Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

-Crawl- My days and nights in the hell that is 4.1.2a

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
August 8, 2005 6:52:41 AM

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

It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be the
Impossible level.

I never agreed with the adage that "Crawl wants you dead" -- in b26, it
always left you a hole to squeeze through if you only could see it. But
4.1.2a really does want you dead, dead, dead. If you see the Temple
with an average combo, you've been lucky and played well. If you see
the Lair with a strong combo, ditto. And strong means "equipped with a
chainsaw," because armours are more widespread, better types in
agonizing places (orc warriors all too commonly in plate mail) and
"behave like they're thicker." On the bodies of enemies, that is. On
the PC's own body, same old same old.

Plus tank types now tend to be shielded.

Plus the tanks you're most desperate not to be standing by swim to the
front of crowds. And wounded parties swim to the back.

Last night my Minotaur Berserker -- Minotaur Berserker for chrissakes,
only non-munchkiny decision was a roleplayingy switch to maces ASAP
after the start -- entered Berserk against Agnes -- Agnes for
chrissakes -- whom she'd met in level 2 of the Mines (uniques can pop
up dang near anywhere in 4.1.2a) and lured up to level 1 and ditched
(along with an orc knight that he was praying was somewhere far away)
so he could come back after resting. He was at 60 HP when he entered
berserk. He died before berserk ended -- Agnes kept holding him at

That's 4.1.2a.

Then there are the ranged attackers, especially the wizard-type
spellcasters (priest-types merely hit you with huger, faster, less
resistable than ever smitings). Forget about luring around corners.
Welcome to (you yourself) healing around corners. They won't follow
you. (Probably shouldn't mention that, otherwise Brent'll make them
start following you around corners when you're low on HP.) And forget
about fighting without either high magic resistance, power out of scale
with the given enemy, or potions of healing and an amulet of resist
slowing. You'll get slowed and confused into the ground (at least in my
build -- anyone with their own builds want to confirm this?) as the
hasted, invisible @%@#$^@^ rips you to shreds.

That's 4.1.2a.

I guess I should go work now. Oooh, the headache -- the tougher it is,
the more it drives me into the wee hours. :-/

e.

More about : crawl days nights hell

Anonymous
August 8, 2005 10:26:02 AM

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

Rubinstein wrote:
> Erik Piper wrote:
> > It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be the
> > Impossible level.
>
> I think every new version should have a unique name (like it is with
> ToME eg). How about this (for 4.1.2a): "Brent's private edition" or
> "Fisherman's friend" (as in "if it's too strong, you are to weak").

Fisherman's Friend it is. :-)

> > [...]
> > You'll get slowed and confused into the ground (at least in my
> > build -- anyone with their own builds want to confirm this?) as the
> > hasted, invisible @%@#$^@^ rips you to shreds.
> >
> > That's 4.1.2a.
>
> I wonder why you don't mention the Zot- and heavy blade traps on D:1.
> Is this fixed in your build for some odd reason? Not for me at least
> (unless I missed something). With these traps active I consider this
> version seriously broken and stopped playtesting so far.

They haven't been fixed, but I've noticed a toning down relative to the
first alpha. Once your max HP gets above the typical damage they do,
they're livable, if cruel. And it's only one bug, a cruel cruel bug,
but not enough to say it's too low in technical quality to test.

> Currently I've
> enough trouble with my hardware and don't need any more. Meanwhile I
> doubt 4.1 was meant for public playtesting at all.

Who cares? I'm-a playtestin' this puppy!

e.
Anonymous
August 8, 2005 7:02:16 PM

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

Erik Piper wrote:
> It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be the
> Impossible level.

I think every new version should have a unique name (like it is with
ToME eg). How about this (for 4.1.2a): "Brent's private edition" or
"Fisherman's friend" (as in "if it's too strong, you are to weak").

> [...]
> You'll get slowed and confused into the ground (at least in my
> build -- anyone with their own builds want to confirm this?) as the
> hasted, invisible @%@#$^@^ rips you to shreds.
>
> That's 4.1.2a.

