Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Vanilla

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 8, 2011, 19:53   #1
jens
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Posts: 348
jens is on a distinguished road
Torches

I guess I have some sort of resource management optimisation syndrome, so it's hard for me to waste fuel. If I have a used torch in hand, and a bunch of new ones in my back pack, and it's time to refuel the torch, I don't just fill up the torch with one in the back pack, because then I'd loose about a 1000 turns of fuel. Instead I wear one of the new torches, carrying around the old one in an extra inventory slot. When I have burned those 1000 turns of fuel, then I refill the torch using the old one that is now in my inventory.

It's a bit of a hassle, and it wastes an inventory slot (well if I really need the slot I refill earlier). So, does anyone else have the same problem I do?

In any case, I just thought of a solution to my problem:
Change torches so they have a maximum capacity of 6000, but start out at 3000. IIRC they used to have 3000 fuel, so it should work OK, and we can always increase allocation to match.

One problem is that then torches would in my opinion be strictly better than lanterns. Today torches are better, except that I want to avoid the hassle, so I prefer Lanterns. I'd suggest changing ego items so only Lanters would apply.
jens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8, 2011, 19:59   #2
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,024
Derakon is on a distinguished road
...well, I was going to say that the disadvantage to torches is their increased weight, but that doesn't seem to apply any more. Torches are 1.2 pounds each and lanterns are 5. Torches used to be 3 pounds apiece, which made a powerful weight-saving argument in favor of lanterns.

Still, lanterns have the advantage of being able to store 15000 turns of light at a time, which is more than enough for one dungeon dive (especially as you'll find other sources of fuel in the dungeon). Typically with lanterns I fill up in town, and fill-and-discard with any oil or lanterns I find in the dungeon, then don't bother carrying oil at all. That's not so easy to do with torches, so you end up wasting an inventory slot.

In any event, if you're worried about fuel, just carry more light with you. I can't remember the last time my light source went out. It's not like either type is expensive.
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8, 2011, 20:19   #3
jens
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Posts: 348
jens is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
...well, I was going to say that the disadvantage to torches is their increased weight, but that doesn't seem to apply any more. Torches are 1.2 pounds each and lanterns are 5. Torches used to be 3 pounds apiece, which made a powerful weight-saving argument in favor of lanterns.
Yeah, could increase the weight of torches a bit again I guess :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
Still, lanterns have the advantage of being able to store 15000 turns of light at a time, which is more than enough for one dungeon dive (especially as you'll find other sources of fuel in the dungeon). Typically with lanterns I fill up in town, and fill-and-discard with any oil or lanterns I find in the dungeon, then don't bother carrying oil at all.
I usually bring a flask of oil with me, just as a precaution, but ready to throw it away if needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
In any event, if you're worried about fuel, just carry more light with you. I can't remember the last time my light source went out. It's not like either type is expensive.
Well, that's why I prefaced my note with me having a syndrome... I mean, I know what I could do. It's just what I actually do that is a problem. And I know how to change the game so I would not have that problem...
jens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9, 2011, 07:16   #4
Philip
Knight
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Prague,Czech Republic
Posts: 909
Philip is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by jens View Post
description of problem

In any case, I just thought of a solution to my problem:
Change torches so they have a maximum capacity of 6000, but start out at 3000. IIRC they used to have 3000 fuel, so it should work OK, and we can always increase allocation to match.
Of course, different times mean different needs, but while browsing old threads I saw one about making torches always have max fuel, so combining them into one stack with half the torches wouldn't be necessary to save fuel. This may have been back when torches gave one radius light, meaning that it may not apply. Also, why make torches lighter? That is supposed to be a major problem.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9, 2011, 08:24   #5
jens
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Posts: 348
jens is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip View Post
Of course, different times mean different needs, but while browsing old threads I saw one about making torches always have max fuel, so combining them into one stack with half the torches wouldn't be necessary to save fuel. This may have been back when torches gave one radius light, meaning that it may not apply. Also, why make torches lighter? That is supposed to be a major problem.
Back in those days torches had a somewhat random amount of fuel, so you ended up with several stacks of them. If they had only decided to always give torches half of max instead ;-)
jens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9, 2011, 15:31   #6
buzzkill
Prophet
 
buzzkill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 2,939
Donated: $8
buzzkill is on a distinguished road
Torches should stack regardless of the fuel remaining. Inspecting the stack could display the individual fuel amounts to the player (if this info is deemed relevant). Problem solved.

