myoksy
Sep 05, 2016
Third (?) story dungeon, when appealing to the priest's religion: The guy says "Let's see how you well you fight without your magic!" but the following combat has no starting conditions and all chars have full mana.
About the pacing (too much gold) I mentioned in the last beta thread: it's even worse now, I have some 60k of gold I'm at level 15 : )
I don't think it's plausible that the trap replacer is at fault - the function was at most triggered twice (I started nobles at lvl 4 with the initial gem, the following two houses had iirc 2 gems each).
my explanation approaches are this ones:
- this time I seduced the guard guy, but I'm not sure if half of the random encounters are worth that much XP
- the new layouts have more places with treasures, especially larger mansions: only 5 different traps and if a house has, say, 9 rooms at least 4 are non-traps. it could be useful to allow some trap types more than once per mansion (the only one I would exclude are vault and green house, both are imo unique features of a noble's mansion)
jack1974
Sep 05, 2016
Third (?) story dungeon, when appealing to the priest's religion: The guy says "Let's see how you well you fight without your magic!" but the following combat has no starting conditions and all chars have full mana.
He strikes Joanne, so she starts paralyzed. At least last time I tested it was working fine
About the pacing (too much gold) I mentioned in the last beta thread: it's even worse now, I have some 60k of gold I'm at level 15 : )
I don't think it's plausible that the trap replacer is at fault - the function was at most triggered twice (I started nobles at lvl 4 with the initial gem, the following two houses had iirc 2 gems each).
my explanation approaches are this ones:
- this time I seduced the guard guy, but I'm not sure if half of the random encounters are worth that much XP
- the new layouts have more places with treasures, especially larger mansions: only 5 different traps and if a house has, say, 9 rooms at least 4 are non-traps. it could be useful to allow some trap types more than once per mansion (the only one I would exclude are vault and green house, both are imo unique features of a noble's mansion)
Well an easier system without touching the layouts again (which can lead to bugs right now just before the release and it's something a good coder should NEVER do
) is simply modify slightly the gold multiplier. As you advance in the story, I give the mansions more "potential gold". It's enough to tweak that value lower, since now the things have changed from when I did that calculation.
myoksy
Sep 05, 2016
He strikes Joanne, so she starts paralyzed. At least last time I tested it was working fine
I am nearly sure that my whole party was able to act in the first round - no one had a debuff I remember
modify slightly the gold multiplier. As you advance in the story, I give the mansions more "potential gold".
actual gold is not the problem - it's (sold) gems.
myoksy
Sep 05, 2016
"problem" is the wrong word, and I'm still not sure if my current game is a freak outlier. more opinions are needed...
myoksy
Sep 05, 2016
...a handful of noble mansions later...
okay, I think I got it: your first work-around for the wall crashing party were redesigned layouts. and the new layouts are generally larger (i.e. more chances to find gems). I made one complete play-through after the randomizer change but before the layout tweaking - and the pacing was near perfect. not that I have a proof (only my porous memory : )) but when you look at your code history I am nearly sure that the mansions have more rooms since ~ 0.8.1.
jack1974
Sep 05, 2016
I never changed the layout for the nobles (the one who have more gems). Using your randomizer there are probably more chances to get a treasure room. I can tweak it so that it's less likely to happen, but people can still get the gems from the various traps. The thing is that they still have to defeat the enemies.
If you think the current game is too easy, have you tried playing in Hard/Nightmare mode? otherwise, if you have a super party full of gems and win easily, but are playing in Normal mode, you can't complain. I added the difficulty levels exactly for that!
jack1974
Sep 05, 2016
Ah I actually found the issue. In the treasure room itself, if the value of the treasure is >50 gold, you get a gem. Since I increase gold value over time, it's also more likely you get a gem. So yes, tweaking the gold amount added to the targets will also solve this problem
Will upload a new version tomorrow with this change.
BTW I tried to play a few battles in Hard mode with your super party level 34, and had a hard time against the mercenary pit. I had to use a potion to save my ass. I can't imagine in Nightmare...
jack1974
Sep 06, 2016
Just did an update, tweaked a bit the values but honestly thinking about it, it was a bit pointless: you can run the shop to get more money anyway, and even if I have reduced the amount of noble treasure rooms, people can get gems anyway defeating enemies in the "trap rooms".
Even the GUI change is mostly a display thing. So just a minor update in practice
myoksy
Sep 06, 2016
if you have a super party full of gems and win easily, but are playing in Normal mode, you can't complain
it sounds as if you're mad at me, sorry if my comments sound aggressive or derogatory - they are not meant this way
Using your randomizer there are probably more chances to get a treasure room.
I compared 0.7.4 and 0.8.8 for treasure rooms and vaults, the two main gem sources. normal disclaimers are valid: this is only true for an infinite amount of robbed houses and this can include calculation errors.
Vaults are good for 1.5 gems in average, treasure rooms for 1 (not exactly true, but in this ballpark).
