PDA

View Full Version : Competition 88


Nick
May 30, 2010, 05:11
Competition 88 is now available from the competition page (http://angband.oook.cz/competition.php?showcompo=88); it is a Vanilla Half-Elf Ranger with randarts. Note that the savefile is from the latest build, and it is expected that players will update to the latest as the competition progresses (if they choose to).

Note also that comp 87 still has a few days to run.

Zikke
May 30, 2010, 09:02
How do competition games handle randarts? Does everybody get the same set of randarts based on the character file? Or does it generate a different set for each person?

Sirridan
May 30, 2010, 09:18
How do competition games handle randarts? Does everybody get the same set of randarts based on the character file? Or does it generate a different set for each person?

Same set, the randarts are generated at creation and saved to the file.

Zikke
May 30, 2010, 09:53
>The Giant Salamander hits you.
>You are enveloped in flames!
>Your Maul (+2, +4) is damaged!



Since when has fire damage done acid-esque damage to mauls?

LostTemplar
May 30, 2010, 14:06
Is there any way to download latest source manually without using subversion ?

PowerDiver
May 30, 2010, 19:56
Is there any way to download latest source manually without using subversion ?

If you send me mail and I try to send it to you. Hotmail is supposed to handle 10M and it seems to be about 7M in tgz form.

Magnate
May 30, 2010, 23:46
Competition 88 is now available from the competition page (http://angband.oook.cz/competition.php?showcompo=88); it is a Vanilla Half-Elf Ranger with randarts. Note that the savefile is from the latest build, and it is expected that players will update to the latest as the competition progresses (if they choose to).

Note also that comp 87 still has a few days to run.Nick, is there any reason why you're using game turns for the ranking instead of player turns? The latter is specifically intended to negate the advantage of early speed items (which was demonstrated in the previous comp, IIUC).

Nick
May 30, 2010, 23:55
Nick, is there any reason why you're using game turns for the ranking instead of player turns? The latter is specifically intended to negate the advantage of early speed items (which was demonstrated in the previous comp, IIUC).

I did vaguely wonder about that...

I'll change it to player turns.

Timo Pietilš
May 31, 2010, 08:32
Competition 88 is now available from the competition page (http://angband.oook.cz/competition.php?showcompo=88); it is a Vanilla Half-Elf Ranger with randarts. Note that the savefile is from the latest build, and it is expected that players will update to the latest as the competition progresses (if they choose to).

Note also that comp 87 still has a few days to run.

Question: how long do I have to complete my char? I don't play much these days (too busy at work) so if this requires fast play I need to submit "work in progress" chardump.

Magnate
May 31, 2010, 09:11
I did vaguely wonder about that...

I'll change it to player turns.It's currently ordering by max depth rather than xp/any kind of turn ...

Another question: are we all agreed that it's cheating to generate the artifact spoiler before the end of the comp? Or are we ok with having a look at what's out there to be found?

Nick
May 31, 2010, 11:24
Question: how long do I have to complete my char? I don't play much these days (too busy at work) so if this requires fast play I need to submit "work in progress" chardump.

The comp finishes on the 25th of June (it says a little way down the competition page). Some people update their dump frequently, some less so - it's a matter of personal taste.

Also, if you want to post more than one character, you'll need to change the name or the older one will be overwritten.

Nick
May 31, 2010, 11:27
It's currently ordering by max depth rather than xp/any kind of turn ...

That may be because existing dumps (I think) don't get re-ordered, or perhaps pav hasn't changed the ranking yet.

Another question: are we all agreed that it's cheating to generate the artifact spoiler before the end of the comp? Or are we ok with having a look at what's out there to be found?

It probably doesn't matter much, but I guess we could agree that it's frowned upon. Unless someone disagrees.

Magnate
May 31, 2010, 22:46
@pav: Every time I upload my dump, I get this error:

Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /usr/home/pav/www/angband/ladder-submit.php on line 148

Didn't happen the first two times, but has happened since. Never seen this error with a non-comp dump.

sandtrap
June 1, 2010, 02:34
Another question: are we all agreed that it's cheating to generate the artifact spoiler before the end of the comp? Or are we ok with having a look at what's out there to be found?

Currently there is some artifact info to be found looking at the dumps on the ladder. But I don't really want to dissuade anyone from posting an in progress dump to the ladder. And deaths would still give up artifact info.