I wonder why you don't mention the Zot- and heavy blade traps on D:1.
Is this fixed in your build for some odd reason? Not for me at least
(unless I missed something). With these traps active I consider this
version seriously broken and stopped playtesting so far. Currently I've
enough trouble with my hardware and don't need any more. Meanwhile I
doubt 4.1 was meant for public playtesting at all. Even for an alpha
it's strong tobacco, only makes sense for coders IMO. Fortunately I'm
still quite happy with b26.

Rubinstein
--
in dubio pro pecuniam et contra populum
Related resources
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 12:54:55 AM

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

In article <1123494760.971011.10310@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Erik Piper <erik@sky.cz> wrote:
// Last night my Minotaur Berserker -- Minotaur Berserker for chrissakes,
// only non-munchkiny decision was a roleplayingy switch to maces ASAP
// after the start -- entered Berserk against Agnes -- Agnes for
// chrissakes -- whom she'd met in level 2 of the Mines (uniques can pop
// up dang near anywhere in 4.1.2a)

In general they're further down in the dungeon than they used to be,
so Sigmund and Erolcha tend to come later. Although they do occur
in the orcish mines now (so the orc uniques can be at home).

// Then there are the ranged attackers, especially the wizard-type
// spellcasters (priest-types merely hit you with huger, faster, less
// resistable than ever smitings).

Smiting is just as resistable as it always has been... it's not.

Brent Ross
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 1:25:18 AM

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

"Erik Piper" <erik@sky.cz> wrote in message
news:1123494760.971011.10310@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be the
> Impossible level.
>
> I never agreed with the adage that "Crawl wants you dead" -- in b26, it
> always left you a hole to squeeze through if you only could see it. But
> 4.1.2a really does want you dead, dead, dead. If you see the Temple

Heh, Crawl 4.1.2a is telling me to give up and go do something else for a
bit. Last 3 chars, 3 deaths, 12 game turns... mommy!

I do like how Crawl baits some of its traps, you see that item you think
would be nice on the floor, step to grab it and ZOT! Next char, takes 1
step from his starting point and WHAM! Axe trap. Next char, walks a bit down
a corridor, diagonally steps around the corner and Oh lookie an Ooze! One
hit for 19 of 17 hp. Ouch that hurts...
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 4:23:45 AM

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

William Klett wrote:
>
> "Erik Piper" <erik@sky.cz> wrote in message
> news:1123494760.971011.10310@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be the
>> Impossible level.
>>
>> I never agreed with the adage that "Crawl wants you dead" -- in b26,
>> it always left you a hole to squeeze through if you only could see
>> it. But 4.1.2a really does want you dead, dead, dead. If you see the
>> Temple
>
> Heh, Crawl 4.1.2a is telling me to give up and go do something else
> for a bit. Last 3 chars, 3 deaths, 12 game turns... mommy!
>
> I do like how Crawl baits some of its traps, you see that item you
> think would be nice on the floor, step to grab it and ZOT! Next char,
> takes 1 step from his starting point and WHAM! Axe trap. Next char,
> walks a bit down a corridor, diagonally steps around the corner and Oh
> lookie an Ooze! One hit for 19 of 17 hp. Ouch that hurts...

You're kidding, right? Otherwise I can't imagine how one can like these
early traps. For physically weak characters that just means instadeath.
Nothing against their appearance later, where they used to be in b26: if
you were killed by such a trap you could say "ok, I had enough
opportunities to train my Traps & Doors skill. But so...

Rubinstein
--
in dubio pro pecuniam et contra populum
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 5:33:34 AM

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

Rubinstein wrote:
> Erik Piper wrote:
> >
> > Rubinstein wrote:
> >> Erik Piper wrote:
> >> > It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be the
> >> > Impossible level.
> >>
> >> I think every new version should have a unique name (like it is with
> >> ToME eg). How about this (for 4.1.2a): "Brent's private edition" or
> >> "Fisherman's friend" (as in "if it's too strong, you are to weak").
> >
> > Fisherman's Friend it is. :-)
>
> I would be glad if you were right, but I'm afraid the first one comes
> closer to the truth. I'm more and more under the impression Brent's
> vision of crawl is far away from mine.

I am having the same impression (though there are other possible
explanations for parts of what I'm seeing), but this impression does
not change the fact that all of these releases have been very much
intended for playtesting and that Brent has hardly been slow in
responding to the playtesting that has been done so far -- thus I don't
see the need for such a snide-sounding nickname as "Brent's Private
Edition." Save any blame towards Brent for the times when it is
actually due.

