On 03.08.2020 13:06, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> [ Angelic beings' summoning storms on Plane of Air ]
>
> I'd like to hear from the experienced Slashem players how they'd solve
> such extreme situations. One high level summoner is already bad enough.
> Four of them is really disturbing. And when solars and planetars enter
> the scene I'm really clueless. Could I have done something in advance
> to alleviate the risk?

Current game, a neutral elven ranger. Had throughout the game a couple
appearances of single 'A's from the major species of angelic beings.
The good thing was that I was able to work around any direct encounter.

But, again, I feared for the Plane of Air, and, as expected the portal
was diagonally at the far end of the map and titans and angelic beings
visible. Had been prepared, wished for a chickatrice corpse before I
entered Air. It was tough, nonetheless; between getting engulfed and
the need to kill these monsters (air elementals, vortices, etc.) and
stone the stonable creatures I had to constantly switch between weapon
and corpse. Eventually I got rid of all nearby summoner-threats and
cleared a narrow path to finally reach the portal. During that process
my HP:723 melted down to something like HP:70. But okay, I was alive.

On Astral I wanted to avoid two Archons and took the path to Pestilence.
Wands of death and teleport did a fairly good job and I reached that
altar without too many wounds. I had my focus on some helm of opposite
alignment management (constantly uncursing and re-wearing) until I got
lawful as the altar was, while an adjacent player character drained my
live from XL:30 to 25, before I noticed. Restored my level to XL:28,
offered the amulet, and was bestowed with the number one highscore in
my local slashem record file.

Janis

Subject was "Re: [slashem] Advice on extraordinary summon storms?"

On Sunday, May 16, 2021 at 11:43:17 AM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
> [...] I had my focus on some helm of opposite alignment
> management (constantly uncursing and re-wearing) until I got
> lawful as the altar was, [...]

Slash'EM is based on nethack 3.4.3, where that worked. However,
it no longer works in nethack 3.6.x. If you're lawful and put on a
helm of opposite alignment you'll become chaotic and vice versa,
but if you're neutral any particular helm will either always change
you to lawful or always change you to chaotic. So you'd need at
least two, maybe more, to be prepared to switch at either one of
the wrong high altars. (If you carry them with you, you can test
them in advance, but wishing for one on the spot won't be reliable.
Using two consecutive wishes will be though, provided no other
objects get created--or split off from stacks--in between, either by
you or by monster activity or by newly created monsters' initial
inventory.)

Holy water and remove curse work the same, but prayer no longer
uncurses a worn helm of opposite alignment. The current god isn't
going to make it easier to switch to a rival one by helping you take
off the helm. (Anywhere in the dungeon, not just on Astral level.)

> was bestowed with the number one highscore in
> my local slashem record file.

In 3.6.x you also get a lower final score if you ascend with different
alignment than you started with. Normal ascension yields 2x points,
the same as in older versions, but using helm of opposite alignment
to temporarily get back to your original alignment after undergoing
alignment conversion at some point yields 1.5x points, and having
different alignment due to either conversion or helm or both doesn't
get any ascension bonus so yields 1x points. Not many players who
manage to ascend care but in this case it might have mattered.

On 17.05.2021 00:12, Pat Rankin wrote:
>
>> was bestowed with the number one highscore in
>> my local slashem record file.
>
> In 3.6.x you also get a lower final score if you ascend with different
> alignment than you started with. Normal ascension yields 2x points,
> the same as in older versions, but using helm of opposite alignment
> to temporarily get back to your original alignment after undergoing
> alignment conversion at some point yields 1.5x points, and having
> different alignment due to either conversion or helm or both doesn't
> get any ascension bonus so yields 1x points. Not many players who
> manage to ascend care but in this case it might have mattered.

Indeed, score doesn't really matter. That's why I'm a bit astonished
to hear how many effort had been put into the score polishing in the
newer Nethack versions. There was (IMO) certainly other stuff that
needed more attention.

