00:01:00 03|amethyst * r30b33c7417c4 10/crawl-ref/source/target.cc: Don't crash when using lightning rods near the map edge. 00:04:10 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.11-a0-2693-g065decd (33) 00:04:47 <|amethyst> I guess CDOites get one more day of free crashes 00:13:21 -!- st_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 00:20:19 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.11-a0-2694-g30b33c7 00:21:17 -!- ainsophyao has joined ##crawl-dev 00:25:04 porcupine (02r) | Spd: 12 | Int: animal | HD: 2 | HP: 6-18 | AC/EV: 2/12 08(spiny) | Dam: 7 | Res: 06magic(8) | XP: 32. 00:25:04 <|amethyst> %??porcupine 00:25:08 minotaur (04H) | Spd: 10 | Int: normal | HD: 13 | HP: 52-90 | AC/EV: 5/7 04(headbutt) | Dam: 35, 20 | 10weapons, 10items, 10doors | Res: 06magic(52) | Chunks: 07contam | XP: 1385. 00:25:08 <|amethyst> %??minotaur 00:27:53 -!- dtsund has quit [Quit: dtsund] 00:54:21 -!- mikee_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:17:03 -!- mikee_ has joined ##crawl-dev 01:36:03 -!- SkaryMonk has joined ##crawl-dev 01:38:34 -!- MarvinPA has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 01:58:52 -!- ussdefiant_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 01:58:53 -!- phunktion has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 02:00:17 -!- phunktion has joined ##crawl-dev 02:03:35 -!- eeviac has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88.2 [Firefox 13.0.1/20120614114901]] 02:08:36 -!- jvj24601 has joined ##crawl-dev 02:53:08 -!- jvj24601 has quit [Quit: Page closed] 03:08:03 -!- ainsophy_ has joined ##crawl-dev 03:08:52 -!- ainsophyao has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:11:29 -!- ainsophy_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:11:51 -!- freefall has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:15:11 -!- freefall has joined ##crawl-dev 03:15:37 -!- Adeon has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:17:11 |amethyst: friendly ballistomycetes not producing spores is intentional? I thought it was a bug 03:20:09 iirc it's intentional because spores do splash damage 03:20:17 and if they popped out at a bad time it could really fuck you up 03:20:45 I thought the change was because otherwise, you could just find a corner and wait while your spores kill everything and reproduce indefinitely 03:20:53 that too 03:20:58 either explanation is good 03:21:03 I don't think you'd even lose piety, all you'd need is a food source 03:21:19 -!- alefury has joined ##crawl-dev 03:21:24 so i recently ascended a character 03:21:26 and had a thought 03:21:30 namely 03:21:34 the endgame is really really samey 03:21:41 like 03:21:45 pan/abyss/hells 03:21:59 tomb punctuates it a little bit but it's a short branch and requires really specific stuff 03:22:02 but along the way 03:22:15 i ran into the holy pan realm 03:22:20 pan/abyss/hells is same monsters and diving, yes 03:22:22 and noticed that it's really, really cool 03:22:26 like 03:22:33 there's about 5 or 6 monsters you will never see elsewhere 03:22:42 i have friends with ascended 15-runers 03:22:43 its mostly a testing ground for the new holy monsters, yes :) 03:22:48 that didn't even know they exist 03:22:56 well 03:23:02 i think its also in 0.10, but im not sure 03:23:06 yes 03:23:06 it would be nice to do more with holy monsters, but its hard to find a use for them. the good gods really screw things up 03:23:09 it's in 0.10, yes 03:23:19 is there a way to check to see location 03:23:25 er 03:23:26 i mean 03:23:28 ffs 03:23:30 let me think of how to say this 03:23:34 the holy level vetos if you are with a good god. I really hate doing this, but it's the only way to make the level work 03:23:42 well 03:23:50 would it be possible to special case the branch 03:23:57 er 03:23:59 not branch 03:24:00 but level 03:24:04 I dislike doing it with a single level... doing it with a whole branch makes me cringe 03:24:06 blahhhhhh let me think ths 03:24:10 basically 03:24:15 think, write, press enter :P 03:24:26 1: there should be a holy branch named Elysium 03:24:27 note the order of these things :P 03:24:29 it would be really cool 03:24:39 yeah, do what alefury says 03:24:43 elysium fits as a name because in dante's inferno it is the "abode of the blessed in the hells" 03:25:18 2: would it be possible to special case an area so that killing holies inside it wouldn't anger good gods 03:25:26 it would have to be made clear 03:25:28 evilmike: great work with swamps! It's much much better :) 03:25:30 through a special message 03:25:42 but if we're talking a bunch of angels chilling in hell 03:25:55 it might make thematic sense for tso to not be especially nice to them 03:26:03 or the other good gods 03:26:04 evilmike: also, coud you take a look at the shoals_colours branch and tell me what you think? 03:26:13 galehar: alright, I'll take a look 03:26:18 03evilmike * rf6a31c44eeeb 10/crawl-ref/source/mon-data.h: Slightly decrease HP of most spiders. 03:26:28 03evilmike * rd0ca5e947a76 10/crawl-ref/source/dat/descript/monsters.txt: Rewrite description for emperor scorpions. 03:26:40 -!- nonethousand_ has joined ##crawl-dev 03:27:07 i haven't really looked at the code for it yet 03:27:09 i should 03:27:31 evilmike: thanks :) 03:27:59 SevenDeadlySins: something to keep in mind... an angel aligned with the bad guys is a demon. We already have a bunch of those 03:28:11 yeah but we're not talking aligned 03:28:13 just... 03:28:14 I think you can make an excuse for daevas of xom... but not of say, makhleb 03:28:16 -!- nonethousand has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 03:28:19 -!