I really wish I could be like that! I really want reduce the number of branches of unfinished features I have. I have a number in mind after Ichorescent. I've finished with battle system changes for the moment, if you want to do anything.
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 at 16:53, James Paige <[email protected]> wrote: > No, I don't have any un-pushed code right now, so you are free to make > changes without worrying about conflicts. > I keep my branches short and merge to main often :D > > > > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 7:40 PM Ralph Versteegen <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 at 09:52, James Paige <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu., Jan. 27, 2022, 8:40 a.m. Ralph Versteegen, <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 at 01:07, James Paige <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu., Jan. 27, 2022, 4:34 a.m. Ralph Versteegen, < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 at 14:56, James Paige <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 6:49 PM Ralph Versteegen <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 at 13:49, James Paige <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So I do have a few other changes related to this one planned. >>>>>>>>> * An option to make heroes controlled by (random) AI >>>>>>>>> * A concept of "traitor" which will affect targeting classes when >>>>>>>>> an attacker is targeting >>>>>>>>> * A concept of "turncoat" which will affect targetting classes >>>>>>>>> when an target is being targeted >>>>>>>>> * Attacks that can turn these effects on and off or set-to-default >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So an enemy with all 3 of Controllable, Traitor, and Turncoat >>>>>>>>> would function as a hero for that one battle. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To simulate a classic "Confuse" status, you would have an attack >>>>>>>>> that turns Controllable off, and traitor on, but don't touch >>>>>>>>> turncoat. Then >>>>>>>>> to end that status, use an attack that sets Controllable and Turncoat >>>>>>>>> back >>>>>>>>> to default. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I was hoping this meant you were going down this direction :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm not sure whether "Traitor" is proposed to swap foes and allies >>>>>>>> of a target, or just makes everyone count as a foe. Those are two >>>>>>>> different >>>>>>>> ways that you might want a Confused status to work, and it seems that >>>>>>>> these >>>>>>>> bits would only allow one or the other. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What I was thinking was to give each combatant a team (default 1 >>>>>>>> for heroes, 2 for enemies) and an "acting" team. A target is >>>>>>>> considered an >>>>>>>> ally by an attacker if their team is the same as the attacker's acting >>>>>>>> team, else they're a foe. Also team 0 could mean "independent", with no >>>>>>>> allies. You probably wouldn't use more than a third team, for >>>>>>>> "Nature", say >>>>>>>> when a clan of hyenas opportunistically attack while you're fighting >>>>>>>> someone else). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So Confuse to make someone attack anyone indiscriminately would >>>>>>>> change their acting team to 0 (so two confused targets still hit each >>>>>>>> other), and to swap sides you'd change their acting team (although now >>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>> realise that means the attack would need to be specific to use by >>>>>>>> heroes or >>>>>>>> enemies, unless there was an attack bit like "swap target's acting >>>>>>>> team" >>>>>>>> that just set it to the attacker's). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Maybe I've overcomplicated it again, while still not adding all >>>>>>>> that much utility/flexibility (really should work on allowing script >>>>>>>> hooks >>>>>>>> for things like this) vs just adding a third Independent bit. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yeah, I think teams will overcomplicate it for now-- and yes, having >>>>>>> scripting hooks so people can customize this behavior will be the best >>>>>>> way >>>>>>> to get advanced fancy effects >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I do kinda like the idea of being able to make a confused enemy >>>>>>> target all, rather than only the opposite side, but I'll have to think >>>>>>> if >>>>>>> there is a nice simple way to do that. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Going down the route of bitsets then I don't really see another >>>>>> option but adding another bitset to make everyone an enemy. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now, I'm not pushing for the team IDs idea, but I just wanted to >>>>>> write something about complexity. Say you add a third bit, or even a >>>>>> fourth >>>>>> ("Foe to all"). I think that arguably two integer-valued settings are >>>>>> simpler than 3 bits, because 3 bits is 8 possible combinations, a lot to >>>>>> think about. And even an 8-way setting could be simpler to reason about >>>>>> than 3 bits if you don't have to think about any interactions. Complexity >>>>>> of implementation is usually also secondary. >>>>>> But in fact after looking at the new version of get_valid_targs I >>>>>> realised team IDs would actually have been simpler in implementation too. >>>>>> The bitsets are more complex... in fact I see some mistakes in the code, >>>>>> which I'll fix: "Dead-ally (hero only)" and "Dead foe (enemy only)" were >>>>>> meant to be informative only, to warn that those settings didn't make >>>>>> sense >>>>>> for enemies/heroes, but not to intentionally restrict the targets. