I closed the duplicate ticket (#1147) - Takk had already reported this as #1058. Most of the discussion is on #572. IMO it would suffice to ensure that the player always get the first move on a new level, however he arrives there, and also after accidental summoning (undetected trap or unIDd scroll or staff, but not known/IDd).
Orc captain attacking just after game load
Collapse
X
-
I closed the duplicate ticket (#1147) - Takk had already reported this as #1058. Most of the discussion is on #572. IMO it would suffice to ensure that the player always get the first move on a new level, however he arrives there, and also after accidental summoning (undetected trap or unIDd scroll or staff, but not known/IDd).
No one seems to care much about energy on new levels. I think it's a little unfair to start the player at 100 and the monsters at around 10. Probably everyone should start at 100. Then the player gets the first move from the tiebreaker, but the monsters aren't penalized.
Personally, I think the player should start at 0 and the monsters at 100. They should get the move on you when you appear from a recall, not vice versa. I know I'm in a minority here.
Doing things properly in terms of setting energy_usage seems like too much effort, so a quick fix seems appropriate. I've been playtesting with debugging printfs and changing to
Code:/* Give player minimum energy to start a new level, but do not reduce higher value from savefile for level in progress */ if (p_ptr->energy < INITIAL_DUNGEON_ENERGY) p_ptr->energy = INITIAL_DUNGEON_ENERGY;
Comment
-
Couldn't we start both monsters and player with a random amount of energy, not guaranteeing the player the first move, but (probably) not being left to move last either.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.Comment
-
If you start the player at 50 energy and a double-speed monster at 15 energy, the monster will still go first. That's true of an entire pack of time hounds if the player is at speed+5 even if some of the hounds are 20% less energetic than average.Comment
-
You'll have to be more specific about what you mean.
If you start the player at 50 energy and a double-speed monster at 15 energy, the monster will still go first. That's true of an entire pack of time hounds if the player is at speed+5 even if some of the hounds are 20% less energetic than average.Comment
-
The goal is to stop the player from being insta-killed when he lands on a new level in a room with a pack of time hounds. That's what the buggy line of code that caused the OP to die was trying to accomplish.
The ticket about avoiding unavoidable deaths has been around long enough for Takkaria to squash it if he opposed it, so presumably he is on board with the general idea. I believe the policy is set, and it's now a question of implementation details.Comment
-
You'll have to be more specific about what you mean.
If you start the player at 50 energy and a double-speed monster at 15 energy, the monster will still go first. That's true of an entire pack of time hounds if the player is at speed+5 even if some of the hounds are 20% less energetic than average.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.Comment
-
Most monsters are sleeping anyway, so this will only make hounds more dangerous, but they are already bad enough.Comment
Comment