I remember
correctly, rockets were faster than fireballs). It would be impossible to
dodge a projectile which was emited from a short distance, and this in turn
would add a new factor to combat: Don't Let Them Get Close.

There are a few monsters, whose projectiles travel at the speed of light.
All the former humans have this ability, and - as Glen has already said - it
makes chaingun guys particularly dangerous.

>> I would add a new property to existing weapons. when enemy was shot, it
>> couldn't move nor shoot for a (very) short
>> time. It was an important advantage of chaingun and plasma rifle,
>> which had high rates of fire (in terms of game mechanics, it meant
>> that delay between two subsequent hits was shorter than the recovery
>> time).
>
> Hmm, I will think about that. AFAIR chainsaw had this feature in the most
> advanced state :-)
>

Yes, indeed. This was my favourite way to dispose of single strong monsters
like cacodemon of baron of hell. As long as there were no other servants of
hell around, you could just stay still and deliver lead to the nastie. It
also worked very well against pain elementals, because it prevented them
from spawning new lost souls.

Oh, by the way, cacodemons seem quite rare in DoomRL. I think they would
make a good intermediate obstacle after player gets familiar with lost souls
but before hell knights show up.

>> - secondary piece of armour (armour class bonus)
>> - vision enhancement (allows to see in dark, if you implement dark
>> rooms) - binoculars (improved sight range)
>> - targeting assistant (improved chance to hit, detailed information
>> about target's properties)
>> - motion detector (reveals monsters behind obstacles)
>
> Hmm, all of these seem good! I would need to remodel level design and
> sight code for 2 and 5 though.
>

Darkness was very important in Doom, but I think total darkness should be
avoided. I would recommend implementing it as a local sight range reduction.
This would allow some rooms to be darker than others.

>>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>> Bigger levels.
>
> Hmm, this would break DoomRL's KISS principle :-). And would demand a
> quite big overhaul of the whole engine...
>

DoomRL is different from most RLs in that it uses lots of ranged weapons.
While a 5x5 square in ADOM is a lot of space (enemy in the opposite corner
needs 3 turns just to get you in range), in DoomRL it's just a small, narrow
room (everyone can attack you immediately and they are close enough to have
an easy shot).

Pozdr.

--
Jacek "Zillameth" Weso³owski
zill@jimp.neostrada.pl
FAQ grupy prgk.rpg - http://faq.prgk.net/rpg.txt
"Decisions are good, but good decisions are better"
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 3:55:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered before the
> next release.
>
> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)

BFG

> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?

Too easy - have player play three times - restarting at a higher skill
level each time, if they die they have to start from 1st difficulty
level again (defeating 1st in minor victory, defeating 3 is major,
defeating the 4th and final is uber victory)

> 3) Is the difficulty level maintained steady during the descent?

No it gets quite easy after your initial char survives to find decent
weapons

> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?

No (although I know your meant to use it to take out the final bad guy
and yourself if you can't win?)

> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?

The developer posts too much and codes too little!!!! ;D

> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?

Also he should fix my reported bugs before doing another release!!!

> 7) Would you like the main "dungeon" to be seperated into separate
> complexes, that you can explore either one ofter another or with the
> ommision of some (different paths)?

not really

> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?

Lightning gun

> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?

Forward facing light, or infrared scanner ala Aliens

> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?

Shambler

--
ABCGi (geek) http://codemonkey.sunsite.dk S14 D15 C13 I17 W9 c12
GCS/IT$/L/B$ d+(-) s: a? C++ ULUSU-- P+ L+>++ E- W++$ N+ o+ K--
w+++(--)$ O- !M- V PS++(+) PE-@ Y+(++) PGP>++ t++ 5+ X R(+++) tv
b++(+) DI++++ D+++ G e++>+++ h++(home office!) r++ y++* BAS-----
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 3:55:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

ABCGi wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here's a bunch of random questions (a poll?) that I need answered
>> before the next release.
>>
>> 1) How many of you found "advanced" weapons? (and what they were?)
>
> BFG

??
You mean you found an "advanced BFG"?