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I was actually considering two more bit states-- "Indiscriminate >>>>> Attacker" to attack both sides, and "Tergiversate Target" to be targeted >>>>> by >>>>> both sides >>>>> >>>> >>>> Maybe we need to make more frequent releases so that you can outlet >>>> your penchant for lexical obscureness elsewise :) >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Haha! I cannot question the perspicacity of this suggestion! >>> >> >> James, have you already started adding these bits? Because I was cleaning >> up some other code and realised I needed an is_foe function, which I was >> going to pull out of get_valid_targs. >> >> >>> >>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Or a classic Berzerk could be implemented with Controllable=Off >>>>>>>>> and could end with controllable set to default (this would work for >>>>>>>>> heroes, >>>>>>>>> but wouldn't do anything meaningful on an enemy) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This should allow a lot of possibilities, and is all pretty easy >>>>>>>>> to implement. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And yes, someone could totally fake 5 or 6 heroes in the party >>>>>>>>> with this, by using an instead-of-battle script, and adding hero >>>>>>>>> enemies to >>>>>>>>> the formation with a script before the battle starts. Definitely not >>>>>>>>> ideal, >>>>>>>>> but fine if people want to try it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually increasing the size of the active party > 4 and >>>>>>>>> increasing the number of enemies in a formation > 8 is something I >>>>>>>>> definite;ly want to do, but it will require lots and lots of cleanup, >>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>> is outside of the scope of what I am trying to do right now. In >>>>>>>>> particular, >>>>>>>>> there are tons of places where the ID range within the bslot() array >>>>>>>>> defines what a BattleSprite Instance does, so the first step of that >>>>>>>>> cleanup will probably be to convert all access to bslot() to a set of >>>>>>>>> accessor functions for heroes, enemies, attack sprites, and weapon >>>>>>>>> sprites. >>>>>>>>> Then those different ranges can be split apart into different arrays, >>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>> can be dynamically sized when you load a battle formation with 15 >>>>>>>>> enemies >>>>>>>>> in it, or something like that. But that is for later. I want to keep >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> scope of what I am working on broken down into bite-sized baby-steps >>>>>>>>> to mix >>>>>>>>> a metaphor :D >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't think we would want to split bslot() into separate arrays >>>>>>>> for heroes and enemies: being able to index across all of them with a >>>>>>>> bslot() index is very useful and widely used (eg. targeting) so it >>>>>>>> would be >>>>>>>> a lot of work to remove that. Why not just add is_hero and is_enemy >>>>>>>> attributes. There's a lot of lines of code to change, but each would >>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>> be an easy change. Could also start using polymorphism. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, you are right. is_hero and is_enemy attributes are much better >>>>>>> than what I was thinking of with the accessor functions for bslot. Glad >>>>>>> you >>>>>>> said it :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On the other hand, I do want to remove attacks and weapons from >>>>>>>> bslot() and was considering doing it soonish. Almost all of the >>>>>>>> BattleSprite data is irrelevant for them, and nearly all of the >>>>>>>> advantages >>>>>>>> of having them in bslot are (or will be) gone now that battles are >>>>>>>> converted to slices. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ah, right! Those only get used in animations, so the slice is all >>>>>>> that really matters :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Fortunately I think the current features I am adding will not make >>>>>>>>> any of that later work harder, and might even lead to a little helpful >>>>>>>>> cleanup. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> James >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 8:22 AM Ralph Versteegen < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Wow! That's not a feature I was expecting to see for a long time. >>>>>>>>>> A nice surprise! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I suppose this is particularly useful for giving the player extra >>>>>>>>>> actions they can perform in battle. People are going to inevitable >>>>>>>>>> think to >>>>>>>>>> use it to get around the 4 hero limit, but it seems really >>>>>>>>>> problematic for >>>>>>>>>> that. Or is time to add team numbers to battles, so you can define >>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>> combatants are "foe" or "ally"? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 at 14:01, <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> james >>>>>>>>>>> 2022-01-16 17:01:32 -0800 (Sun, 16 Jan 2022) >>>>>>>>>>> 39 >>>>>>>>>>> New enemy bitset "Controlled by Player" >>>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>> U wip/bmodsubs.bas >>>>>>>>>>> U wip/enemyedit.bas >>>>>>>>>>> U wip/loading.rbas >>>>>>>>>>> U wip/udts.bi >>>>>>>>>>> U wip/whatsnew.txt >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ohrrpgce mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ohrrpgce mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Ohrrpgce mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org >
_______________________________________________ Ohrrpgce mailing list [email protected] http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org
