Equipment optimiser for frogcomposband characters
Collapse
X
-
When this happens, I have added a message in the Solution text box below about the possibility of item exclusions excluding everything.
Have also made it such that one should not be able to create an empty valued exclusion entry.
Hopefully this resolves similar issues in the future.Comment
-
Code:Fi: *0
Code:Fi: 0 *Fi: 1
Comment
-
Also, the first dump I uploaded that had the Dagger of Amun did not lead to that item being added to the item list. I tried putting it in my home and re-uploading, and then it was visible to the Optimiser.Comment
-
Parsing bug?
In my character's pack, I have:
a Ring of Combat (+16,+14) {Fe}
The Ring of the Future King (+11,+8) (+2) {St;Di;Si(St}
but the Optimizer recommends I use
a Ring of Combat (+16,+14) {St;Di;Si(St}
which appears to be some weird combination of the two that doesn't actually exist.
I'm excited about this optimizer! Thanks for making itComment
-
In my character's pack, I have:
a Ring of Combat (+16,+14) {Fe}
The Ring of the Future King (+11,+8) (+2) {St;Di;Si(St}
but the Optimizer recommends I use
a Ring of Combat (+16,+14) {St;Di;Si(St}
which appears to be some weird combination of the two that doesn't actually exist.
ring: a Ring of Combat (+16,+14) {Fe}
ring: The Ring of the Future King (+11,+8) (+2) {St;Di;Si(St}
a Ring of Combat (+16,+14) {St;Di;Si(St}Comment
-
Thanks for fixing the issues I was having, especially missing the /* tag on some items. This is a handy tool and we are grateful for your effort and for sharing it with us.Comment
-
Thanks for your hard work!Comment
-
-
Please send the HTML dump to optimiser@riverwaterhill.com and I will take a look. Thanks!
The problem here is that within the Inventory section of the HTML dump, similar items of the same "coloring" is wrapped in a single <font> tag.
For instance,
Code:<font color="#c00000">a Ring of Combat (+16,+14) {Fe} The Ring of the Future King (+11,+8) (+2) {St;Di;Si(St} </font>
Code:<font color="#c08040">a Fur Cloak of Aman [3,+10] (+2) {SpSl;Sh} a Large Leather Shield of Celestial Protection [6,+17] {DkSh} </font>
The parser in Optimiser had assumed that the two rings are one item and hence the strange combined attribute item you see in your character earlier.
I have done a workaround by treating the Inventory section separately so it should work properly now for your character.
Hopefully this doesn't break something else.
By the way, this might explain the problem that Bostock had earlier:
Also, the first dump I uploaded that had the Dagger of Amun did not lead to that item being added to the item list. I tried putting it in my home and re-uploading, and then it was visible to the Optimiser.Comment
-
Thanks, schatz. I love your Optimizer.
Idea, in case you're looking for them: allow us to assign weights to various stats for use in the Optimizer's maximization calculations. For example, we might tell the optimizer to value +dam more than +AC by assigning a weight of 1.0 to +dam but a weight of 0.4 to +AC.
Keep up the good work!Comment
-
I have a cloak with Aura of Shards and the Optimizer is counting it as both [Sh and Sh.
Sorry to pester; I love this OptimizerComment
-
Probably another case of the same error I reported last: gloves of slaying with the Slay Living flag get counted as having Levitation by the Optimizer (they both use Lv in their inscriptions). I think with the way the inscriptions are set up it should be possible to always determine the intention of an ambiguous string like Sh or Lv by detecting certain tag-like characters ([ and /)in the string before them.
Have a good one and thanks again!Comment
-
Probably another case of the same error I reported last: gloves of slaying with the Slay Living flag get counted as having Levitation by the Optimizer (they both use Lv in their inscriptions). I think with the way the inscriptions are set up it should be possible to always determine the intention of an ambiguous string like Sh or Lv by detecting certain tag-like characters ([ and /)in the string before them.
Very much appreciate the bug reports. I should have written a parser for the attributes string rather than doing string comparisons. A bit too late now - something to keep in mind should I find more time on my hands.Comment
Comment