>> 2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
>
> Too easy - have player play three times - restarting at a higher skill
> level each time, if they die they have to start from 1st difficulty
> level again (defeating 1st in minor victory, defeating 3 is major,
> defeating the 4th and final is uber victory)

Uh, I'm afraid that just restarting would be boring :-/

>> 4) Do you have any constructive use for the thermonuclear bomb?
>
> No (although I know your meant to use it to take out the final bad guy
> and yourself if you can't win?)

Not only ;-)

>> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
>
> The developer posts too much and codes too little!!!! ;D

LOL ;-)

>> 6) What do you consider a "must" to be left and not changed?
>
> Also he should fix my reported bugs before doing another release!!!

These were? I think I killed most of them already...

>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
>
> Lightning gun

Yeah ;-).

>> 9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?
>
> Forward facing light, or infrared scanner ala Aliens

Hmm.

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>
> Shambler

Oh yes ;-). He would come into play with the introduction of the lighting
gun.

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 4:03:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Mark A. Nicolosi wrote:
>
>>Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>>
>>>10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>>
>>A linux port!
>
>
> I know ;-). That makes you the 5th person to mention that -- so seems a
> linux port is unevitable.

I'm actually considering figuring Wine (windows emulator) for your game.
It sounds fun.

--
Mark A. Nicolosi
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 4:38:10 PM

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

Hi there!

Mark A. Nicolosi wrote in message <QKqKd.104718$w62.20151@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>:

> I'm actually considering figuring Wine (windows emulator) for your game.
> It sounds fun.
>

WINE stands for 'Wine Is Not an Emulator' :-)

It will not work in wine. You need a dosbox (DOS 'emulator').
I didn't tired, but it might work in dosemu.


--
May your code work forever and never have a bug.
At your service, Ilya Bely
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 4:54:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

<cut>
>
>>>2) Do you think the game is too easy/hard?
>>
>> 2) It is okay. Certainly it is not an uber-challange like winning a
>>*band with a half-yeek nose-picker or whatever, but for the kind of
>>rougelike it is (fast, easy-to-learn and fun) the difficulty level is
>>adequate.
>
>
> Yeah, coffee-break game ;-). (hell, I like that description, who was the
> first to describe it like that?)

Well, I didnt read anybody saying that before I wrote it down, but that
doesnt mean i was the first do describe doom rl like that. (after all it
is an often used term in the gaming world...just rarely used in
conjunction with roguelikes. Lost Labyrinth would be an exception,
though even that game has an uber-extensive skill system, but similarily
fast gameplay)

<another mega cut>

>
>>Honestly, aint much. Maybe the ability to dump while still alive. (not
>>really important though)
>
>
> But easy to implement. And good for the community :-D
>
>
>>Difficulty levels would be nice. Some (birth) options tweaking monster
>>ai/aggressivity level.
>
>
> Hmm....
>
>
>>And a ladder maybe.
>
>
> You mean posting on-line?
>
> regards,
> Kornel Kisielewicz
>

That is exactly what I mean. Just consider how much good it did to
angband to have a ladder on oook. People could brag about their chars,
and they did not have to do mile-long newsgroup discussions in case the
dump was updated a few times. I dont know how much html magic it takes
to manage that though. If it is complicated, than maybe you better focus
your efforts on the game, and we can keep discussing dumps in the
newsgroup.
If you want to avoid cheaters you can do Heng-style dumps, meaning the
game would upload the char dump for you to the server when you die. But
I dont think that is necessary (I mean...if people want to post fake
dumps...who cares? they aint getting money for it anyhow:) 
Along with in-game char dumps it would be nice to be able to do
screenshots. (Well maybe even cmovies but than that is a lot of work) So
people can post funny ascii screendumps like "Me and a dozen of my
cyberdemon friends celebrating birthday!"

All the best,

Artagas

p.s.: it is absolutely fascinating that you had the energy to answer
every single user comment. wtg!
p.s2: back to the game...and this time I am gonna' win!
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:47:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote::
>
>> Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:
>
>>> - Stun grenades: shock/paralyce opponets for a while
>>> - Flash grenades: blind the opponents for a while
>>
>> I somehow can't see grenades in the Doom world, it might be only me
>> ;-/
>
> You mean you don't want to have them, becuase the will affect the
> playing style and the game balance? Or just because original doom
> didn't have them?