Nick
June 1, 2010, 02:36
Yeah, the top two dumps are ranked 0, too - presumably a symptom of the same problem.

pav
June 1, 2010, 11:33
Fixed, and sorry for my sloppy coding here.

Timo Pietilš
June 1, 2010, 20:14
This is fun. I had not been playing for a while, and randarts combined with race I almost never select and pressure to dive fast from competition makes this much more fun than many of the last games I have played. This time I have much better char going...

Timo Pietilš
June 2, 2010, 13:40
I did vaguely wonder about that...

I'll change it to player turns.

Noticed that there are two "player turn" counters: Player Turns and Active Turns. What exactly does "Active Turns" count? My Active Turns counter is over 4000 less then Player Turns. Time used to rest excluded?

Derakon
June 2, 2010, 16:27
Correct. I don't really follow why you'd want to exclude resting...but whatever.

Timo Pietilš
June 2, 2010, 17:51
Warning to everybody:

This new color scheme makes monsters harder to distinguish. Nalfeshnee and Lesser Balrog are now same color. If there is one case like this there can be several....At least Barrow Wights and Emperor Wights are now also same color.

Be very careful around monsters. Look every single one what it is.

This death was extremely infuriating. I would never ever have been killed by that should I have recognized that this Nalfeshnee is Lesser Balrog.

Is there a way to restore old much better color scheme? Some pref-file copy perhaps?

PowerDiver
June 2, 2010, 18:05
Is there a way to restore old much better color scheme? Some pref-file copy perhaps?

Colors are set in monster.txt. The letter to color conversion is described in the comments at the top. One of my first hacks to vanilla, long ago, was to change dark grey monsters I couldn't see to light green. Now linux gamma correction is better, but it was horrible in the old days.

It should be possible to write a script to read in the colors from an old monster.txt and then convert the colors in the current file. You cannot simply use an old file, as too many other things have changed.

Magnate
June 2, 2010, 20:52
Correct. I don't really follow why you'd want to exclude resting...but whatever.It's just interesting to see how much of a game you spend resting, that's all. It's not a big deal.

I'd quite like to track "town turns" separately, as I'm convinced I spend waaay to much time shopping.

Magnate
June 2, 2010, 20:54
Warning to everybody:

This new color scheme makes monsters harder to distinguish. Nalfeshnee and Lesser Balrog are now same color. If there is one case like this there can be several....At least Barrow Wights and Emperor Wights are now also same color.

Be very careful around monsters. Look every single one what it is.

This death was extremely infuriating. I would never ever have been killed by that should I have recognized that this Nalfeshnee is Lesser Balrog.

Is there a way to restore old much better color scheme? Some pref-file copy perhaps?As per the other thread, this is my fault. Sorry Timo - I didn't put much thought into changing purple non-unique monsters to other colours. Please feel free to suggest better colours for any clashes you come across. I've noted Nalfeshnee and Barrow Wights for now.

Timo Pietilš
June 3, 2010, 04:36
It's just interesting to see how much of a game you spend resting, that's all. It's not a big deal.

I'd quite like to track "town turns" separately, as I'm convinced I spend waaay to much time shopping.

I also often go back and forth in shops buying and selling things, go back to home to pick some thing up and sell it to other side of the town shop and test not yet ID:d items against town monsters etc.

Resting is something that I do because in safe place it is safe and fast way to regain HP and mana. For player point of view resting is one turn. For game it is several.

Timo Pietilš
June 6, 2010, 11:15
Strange rPoison case. No rPoison until 4450'. Then after one single "killthemall" -case against immunity to cold -dragon pit, I have suddenly three sources of rPoison. Not one of them are ring of Resist Poison.

Also RoS have been successfully avoiding me even after killing at least ~30 "drop good" monsters and countless number of lesser "drop something" monsters deeper than 4000'. Best boots are stealth-boots, have found only "slow descend" and "Free Action" boots. Stat-potions are avoiding me. Top three healing-potions are rare.

Have seen at least 15 Gondolin weapons. All of them lacking extra ability. I'm guessing they all got either See Inv or FA as extra ability.

There is something wrong in item distribution.

Timo Pietilš
June 6, 2010, 15:14
Strange rPoison case. No rPoison until 4450'. Then after one single "killthemall" -case against immunity to cold -dragon pit, I have suddenly three sources of rPoison. Not one of them are ring of Resist Poison.

