Unofficial Oangband release

[PowerDiver]

I must say, it is kind of amusing that two people who agree that the ID system is flawed are arguing over the precise nature of the flaws.

Who would be better informed about particulars than the malcontents? I should admit, I don't know O, but I believe it to be the same as S and am talking about S specifics that drove me crazy.

In any case, I am pleased to be a source of amusement.

[Nick]

The only "bug" is that the ammo was stacked in the first place. If you do not identify it, it does not stack, and that isn't about pseudo.

Unless you take the view that once you know two things are the same, you shouldn't forget just by throwing one of them a few feet and then picking it up again.

I must say, it is kind of amusing that two people who agree that the ID system is flawed are arguing over the precise nature of the flaws.

[PowerDiver]

I had the impression (and I'm not sure where I got it from) that the throwing weapons not stacking behaviour was unintentional

The only "bug" is that the ammo was stacked in the first place. If you do not identify it, it does not stack, and that isn't about pseudo.

The fact that it is generated stacked was clearly intentional, and that's why I put bug in quotes. It is inconsistent behavior set up to allow the player to use a single identify so long as he is not so obstinate as to, heaven forbid, use the item before identifying it.

[Nick]

I think that it should be a fairly easy change to object_similar. Changing each invocation of object_known_p with (object_known_p || goes_into_quiver) should work. Oh, should also allow merging with different pseudo [at the very end] to address another complaint upthread.

Yes, I'll do that.

I don't understand your comment about avoiding gameplay changes. This is old and has to be presumed to be intentional behavior, forcing the player to ?id a stack before using it, and so any change you make is a conscious gameplay change. If you are going to take on the responsibility for a change, you might as well do it right.

I had the impression (and I'm not sure where I got it from) that the throwing weapons not stacking behaviour was unintentional; there's a whole lot of weirdness that happens to do with throwing something and then pseudoing the ones you haven't thrown, amnesia, etc. etc.

On the whole, I think I'll just make quiver stuff stack regardless. In FA I have made everything stack the way you suggest (and nerfed amnesia), but I won't go that far with O.

As for the question of what's a bugfix and what's a gameplay change, that depends on the mind of the maintainer at the instant of release, I guess, and that way lies madness. I'll do something, and you can tell me if I've got it wrong again

[PowerDiver]

You could be gross and apply that principle only to things that go in a quiver.

I think that it should be a fairly easy change to object_similar. Changing each invocation of object_known_p with (object_known_p || goes_into_quiver) should work. Oh, should also allow merging with different pseudo [at the very end] to address another complaint upthread.

I don't understand your comment about avoiding gameplay changes. This is old and has to be presumed to be intentional behavior, forcing the player to ?id a stack before using it, and so any change you make is a conscious gameplay change. If you are going to take on the responsibility for a change, you might as well do it right.

[Nick]

Let me proselytize my belief that id should never affect gameplay. In this case, that implies that if things would stack if identified, IMO they should stack if not identified.

You're preaching to the converted here - but I'm trying to avoid gameplay changes.

You could be gross and apply that principle only to things that go in a quiver.

That might be the best option here.

[PowerDiver]

Yeah, this is standard O behaviour, and I believe intentional. The main weirdness is with weapons stacking until you have used them; I'll do some sort of fix, but I'm not sure exactly what.

Let me proselytize my belief that id should never affect gameplay. In this case, that implies that if things would stack if identified, IMO they should stack if not identified.

You could be gross and apply that principle only to things that go in a quiver.

[Bandobras]

Yeah, this is standard O behaviour, and I believe intentional. The main weirdness is with weapons stacking until you have used them; I'll do some sort of fix, but I'm not sure exactly what.

Please stack all identical (regardless of (pseudo-)ID), ever. That's where the world is going...

[Nick]

Here's more of the same... Picked up some lead shots, pseudo-ID'd them as excellent, put them in my quiver and fired a few. During battle, I ID'd the ones still in my quiver as, of freezing (+4,+4). After the battle, when I picked up the un-ID'd ones I had fired (exactly identical), they wouldn't stack with the ID'd ones. I'm not exactly sure when the pseudo-ID occurred, it may have been after I fired them, if that matters.

