[crawl] YASDxPlenty

G

Guest

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

OK, decided to try the latest version of crawl a little. To make the
early levels relatively easy and simplify things I decided on human
fighters. And the results are: I keep dying in the first few levels.
Either something that seems excessively strong for its depth (often
named Sigmund) gets me, or a group of monsters gets me, or attrition
gets me where I have insufficient freedom of movement and no sources of
healing or escapes. Here's what I'm doing -- can anyone tell me what I'm
doing wrong?

* Try to explore each level before descending; if I have to descend
sooner try to find another up stair and ascend into, hopefully,
unexplored areas of earlier level.
* Try to fight stuff in a corridor if possible.
* Uniques and anything that seems tough: run for nearest stairs. Hope it
isn't next to me going up the stairs. Maybe return to the level at a
distant location using different stairs.
* Read unfamiliar scrolls once a bunch of items picked up. Quaff
unfamiliar potion with largest number when in trouble, as its likely
to be healing. Once detect curse scrolls are known (if that point is
even *reached*!) wield-test uncursed weapons and wear-test uncursed
other equipment.

I have yet to encounter an ego item this way, though I found an
artifact, the +1, +3 whip of dust, once. The major problem seems to be
lack of healing and lack of escape methods, with food a significant
nuisance since hunger creates pressure to dive, since new food can't be
acquired quickly on an already-explored level.

Got to the ecumenical temple once, with the same character that had the
artifact whip (and a ring of teleport control). He prayed to the Shining
One. It didn't help much -- eventually surrounded and killed on D:7
(deepest character I've *ever* had in crawl). That character also saw a
shop -- a bookshop, naturally, being a fighter.

It seems to me that there are six problems making things a bit too tough
(and if it's nearly impossible to survive even with fairly cautious play
with a *fighter* at early levels, I can only imagine how frustrating it
would be with any kind of caster...)

1 -- Lack of healing
2 -- Lack of escapes
3 -- Strong monsters for their depths -- snakes and orc wizards come to
mind, as well as that Sigmund. Usually when they're first
encountered they are best run away from, save that (especially with
snakes) that tends to be ineffective.
4 -- Monsters that aren't ordinarily strong, but become so due to
equipment they happen to have -- a gnoll with a runed spear got one
character, and another had serious difficulty with some orcs that
had armour. These can be excessively dangerous. Weak monsters
should get penalties trying to fight with equipment that's much
stronger than their own depth.
5 -- It seems that inevitably an individual strong monster or a strong
group of perhaps-not-individually-strong monsters will end up
making a whole area of some level too dangerous to go near, and
force one to dive even deeper or else hang on shallower levels
(with, as a result, the ever-present specter of starvation). That
is, of course, if they don't kill you outright.
6 -- Something may be wrong with the copy I downloaded, because it
actually seems to get harder with more characters played. It's
either that, or despite humans learning and getting better at
things normally, I am actually getting worse at the game with time.
My first char did reasonably well (level and dlevel around 5) and
shortly after I had the one that got to level and dlevel 7. Now
they tend to die on levels 1 to 3. This makes no sense! Why would
those levels have gotten harder? The only way having run a previous
character might affect difficulty for later characters legitimately
would be player ghosts, and I only encountered one of those. It was
a nuisance but not seriously dangerous: neither of us could
seriously harm the other.

I have been choosing short swords for the most part, simply because they
seem much more common weapons to find than others (so I figure early
skill increases will be more likely to correspond to a decent weapon
found later). The best-yet char was one of these, as was one of two
second-bests (dl and cl 5ish). (The other choose the axe at the start).

Is there something basic I'm missing/doing wrong, or is the game simply
insanely difficult or wildly dependent on luck with nearly no
involvement of skill in determining outcomes whatsoever?!

Also, the best-ever char had nearly 60hp at full health, and by D:7 was
encountering plenty of things that could knock half of that away
quickly. The YAVPs and late game YASDs I've seen posted here seem to
indicate typical endgame hitpoints are only around four times that. I
wonder how people are supposed to keep their health up? It sounds like
even a character that's nearly won will find D:7 monsters nuisances and
potentially dangerous, able to kill in around eight or nine attacks.
This is in contrast with, say, an Angband lvl 50 character who will find
any monster from level 7 (350') to be a joke.