> You know I love b26 'as it is'
> and, besides some UI improvements (which I like btw), I only would
> accept *small* changes towards a more challenging game (I'm probably too
> weak for a Fisherman's version, but to that I'm only convinced if
> someone ever would manage to win a 4.1 game).

I agree with your statement later on in the thread that the difficulty
level on b26 was just about right, if not a little too hard for many
people new to the game (and thereby reducing the size of the community
:-/ ). Because Brent hasn't issued any unified statement on the
overarching game balance philosophy for the new version, we can only
guess at what is accident and what is intention, which creates a bad
atmosphre, I think.

> To fit my taste those
> changes would have to be in the region of 'fine-tuning' but not leading
> to an entirely new game, that's what it feels to me now.

I wouldn't mind a new game -- as long as it's good and feels worthy of
the name Crawl. :-)

> [amnesia traps change]

Ooooh, yeah. Don't get me started or I might say something I regret.
;-)

[...]

> I still wonder:
> 1.) Why are there so few playtesting reports?

Because you're not writing any! :-D But yeah, like whoever said it said
-- small community. Plus we got a technical problem blocking the person
most eager to give Windows reports.

> 2.) Why should I bother at all?

Because if the version continues to remain imbalanced through further
versions, that is, if the design philosophy is bad (and we're not just
seeing technical mistakes), and then a final release with a broken
design is issued, you'll only have yourself to blame if you didn't
protest. :-)

e.
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 7:23:49 AM

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

Erik Piper wrote:
>
> Rubinstein wrote:
>> Erik Piper wrote:
>> > It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be the
>> > Impossible level.
>>
>> I think every new version should have a unique name (like it is with
>> ToME eg). How about this (for 4.1.2a): "Brent's private edition" or
>> "Fisherman's friend" (as in "if it's too strong, you are to weak").
>
> Fisherman's Friend it is. :-)

I would be glad if you were right, but I'm afraid the first one comes
closer to the truth. I'm more and more under the impression Brent's
vision of crawl is far away from mine. You know I love b26 'as it is'
and, besides some UI improvements (which I like btw), I only would
accept *small* changes towards a more challenging game (I'm probably too
weak for a Fisherman's version, but to that I'm only convinced if
someone ever would manage to win a 4.1 game). To fit my taste those
changes would have to be in the region of 'fine-tuning' but not leading
to an entirely new game, that's what it feels to me now. I still hope
these impressions are just cause I didn't got the great picture and
cause many things are still unready and simply don't yet fit. On the
other hand, when I read Brent's statement about the new way amnesia
traps are treated in combination with the travel patch and that it was
intentionally, I'm not all too optimistic. Maybe I'll stay behind the
moon with b26 until eternity, who cares...

I still wonder:
1.) Why are there so few playtesting reports?
2.) Why should I bother at all?

Rubinstein
--
in dubio pro pecuniam et contra populum
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 7:23:50 AM

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

On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 03:23:49 +0200, Rubinstein wrote:
>--8<--...I'm not all too optimistic. Maybe I'll stay behind the
>moon with b26 until eternity, who cares...
>
>I still wonder:
>1.) Why are there so few playtesting reports?

Because I don't yet have a working binary. Not all people have taught
themselves to compile.

>2.) Why should I bother at all?

Because Brent has to look at what the players like, to keep his
reputation. Even if he only leaves a couple of easy races, or a
mini-ending at level 10 for us. *grin*

And if the game is super hard or otherwise bad, "they" will code it
better, starting from b26 or 4.xxx.


And you don't need to panic. The traps will surely go out, and ooze
can start appearing at level 2 or 3, like it was before. Just post
about every small thing and the players here will echo you if nothing
happens in time. ;-)

Be glad that ooze doesn't multiply.
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 8:57:43 AM

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

Lauri Vallo wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 03:23:49 +0200, Rubinstein wrote:
>>--8<--
^^^^^^ what's this?
>>...I'm not all too optimistic. Maybe I'll stay behind the
>>moon with b26 until eternity, who cares...
>>
>>I still wonder:
>>1.) Why are there so few playtesting reports?
>
> Because I don't yet have a working binary. Not all people have taught
> themselves to compile.