Also RoS have been successfully avoiding me even after killing at least ~30 "drop good" monsters and countless number of lesser "drop something" monsters deeper than 4000'.

It seems that RNG is having fun with me. Itangast dropped not one, not two but *three* RoS. +13, +10 and +7 ones. Just before that I emptied a GV with a lot of ego-items and few artifacts, but no RoS. I seem to get my missing gears in single events.

What next? Someone drops five BoS? Vault full of augmentation potions?

PowerDiver
June 6, 2010, 19:43
Have seen at least 15 Gondolin weapons. All of them lacking extra ability. I'm guessing they all got either See Inv or FA as extra ability.

Are you 100% sure about that? Did you cast identify? Most abilities do not show up immediately through use. If you hit to use a slay you learn the ego, but not the random ability.

This has been fixed a few times, and I was sure that Gondolin *always* get an extra ability now. If you find another, please post the savefile.

PowerDiver
June 6, 2010, 19:48
It seems that RNG is having fun with me. Itangast dropped not one, not two but *three* RoS. +13, +10 and +7 ones. Just before that I emptied a GV with a lot of ego-items and few artifacts, but no RoS. I seem to get my missing gears in single events.

What next? Someone drops five BoS? Vault full of augmentation potions?

My wife goes on and on about the code getting stuck in a loop where it tends to generate the same thing over and over. A game where all immunities seem to be to the same element, etc.

Item generation has changed a bit with the maximum drop levels and drops independent of ML. I got all 4 brand rings, for the first time each, from a single orc pit once.

Timo Pietilš
June 6, 2010, 20:45
Are you 100% sure about that? Did you cast identify? Most abilities do not show up immediately through use. If you hit to use a slay you learn the ego, but not the random ability.

This has been fixed a few times, and I was sure that Gondolin *always* get an extra ability now. If you find another, please post the savefile.

Yes, I'm sure. I cast ID to all items, because "ID by use" is still way too slow to be useful.

It isn't just Gondolin weapons, I just few minutes ago found *slay evil* weapon with no extra ability.

Need to save as soon as I find another one.

PowerDiver
June 10, 2010, 09:32
I need a ruling. My comp char's gloves of thievery somehow got cursed with "no running". I.e. if I wield them, shift + direction does not let me run. I have no idea how it happened. I can't even guess what kind of data structure corruption could cause such a problem.

To what extent am I allowed to debug? It will undoubtedly involve save scumming to debug properly.

I could just toss the gloves, finish the char, and debug later. That's probably the fair answer since if it happened to a non-coder they might not have any other option, but I figured I might as well ask.

Magnate
June 10, 2010, 09:44
I need a ruling. My comp char's gloves of thievery somehow got cursed with "no running". I.e. if I wield them, shift + direction does not let me run. I have no idea how it happened. I can't even guess what kind of data structure corruption could cause such a problem.

To what extent am I allowed to debug? It will undoubtedly involve save scumming to debug properly.

I could just toss the gloves, finish the char, and debug later. That's probably the fair answer since if it happened to a non-coder they might not have any other option, but I figured I might as well ask.Separate the debugging from the playing. Back up the savefile when you're in a safe corridor and reload it as many times as you need to solve the problem, but don't go anywhere except run down that corridor until you're done debugging.

Fair?

Nick
June 10, 2010, 10:09
To what extent am I allowed to debug? It will undoubtedly involve save scumming to debug properly.

I think I speak for everyone when I say do what you need to. It's not like anyone really suspects that you're going to savescum to get an advantage.

Jungle_Boy
June 10, 2010, 15:01
I think I speak for everyone when I say do what you need to. It's not like anyone really suspects that you're going to savescum to get an advantage.

I agree, one of the reasons we have these comps is to get some extensive playtesting to fix exactly this sort of thing so go ahead and fix it.

PowerDiver
June 10, 2010, 19:37
So I found that there was no inscrutable data structure bug.

The gloves put me up to 100% searching. Running code calls searching code with each step to see if you notice something as you move. The searching code wants to save you the embarrassment of repeated searching when you know nothing is there, so it disturbs if searching is 100%. Ergo no running.

Now that 's' autorepeats 10 times, I think the disturb might actually be useful when you are actively searching. I guess I shouldn't simply remove the disturb. Or maybe the disturb should be removed, but the repeat counter on searching should never exceed 1 when searching is 100%. But I have gotten into the habit of using 's' as shorthand to wait 10 player turns for an approaching monster ...