--
http://www.crisispapers.org/Editorials/germany-1933.htm
Reichstag fire -> 9/11
Communist "arsonist" -> Iraq "weapons of mass destruction"
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
 
G

Guest

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

Twisted One wrote:
> OK, decided to try the latest version of crawl a little.
> To make the early levels relatively easy and simplify
> things I decided on human fighters. And the results are:
> I keep dying in the first few levels. Either something
> that seems excessively strong for its depth (often named
> Sigmund) gets me, or a group of monsters gets me, or
> attrition gets me where I have insufficient freedom of
> movement and no sources of healing or escapes. Here's
> what I'm doing -- can anyone tell me what I'm doing
> wrong?

Seemingly almost everyone hates Sigmund. First off, you
can't expect to win with every character in Crawl. Some
characters are doomed, unfortunately. So don't be too hard
on yourself. Especially in the early game. But you will
get a bit more successful.

> [Snip specific tactics]

Those all sound like good things to do. I think you want
to add more tactics rather than revising those. More on
that below.

> I have yet to encounter an ego item this way, though I
> found an artifact, the +1, +3 whip of dust, once.

The difference in base types is a lot more significant in
Crawl than other RLs. Give me a +0 Executioner's Axe over
a (+4,+6) Vorpal Short Sword any day. You probably want to
use the best base type weapon of your chosen class unless
you see a really well enchanted weapon. That said, drops
are very random, and you will see an exceptional weapon to
break the rule every now and then.

> The major problem seems to be lack of healing and lack of
> escape methods

Teleport is usually one of the more common scrolls. Are you
having trouble finding them, or burning through them too
quickly? You do have to conserve them somewhat rather than
using them every time it seems like you might die.

> Got to the ecumenical temple once, with the same character
> that had the artifact whip (and a ring of teleport control).
> He prayed to the Shining One. It didn't help much --
> eventually surrounded and killed on D:7 (deepest character
> I've *ever* had in crawl). That character also saw a shop
> -- a bookshop, naturally, being a fighter.

I think most people consider the Shining One one of the harder
gods to win with. Never tried him myself. When learning,
Okawaru, Trog, and Elviron (sp?) are probably the easiest.

Shops are very rare until you get to the branches. And about
the only good they do you until you have a lot more money is
ID of cheaper items. So don't worry about that.

> 1 -- Lack of healing
Could try the healer god.

> 3 -- Strong monsters for their depths
First off, don't fight Sigmund unless you have a couple strong
wands + !heal wounds, or really exceptional equipment.
Remember where he is and leave that section of the level well
alone.
For snakes, soften them up with a ranged attack. That's what
all those darts are for. Or a wand if you've got it. Only
run if there are stairs very close by, or after you've read a
?TP. If you can't do that, the best you can do is dance to get
the first hit in, and hope for the best.

> I have been choosing short swords for the most part.

I almost always use axes myself. Short blades have serious
troubles later in the game, and I believe are mostly for
stealth characters. You should be able to get by with them,
but they are a harder choice.

> Is there something basic I'm missing/doing wrong, or is the
> game simply insanely difficult or wildly dependent on luck
> with nearly no involvement of skill in determining outcomes
> whatsoever?!

The game is difficult and dependent on luck, but nowhere near
as much as it seems to you so far.

> Also, the best-ever char had nearly 60hp at full health, and
> by D:7 was encountering plenty of things that could knock half
> of that away quickly. The YAVPs and late game YASDs I've seen
> posted here seem to indicate typical endgame hitpoints are
> only around four times that. I wonder how people are supposed
> to keep their health up?

First, armor is very effective. Even against certain elements.
That helps a lot. Second, you really don't keep your health up.
There are totally unresistable attacks that take off half your
hitpoints. There are some really devistating attacks. Avoid
getting hit when you can and have a plan to get out of harms way
in a hurry when you get beat down.