Forte Free Agent, looks like a Windows user, right? I thought meanwhile
there are binaries around for Windows...

Rubinstein
--
in dubio pro pecuniam et contra populum
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 10:52:39 AM

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

Lauri Vallo wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 04:57:43 +0200, Rubinstein wrote:
> >Lauri Vallo wrote:
>
> >> Because I don't yet have a working binary. Not all people have taught
> >> themselves to compile.
> >
> >Forte Free Agent, looks like a Windows user, right? I thought meanwhile
> >there are binaries around for Windows...
>
> Yep, win98se. I posted in another (crawl 4.1.1a released) thread about
> the error messages I got.

Lauri, I sent you a zip that incorporated Darshan's fix suggestion. Did
you receive it?

e.
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 11:18:40 AM

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

Would you be so kind as to send me working win 98 build as well? Or,
even better, post it somewhere so it could be d/loaded?

Blofeld
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 4:50:04 PM

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

Erik Piper wrote:
> Rubinstein wrote:
>> Erik Piper wrote:
>> >
>> > Rubinstein wrote:
>> >> Erik Piper wrote:
>> >> > It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be
>> >> > the Impossible level.
>> >>
>> >> I think every new version should have a unique name (like it is
>> >> with ToME eg). How about this (for 4.1.2a): "Brent's private
>> >> edition" or "Fisherman's friend" (as in "if it's too strong, you
>> >> are to weak").
>> >
>> > Fisherman's Friend it is. :-)
>>
>> I would be glad if you were right, but I'm afraid the first one comes
>> closer to the truth. I'm more and more under the impression Brent's
>> vision of crawl is far away from mine.
>
> ...thus I don't see the need for such a snide-sounding nickname as
> "Brent's Private Edition." Save any blame towards Brent for the times
> when it is actually due.
>
>> [...]
>
> I agree with your statement later on in the thread that the difficulty
> level on b26 was just about right, if not a little too hard for many
> people new to the game (and thereby reducing the size of the community
> :-/ ). Because Brent hasn't issued any unified statement on the
> overarching game balance philosophy for the new version, we can only
> guess at what is accident and what is intention, which creates a bad
> atmosphre, I think.

Yes, that's pretty close to what I'm thinking, too. That also was the
intention behind what you call "snide-sounding nickname": provoking some
information about how the new(?) game balance actually is meant to be.
Right now it appears quite uncertain to me whether it's an accident or
intended. Though "Brent's Private Edition" wasn't meant that serious as
you might have gotten it. But then politeness never was my strongest
side and I don't have to lose any reputation in this area. ;-)

>> 2.) Why should I bother at all?
>
> Because if the version continues to remain imbalanced through further
> versions, that is, if the design philosophy is bad (and we're not just
> seeing technical mistakes), and then a final release with a broken
> design is issued, you'll only have yourself to blame if you didn't
> protest. :-)

There you hit another point: after watching some discussions on
crawl-dev it looks somewhat tough to me when it comes to convincing
Brent from a tester's point of view of likely bugs/misbehavior. He tend
to look at technical facts in the first place, which probably is quite
natural and the only way for a coder.

My impression is that the 'old' code is so complicated (if not to say
screwed), that even the slightest changes often lead to quite unexpected
results. OTOH Brent seems to be aware of this, but then I don't quite
understand when he says things like "this can't be, I havn't change
anything in this part of the code". Apparently he doesn't have enough
time to spend with playtesting, but then has a hard time to trust in the
feedback that's coming from other testers, which renders playtesting
less useful (or difficult at least). This problem still has to be solved
somehow, maybe a little more 'counter-feedback' from Brent would help
here...

I'm glad to see one more playtester now (Glen Wheeler). With some more
active testers we can at least increase the chance of detecting program
faults which are just a result of bad compilations (though less useful
with one single shared windows binary).