Yeah, this is standard O behaviour, and I believe intentional. The main weirdness is with weapons stacking until you have used them; I'll do some sort of fix, but I'm not sure exactly what.

[buzzkill]

This probably isn't - I can't remember if I'e made any changes to pickup yet, but I know it's not quite right. The current competition is O, so I'm getting lots of bug reports and there should be another fix before too long.

Here's more of the same... Picked up some lead shots, pseudo-ID'd them as excellent, put them in my quiver and fired a few. During battle, I ID'd the ones still in my quiver as, of freezing (+4,+4). After the battle, when I picked up the un-ID'd ones I had fired (exactly identical), they wouldn't stack with the ID'd ones. I'm not exactly sure when the pseudo-ID occurred, it may have been after I fired them, if that matters.

[Nick]

Nick, just wondering if a bugfix update is going to come out some day. I know your initial post implied that this was a one shot deal, but I'm compelled to at least ask.

I have actually put up a few - the most recent about two weeks ago.

* Incorrect display of resistance percentages in the Character screen.

This is fixed.

* Can't find a set of options that will not autopickup items but will automatically list each item as I walk over it. And even though autopickup is turned off I should still pick up $ automatically and that's not happening.

This probably isn't - I can't remember if I'e made any changes to pickup yet, but I know it's not quite right. The current competition is O, so I'm getting lots of bug reports and there should be another fix before too long.

[wdvaughn]

Any Updates/Bugfixes Coming Out?

Nick, just wondering if a bugfix update is going to come out some day. I know your initial post implied that this was a one shot deal, but I'm compelled to at least ask.

For me the two biggies are:
* Incorrect display of resistance percentages in the Character screen.
* Can't find a set of options that will not autopickup items but will automatically list each item as I walk over it. And even though autopickup is turned off I should still pick up $ automatically and that's not happening.

Despite these glitches I've been playing O (OS X version) fairly constantly the past two months. I've also rediscovered the joy of playing with preserve off - I forgot how fun that was.

William

[Nick]

2) Random minor niggle - the 'monster list' window doesn't update instantly when you move out of monster detection range (teleporting or taking the stairs)...

Yes, window updating is less than perfect all round - it's kind of an unsexy development task...

[Nick]

Every so often the @ tries to walk through a wall... it turns out that whenever he does that, there is a secret door there. It seems the pathfinding alogorithm must know a little more about the underlying map than it should.

Yes, that's a bug - presumably in FA too.

Also the @ often doesn't head where I'd expect when I tap the screen - maybe it is because I usually have some form of mapping before I enter the dungeon in FA.

Not sure about this one - I'll have to test a bit.

Not sure if it will help or not, but there is actually a different message if you try and walk through a secret door as opposed to a wall! I wonder if that was intentional? It means you don't need to search for secret doors in O - you could just try and walk into all the walls... one message says the wall is in the way and the other says blocking the way.

This is a consequence of the pathfind bug, I think. It doesn't happen (as far as I can see) when you walk into a secret door using the arrows, only with the mouse, and even then not if you tap on the door itself. If you tap on a square which isn't adjacent, the pathfinding algorithm is invoked; this bypasses the initial check for a wall (which gives the "wall in the way" message), and goes through to actually trying to move you. Once the bug is fixed, you will probably not get a message at all - the algorithm will either find a path and move you there, or fail and not try the secret door.

[Psi]

I'm seeing some strange things in pathfinding (which I haven't noticed in FA). Every so often the @ tries to walk through a wall... it turns out that whenever he does that, there is a secret door there. It seems the pathfinding alogorithm must know a little more about the underlying map than it should.

Not sure if it will help or not, but there is actually a different message if you try and walk through a secret door as opposed to a wall! I wonder if that was intentional? It means you don't need to search for secret doors in O - you could just try and walk into all the walls... one message says the wall is in the way and the other says blocking the way.