Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Old MUME discussions.

Moderator: Builders

Forum rules
The posts in this forum should be related to MUME.
Ilie
Site Admin
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Ilie » Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:09 am

A thread for feedback on the changes on testmume. Please test it before coming with iput & opinions.

All these changes are relative to the real MUME, not to the previous test version.

ESCAPE
Escape is now twice as fast.
Escaping from a single opponent is a tad harder.
Escaping from multiple opponents is a lot easier.
Escape <direction> if you are not fighting will just move you.
Escape if you can disengage will disengage you instantly (like disengage) and then move you if you gave a direction.

Note: Your defense is not reduced while doing escape (this is not a change).

FLEE
Panic lasts a bit shorter

If you get panic, you cannot sneak for 4 seconds. Sneak will be auto-enabled again as soon as you can sneak. You will see this in your promt as "s" instead of "S" - "s" means you want to sneak but are unable to right now. You also get a message when you can sneak again, but this might be too spammy.

ENTER/LEAVE
Enter and leave have been fixed to behave more like movement commands.

BACKSTAB
You can no longer backstab people who were bashed during a backstab attempt.

HIDE
Hide/search/reveal/flush mechanics have been altered.

If you are searching/revealing/flushing, you will stop instantly as soon as anyone in the room reveals or flushes anything and you can see it.
If you were flushing, you will join the fight.

It's probably a good idea to sometimes use search/reveal/flush t instead of q if you want to find something.

If someone who is hidden tries to leave the room, there is a chance that you will detect it if you are currently searching or flushing. If you detect it, the following happens:
  • If you were searching, you will see it & the direction of the exit.
    If you were revealing, you will see it and also reveal it to your group (and everyone will see the direction).
    If you were flushing, you will attack.
-- Ilie Your friendly site Administrator

Elemmakil
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:03 pm
Location: Massachusetts, United States of America

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Elemmakil » Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:19 pm

How long is it going to be up? Dunno if I can test it today :/

Ilie
Site Admin
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Ilie » Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:27 pm

Elemmakil wrote:How long is it going to be up? Dunno if I can test it today :/
As long as necessary. Hopefully not more than a day.
-- Ilie Your friendly site Administrator

Jahara
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:55 pm
Location: Indiana, USA
Contact:

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Jahara » Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:30 pm

The main problem is that the change to sneak is unnecessary. Sneaking, after all, can be countered by going paranoid. Sneak to a thief is like armour/shield to a caster. Without it they're mincemeat.

Fankil
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: Trondheim, Norway

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Fankil » Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:01 pm

I tested escape/flee/sneak briefly as an orc scout, 100% or higher in the scout guild. I tried it out at foreman, huge stone trolls x3, and GC shatteredbranches, all rooms with one exit out and multiple enemies. I found escape slightly more hpdraining than flee, and the fail-ratio felt like it was close to same as flee.

The sneak-delay after flee didn't bother me, granted I didn't pk, but those four seconds didn't seem to last long.

All-in-all, good first impression regarding escape and sneak delays.

Edit: The killer is when you fail an escape. I still believe this should be automated until one succeed, if that's possible.
Fankil - Servant of Morgoth (Shaper)

Edvard
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Edvard » Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:58 pm

I also tried it breefly, 100% and 101% escape as orc scout, and I found that it was almost too easy. Escaping at guardian, kormock, guthblug etc was almost flawless. We have to remember that the ability of choosing which way to escape makes a great favor for scouts, and if escape works as good as flee or even better, this advantage is too great imo. Again, i only tried it briefly but this is my first imprssion.

Edvard
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Edvard » Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:00 pm

Jahara if you think sneak can be countered by going paranoid, you're living in a dreamworld. You even eat backstabs on paranoid.

Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Wobbler » Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:19 pm

I agree with Edvard regarding both escape and paranoid alertness. Escaping is a bit too easy considering its advantages and being paranoid brings no noticeable advantage.
I failed about 2 out of 30 escapes so far, in ranges from 1 to 4 opponents with 1 or 2 exits available (with 107% escape) - this is a higher success ratio than I get with flee. I was even able to backstab-escape two mobs sitting in adjacent rooms by escaping from the one into the other's room and immediately backstab it and escape back to the first, with pretyped commands.

On the other hand, the nosneak seems so harmless now it seems rather pointless, since it has almost no duration and only happens at half or less of my flights. In fact, backstab-fleeing is no slower than backstab-escaping for xping on a static mob despite flee having a lower success ratio than escape. Either make every flee result in a nosneak (the duration is short enough now) or just do away with it completely.