Rubinstein the nervous (cause he still havn't won b26, while 4.1 is
getting harder and harder...) :-/
--
in dubio pro pecuniam et contra populum
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 5:08:34 PM

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

On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 04:57:43 +0200, Rubinstein wrote:
>Lauri Vallo wrote:

>> Because I don't yet have a working binary. Not all people have taught
>> themselves to compile.
>
>Forte Free Agent, looks like a Windows user, right? I thought meanwhile
>there are binaries around for Windows...

Yep, win98se. I posted in another (crawl 4.1.1a released) thread about
the error messages I got.
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 8:30:45 PM

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

"Rubinstein" <picommander@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:D d90j5$1lq$05$1@news.t-online.com...
> Erik Piper wrote:
>>
>> Rubinstein wrote:
>>> Erik Piper wrote:
>>> > It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be the
>>> > Impossible level.
>>>
>>> I think every new version should have a unique name (like it is with
>>> ToME eg). How about this (for 4.1.2a): "Brent's private edition" or
>>> "Fisherman's friend" (as in "if it's too strong, you are to weak").
>>
>> Fisherman's Friend it is. :-)
>
> I would be glad if you were right, but I'm afraid the first one comes
> closer to the truth. I'm more and more under the impression Brent's
> vision of crawl is far away from mine. You know I love b26 'as it is'
> and, besides some UI improvements (which I like btw), I only would
> accept *small* changes towards a more challenging game (I'm probably
> too
> weak for a Fisherman's version, but to that I'm only convinced if
> someone ever would manage to win a 4.1 game). To fit my taste those
> changes would have to be in the region of 'fine-tuning' but not
> leading
> to an entirely new game, that's what it feels to me now. I still hope
> these impressions are just cause I didn't got the great picture and
> cause many things are still unready and simply don't yet fit. On the
> other hand, when I read Brent's statement about the new way amnesia
> traps are treated in combination with the travel patch and that it was
> intentionally, I'm not all too optimistic. Maybe I'll stay behind the
> moon with b26 until eternity, who cares...
>

I won't, that's for sure. Crawl development should approach something
new, there are always the old versions to download. Brent has the right
to do so and IMO has actually been quite conservative (just looks at how
long he has been maintainer for).
One vote from me to keep the development going, and the playtesting.

> I still wonder:
> 1.) Why are there so few playtesting reports?

Crawl isn't exceptionally popular and this newsgroup less so.

> 2.) Why should I bother at all?
>

You might find it fun. Regardless, this is rhetorical as you've
already bothered, so must have an answer to the question.

--
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
August 9, 2005 8:30:46 PM

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

Glen Wheeler wrote:
>
> "Rubinstein" <picommander@t-online.de> wrote in message
> news:D d90j5$1lq$05$1@news.t-online.com...
>> Erik Piper wrote:
>>>
>>> Rubinstein wrote:
>>>> Erik Piper wrote:
>>>> > It's been some hard times. If Crawl were Doom, 4.1.2a would be
>>>> > the Impossible level.
>>>>
>>>> I think every new version should have a unique name (like it is
>>>> with ToME eg). How about this (for 4.1.2a): "Brent's private
>>>> edition" or "Fisherman's friend" (as in "if it's too strong, you
>>>> are to weak").
>>>
>>> Fisherman's Friend it is. :-)
>>
>> [snip not liking the current state of 4.1]
>
> I won't, that's for sure. Crawl development should approach something
> new, there are always the old versions to download. Brent has the
> right to do so and IMO has actually been quite conservative (just
> looks at how long he has been maintainer for).

I never argued this. Everybody has the right to do with the code what
s/he likes and Brent even more so. I just dislike the current state of
4.1, that's it. How useful a feedback would be when excluding any
negative opinions? I'm almost sure Brent doesn't need sheerleaders.

> One vote from me to keep the development going, and the playtesting.

So why don't you start then? Windows binaries are out and thus no excuse
for not doing it.

>> I still wonder:
>> 1.) Why are there so few playtesting reports?
>
> Crawl isn't exceptionally popular and this newsgroup less so.

How many playtesting reports have you seen so far and how many Crawl
players do you know from this group? Won't you expect a little more
interest and reports about the new versions up to now?

>> 2.) Why should I bother at all?
>
> You might find it fun. Regardless, this is rhetorical as you've
> already bothered, so must have an answer to the question.