Just the general feel I think. Much of here is just subjective designers
feel :->

> What about this one:
>
> A weapon that shoots darts of frozen poison or drugs. The frozen darts
> can penetrate light armor and will thaw in-body, causing some effect.
>
> They are non-lethal usually - if you should ever need that in your
> game.

Yeah, that's the point. I can't see any reason of using non-lethal weapons
in a bloody game like doom :-D

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:02:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote::

> Hansjoerg Malthaner wrote:

>>They are non-lethal usually - if you should ever need that in your
>>game.
>
> Yeah, that's the point. I can't see any reason of using non-lethal weapons
> in a bloody game like doom :-D

Then modify the gravoshocker or tractor beam to rip chunks of flesh out
of the oppenets bodies, let it tear them to pieces.

I'm really wondering if a RL game could work with non-lethal combat. The
problem is that the monsters will recover and wait for the player to
come back.

In a RPG forum someone named VaultDweller announced to work on a game
that features non-lethal combat. I'm quite curious if and how it will work.

> regards,
> Kornel Kisielewicz

--
c.u. Hajo
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:02:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Hansjoerg Malthaner <hansjoerg.malthaner@nurfuerspam.de> wrote:
>I'm really wondering if a RL game could work with non-lethal combat. The
>problem is that the monsters will recover and wait for the player to
>come back.

Many RLs have some kind of nonlethal attack available to the player.
Off the top of my head:

Angband etc: Sleep monster, slow monster, confuse monster, scare monster,
teleport other.

Nethack: Sleep, slow monster, paralysis, confusion, teleportation,
blindness.

Crawl: Paralysis, confusion, slowing.
--
Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:20:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

quoting Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl>:
>I saw a roguelike project which had slower-then-a-turn projectiles, and it
>made a bad impression on me (but it might have been the fact that that
>roguelike project was realy bad overall, remember FIR? ;-) ). Anyway dodging
>missiles then would be so easy that it would completely unbalance the game!

I think dodging of non-instantaneous projectiles is a futile objective in
a roguelike. You can't make a game exactly like Doom, and there's no
point; if I want that, I'll play Doom.

However, I think you could add a "dodging" tactical option without doing
this.

I propose that if the player's last action was a move, there is a chance
that a monster fireball will be fired at the last space the player
occupied. Players could easily be made aware of this if fireball
trajectories were animated (quickly, or it'll get tedious).

Further suggestion; check this chance for any monster that had LOS to the
player before their move, but not after it, and have it fire if the chance
is made. That way, a player going for cover will sometimes see fireballs
zip past the cover.

That chance is affected by an assumed monster projectile speed and
increased by player speed from HellRunner (or, ooh, some new boots?) The
chance decreases at close range but not as much as you might think - a
good Doomer can dodge fine at point-blank because monster attack
animations take a constant time regardless of range - but of course at
close range you can't move laterally to get under cover, because you'll
have to describe circles around the monster and it'll nail you eventually.

Obviously only lateral movement helps you dodge here; if you move directly
towards or away from the monster, it nails you anyway. There are probably
some edge cases where movement that seems like it should be a dodge isn't.
Two suggestions; either your projectile code is smart enough to see how
close a projectile's trajectory comes to the centre of the player's space
and inform the chance to damage appropriately, or just have a debug mode that
tells you whenever a "missed" shot hit you anyway, and look out for
oddities.

Roughly speaking I'd expect that a player eight spaces away from an imp
could evade essentially all fireballs by moving laterally (but hence
foregoing all return fire). Imp fireballs are pretty slow. This would drop
to 70% or so at range 2.

Barons have faster fireballs, and the nearly-safe range might be as much
as twelve.

Tomatoes (cacodemons) have slightly slower fireballs than barons, but
their attack animation is much faster. This is a particular nuisance on
-fast (as in Nightmare mode) where you have to dodge tomato/baron
fireballs at short range during the attack animation. I would suggest
implementing this in DoomRL by having the safe range be still longer for
tomatoes; this also gives them a unique threat, and since they do less
damage it will be less likely to result in unavoidable deaths to have
tomato fireballs sometimes impossible to dodge.

Monsters with guns have hitscan weapons in Doom; I wouldn't go that far,
but even a very great range should provide only about a 1/3 chance not to
be hit. For multishot weapons, check the chance for each shot individually;
that way a chaingunner will spatter some shots behind you, rather than
either missing or hitting with the whole burst.

