Old School Needs Help With New School

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • prh182
    Rookie
    • Sep 2011
    • 16

    #16
    Man you guys are great. I don't think I have ever seen a game forum where people are so nice, informative, and willing to help the game illiterate. Thanks a lot!

    Comment

    • Timo Pietilä
      Prophet
      • Apr 2007
      • 4096

      #17
      Originally posted by Derakon
      You're talking about what we call "pseudo-ID". Different classes have different pseudo-ID strengths; generally, warriors have the best pseudo-ID (strong and fast), hybrid classes have strong-but-slow pseudo-ID, and pure-casters (priests and mages) have weak and slow pseudo-ID.
      Actually priest pseudo is second fastest, only warrior beats it. Mage is extremely slow, but they get ID as spell very early so it doesn't matter. Second slowest I think is ranger in 3.0.9. Paladin and Rogue are about equal to each other.

      Comment

      • Magnate
        Angband Devteam member
        • May 2007
        • 5110

        #18
        Originally posted by fizzix
        I agree that some of the wording could be improved here.
        I think this is because all options are variations from the basic default game, and the default is "no variation". So the default setting is that artifacts will be created, but you can turn on an option called "no artifacts". So you end up with the back-to-front concepts of "yes, no artifacts" or "no, I want artifacts as normal please". Similarly no_stores, no_selling etc. These are all options to turn off various things in the game.

        I guess we could just call them turn_off_artifacts, turn_off_selling etc.
        "Been away so long I hardly knew the place, gee it's good to be back home" - The Beatles

        Comment

        • EpicMan
          Swordsman
          • Dec 2009
          • 455

          #19
          Or just call them 'Artifacts', 'Selling', etc and set the defaults so that the result is the same.

          Comment

          • Nomad
            Knight
            • Sep 2010
            • 958

            #20
            Well, several of the options like maximise, keep_randarts and monster ai default to yes anyway, so it seems like you might as well set the whole lot that way:

            Code:
            Allow use of stairs/recall                   : yes  (birth_recall)
            Allow use of stores/home                     : yes  (birth_stores)
            Allow creation of artifacts                  : yes  (birth_artifacts)
            Allow objects to stack on the floor          : yes  (birth_stacking)
            Preserve artifacts when leaving level        : yes  (birth_preserve)
            Generate connected stairs                    : yes  (birth_stairs)
            Show level feelings                          : yes  (birth_feelings)
            Stores pay money for items                   : yes  (birth_selling)

            Comment

            • fizzix
              Prophet
              • Aug 2009
              • 3025

              #21
              Originally posted by Nomad
              Well, several of the options like maximise, keep_randarts and monster ai default to yes anyway, so it seems like you might as well set the whole lot that way:

              Code:
              Allow use of stairs/recall                   : yes  (birth_recall)
              Allow use of stores/home                     : yes  (birth_stores)
              Allow creation of artifacts                  : yes  (birth_artifacts)
              Allow objects to stack on the floor          : yes  (birth_stacking)
              Preserve artifacts when leaving level        : yes  (birth_preserve)
              Generate connected stairs                    : yes  (birth_stairs)
              Show level feelings                          : yes  (birth_feelings)
              Stores pay money for items                   : yes  (birth_selling)
              I thin this is an improvement. What do you think Magnate? It shouldn't be too hard to fix this up. (and I guess that can be interpreted as me volunteering...)

              Comment

              • d_m
                Angband Devteam member
                • Aug 2008
                • 1517

                #22
                Originally posted by fizzix
                I thin this is an improvement. What do you think Magnate? It shouldn't be too hard to fix this up. (and I guess that can be interpreted as me volunteering...)
                Agreed.

                Biggest thing is probably writing the compatibility to code to update (and possibly reverse the sense of) the old options.
                linux->xterm->screen->pmacs

                Comment

                • fizzix
                  Prophet
                  • Aug 2009
                  • 3025

                  #23
                  Originally posted by d_m
                  Agreed.

                  Biggest thing is probably writing the compatibility to code to update (and possibly reverse the sense of) the old options.
                  oh, i hadn't thought about that part. drat. That is going to be a pain.

                  Comment

                  • Magnate
                    Angband Devteam member
                    • May 2007
                    • 5110

                    #24
                    Originally posted by fizzix
                    oh, i hadn't thought about that part. drat. That is going to be a pain.
                    Really? Is it any more difficult than reverting the logic of all the current if statements? So opt(birth_foo) becomes !opt(birth_foo) and vice versa.

                    Unless I am being dim and have missed something.

                    Anyway, I'm fine with this change.
                    "Been away so long I hardly knew the place, gee it's good to be back home" - The Beatles

                    Comment

                    • takkaria
                      Veteran
                      • Apr 2007
                      • 1951

                      #25
                      Originally posted by Magnate
                      Really? Is it any more difficult than reverting the logic of all the current if statements? So opt(birth_foo) becomes !opt(birth_foo) and vice versa.

                      Unless I am being dim and have missed something.

                      Anyway, I'm fine with this change.
                      It's the savefile update that is the pain in the arse, I think.
                      takkaria whispers something about options. -more-

                      Comment

                      • Magnate
                        Angband Devteam member
                        • May 2007
                        • 5110

                        #26
                        Originally posted by takkaria
                        It's the savefile update that is the pain in the arse, I think.
                        Even that should be ok if rd_options_4() ... or whichever version ... just inverts and renames those options one time only.
                        "Been away so long I hardly knew the place, gee it's good to be back home" - The Beatles

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        😀
                        😂
                        🥰
                        😘
                        🤢
                        😎
                        😞
                        😡
                        👍
                        👎