I could mangle the code so that the disturb happens except when running. That kind of solution often leads to unintended consequences down the road.

No solution I can think of appeals to me. Is any solution obvious to any of you?

Sirridan
June 10, 2010, 19:53
Call the searching code from running, but pass a flag saying you're running, so not to disturb if nothing is found?

PowerDiver
June 10, 2010, 22:34
Call the searching code from running, but pass a flag saying you're running, so not to disturb if nothing is found?

That's just an implementation detail. The question is what behavior is desirable.

The more I think about it, the surer I am that I would never search for the purpose of searching once I have a searching skill of 100%. I am using detections to find things, and magical disarm on chests without bothering to search first. The only reason I search is to stay in place without risking an autopickup using '5', or because the 's' key is easier to press for whatever reason than the '5' key.

I am pretty certain now that the right answer is just to remove the disturb. That way, 's' remains the "wait 10 turns", which is the main way it should be used. If you have 100% searching, you shouldn't search anyway except the turn after you teleport or switch levels since you already found everything when you moved to your current spot.

Derakon
June 10, 2010, 22:39
What about when someone summons traps around you?

PowerDiver
June 10, 2010, 22:46
What about when someone summons traps around you?

I'd detect by reflex forgetting I could search with certainty :). In any case, the search would succeed and that would disturb you, so you don't need another disturb on the 's' command.

PowerDiver
June 10, 2010, 22:47
What about when someone summons traps around you?

I'd detect by reflex forgetting I could search with certainty :). In any case, the search would succeed and that would disturb you, so you don't need another disturb on the 's' command.

Magnate
June 12, 2010, 09:53
Strange rPoison case. No rPoison until 4450'. Then after one single "killthemall" -case against immunity to cold -dragon pit, I have suddenly three sources of rPoison. Not one of them are ring of Resist Poison.

Also RoS have been successfully avoiding me even after killing at least ~30 "drop good" monsters and countless number of lesser "drop something" monsters deeper than 4000'. Best boots are stealth-boots, have found only "slow descend" and "Free Action" boots. Stat-potions are avoiding me. Top three healing-potions are rare.

Have seen at least 15 Gondolin weapons. All of them lacking extra ability. I'm guessing they all got either See Inv or FA as extra ability.

There is something wrong in item distribution.Just to torment you, I just found my first =rpois at 1800', with only the second Leisa to get that far.

PowerDiver
June 15, 2010, 04:44
I noticed a quirk of the scoring method. If your bottleneck is a device activation, for example the Palantir, you pay a *penalty* for speed. If you wait around for recharge, be it resting or killing hapless demons, the more speed you have the more player turns accumulate while you await the recharge.

fizzix
June 15, 2010, 04:45
I noticed a quirk of the scoring method. If your bottleneck is a device activation, for example the Palantir, you pay a *penalty* for speed. If you wait around for recharge, be it resting or killing hapless demons, the more speed you have the more player turns accumulate while you await the recharge.

the same thing occurs when resting to generate HP/SP i believe.

Magnate
June 15, 2010, 09:45
the same thing occurs when resting to generate HP/SP i believe.This (the penalty for speed while waiting for recharging or recovering hp/sp) is similar to the "penalty" for extra shots (one player turn per shot). I'm firmly with Eddie - player-turns needs to be a count of total energy used (divided by 100, I guess).

Timo Pietilš
June 15, 2010, 09:56
This (the penalty for speed while waiting for recharging or recovering hp/sp) is similar to the "penalty" for extra shots (one player turn per shot). I'm firmly with Eddie - player-turns needs to be a count of total energy used (divided by 100, I guess).

I disagree about that. One player turn is one action player makes. If that means resting and waiting takes more turns, then resting takes more turns. Same with extra shots. One extra shot is one action. IMO that is accurate measurement of player turns.

For competition speed can mean more turns for some odd cases, but competition is no reason to change to way to count actual actions.

Magnate
June 15, 2010, 10:14
I disagree about that. One player turn is one action player makes. If that means resting and waiting takes more turns, then resting takes more turns. Same with extra shots. One extra shot is one action. IMO that is accurate measurement of player turns.

