On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 04:58:00PM +1300, Ralph Versteegen wrote:
> On 30 December 2010 05:47, James Paige <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:55:03PM +1300, Ralph Versteegen wrote:
> >> I looked down the HeartBug page wanting to tackle something, and more
> >> elements + the Plan for more flexible elementals seemed like a good
> >> task. However this plan is very sparse on details, and has never been
> >> discussed.
> >>
> >> http://hamsterrepublic.com/ohrrpgce/Plan_for_more_flexible_elementals.html
> >>
> >> I think that 64 elements would be enough that we wouldn't need to
> >> worry about allowing an unlimited number of elements, which would
> >> require switching to RELOAD instead of some simple binsize increases.
> >> But if I were to increase the number of elements to 64, wouldn't I
> >> want to convert the 8 enemy types into elements at the same time? And
> >> in that case, I'd want to convert strong/weak/absorb bitsets to
> >> percentage damage options, and so on.
> >
> > I had not worked any on this because I was always thinking of this as a
> > post-edit-edit feature, but increasing it now doesn't make a later
> > conversion to unlimited any harder, so I have no problem with it.
> 
> Practically every HotOHR request is a post-edit-edit feature if you
> take that approach... how did you hope to ever get any done?!

I dunno. I keep leaving cookies and milk on my keyboard every night, but 
the feature-elves haven't filled any requests for me yet :)

No, actually, If I didn't have so much real life going on lately, I 
think I actually would have had the editor editor finished already. 
Certainly based on the pace I was working in the month or two right 
before the HotOHR contest started.

> >> * The elemental absorb bit overrides cure and harmed by cure bits, so
> >> we have to emulate that when calculating attack damage. Not too bad.
> >>
> >> * The "Fail on <element> resistance" attack bit checks only a target's
> >> Strong Against bit. Luckily if both strong and weak are set, the
> >> damage is 24%, less than 100%, so we can switch the "Fail on
> >> resistance" bit to work by checking that the enemy takes damage
> >> between 100% and -100% (exclusive). It's weird that greater than 100%
> >> absorption shouldn't trigger a fail though. Perhaps we could switch
> >> over to a strictly less than 100% damage check with a general bitset.
> >
> > That is good.
> > And maybe as a /later/ update we can convert these fail on < 100% to
> > non-bitset data that says Fail if elemental is between x% and y% or
> > something like that?
> 
> I like the sound of having the behaviour explicitly stated rather than
> relying on a general bitset, though I'm not sure what the utility of a
> range is, other than compatibility.

Eh, I don't know. Might not be that useful.

> >> * These days oobcure calls inflict (I wasn't even aware of that), so
> >> that's a bullet dodged.
> >
> > Yeah, I did that one a few months ago :)
> 
> Excellent, that one terrified me :)
> But hang on, what's this comment in oobcure about?
> 'FIXME: populate elemental hits here
> 
> herobattlebits is called to set the elemental bits on the target, and
> the attack of course has its elemental bits loaded, so is this comment
> just obsolete?

Hmmm. yeah... I don't know what I meant with that comment. I added that 
comment in the same commit that converted oobcure to call inflict... i 
am guessing it was a note to myself when I was still working on it, and 
I just forgot to remove it after I added the call to herobattlebits

> > The only other elemental features I can think of are:
> >
> > * Elemental spawning
> > * Elemental counterattacks
> 
> Ah yes. Spawning and counter attacks are easy because attacks will
> still only have a bit per element, as they do now. Did you eventually
> want to switch to percent elemental damage on attacks as well? We can
> worry about those then ;)

I don't see any special reason to add percentage for attacks. That 
sounds like it would just be extra confusion.

---
James
_______________________________________________
Ohrrpgce mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org

Reply via email to