General advice. Humans are hard, especially when you're learning.
Try a Minotaur, dwarf, or troll. Use some sort of ranged weapon
to soften up hard enemies. Pay careful attention to which skills
you are practising.
 
G

Guest

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

In article <R8-dnWxl9abfYOXfRVn-vg@rogers.com>,
Twisted One <twisted0n3@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>5 -- It seems that inevitably an individual strong monster or a strong
> group of perhaps-not-individually-strong monsters will end up
> making a whole area of some level too dangerous to go near, and
> force one to dive even deeper or else hang on shallower levels
> (with, as a result, the ever-present specter of starvation). That
> is, of course, if they don't kill you outright.

With the groups, you can use stairs to try to peel them off one or two
at a time and then engage them on better terms on a mostly-clear level.
As you say, in general you have to dive to avoid trouble, but it's not
all that common to have beefy out-of-depth stuff on two or three levels
running.

>Also, the best-ever char had nearly 60hp at full health, and by D:7 was
>encountering plenty of things that could knock half of that away
>quickly. The YAVPs and late game YASDs I've seen posted here seem to
>indicate typical endgame hitpoints are only around four times that. I
>wonder how people are supposed to keep their health up? It sounds like
>even a character that's nearly won will find D:7 monsters nuisances and
>potentially dangerous, able to kill in around eight or nine attacks.
>This is in contrast with, say, an Angband lvl 50 character who will find
>any monster from level 7 (350') to be a joke.

A couple of things: armor gives a much more significant damage reduction
than you're used to coming from Angband, and level 7 is much deeper,
relative to the total dungeon length, than it is in Angband. Not that
many Angband winners worry about monsters from stat-gain either.

You also mention food difficulties; bear in mind that you probably don't
want to eat rations until you're starving; in general in the early game
I float around the border of hungry, going from corpse to corpse.

-Andrew (who doesn't consider himself an expert)
 
G

Guest

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

On Wed, 4 May 2005, Twisted One wrote:
> JOAT???
>

In this context, "Jack Of All Trades" - unlike most of the other species
choices, humans are equally good at learning all skills in Crawl.

> > > fighters.
> > Fighters don't exist.
>
> It's one of the class options if you pick human ... or minotaur for that
> matter. You must be either joking, mistaken, or being woefully and
> gratuitously obscure.
>

He's trying to suggest that, unlike class-based systems (like D&D), in
which your initial choice of class influences the rate at which you can
learn different skills (so that, for example, a Fighter would find it
harder or impossible to cast certain spells), Crawl lets all classes learn
all skills at the same rate.
Hence, all your initial "class" choice determines is which skills you
start the game with experience points in - it does not restrict you in
any way from going off and learning totally different ones.
Knowing this can lead to entirely different skill-development strategies
than in, for example, Angband, where your class choice can make some
skills totally unattainable.

> Trog didn't help that Minotaur, who had Trog neutral to him right till
> the end. And that is with killing and sacrificing corpses (other than
> when worried enough about food to want burchered corpses to stick around).
>

You /were/ remembering to pray before killing things, to get the bonus
piety for killing in your god's name? I don't recall having a huge problem
getting Trog up to reasonably good piety levels with a Troll
Fighter...and, considering their high hunger rate, I was probably
scarificing less corpses than you.

> > Sounds about right. I think the highest ever reported was somewhere over
> > 300. Do keep in mind that Dragons are in the 60-90 range.
>
> In terms of how much they have, or how much damage they do in one shot?
>

How much they /have/, I think.



Sam
 
G

Guest

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

On Thu, 5 May 2005, Twisted One wrote:

> Erik Piper wrote:
> >
> > Oooh, slime creatures. That's awfully shallow to be seeing them --
> > condolences.
>
> They can't be that uncommon at that depth -- I ran into at least two of
> them, since I killed one and shortly encountered another. If the odds of
> seeing one at that depth are one in N, the odds of seeing two are one in
> N^2. If N is large, N^2 is really REALLY large.
>

Nah. They're pack creatures, so the generation routine makes more than one
of them in the first place (that is, it generates a pack of them, at the
given probability).