For competition speed can mean more turns for some odd cases, but competition is no reason to change to way to count actual actions.For a long time I held exactly that opinion, which is why we started counting player turns in the first place. But the main reason to do so was to eliminate the advantage that early speed finds gave when counting game turns. Since counting player turns actually penalises early speed finds, we've just swapped one inaccurate measure for another. Counting total energy used is completely independent of speed, which is what makes it so attractive. It also solves the extra shots problem, which is a nice side effect.

However, I do appreciate your position that we should be counting player decisions, and if you're lucky enough to have extra speed that gives you extra player turns on which to make decisions, we should count those. But to do this properly we'd need to make recharge times constant in player turns rather than game turns, and this offends some people. Personally I hate the fact that extra speed makes you wait longer for things to recharge, but some people find this 'consistent'.

EDIT: I think my point here is that Eddie's issue about being penalised while waiting for recharges is as much an artefact of the absolutism of recharge times as it is of the counting of player turns. Which is ironic, because IIRC Eddie is one of the people who believes recharge times should be absolute (i.e. independent of player speed). Personally I think it would be entirely consistent to set recharge times in player turns - especially since things don't recharge unless you're carrying them!

PowerDiver
June 15, 2010, 19:06
Personally I think it would be entirely consistent to set recharge times in player turns - especially since things don't recharge unless you're carrying them!

Carrying is irrelevant. Rods charge on the floor or in the pack, but not at home or in stores. Wieldables recharge only when wielded.

I wonder whether the distinction between wieldables and rods was intentional, or just the result of different people writing different pieces of code.

Magnate
June 15, 2010, 20:37
Carrying is irrelevant. Rods charge on the floor or in the pack, but not at home or in stores. Wieldables recharge only when wielded.

I wonder whether the distinction between wieldables and rods was intentional, or just the result of different people writing different pieces of code.Are you sure rods still recharge on the floor? I thought that had been changed so they had to be in the pack. If that's wrong then I suspect the difference is unintentional.

PowerDiver
June 15, 2010, 20:46
Are you sure rods still recharge on the floor?

Does "pretty sure" count as sure? I remember it happening recently. That doesn't mean it did. :)

PowerDiver
June 16, 2010, 06:53
I saw a new ticket that seems confused. Total energy suffers the same score penalty for resting and/or waiting at higher speeds. It's better for extra shots and much better for ammo pickup, but it doesn't change the quirk I mentioned.

It's not as if you often have the Palantir, activate it, and see nothing worth investigating very often. I was more amused than annoyed by it.

I was happy the comp was set up so that I didn't suffer a penalty for not using rings of escaping.

Magnate
June 16, 2010, 20:18
I saw a new ticket that seems confused. Total energy suffers the same score penalty for resting and/or waiting at higher speeds. It's better for extra shots and much better for ammo pickup, but it doesn't change the quirk I mentioned.Oh yes, I get it. Since recharge times are set in game turns, and +speed means more energy per game turn, then yes counting total energy still penalises extra speed.

I am now more convinced than ever that recharge times need to be in player turns. Or better still, in units of energy.

PowerDiver
June 16, 2010, 21:44
I am now more convinced than ever that recharge times need to be in player turns. Or better still, in units of energy.

I disagree on rods. How does the rod on the floor know how fast you are? Presumably devices draw mana from the ether at a fixed rate. Let me put on a ring of escaping while I rest so my rods recharge faster. Ugh.

The more interesting question is resting. When you are faster, should your body heal more in a fixed amount of time? That seems much more reasonable to me.

I think the real problem is the distaste for game turns, which IMO is the obvious thing to optimize. The faster your char kills M, the more of the Middle Earth Cup he can watch. Sure, a lucky early speed find makes a difference, but so would luckily finding Aule.

d_m
June 16, 2010, 21:50
I agree with you about rods on the floor, but there's no reason rods on the floor have to recharge at all. An equally reasonable scenario is that weapons/armor/rods draw their power from the character's own chi or something. In that case player turns seem fine, and only items in the inventory recharge at all.

Derakon
June 16, 2010, 22:30
I suspect that an early BoS +4 would make a bigger difference in the long run than an early powerful weapon. While a powerful weapon lets you skip some portion of the game (the portion at which you are unable to kill certain enemies due to an insufficient offense), a speed boost makes everything you do faster by a multiplier. So maybe Aule could compete with an early BoS+4, because it's so powerful a weapon (and thus lets you skip a very large portion of the "insufficient offense" section), but I don't think most other non-speed-boosting weapons could.