I never had a closer look at the actual score computation algorithm;
my impression was that carrying tons of gems or gold would help, and
many monster kills. This time I had 5500+ monsters on my kill list -
in Nethack I had typically around 3200 and in Slashem it's typically
around 4200 monsters -, and quite some dangerous 'A's amongst them
3 Solars, 2 Planetars, 5 Archons, an astral deva,
3 crystal golems, a steel golem, a sapphire golem,
Demogorgon, Asmodeus, Orcus, Yeenoghu, Juiblex,
Pestilence, Vecna, The Wizard of Yendor (thrice),
Shelob, Girtab, an arch-lich, 3 vorpal jabberwocks,
a vampire mage, ...
I mean killing those beasts is certainly an achievement, even if
some of these species can be petrified, but the points are quickly
made (if you are sufficiently prepared; still very dangerous).

Janis

On Sunday, May 16, 2021 at 5:07:45 PM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
> On 17.05.2021 00:12, Pat Rankin wrote:
>> In 3.6.x you also get a lower final score if you ascend with different
>> alignment than you started with. [2x, 1.5x, or 1x points]
>
> Indeed, score doesn't really matter. That's why I'm a bit astonished
> to hear how many effort had been put into the score polishing in the
> newer Nethack versions.

It effectively changed
if (ascended) {
add(points, points) /* doubling the points value */
}
to
if (ascended and current_alignment == original_alignment) {
tmp = (base_alignment == original_alignment) ? points : points/2;
add(points, tmp)
}
That isn't the exact code but that does accurately reflect the
complexity of this particular change, one that was made 14 years
ago according to the commit logs. [current_alignment is what
is shown on the status lines; base_alignment will be the same as
that unless you're wearing a helm of opposite alignment.]

> There was (IMO) certainly other stuff that needed more attention.

The game's plot, such as it is, is that you're on a mission to
recover the Amulet for your patron deity. Acquiring it and lugging
it to the Astral Plane, then offering it to a rival deity should count
as loss rather than a win. The reduced or omitted score bonus is
just a less drastic way to emphasize that point.

> I never had a closer look at the actual score computation algorithm;

Killing monsters yields the most points by far. If you die, escape,
or quit then the depth you made it into the dungeon is also a
significant factor. Gold, gems, and artifacts (plus invocation tools
even though they aren't artifacts) add to the score, but not by very
much compared to monsters. For ascension or escape from the
dungeon, adjacent pets also add a small amount.

On 17.05.2021 08:04, Pat Rankin wrote:
> On Sunday, May 16, 2021 at 5:07:45 PM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
>> On 17.05.2021 00:12, Pat Rankin wrote:
>>> In 3.6.x you also get a lower final score if you ascend with different
>>> alignment than you started with. [2x, 1.5x, or 1x points]
>>
>> Indeed, score doesn't really matter. That's why I'm a bit astonished
>> to hear how many effort had been put into the score polishing in the
>> newer Nethack versions.
>
> It effectively changed
> if (ascended) {
> add(points, points) /* doubling the points value */
> }
> to
> if (ascended and current_alignment == original_alignment) {
> tmp = (base_alignment == original_alignment) ? points : points/2;
> add(points, tmp)
> }
> That isn't the exact code but that does accurately reflect the
> complexity of this particular change, one that was made 14 years
> ago according to the commit logs. [current_alignment is what
> is shown on the status lines; base_alignment will be the same as
> that unless you're wearing a helm of opposite alignment.]

The point was not meant as "many lines of code" but *unnecessary*
complexity, and why in the first place the designers focused on a
detail like that. But don't get me wrong; it's not my business to
question a Devteam's member's design decision. As said, there are
certainly many much more important issues to focus on, and I have
no intention to stress this irrelevant one.

>> There was (IMO) certainly other stuff that needed more attention.
>
> The game's plot, such as it is, is that you're on a mission to
> recover the Amulet for your patron deity. Acquiring it and lugging
> it to the Astral Plane, then offering it to a rival deity should count
> as loss rather than a win. The reduced or omitted score bonus is
> just a less drastic way to emphasize that point.