> > There is: in your case a good example would probably be +0 chain mail.
> > That is -- heavy armors are cumbersome and worsen your evasion and your
> > offense. As your Armour skill rises, you can compensate for more and
> > more cumbersome armours. At dungeon level 7, your armour skill probably
> > won't be high enough yet to be more effective in plate mail than in
> > chain mail. ("Your armour prevents you from hitting the foo...")
>
> I saw those messages, but only rarely, and someone here said AC was
> quite important.
>

I believe they said that armour was much more effective in Crawl than in
Angband. Which it is. On the other hand, it also has more side-effects.
You could try increasing your evasion rather than your AC...

> > If it's got a slow weapon, I'll pillar dance only long enough
> > to absorb what I think is the worst they can delivery in one round, and
> > then I'll game their weapon speed and retreat via a staircase. If it
> > doesn't, I'll just pillar dance that much longer.
>
> How do you know if its weapon is slow?
>

Well, there are spoilers. But, generally, short blades are fast weapons,
and hafted weapons (double handed weapons in general, I think) tend to be
slow.


Sam
 
G

Guest

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

On Thu, 05 May 2005 12:09:50 +0200, Erik Piper <erNOikSP@skyAM.cz>
wrote:

>More generally, you could hardly pick a roguelike with a design
>philosophy more different from Angband's (judging, once again, mostly
>from my experience with ToME), so there's a lot to unlearn.

Don't judge Angband by ToME, ToME has moved a long way from Angband.

Angband/Moria and Crawl differ in a lot of ways, but they are the big
RLs that stick closest to the pure dungeon dive of Rogue itself,
without the puzzle-box nature of NetHack or the "story" elements that
dominate ADOM/GearHead. Which to me, makes them feel the closest of
the major roguelikes (although still different in very important
ways).

R. Dan Henry
danhenry@inreach.com
 
G

Guest

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

Twisted One <twisted0n3@gmail.invalid> writes:
> OK, decided to try the latest version of crawl a little. To make the
> early levels relatively easy and simplify things I decided on human
> fighters. And the results are: I keep dying in the first few
> levels.

Basically you just have to play a bit more -- you'll eventually get a
better sense of what to do/monsters-to-avoid/when-to-worry/etc.
In general crawl is _very_ well balanced.

When I first played crawl I would rarely make it past level 1! But now
I almost never die before level 10 or so, even if I'm not really paying
attention.

-Miles
--
"Nah, there's no bigger atheist than me. Well, I take that back.
I'm a cancer screening away from going agnostic and a biopsy away
from full-fledged Christian." [Adam Carolla]
 
G

Guest

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

By the way, what's the nastiest out-of-depth monster possible ?

I've been killed by an (shapeshifting)Iron Dragon on level1. Nothing to be
proud of, actually.

B0rsuk
 
G

Guest

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

B0rsuk wrote:
> By the way, what's the nastiest out-of-depth monster possible ?
>
> I've been killed by an (shapeshifting)Iron Dragon on level1. Nothing to be
> proud of, actually.
>
> B0rsuk

Oof, it's the famous code for very occasionally generating something not
merely out of depth (but still intended to be reasonable), but
*ridiculously* out of depth. I don't know offhand how many levels that
code can add; then again it's not really important. The only important
thing in such cases is to ruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuunn!!!

Erik
 
G

Guest

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

Erik Piper wrote:
> Oof, it's the famous code for very occasionally generating something not
> merely out of depth (but still intended to be reasonable), but
> *ridiculously* out of depth. I don't know offhand how many levels that
> code can add; then again it's not really important. The only important
> thing in such cases is to ruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuunn!!!

ITYM "The only important thing in such cases is 'shift+Q'". They'll
never take me alive! :)

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
 
G

Guest

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

B0rsuk wrote:
> By the way, what's the nastiest out-of-depth monster possible ?
>
> I've been killed by an (shapeshifting)Iron Dragon on level1. Nothing
> to be proud of, actually.

Do you know how I came to play Crawl? No?
I had a nightmare about playing a new, yet unknown (to me) roguelike.
A few days later I played my very first game of Crawl and I immediately
knew I've found 'my dream-game'! ;-)
No joke, that's what actually happened...

Rubinstein