You're right, that was mainly rhetorical and very likely I'll continue
testing the next versions. Of course I'm curious in what direction this
train will go. I also have to admit this new babe looks very promising
and beautiful - from afare.

My main concern is that I consider the early game in b26 as already very
hard, closed to the edge. IMO there's no more tolerance for further
increasing the difficult level for the early game, but that's what
happening right now. And since I haven't heard a clear statement yet
from Brent about this aspect, I'm afraid that's exactly the way he want
and that he disagrees in this evaluation.

Rubinstein
--
in dubio pro pecuniam et contra populum
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 9:57:12 PM

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

On 9 Aug 2005 06:52:39 -0700, "Erik Piper" wrote:

>Lauri, I sent you a zip that incorporated Darshan's fix suggestion. Did
>you receive it?

I did. Thanks! It works!
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 10:04:22 PM

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

On 9 Aug 2005 07:18:40 -0700, "Blofeld" wrote:

>Would you be so kind as to send me working win 98 build as well? Or,
>even better, post it somewhere so it could be d/loaded?

http://koti.mbnet.fi/lava/crawl/dc412a-w32.zip
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 2:22:18 AM

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

In article <42f84fbd$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>,
Glen Wheeler <gew75@uow.edu.au> wrote:
//
// I won't, that's for sure. Crawl development should approach something
// new, there are always the old versions to download. Brent has the right
// to do so and IMO has actually been quite conservative (just looks at how
// long he has been maintainer for).

Conservative is a good word for what I've been attempting. I've
pretty much tried to keep things working largely the way they used
to... or more appropriately, how they appeared to (ie tossing out
pointless factors and trying to make the factors people expect to
affect things actually revelant to them). So I kept things like
the speed system and the extra attacks the way they used to be,
although it's really troublsome and practically impossible to
balance well. I've been tempted a few times to redo the melee
system from scratch in a different way.

The few significant changes to the systems are mostly geared
towards increasing options, while not overly impacting the old
systems.

Brent Ross
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 3:17:16 AM

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

"Rubinstein" <picommander@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:D da1or$orb$04$1@news.t-online.com...
> [...]
> I'm glad to see one more playtester now (Glen Wheeler). With some more
> active testers we can at least increase the chance of detecting
> program
> faults which are just a result of bad compilations (though less useful
> with one single shared windows binary).
>

I'm no expert, but do care quite a bit about Crawl.

> Rubinstein the nervous (cause he still havn't won b26, while 4.1 is
> getting harder and harder...) :-/

Same here; furthest I've reached is the bottom of Vaults. Killed by
tiredness: didn't notice the Iron Dragonses. Ah well.

--
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
August 10, 2005 3:17:17 AM

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

Glen Wheeler wrote:
>
> "Rubinstein" <picommander@t-online.de> wrote in message
> news:D da1or$orb$04$1@news.t-online.com...
>> [...]
>> I'm glad to see one more playtester now (Glen Wheeler). With some
>> more active testers we can...
>
> I'm no expert, but do care quite a bit about Crawl.
>
>> Rubinstein the nervous (cause he still havn't won b26, while 4.1 is
>> getting harder and harder...) :-/
>
> Same here; furthest I've reached is the bottom of Vaults. Killed by
> tiredness: didn't notice the Iron Dragonses. Ah well.

Tiredness is also my second most death reason, first are yellow wasps.
I just can't leave them alone, what a bad habit. My best one (in b26 of
course) was close to a win. He died on D:27 and guess to what (no, not
a yellow wasp this time). *g*

That was a very pleasant game I still like to remember. If you are
curious about the whole story, google search for 'YASD on D:27', but do
a group search, otherwise you won't find it. The original post is dated
from 24 Dez. 2004 (what a nice christmas present that would have been),
poster Rubinstein. I could give you the url, but it's too long and ugly.

Iron dragons btw are always dangerous, but not generally or at least not
always the same level of danger. Strange enough, I once was cornered by
2 of them in an open area on Vault 7, but killed them both (and later
was killed somewhere else by something else).

Rubinstein
--
Pssst, don't tell it to the RNG: right now I have a MeIE with a randart
+10, +10 dagger, Level 10 (both dungeon and character). 10 seems to be
the magic number of this game! Hopefully the RNG is using a sig-filter.
!