I think with such an argument you enter difficult terrain. Killing
thousands of creatures isn't particularly on the official agenda[*] -
and this contributes most to win score?!

And the "patron deity" is only mentioned with the ^X command; there
seems to be no mention that it's (score-wise or else) bad to convert.

It's probably a safer argument to say that the plot is artificially
woven around a game only loosely coupled. Incidentally I observed
that the introductory text in the NH-Guidebook is in that respect
quite identical to the Rogue-Guidebook, not much has changed here,
but the game - and I think all the pantheon things - are newer (or
am I misremembering?).

[*] At least the Guidebook speaks about gathering treasure, getting
the Amulet, and escaping (not offering) with it.

>
>> I never had a closer look at the actual score computation algorithm;
>
> Killing monsters yields the most points by far. If you die, escape,
> or quit then the depth you made it into the dungeon is also a
> significant factor. Gold, gems, and artifacts (plus invocation tools
> even though they aren't artifacts) add to the score, but not by very
> much compared to monsters. For ascension or escape from the
> dungeon, adjacent pets also add a small amount.

Yes, that closely fits my impression and probably explain the high
score with the amount and severity of the killed monsters.

Thanks.

Janis

On Sun, 16 May 2021 23:04:44 -0700 (PDT), Pat Rankin wrote:

> On Sunday, May 16, 2021 at 5:07:45 PM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
>> On 17.05.2021 00:12, Pat Rankin wrote:
>>> In 3.6.x you also get a lower final score if you ascend with different
>>> alignment than you started with. [2x, 1.5x, or 1x points]
[...]
>> There was (IMO) certainly other stuff that needed more attention.
>
> The game's plot, such as it is, is that you're on a mission to
> recover the Amulet for your patron deity. Acquiring it and lugging
> it to the Astral Plane, then offering it to a rival deity should count
> as loss rather than a win. The reduced or omitted score bonus is
> just a less drastic way to emphasize that point.

When the helm of opposite alignment was first introduced into the game,
I regarded it as a solely detrimental item (like dunce cap). Without
being spoilered (much later) I never would have expected (or even have
tried) to use it to offer the AoY to the "wrong" deity. So, severe
punishment in score is the least, what (IMHO) should happen in such a
case.

BeAr
--
===========================================================================
= What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"? =
===============================================================--(Oops!)===

On Monday, May 17, 2021 at 4:28:02 AM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
[...]
> And the "patron deity" is only mentioned with the ^X command; there
> seems to be no mention that it's (score-wise or else) bad to convert.

Your run-time config file has the 'legacy' option toggled off.
Toggle it back on and start a new game, or start one with
NETHACKOPTIONS='@/dev/null' nethack
to force use of an empty config file. (You can't change legacy
with the 'O' command because by the time you can execute
that, it's too late.)

That introduction states that you have been chosen to obtain
the Amulet for <deity>. Not just chosen, but "heralded from
birth to be the instrument of <deity>."

On 17.05.2021 20:56, Pat Rankin wrote:
> On Monday, May 17, 2021 at 4:28:02 AM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
> [...]
>> And the "patron deity" is only mentioned with the ^X command; there
>> seems to be no mention that it's (score-wise or else) bad to convert.
>
> Your run-time config file has the 'legacy' option toggled off.

Of course.

It's probably a good idea to put all relevant information into the
Guidebook (as opposed to an optional display feature).

(Not that I think that score would be relevant, but if "correct"
behavior shall be fostered that would be helpful. Same with other
related information, like killing monsters as goal since it's a
primary source of score. Of course then there's also other changes
necessary; pacifism would not be a conduct any more, I suppose.)

Maybe it's time to write up a new 'code of conduct' sort of thing
that reflects the actual design mindset. The Guidebook is in my
opinion the right place to lay out all the meta-information, but
it seems to be outdated if I am thinking about the implications
of the mentioned facts and intentions.