I also agree with Fankil and others concerning the automation; a failed escaping attempt should result in an immediate new one, unless an "escape off" command is given. Preferably this should be toggleable (cha autoescape or something like that), since escape is a delayed command and there might be situations where this is a disadvantage.
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.

Wobbler
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Wobbler » Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:51 pm

I have done some testing with hide and search/reveal now.
Hidden thoroughly in forest with 107% hide, it averaged me about 5-6 thorough reveals/search to find myself multiplaying, with the quickest being on the first attempt and the slowest needding about a dozen. This seems OK to me. Alertness had no effect that I could notice.
Sneaking in and out of a room where my other char was spamming search thoroughly, I was seen about every third time. This is a definite improvement.

I retract my previous statement about being paranoid against sneakers. For some reason I cannot find this part of my test in my scrollback, but I noticed a significant increase in the chance of detecting someone who had snuck into a room (i.e. not hidden with the hide skill) before I entered when my alertness was paranoid. This is a considerable difference compared to my previous experiences with the normal mume, is this some sort of change that did not make it into a news post?

I was unable to test backstabbing a paranoid opponent since both my testchars were pukes.

I also noticed that one rather serious problem with sneak remains: If one is following someone, one cannot stop sneaking because one is too busy sneaking, nor can one ask one's leader to stop for half a second so one can turn sneak off. The command is not even stacked up to be executed when the leader pauses, it is just lost.


And finally, a feature request: When one is hiding, show a H or h in the prompt (preferably a H when one is freshly hidden, h when one has manually revealed oneself to the room through some command). Example: "of HcS Move:Slow>"
Alternatively, list all commands that makes a hidden person reveal himself in the helpfile for hide.
Politicians are wise and benevolent and will gladly sacrifice themselves for the common good. Anyone who implies that there might exist dishonest politicians is obviously a terrorist who should be locked up indefinitely without a trial.

Lobtharq
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:45 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Lobtharq » Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:58 pm

Just out of curiosity, was anything more than being unable to sneak after fleeing from the first set of scout changes implemented to "real MUME"? When can revisions be expected from this second testmume? Are these changes relative to "real MUME" before the changes or "real MUME" after the changes? If it was after, a detailed list of what exactly was changed (if it was indeed everything or if it was only certain parts and if so which, etc.).

I do not feel that I have the experience with scouts to make my testing helpful; I will leave that to more experienced players. I would like, however, to make sure that those who are testing have all of the information they need!

P.S. Thanks for all the work you've been doing lately, Ilie!

Razoor
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:20 am

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Razoor » Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:08 pm

Well, I have rather extensive experience playing scouts and I'm gonna tell you right now that
the nosneak with panic flag is gonna break the class if you try to do anything else than backstabbing.

4 seconds is too big a delay for PK, it will get you slaughtered against warriors, mages and multiple opponents inside a
closeable. The change is really not necessary, please dont implement it. It serves no purpose other than annoyance.

Escape is working pretty well atm.

Ilie, i'd really like to know what the purpose is of removing sneak? What is the thought behind your reasoning?
Perhaps there is some larger picture that I dont see, but it's hard to argue if you dont know the purpose :)

Dak
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:34 am

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Dak » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:00 pm

I did a bit of testing myself. I found the escape is nice, a little slow but not bad. I have a couple requests tho, perhaps make it so you see which way you escaped (like flee does) even tho you do escape n it would still be nice to see when successful "You escaped to the north" I also had an idea that perhaps if you fail your escape you automatically try again but this escape would be a random direction like flee and you would not sneak into the room you escaped too.

Xaviar
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 7:16 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Xaviar » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:01 pm

At first I was skeptical because I play mostly thieves, however after testing it out with escape, it is pretty sweet. In regards to the 4 second no-sneak thing, I have a feeling it will affect poorly linked people more than anything.

Edvard
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Edvard » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:22 pm

Well link matters in mume, no doubt. However, this change doesn't affect poorly linked people anymore than poorly linked people have disadvantages for all other classes, such as warriors and mages, that don't sneak at all. Basically, it will affect poorly linked people because the way it is now, it doesn't matter how bad your link is, how crappy/good a player you are, etc, you can just sneak away safely anyhow. I haven't heard an official statement regarding these changes, but I'm guessing that preventing this is one of the reasons and I support it. It's too easy to survive playing scout IMO.

Alve
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:44 pm
Location: Antarctica

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Alve » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:40 pm

Well, I'd also like to hear an official statement on the rationale behind these changes/tests. I think it would lead to a more focused discussion. People would discuss
1. If the goal is appreciable
2. if the means actually lead to the goal
At the moment people seem to discuss if the changes fit their respective playing styles. Well, perhaps that's exactly what you want to have discussed, but even then an official statement and perhaps different threads for the different aspects would be nice.

