Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Development

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 1, 2011, 13:36   #1
jens
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Posts: 348
jens is on a distinguished road
Notes on latest commits

Some notes after reading the latest commits to GitHub:

1)
DSM:
In 'object_base.txt' the entry for DSM has HATES_ACID.

In 'object.txt' every DSM entry has this line:
F:IGNORE_ACID | IGNORE_ELEC | IGNORE_FIRE | IGNORE_COLD
- thus nullifying the entry in 'object_base.txt'

In the new section for DSM in ego_item.txt the IGNORE_* flags are sometimes repeated.
- I guess you can say it's protection against future changes, but it does seem a bit strange ;-)


2)
Suggestion:
Could you add a bunch of empty numbers in the ego file, plus increase the max nr of ego's? Would make it easier to add your own ego types :-)


3)
Commit 821f59dd413062c90885, adressing issue #1394:
This commit fixes so pvals can now be negative. That is great. However, if I read the comments correctly, a very nice feature we could get quite easily is not possible. I would much prefer to have a different token than 0 stand for "do not apply a minimum". Then we could create ego items with properties like:
L:-2M4:0:STR:CON
IIRC the minus would work in one location of the randomizer, but the other would remain positive, so -2M4 would be a negative value in most instances in the early levels, but start being predominantly positive later on. Allowing a min to be set to 0 means we can make not only mixed blessing items, but also items that have more variation. You think you know what an ego type does, then suddenly you find a new version of that ego type that boost your stats as well. And since this would not come into play until late in the dungeon game balance is maintained.

A setting like
L:-9+1d10:0:SPEED
L:-9+1d10:0:STEALTH
L:-9+1d10:0:STR
L:-9+1d10:0:CON
Would allow us to basically add random stats etc. to ego items. I'm not saying that we should go ahead and construct unbalanced items, I'm saying more variation in what content producers can produce is good.
jens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 1, 2011, 13:51   #2
takkaria
Veteran
 
takkaria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,850
Donated: $40
takkaria is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by jens View Post
1)
DSM:
In 'object_base.txt' the entry for DSM has HATES_ACID.

In 'object.txt' every DSM entry has this line:
F:IGNORE_ACID | IGNORE_ELEC | IGNORE_FIRE | IGNORE_COLD
- thus nullifying the entry in 'object_base.txt'

In the new section for DSM in ego_item.txt the IGNORE_* flags are sometimes repeated.
- I guess you can say it's protection against future changes, but it does seem a bit strange ;-)
Thanks, fixed.

Quote:
2)
Suggestion:
Could you add a bunch of empty numbers in the ego file, plus increase the max nr of ego's? Would make it easier to add your own ego types :-)
Is increasing the limit in limits.txt so hard? We're aiming to remove the need for the limit anyway, but in the meantime, if you want to edit, you can easily make room for them yourself.

Quote:
3)
Commit 821f59dd413062c90885, adressing issue #1394:
This commit fixes so pvals can now be negative. That is great. However, if I read the comments correctly, a very nice feature we could get quite easily is not possible. I would much prefer to have a different token than 0 stand for "do not apply a minimum". Then we could create ego items with properties like:
L:-2M4:0:STR:CON
OK, so you're confusing 'applying a minimum' (applied using the M: line) with the random pval (specified on the L: line). You're right that you still can't do -2M4, though (there's a bug filed if you want to watch the progress on this, #1451).
__________________
"Physician, heal thyself."
takkaria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 1, 2011, 14:06   #3
jens
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Posts: 348
jens is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by takkaria View Post
Is increasing the limit in limits.txt so hard? We're aiming to remove the need for the limit anyway, but in the meantime, if you want to edit, you can easily make room for them yourself.
I guess I have always been wary of changing there, with the idea that I might break something else. So when I have made new ego items I've always used holes in the current set. There are 16, so it works for a while ;-) Another issue is that I would prefer to place my additions in conjunction with the others of the same type, so having the holes appear at the end/start of each section would be even better. But I guess that is a bit of work not very many will appreciate...

Quote:
Originally Posted by takkaria View Post
OK, so you're confusing 'applying a minimum' (applied using the M: line) with the random pval (specified on the L: line). You're right that you still can't do -2M4, though (there's a bug filed if you want to watch the progress on this, #1451).
No, don't think so, the M: line gives:
M: min to-hit : min to-dam : min to-ac
- probably changed in conjuction with adding multiple pvals.

The L: line is now the one responsible for minima for pvals
L: pval : min pval : flag | flag | etc.

But which line it's on is not relevant for my issue. I want to be able to set 0 as a minima, because that allows for a lot of variation. Of course, this only become relevant after #1451 has been resolved.
jens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 1, 2011, 14:08   #4
takkaria
Veteran
 
takkaria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,850
Donated: $40
takkaria is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by jens View Post
I guess I have always been wary of changing there, with the idea that I might break something else. So when I have made new ego items I've always used holes in the current set. There are 16, so it works for a while ;-) Another issue is that I would prefer to place my additions in conjunction with the others of the same type, so having the holes appear at the end/start of each section would be even better. But I guess that is a bit of work not very many will appreciate...
The reason they are already not so arranged is because doing so would break savefiles. Increasing the number of ego-items won't, though, so that's safer.

Quote:
No, don't think so, the M: line gives:
M: min to-hit : min to-dam : min to-ac
- probably changed in conjuction with adding multiple pvals.

The L: line is now the one responsible for minima for pvals
L: pval : min pval : flag | flag | etc.

But which line it's on is not relevant for my issue. I want to be able to set 0 as a minima, because that allows for a lot of variation. Of course, this only become relevant after #1451 has been resolved.
Oh, yeah, sorry, you're right.
__________________
"Physician, heal thyself."
takkaria 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
Notes/History StephenR Vanilla 0 February 22, 2009 11:47
Code: Notes live where? camlost Vanilla 4 February 20, 2009 21:11
Comp #61 notes Donald Jonker Competition 37 November 29, 2008 18:45
Notes Patch Narvius Vanilla 12 August 8, 2008 20:50
[ToME] Notes on a thaumaturgist build Therem Harth AAR 0 January 19, 2008 22:08


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:29.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.