Janis

Janis Papanagnou — 18.05.21 14:32:
> On 17.05.2021 20:56, Pat Rankin wrote:
>> On Monday, May 17, 2021 at 4:28:02 AM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
>> [...]
>>> And the "patron deity" is only mentioned with the ^X command; there
>>> seems to be no mention that it's (score-wise or else) bad to convert.
>> Your run-time config file has the 'legacy' option toggled off.
> Of course.
>
> It's probably a good idea to put all relevant information into the
> Guidebook (as opposed to an optional display feature).
>
> (Not that I think that score would be relevant, but if "correct"
> behavior shall be fostered that would be helpful. Same with other
> related information, like killing monsters as goal since it's a
> primary source of score. Of course then there's also other changes
> necessary; pacifism would not be a conduct any more, I suppose.)
>
> Maybe it's time to write up a new 'code of conduct' sort of thing
> that reflects the actual design mindset. The Guidebook is in my
> opinion the right place to lay out all the meta-information, but
> it seems to be outdated if I am thinking about the implications
> of the mentioned facts and intentionsHmm, killing none (or only very few creatures, by accident) _could_
trigger an alternative calculation / a huge bonus. Then the pacifist
conduct would make sense again in that respect… I wouldn't take it out
of the game, since it does add to variety.

Benjamin

--
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires.
Seek discipline and find your liberty.
-- Frank Herbert, Dune Chronicles

[ Sorry for my newsreader misbehaving — trying again… ]

Janis Papanagnou — 18.05.21 14:32:
> On 17.05.2021 20:56, Pat Rankin wrote:
>> On Monday, May 17, 2021 at 4:28:02 AM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
>> [...]
>>> And the "patron deity" is only mentioned with the ^X command; there
>>> seems to be no mention that it's (score-wise or else) bad to convert.
>> Your run-time config file has the 'legacy' option toggled off.
> Of course.
>
> It's probably a good idea to put all relevant information into the
> Guidebook (as opposed to an optional display feature).
>
> (Not that I think that score would be relevant, but if "correct"
> behavior shall be fostered that would be helpful. Same with other
> related information, like killing monsters as goal since it's a
> primary source of score. Of course then there's also other changes
> necessary; pacifism would not be a conduct any more, I suppose.)
>
> Maybe it's time to write up a new 'code of conduct' sort of thing
> that reflects the actual design mindset. The Guidebook is in my
> opinion the right place to lay out all the meta-information, but
> it seems to be outdated if I am thinking about the implications
> of the mentioned facts and intentions.

Hmm, killing none (or only very few creatures, by accident) _could_
trigger an alternative calculation / a huge bonus. Then the pacifist
conduct would make sense again in that respect… I wouldn't take it out
of the game, since it does add to variety.

Benjamin

--
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires.
Seek discipline and find your liberty.
-- Frank Herbert, Dune Chronicles

On 18.05.2021 14:58, Benjamin Heiligenbrunner wrote:
>
> Hmm, killing none (or only very few creatures, by accident) _could_
> trigger an alternative calculation / a huge bonus. Then the pacifist
> conduct would make sense again in that respect… I wouldn't take it out
> of the game, since it does add to variety.

Oh, that was not what I suggested. I was merely pointing out that
it may be time for an 'code of conduct' and that it might require a
refactoring of the documentation and/or code to create a coherent
game. At the moment we seem to have a mixture of anachronistic or
historic to undocumented or only implicit hinted designs, some may
be in the head of one developer/designer but it's unclear whether
that's common sense amongst the Devteam; if it is, it should be
quite simple to write it down, and reflect that in the game, of
course making adjustments where necessary. (Often only documents
are adjusted to avoid code changes. That's what I meant upthread
by the "plot woven around game".) The good thing would be that
we'd also get a clearer view about what behavior is deprecated; I
recall someone saying here that traveling burdened is punished by
the game because you hurt yourself when descending stairs, thus
it is the intention of the designers that players don't do that.
(Along that line was the argument of the poster.) I consider that
only as game mechanics, not as [by designer] deprecated behavior.

Of course we could also just play and enjoy the game.[*]

Janis

[*] As opposed to discussing whether there should be a score penalty
when wearing a helm of opposite alignment. Here the more interesting
thing is anyway the game mechanics; e.g. you instantly lose all divine
protection in a very hostile area. (Why should I care about score?)
Less AC, necessary spare time for wardrobe management; that are the
decisions to make, the things that tactically matter at that stage!

On Tuesday, May 18, 2021 at 6:31:06 AM UTC-7, Janis wrote:
> (Why should I care about score?)

No one said you should. You were the one who stated that
your score made #1 on the local score file after using a helm
of opposite alignment as a shortcut to avoid going to a second
and perhaps even third high altar. I pointed out that it would
have been only half as many points if you were running an up
to date version of nethack rather than a decade-and-a-half or
so old version of slash'em. That could easily have resulted in
a score that wouldn't have become #1. Even if you don't care
about score, somebody else might.

As for rewriting the Guidebook, be sure to let everybody know
when you've finished doing that.

Am 18.05.2021 um 15:31 schrieb Janis Papanagnou:
(Why should I care about score?)

Yes, in a game where you can lose and still have a higher score than in
another instance of the game where you won, score is not a major
consideration... It just serves to sort the entries in the record file.

On 18.05.2021 23:26, Pat Rankin wrote:
>
> As for rewriting the Guidebook, be sure to let everybody know
> when you've finished doing that.

Not sure why you suggest that. I am certainly not the right person
for a rewrite; I'm not a native speaker/writer, I have no insights
in the design ideas of the Devteam, I don't know the NH36x changes,
and I don't even play the new NH version. It was just a suggestion
that it might be time to make game and documentation more coherent,
since (as we could observe) there are occasionally assumptions and
statements made that aren't reflected properly (or at all) in the
main source of the documentation (in the Guidebook). I don't know
whether you are still actively involved in the Devteam, but if so
you can of course just ignore my suggestion. (It's not uncommon
that software documentation is not updated by the game hackers,
but I've seen "NH-36x labels" in the docs so I thought someone
involved in the Devteam might care.)

Janis

On 22.05.2021 15:22, Klaus Kassner wrote:
> Am 18.05.2021 um 15:31 schrieb Janis Papanagnou:
> (Why should I care about score?)
>
> Yes, in a game where you can lose and still have a higher score than in
> another instance of the game where you won, score is not a major
> consideration... It just serves to sort the entries in the record file.

One could keep them also just in the logfile, implicitly sorted by date.
;-)

Janis

Quoting Pat Rankin <r.pat.rankin@gmail.com>:
>The game's plot, such as it is, is that you're on a mission to
>recover the Amulet for your patron deity. Acquiring it and lugging
>it to the Astral Plane, then offering it to a rival deity should count
>as loss rather than a win.

I always thought it should be a celestial disgrace. Presumably at some
point you get the HoOA off and "dear Odin, what have I done?"
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Clown shoes. I hope that doesn't bother you.
Today is Teleute, June.
Tomorrow will be Oneiros, June.

On 16.05.2021 20:43, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 03.08.2020 13:06, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>> [ Angelic beings' summoning storms on Plane of Air ]

Yet another annoying death... (a chaotic orcish ranger)

Before I entered the Plane of Air I wielded a cockatrice corpse to
be prepared. On Air I had two or three A close by (Planetar, or so).
Petrified one of them. Summoning storm. Killed another adjacent one.
Engulfed by an air elemental I had to switch weapons. And there was
still a titan and another A adjacent. - DYWYPI? - What? With HP:478
(max: 649) I thought I had some buffer. What happened was that there
were two basilisks adjacent and I just missed them and their attack;
I got petrified. Note to self: next time I have to genocide ':' too.
Maybe I should have scared the monsters with my drum of earthquake
first?

N+1 to my died on the Plane of Air record.

Janis