Generally, it's nice to see a discussion and test runs on this topic at all. Thank you, Ilie.

Razoor
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:20 am

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Razoor » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:48 pm

Edvard, it's too easy surviving playing scout if you play with backstab and in the open.

This change does not make that kind of scout ANY easier to kill what so ever. Rather it will
be even easier to survive with them, since they can now escape away from any potential risk
of fleeing into a closeable, which was the only way of killing them before.

Any scout who tries to fight in a closeable is reduced to ridiculous alias-spamming.

If you consider a fight in oakendoor, moldywall and oakendoor blocked. Scout vs mage.
What will happen is that the mage will spam close pegs;qbolt;close pegs;qbolt. This forces
the thief to do escape;open pegs;d. If the mage then does d;qbolt;u;qbolt;d;qbolt, the thief
will be unable to do anything else than spamming escape for the whole fight, rendering him
completely out of control and unable to attack. Since the mage will be INSTANTLY after him
in the next room, you will have to eat 1 qbolt for each pierce you land. There is no way you have
time to go down+hit since you have sneakdelay and the mage has prespammed.

Even IF you'd be the one starting to attack, you'd have to spam d;k man;esc;u;d;k man;esc;u etc.
It'd be a fight reduced to nothing but spamming of the same commands, until one part is dead.
No playing with doors, no clever hitfleeing, no switching to bows in midfight since you can only
do damage with pierce.

Ryalnos
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:38 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Ryalnos » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:52 pm

In one sense, I like that escape <dir> when not engaged just moves you <dir>.
What happens though is that I just alias e, w, s, n, u, d to escape e, w, etc. It's really handy for moving about,
but it seems a little bit too easy...

It seems like removing sneak under after panic/fleeing is attempting to help give escape some usefulness. 4 seconds delay after flee isn't really all that much in open, while it's too long in closeables...

Now these changes make escape another required skill for scouts. This isn't necessarily a bad, but it seems like it'd be nice to have a new option for scouts rather than a new 'required skill'.

Razoor
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:20 am

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Razoor » Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:03 pm

A required skill is also quite bad for combos, since they dont have enough pracs. On my scouts i will either reroll warrior
if possible, or i'll start playing as a backstabber only...which means i'll get bored and just not play my thieves at all :)

Aliasing move keys to escape is a really good idea btw, no way anyone can ever kill you then..just walk around as usual
and be unstoppable :)

Edvard
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:05 pm

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Edvard » Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:50 pm

Razoor wrote:Edvard, it's too easy surviving playing scout if you play with backstab and in the open.

This change does not make that kind of scout ANY easier to kill what so ever. Rather it will
be even easier to survive with them, since they can now escape away from any potential risk
of fleeing into a closeable, which was the only way of killing them before.
Well "this change" is just a test at the moment, i'm sure the final, ideal result is supposed to be a system in which escape is slightly more dangerous and/or hp-draining than flee is. Fleeing as scouts would make them vulnerable to closable and bottleneckspamming just like any other class.

You make very valid points about thieves and closables however! This is a problem, at least with the old system as a frame of reference. Personally i think it's quite silly that you can sneak-flee someone in for example, a mountain cabin. I mean how could he disappear in the first place, snuck under the dinner table?... I also don't have very much experience of playing scout, how bad do they function in closables with sneak off? Alot of scouts nowdays has bash and other means of winning a fight. Scouts certainly has enough missile ob to win in 1-rooms against mages alot of the times, unless you're facing 5 stored quakes or so. Perhaps this would mean a downgrade of scouts, and perhaps it's justified, perhaps not. I'm not one to tell, really.

Razoor
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:20 am

Re: Testmume feedback on scout changes revision 2

Post by Razoor » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:15 pm

It's justified with a downgrade of scouts abilty to survive in the open, in closeables they should be the same
as any other class. Strong vs some, weak against others.

To answer your question, a scout is quite viable in closeables without sneak against some enemies.
For example if you're fighting other scouts you can turn sneak off and use it to your advantage. Against mages
it's possible to win anyway, makes it quite a lot harder though. The biggest problem as i see it is if you're
slower linked and facing a mage or warrior, then sneak off will be a certain killer. Shooting inside closeables
would also be pretty useless now, but that has been the case more or less against most classes for some time anyhow :)

Generally, the sneak-hit has such a nice bonus to OB (afaik) that it'll mean a downgrade in closeable fighting. You will do
far less damage in closeables, but all the same when backstabbing/running around.

I heard they want to remove the necessity of fleeing between combatrounds, and it seems they're trying to find ways
to add delayed commands as means of retreating.

Locked