Wands should works this way too, rather than combining charges. Staffs too. Once staffs stack, they should stay stacked even if the numbers of charges then change. The current behavior makes no sense.
__________________
www.mediafire.com/buzzkill - Get your 32x32 tiles here. UT32 now compatible Ironband and Quickband 9/6/2012.
My banding life on Buzzkill's ladder.
buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9, 2011, 20:07   #7
jens
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Posts: 348
jens is on a distinguished road
Yeah, that sounds better :-) I started by checking the stacking code for wands, but I felt it was too involved to bother bringing torches to that...
jens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9, 2011, 21:19   #8
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,060
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate
Quote:
Originally Posted by jens View Post
Yeah, that sounds better :-) I started by checking the stacking code for wands, but I felt it was too involved to bother bringing torches to that...
It is better, but it's one of those improvements whose effort to code is way beyond the expected benefits.

Currently, a "stack" is actually a single object. All objects have a property "num" which is how many in the stack (usually 1, up to 99). Charges are stored using the object's pval, which is why they get combined in a stack (multiple pvals are a red herring here). I confess that I can't remember whether lights use o_ptr->pval or o_ptr->timeout for fuel, but it's the same issue. (That said, stacks of rods recharge one at a time, so there must be some way to track individual timeouts - but I suspect a terrible hack.)

Anyway, making a stack of objects a collection of individual objects is quite a lot of work at quite a fundamental level, for fairly small gains. (There are almost no properties other than fuel/charges which are affected by this approach.)

The good news is that it's essentially the same code needed to create bags of holding (or potion belts, or whatever - any container-type code). d_m has been saying for a long time how much he dislikes the INVEN_FOO hackery (scarred by the quiver experience), so maybe he'll rewrite it one day (but it's not on his to-do list for 3.4 ...).
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila
Magnate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9, 2011, 21:37   #9
Max Stats
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 324
Max Stats is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnate View Post
Anyway, making a stack of objects a collection of individual objects is quite a lot of work at quite a fundamental level, for fairly small gains. (There are almost no properties other than fuel/charges which are affected by this approach.)
I can only think of one instance where this would be a significant improvement, which is when you have emptied out all the charges from something but don't want to discard it because you might recharge it in town and use it again (Staffs of Mapping in the early levels would probably be the best example). But if you happen to find a like item with charges, they merge and you are stuck with two combined items with half the charges in each one.

This could be solved without going to all the trouble of tracking individual items, though, by swapping the empty item with the one on the ground rather than merging them, if you are playing with the "auto-pickup like items" option on. If, for whatever reason, the player really did want to combine the items, the pickup command 'g' could combine them.
Max Stats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9, 2011, 23:12   #10
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,060
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Stats View Post
I can only think of one instance where this would be a significant improvement, which is when you have emptied out all the charges from something but don't want to discard it because you might recharge it in town and use it again (Staffs of Mapping in the early levels would probably be the best example). But if you happen to find a like item with charges, they merge and you are stuck with two combined items with half the charges in each one.

This could be solved without going to all the trouble of tracking individual items, though, by swapping the empty item with the one on the ground rather than merging them, if you are playing with the "auto-pickup like items" option on. If, for whatever reason, the player really did want to combine the items, the pickup command 'g' could combine them.
But that wouldn't address your use case, would it? What you want is to be able to carry both items in your inventory (one to use, one to sell/recharge) without the charges merging. I don't think there's an easy way to do that.

Besides, adding special-case code for pickup commands would be icky.
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila
Magnate is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Half-burned torches for sale!" Zero Vanilla 18 February 26, 2008 16:32


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:21.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.