[Throughout this, by "miss" or "hit" I mean only "fire at wrong/right
square", rather than the process that takes place once the shot is fired
into your square. I don't even know what that is.]

Rockets are actually very fast in Doom, but an important part of
cyberdemon tactics was dodging, and meeting a RL-armed monster earlier is
a complete pain. Hence I would make DoomRL rockets no faster than imp
fireballs.

Hence I'd implement monster weapons with 2 statistics; miss chance at range
1, and a range at which the miss chance is 90%, with flat scaling of the
chance of a miss between those ranges. Outside the 90% range, the chance
increases by 1% per space to a flat maximum 99%.

range 1 90% miss range
Imp 70 8
Rocket 50 8 # dodge rockets fine at medium range but
# hard inside that
Tomato 50 15 # tomato fireballs hard to dodge
Baron 70 12
Firearm 10 60 # corresponds to 1/3 chance at range 20

These numbers seem very high until you consider that this works _only_ if
you do nothing but move. The moment you stop to fire or reload, the
monsters can nail you just normally. Hence this only really helps with the
situation where you suddenly have a bunch of beasties in front of you and
want to run for cover. Note that in Doom, if you do nothing but move
sideways, no fireball monster except a revenant will _ever_ hit you.

If revenants and mancubi are added, mancubi would be like barons, but the
spread of three projectiles would have a good chance of nobbling you
anyway. I'd suggest implementing revenants differently from in Doom; they
_would_ use slower-than-instananeous projectiles, but all their
projectiles would home. Hence you'd have to maneuver quickly to scrape
them off on cover. If they had some small wall-destroying ability, they'd
be a real pain; the projectiles wouldn't have to be very fast at all,
arguably no faster than the player.

Each level of HellRunner should add 2 to the effective range; hence a good
HellRunner can enjoy relative impunity from everything but firearms - as
long as they do nothing but dodge.

Of course this would work very well with the proposed move-reload
shotgun...
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is Chedday, January.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:32:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

quoting Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl>:
>David Damerell wrote:
>>>9) What do you imagine could be in a head equipment slot?
>>Helmet for armour; light-amp goggles (extend vision range); motion
>>tracker (detect monsters close-in through walls).
>Yes, people seem to all have a similar feel. Wouldn't it destrot the doomish
>feeling? At least with helmet and goggles I think not...

Light-amp goggles would work best if levels had varying light levels that
decreased LOS range; then the goggles would fix LOS range as if the light
were maximally bright (perhaps 2 spaces more than the current range, which
might be what a typical medium-lit level would have).

Motion tracker wasn't in Doom but it's not atypical of the genre.

>>>10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>>Change the shotgun!
>You mean throw out assault shotgun, and change the sg to have a magazine of
>four, reloaded one by one, right?

No. That's a bad idea, since it would be such an infernal pain to be
bouncing on reload after every encounter. I think that's the worst of the
new shotguns we've had proposed, and only a marginal improvement on the
current one.

My preference would be for my shotgun proposal (naturally); magazine of
five, first 'r' is a quick reload that readies another shell from the
magazine, second 'r' or 'r' when empty is a slow reload that reloads the
magazine and readies a shell. For simplicity of UI, 'f' without a shell
readied would ready a shell and print a message to that effect. I think
this is the most DoomRLish proposal, since weapons typically have
magazines where they didn't in Doom, but it preserves the small delay
between shots that one had in Doom.

Failing that, the move-reload shotgun. This is Doom's shotgun, with an
endless belt from the ammo butler and no effort necessary to load fresh
shells, but isn't very DoomRLish.

The two could be combined, if the shotgun I propose also readied a fresh
shell when moving. This would be a slower way to ready a fresh shell, but
would let you move (thank you, Captain Obvious); for maximum fire rate,
you'd want to sit still and reload manually.

I know the code is more complex, but I really think this is the right way
to make the SG an effective weapon that preserves both the flavour of Doom
and DoomRL. The four-reload SG is an interface annoyance.

>>Maybe one or two of the smaller ID level layouts could be represented
>>as homage to Doom itself...
>Yes, I even had a draft of E1M1 ready ;-).