The real problem here is that we're trying to hold competitions, which rely on every player having equal access to advantages, in an inherently random environment. It just so happens that speed boosts are an unusually prominent factor in that random environment.

buzzkill
June 17, 2010, 04:41
What power diver said, I think. Rod recharge should not be based on player speed, but based on the passage of real time. For rods to recharge faster, time would have to pass faster. In fact though, just the opposite happens. As you move faster, time effectively slows down. I can't imagine a logical justification for 'Because I can beat you in a foot race, my rods will recharge faster than yours'.

In other words, if you really want to maximize your competition turn count and make your rods recharge faster just quaff every potion of slowness you can find. Problem solved.

IMO the whole "let's count turns in three different ways" is a waste of energy.

LostTemplar
June 17, 2010, 09:52
It is not recharge times but normal regen of HP and SP that hurts more.

Timo Pietilš
June 17, 2010, 11:54
It is not recharge times but normal regen of HP and SP that hurts more.

I think that should be variable of speed.

Actually I think that "speed" as magical bonus or penalty is "tweaking with time" and should affect anything that player is, while getting burdened or "non-magically hasted" is tinkering with your physical being and thus does not affect your recovery times.

Making distinction between those two is a bit beyond what we are now discussing.

So: I think player recovery times should depend of "player time" IE player turns, while player equipment recharge times should depend of "game time" IE game turns.

PowerDiver
June 17, 2010, 21:14
So: I think player recovery times should depend of "player time" IE player turns, while player equipment recharge times should depend of "game time" IE game turns.

My only problem is that increasing regen based upon energy is yet another change to make things easier.

Magnate
June 17, 2010, 21:33
I think that should be variable of speed.

Actually I think that "speed" as magical bonus or penalty is "tweaking with time" and should affect anything that player is, while getting burdened or "non-magically hasted" is tinkering with your physical being and thus does not affect your recovery times.

Making distinction between those two is a bit beyond what we are now discussing.

So: I think player recovery times should depend of "player time" IE player turns, while player equipment recharge times should depend of "game time" IE game turns.I think both of these are wrong, since the timings should be based on total energy not on whatever size clumps of energy are measured as turns. I propose a "standard turn" of 100 energy, which may be more or less than ten game turns and one player turn, depending on your current speed (and extra shots and fractional blows etc.). Recharge times should then be set in standard turns. Regeneration I'm less fussed about - I can see an argument for making it related to player speed, but I can equally see it being left as is.

Derakon
June 17, 2010, 22:17
If anything, regeneration is currently too powerful; making it even stronger isn't a great idea. So if we decide to make it based on player turns, then we should simultaneously weaken the effect.

PowerDiver
June 17, 2010, 22:29
If anything, regeneration is currently too powerful; making it even stronger isn't a great idea. So if we decide to make it based on player turns, then we should simultaneously weaken the effect.

I find my early spellcasters do not have enough mana. Both pure and impure. Weakening mana regen seems like a bad idea to me, unless maybe you simultaneously flatten the int curve to give starting chars significantly more mana.

Derakon
June 18, 2010, 00:31
I'm talking about the regeneration trait, not inherent regen. I agree that inherent mana regen, especially early on, is too slow. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

PowerDiver
June 18, 2010, 02:04
I'm talking about the regeneration trait, not inherent regen. I agree that inherent mana regen, especially early on, is too slow. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

We are discussing whether increased speed should increase the power of resting. At least, I think that's what we're discussing. :) It certainly makes sense that however the body heals itself, if everything about the body is faster then healing should be faster too. This change would at least triple the healing while resting [or moving for that matter] of endgame chars presumably at speed at least +20. You could balance that by reducing the healing rate to one third what it is now, but that would be tragic for starting chars. Or you could take the viewpoint that resting between fights in the depths is no big deal, the only important thing is each individual fight, and then it would be OK to make the game a little easier.

Derakon
June 18, 2010, 02:12
Well, fair point. Current inherent regeneration (let's call that "recuperation") is .02 + .03%, if I'm reading the code correctly (for some reason there's a factor of 2^16 being thrown in), with the regeneration trait doubling that. We could increase the flat recuperation factor and decrease the percentage; this would speed up early recuperation and slow it down later on, when the player can be assumed to be moving at a faster speed. However, this linear function doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room.