[code]
0.7.4 0.8.8
ID Treasure Vaults Gems Treasure Vaults Gems
0 1.5* 0.75 2.6 2.35* 0.75 3.5
1 0.5 0.56 1.3 1.17 0.67 2.1
2 0.5 0.42 1.1 1 0.33 2
3 0.5 1.06 2.1 0.75 1* 2.3
4 0.66 0.28 1.1 0.93 0.5 1.7
5 0.5 0.64 1.5 0.2 0.33 1.2
6 0.5 1.64* 3.0 0.31 0.31 0.8
7 -/- -/- -/- 1.42 0.62 2.4
average 2.1 average 2.3
*) of which one is guaranteed
[/code]
So generally the amount of gems is very similar between 0.7.4 and 0.8.8 - but as those are averages for infinite robberies the actual game can be very different.
I don't remember my "argh! level 6 already and only 3 gems!" in detail, but it is likely that I visited often the dungeons 5 and 6. My current game with way too much available gold gives me often mansion 0 (I remember the blueprint).
With the wide range of gem drops the pacing will be different from game to game - this can be seen as good or bad, I have no clear opinion.
jack1974
Sep 06, 2016
Haha no I'm not mad at you! If seemed like so it's because the past week have been bad and I'm tired, so probably wrote that quickly without thinking
I think mainly the thing is that the game, having a lot of random stuff, as you said it can be very different from game to game. So in general I think it's better to stay on the safer side, and better if players have money in excess than less.
Also my point was that you can have all the money/gems you want, but you still need to be able to play the game, use the right skills, etc. And if it's too easy, you can always increase the difficulty to make it more challenging
myoksy
Sep 07, 2016
me again. sorry.
could you take a look at the XP calculation, again? advancing is honestly more sluggish than before 0.8.1, and I just had a fine example: the mad alchemist with his monstrous dog, with a party at lvl 19 my chars were rewarded with 57 XP in total. I cannot prove it, but combats like this were in the 100+ XP region.
PS I very much like the new turn order prediction column, this works much much better now. thanks!
jack1974
Sep 07, 2016
When I did the XP change, I made sure that the values were the same of the 0.8.1 version (with the "old" XP calculations). However, it could be that before since the two values (battle preview and post-battle screen) were different, maybe in the previews was 79 XP, but in reality the XP awarded was more.
I can just boost the XP overall or increase single encounters XP in any case. If you feel that in general advancing takes more, better an overall XP boost
myoksy
Sep 07, 2016
When I did the XP change, I made sure that the values were the same of the 0.8.1 version (with the "old" XP calculations).
you mean 0.8.0?
the XP on the end screen also matches the one in the pre-battle screen (before they could be different! )
maybe in the previews was 79 XP, but in reality the XP awarded was more.
this was my _first_ suspicion : P but alas, no. I used my trusty pocket calculator to compare before and after and your GUI did not lie
I can just boost the XP overall or increase single encounters XP in any case. If you feel that in general advancing takes more, better an overall XP boost
I am honestly not sure if this is a good idea. the pacing was fine and it could be better to take a look at the code changes to identify the cause.
jack1974
Sep 07, 2016
Yes I mean 0.8.0, basically the last version to use the old XP calculation.
I don't have the exact code I was using before, but the thing is that probably the enemy level (which is not shown to players) had more weight than it's now. In practice something like:
EnemyA at level 5=50XP
EnemyA at level 6=60XP
etc, while now is lower, like EnemyA at level 7=55XP or something.
HOWEVER, I agree that changing the overal XP calculation now is a bit risky, unless more people tell me that now is too slow. I can increase the XP for that single encounter (the giant beast in practice) though, if you feel the reward is too small?
myoksy
Sep 07, 2016
more opinions would be extremly welcome, but the few times I asked in my posts no one was willing to chip in.
as case in point: without dilly-dallying I currently own 96000 gold at level 20 - _after_ I paid the 25000 to open the next story dungeon. this cannot be explained anymore by more or less luck with gem drops. but 30 % (or something) lowered XP are a plausible explanation approach.
jack1974
Sep 07, 2016
Now that I think about it, a good way to measure it is to try doing the catacombs, since I designed them so that you could ALMOST do each level one after the other. My intention was that (except maybe the first 2 levels), you would level up almost to the required level, so you had to do the missions for a bit, and then get back to the catacombs.
Anyway, I made some tests and on next update I think I can safely increase the XP (based on enemy level, so it increases more as the party gain levels) by a little. The current formula is:
[code]self.cExp=int(self.cExp+(self.cExp*self.level/40))[/code]
I changed the 40 to 38 and at level 10 the difference was only 13XP (so about 4XP each sister). Of course during all the battles it adds up, but I think it's a safe change to do
jack1974
Sep 07, 2016
Do you remember what level you were when you did the mad alchemist scene? I just stumbled in one myself, and with party at level 26 I get 127XP (without doing any tweak). If you were lower level, then the issue could be XP scaling as enemies have higher levels then.
myoksy
Sep 07, 2016
I was at level 19, and got 57 XP in total - and I am nearly sure that the alchemist with his lap dog was worth about 100 around this character level (the few military mansions I visited were always around lvl 18 to 22 or so).
another thing, this time a story contingency bump: when fighting Jana (or so, the former aide of the general) the dungeon ends without the party searching for clues. coming home the father directly asks about the letter.
jack1974
Sep 07, 2016
OK will do an update tomorrow with a bit more XP, since I don't think will hurt anyway. Regarding Jana I think I fixed that (I noticed it myself while testing) but will take a look to be sure.