E2M9 "Fortress of Mystery" could work, but you'd have to avoid the start
being utterly lethal.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is Chedday, January.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:36:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

quoting Yves Rizoud <rizoud.yves@free.fr>:
>>8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
>Not really a "weapon-of-choice", but before the chaingun, the player could
>find an assault rifle

Since the chaingun fires pistol ammo, perhaps this could be called a
submachine gun? It could also have an intermediate fire rate as well as a
smaller clip - and gives us another type of zombie soldier, potentially.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is Chedday, January.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:37:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Lars Kecke wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 5) What do you don't like about DoomRL?
> no shift-run command,

This will be in.

> no way to use
> medpacks while standing on a summoning lever

Press 'i' for inventory screen and then the letter of the medikit.

> and the fact that it
> crashes on the combination escape-direction (may be a Linux thing)

Uuuh. Wierd. And probably is a linux thing. I hope that a linux port will
fix that.

>> 8) If you could add a weapon of your choice what would you add?
> a survival knife to replace the axe; the axe looks quite un-doomish
> to me.

It's quake-ish. But you're probably right. Maybe a castet then? (that thing
on the fist -- i don't know what's the name of that in english.

>> 10) Asides from the above, what would be your most requested feature?
>
> transparent demons :-),

I think many people would kill me for that :D . If I would implement them,
they would be a different coloured dot on the floor ;-D

> an AI that doesn't run straight into lava,

Will be.

> a backpack that doubles your stack sizes (so that now 200 10mm rounds
> fit into a slot),

That's not a bad idea!

> a view at the source

You wouldn't want that. It's FreePascal, and it's a realy messy FreePascal
(contrary to GenRogue). Also it would spoil the easter egg/secrets I
implemented/will implement in the game.

> and a native Linux version.

Planned.

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:37:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Dnia Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:37:40 +0100, Kornel Kisielewicz napisal(a):
> Lars Kecke wrote:
>> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:

>> a survival knife to replace the axe; the axe looks quite un-doomish
>> to me.
>
> It's quake-ish. But you're probably right. Maybe a castet then? (that thing
> on the fist -- i don't know what's the name of that in english.

Knuckles maybe?
There were `buzz knuckles' in Ghost in the Shell manga, to hit the robots
really hard ^^)).

I guess anything, from steel pipe (great in DeadCold), machette, claimore,
PR-24 nightstick, tonfa or crowbar would be good.

--
Radomir @**@_ Bee! .**._ .**._ .**._ .**._ zZ
`The Sheep' ('') 3 (..) 3 (..) 3 (..) 3 (--) 3
Dopieralski .vvVvVVVVVvVVVvVVVvVvVVvVvvVvVVVVVVvvVVvvVvvvvVVvVVvv.v.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:41:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

Mark A. Nicolosi wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> Mark A. Nicolosi wrote:
>> I know ;-). That makes you the 5th person to mention that -- so
>> seems a linux port is unevitable.
>
> I'm actually considering figuring Wine (windows emulator) for your
> game. It sounds fun.

Contrary to what it may seem by releasing DoomRL just for win/dos, I *am* a
linux user and fan ;-). It's just that DoomRL uses my old Valkyrie
libraries, and they aren't portable (they access direct screen memory of
DOS). The new Valkyrie I'm writing GenRogue with is 100%
platform-independant, so GenRogue is going to be inherently multi-platform
;-).

Also I don't know about WINE. Ilya Bely reports that the game runs quite
stable on a DosBox (http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/).

regards,
Kornel Kisielewicz
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 6:41:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development,rec.games.roguelike.misc (More info?)

In rec.games.roguelike.misc Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl> wrote:
> Mark A. Nicolosi wrote:
>> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>>> Mark A. Nicolosi wrote:
>>> I know ;-). That makes you the 5th person to mention that -- so
>>> seems a linux port is unevitable.

Add me...

> Also I don't know about WINE.

I'm no Wine expert, but I don't think this will work, as Wine is a Windows
implementation, and there isn't a Windows (not DOS) version of your game, is
there?

> Ilya Bely reports that the game runs quite stable on a DosBox
> (http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/).

Hmm... In my case, the game was running terribly, terribly slow in a
DosBox, and it crashed on the first level. So that's why I'm waiting for the
Linux port. Any hint when we might see it?

Cheers, Gero

--
Gero Kunter (gero.kunter@epost.de)
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest