A problem of metagame

All things Desktop Dungeons

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby TigerKnee on Tue May 08, 2012 5:49 am

Transmutation scroll is the one which turns items into gold right?

I mean, why bother? Might as well just get translocation and steal the most expensive item you want to buy and convert the item that you didn't want.

I guess you can use it to break through walls but congratulations, you have a terrible EndIsWal that can only be used once.
TigerKnee
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:54 am

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby Darvin on Tue May 08, 2012 3:24 pm

The conversion and transmutation scrolls are both lackluster. Because there is exactly one item in the game that grants more than 100 conversion points, the transmutation scroll is basically a flat 50 conversion point prep. I'd rather see it removed and the sensation stone buffed back up to 225 (if not back up to 300 now that stacking orcs are gone), since that's pretty much all it got used for. Transmutation scroll is similarly just a 1-time ENDISWAL. You virtually never want to use it on an item since conversion points are almost always more valuable than gold, with only a handful of 1 CP items forming exceptions to that rule.

Really, the compression scroll is the only really interesting alchemy scroll. Translocation is okay, the other two need work or total replacement.
User avatar
Darvin
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:44 am

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby Bloggorus on Mon May 14, 2012 4:34 am

Hey guys,

In light of the recent changes to the economy, how do we feel about the new importance of out-game gold?

Personally, I see them as a step in the right direction. I seriously considered whether I actually needed a few preps in the games I played; things like theif stuff, blacksmith items and the seals suddenly seemed... unnecessary.

At the moment the 'gold sink economy' is still fairly one dimensional. Extra locker spaces are a dodgy reward and something that should have been there in the first place. I would like to see some things that are tied to the perpetual 'management' of the kingdom after the big bad bosses are beaten.

Does anyone have any ideas for more ways to spend gold?
User avatar
Bloggorus
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Orstraleeea

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby Sidestepper on Mon May 14, 2012 7:52 am

A gold sink is something I've wanted for a while. Money is only interesting when spending it on a preparation sticks you with an opportunity cost. I always avoided unnecessary preps until I had maxed my kingdom out, at which point I would suddenly stop caring. Having an open ended sink helps keep things interesting.

I'm fine with the devs giving us much-wanted but officially-dissapproved features such as bigger lockers in exchange for gold. I'd like to see a higher locker cap and a more sensible rate increase. I'd also like to see the bank upgrades do something other than just let you hold more gold (so that you can buy the next upgrade, to hold more gold, to buy the next...). One possibility I floated in another thread was that each bank upgrade could add a +1 to your adventurer gold allowance. This would make very old, very mature kingdoms have a slight but real edge, but is also something that wouldn't become significantly useful until after the player has pretty much beaten everything anyway.

Another goldsink idea I'd like to see is a "boycott" option. It's basically like the locker, except that items you place in it are banished from shop inventories. Maybe we could buy boycott slots at $10k a pop or so. I'd be willing to pay even more for an 'iconoclast' menu where I can ban one or two religions, or 'magical censure' where we could banish 1-3 glyphs.

As for 'management' costs, I have some crazy ideas. I wouldn't want to have to pay a flat maintenance fee every round. That would be a chore and would feel like a penalty for playing quick, experimental adventures. It could be fun if it were tied to an optional task that the player could engage in if he so chose.

I was thinking that maybe after Horatio has been defeated that the player could begin "annexing" dungeons. This could only be done on dungeons that have already been cleared, and annexing a given dungeon requires that you have already taken over the intervening dungeons as well (e.g. You can't take Hexx Ruins without having taken the Southern Swamp). Taking land would require an initial investment and create a recurring cost that you would have to pay every few rounds. If you can't pay the fee, you begin losing land.

Annexed dungeons still have the usual monsters, but when you play them, you get some sort of homecourt advantage, like maybe a new prep line that gives us back the old scout boss/shop/altar options.

Since annexing requires you to have already beaten Horatio, and presumably costs more than it is really worth, it would not so much be a tool for steamrollering dungeons as it would be a way to make getting 100% a bit easier. It would also add a new open-ended goal to the game: take as much land as you can and see how long you can keep it.


EDIT: I had a few more ideas along these lines. It would be possible to turn the post-Horatio endgame into a type of open-ended game-within-a-game, one with clear losing conditions (and an open-ended winning condition). Maybe every time you win a dungeon, you get a small percent bonus to the payout based on the number of dungeons you have already annexed (your new vassals are paying for the 'protection service' that you are providing). If you are able to win battles consecutively, you turn a profit. But if you lose battles, you also lose a lot of cash, both from wasted preps and from support costs of having all that extra territory. As you take more land, the stakes increase. How long can you hang on before a few successive failures abruptly bankrupts your kingdom?

Of course, if this were all there were to it, people would just grind Hobbler's Hold over and over again. So maybe the gold bonus only gets applied when you beat one of the 'burning' dungeons (these could be conceptualized as dangerous hotspots of monster activity that are threatening the kingdom). You would now be playing a higher level metagame, where you must use your resources (gold and unlocked preps) to deal with randomly emerging challenges (the specific dungeon that gets selected). Once you get sick of chasing the burning dungeons, you can just go back to ignoring it. You'll quickly lose all your land and you're back to a normal game of DD.

The fun would come in seeing how long you can hold onto your kingdom, and how high you can push your bank account until a series of difficult dungeon selections causes you to break the bank. This would also make the bank upgrades serve a purpose, since you could start with a larger buffer of gold before starting to play the new metagame.
Sidestepper
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:36 am

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby The Avatar on Mon May 14, 2012 12:11 pm

That's... Strange. Not quite sure whether I like it or not. It would have to be implemented for me to tell.

One thing I've found on my new profile, is that, by the time I finish Hobbler's Hold, the only second tier class I have is the berserker. The reason for this is that the 300 gold cap isn't letting me get my full money's worth out of dungeon runs. Then again all you need to fix that is expand the level 0 cap to 400.

My idea for the locker lobby is not only making the price expansion less radical, but also add 4 types of lockers.
Adventuring Locker (Guild): Same as always
Stolen Locker (Theives Den): Items are stolen and stached, so they can not appear in shops.
Idol Locker (Church): Let's you prep more gods, you can locker the one you leave the dungeon worshiping.
Glyph Locker (Mage Tower): Let's you prep a glyph. It appears within 5 or so tiles of the start. Like the current Church preps.
JakshdfFiha$#jaigb532i97fbnPKASN*@)sdjbau9a0)f+,Ahghs*hr)sk_sabdh^ujsbUA3{mvio/~dgffdsT^klndf,#ikon%(d

I speak chaos.
User avatar
The Avatar
 
Posts: 4453
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:52 pm
Location: Demonic Library

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby Sidestepper on Mon May 14, 2012 12:18 pm

The Avatar wrote:That's... Strange. Not quite sure whether I like it or not. It would have to be implemented for me to tell.


Yeah, like I said, it was a crazy idea. I was trying to think of something along the lines of Blog's kingdom management idea that would also be interactive and potentially give the player something useful and fun. The plan I laid out is way too specific and elaborate to ever be actually implemented. I'm mostly just trying to get people talking about what kinds of things they'd like to see.




My idea for the locker lobby is not only making the price expansion less radical, but also add 4 types of lockers.
Adventuring Locker (Guild): Same as always
Stolen Locker (Theives Den): Items are stolen and stached, so they can not appear in shops.
Idol Locker (Church): Let's you prep more gods, you can locker the one you leave the dungeon worshiping.
Glyph Locker (Mage Tower): Let's you prep a glyph. It appears within 5 or so tiles of the start. Like the current Church preps.


Yeah, I think lots of people want something like this. I remember suggesting something similar a long time ago, back when selective unlocking was becoming a thing. I'm kind of fond of the whole selective unlocking/item blacklisting thing, since as far as I know, I was the first person on the boards to do it (or at least talk about doing it).

I'm hoping that expensive unlocks can become a dumping ground for much-requested features that the devs have been hesitant to add into the game.
Last edited by Sidestepper on Mon May 14, 2012 2:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sidestepper
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:36 am

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby The Avatar on Mon May 14, 2012 12:24 pm

While there is no reason to selective unlock gods, or it is just much less effective, but you are not restricted from item selective unlocking. Just don't do the quests/silver challenges.
JakshdfFiha$#jaigb532i97fbnPKASN*@)sdjbau9a0)f+,Ahghs*hr)sk_sabdh^ujsbUA3{mvio/~dgffdsT^klndf,#ikon%(d

I speak chaos.
User avatar
The Avatar
 
Posts: 4453
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:52 pm
Location: Demonic Library

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby Sidestepper on Mon May 14, 2012 12:32 pm

The Avatar wrote:While there is no reason to selective unlock gods, or it is just much less effective, but you are not restricted from item selective unlocking. Just don't do the quests/silver challenges.


Yeah I know, I just don't like it that it feels like a penalty to finish some of the quests. A boycott locker could solve this by letting us unlock specialized gear that we want 10% of the time without having it haunt us the remaining 90% of the time.

The devs solved the deity unlock issue by linking the number of altars per dungeon to the number of gods unlocked. It's usually not worth selectively unlocking them anymore, especially since getting all 9 lets you get the +1 altar prep on top of everything else.

I have to admit, I sometimes miss my strategic unlock of (old) GG, Binlor, Taurog and Dracul. That was when we had Scout: Altar too, so it was awesome. The combo you wanted was Binlor, Glowing Guardian, and Dracul. I pulled some INSANE quadruple conversion antics with that set up.
Sidestepper
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:36 am

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby Lujo on Mon May 14, 2012 12:50 pm

I wouldn't go overboard with blacklisting stuff. It's good for testing purposes, was at times quite necessary, but it's one of the things that lets people ignore lackluster content (or even balanced content) instead of considering game adjustments which could be good for the game.

I don't see necessity for blacklisting stuff as good for the game, and, erm, since we're on the subject of selctive unlocks and pioneering it and all that, well, not to blow my own horn or anything, but... yeah ;) I couldn't say I invented it, but if there was a run for a patron saint of minimalist unlocks, I'd say I'd have a decent shot at it. I'd at least get the honnorary pants of flaming :D

(DISCLAIMER: I never considered it a viable strat or wanted to encurage the people to do it. My thesis was always that "Selective unlocks viable & beneficial to pwnage = game broken beyond belief")
User avatar
Lujo
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:47 am

Re: A problem of metagame

Postby Sidestepper on Mon May 14, 2012 1:23 pm

Lujo wrote:I wouldn't go overboard with blacklisting stuff. It's good for testing purposes, was at times quite necessary, but it's one of the things that lets people ignore lackluster content (or even balanced content) instead of considering game adjustments which could be good for the game.

I don't see necessity for blacklisting stuff as good for the game, and, erm, since we're on the subject of selctive unlocks and pioneering it and all that, well, not to blow my own horn or anything, but... yeah ;) I couldn't say I invented it, but if there was a run for a patron saint of minimalist unlocks, I'd say I'd have a decent shot at it. I'd at least get the honnorary pants of flaming :D

(DISCLAIMER: I never considered it a viable strat or wanted to encurage the people to do it. My thesis was always that "Selective unlocks viable & beneficial to pwnage = game broken beyond belief")


Oh, you definitely took the idea to its extremes, far beyond what I had originally conceived. I had a lot of fun watching you select and combine pieces from the jigsaw that is Desktop Dungeons.

I think I would mostly use the boycott on things like Yendor and Zot (too expensive to be cost effective in most cases). Banning specialized stuff might be worth it when going for specific strategies (Berserker of Taurog probably doesn't want to find mageplate, battlemage ring, and crystal ball all in consecutive shops).
Sidestepper
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:36 am

PreviousNext

Return to Desktop Dungeons

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Astral, Google [Bot] and 2 guests