- nonethousand_ is now known as nonethousand 03:28:24 just kinda chilling in hell 03:29:00 there would take some thematic work probably 03:30:28 the way I'd justify it, would be to add some rogue god that claims it is good (and has angels, and all that), but the other good gods hate. I still find that iffy, though 03:30:31 demigod boss 03:30:34 =D 03:30:50 it could be some kind of upstart demigod, yeah 03:30:50 actually i like that 03:30:59 especially if the demigod change goes through 03:31:05 where piety mirrors "worshippers" 03:31:09 but i mean 03:31:17 making the lord of that area a demigod 03:31:27 who attracted a following of holy beings 03:31:35 -!- Adeon has joined ##crawl-dev 03:31:40 maybe if you worship a good god 03:31:44 there could be a message 03:32:02 try to type your sentences on one line. You're a bit hard to follow 03:32:07 sorry 03:32:16 It's a bit of a habit from other chats where things go a lot faster. 03:32:42 Anyway... maybe when you enter, if you worship a good god, it can give a message. 03:32:57 yes, "destroy this infidel" or something like that 03:33:01 Something like "The Shining One says: No heretic can escape my wrath, not even an angel! Slay the unbelievers!" 03:34:29 Where would the penance infliction from killing a holy being while worshipping a good god be located? I'm assuming religion.cc but it'd be nice to know so I can look around. 03:34:56 I don't know, sorry 03:35:07 it would be easy to find, though 03:37:06 galehar: hmm, the shoals colours actually look better than I thought they would. The special coloured water could probably get a different name though 03:37:21 like, "some deep water (tidal)" 03:37:52 Only for when you examine it with 'x', when moving through it, it can just print the regular water message 03:39:27 galehar: I'm noticing some light cyan water that is always there, regardless of tides 03:39:51 Hm. Looks like the setting of penance is in godconduct.cc. 03:40:24 galehar: yeah, at lowest possible tide, some shallow water is light cyan 03:40:48 Maybe there could be a check to see if the current location is to see if penance would be applied? 03:41:42 galehar: or is that how it's supposed to work? my assumption was that the lightcyan / lightblue was for squares that are floor at low tide 03:43:06 SevenDeadlySins: sounds hackish. it would make more sense for these monsters to actually be followers of this heretical god 03:45:23 Wasn't aware monsters actually followed gods. 03:45:33 Or rather, that there was a way to set that. 03:47:52 yeah, you can do it in wizard mode even 03:47:56 -!- ainsophyao has joined ##crawl-dev 03:48:00 Neat. 03:48:01 &M daeva god:Fedhas 03:48:20 it's not great though, you still get TSO wrath for killing them 03:48:29 Thus why I was talking about the penance hack. 03:48:34 That, or... 03:48:41 Can you set monster holiness status? 03:48:56 Seems like that would solve all the problems by setting them to a neutral holiness. 03:49:04 well if you get tso wrath for killing daevas of any god there's a problem with xom-aligned daevas, which I think can happen? 03:49:18 naturally in the abyss and from xom effects 03:49:20 monqy: it's a problem for zin aligned ones too (placed by some vaults) 03:49:33 also, silver stars (which are kind of *the* zin monster) give tso wrath :P 03:49:49 Of course... this raises another issue. 03:50:05 Namely, this theoretical branch would be ludicrously hard for undead/demonspawn. 03:50:07 evilmike: I don't understand how the tide work all that well. I noticed it too, but there's no hard limit. 03:51:18 What with every enemy doing Holy damage and all. 03:53:23 -!- Dixie has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:56:21 Do you know if it's possible to set or modify holiness of monsters on spawning? 03:57:53 what do you mean by holiness? I ask because holiness is a technical term in crawl and it doesn't seem like what you want 03:58:04 -!- ainsophyao has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:59:10 I think I'm using the term right? Can't be entirely sure. Holiness in Crawl means alignment (holy/neutral/evil), right? 03:59:31 ??holiness 03:59:31 holiness[1/1]: Every Crawl monster has a holiness stat, from (holy, plant, natural, undead, nonliving, demonic). This stat reflects the monster's general nature, and many effects only occur to some types; polymorph only affects natural creatures and demons, and torment holy/natural, DU undead, etc. 03:59:35 yeah 03:59:35 evilmike: "a frustrated thirteen year old who just discovered sarcasm." haha :) 03:59:38 That. 04:00:10 SevenDeadlySins: well it says nothing about the monster's "alignment" 04:00:15 Yeah you're right. 04:00:30 -!- ontoclasm has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 04:01:35 Anyway, it would be in reference to a theoretical branch in which holy monsters would spawn (angels, daevas, cherubs, ophans, apises, etc), but you would want them to aggro against followers of a good god and not generate penance. 04:03:14 Also ostensibly you'd actually want a weapon of Holy Wrath to damage them, since a follower of TSO would likely have their best/only endgame weapon be holy branded. 04:04:13 I disagree in that regard; no need to have holy brand do big damage to everything in extended 04:04:56 Yes, but unless I'm mistaken such weapons would actually be completely ineffectual against holy enemies 04:05:10 they wouldn't be ineffectual at all 04:05:11 Nor am I suggesting that they should take increased damage from Holy Wrath. 04:05:18 In that case, ignore that bit. 04:05:32 they just wouldn't get the bonus damage from the holy brand 04:05:37 galehar: I've called him worse :P 04:06:38 i guess i'm a little confused then? 04:07:00 mon-data.h says: "MH_HOLY - irritates some gods when killed, immunity from holy wrath weapons" 04:08:25 holy-holiness monsters should irritate the god to which they're aligned imo 04:08:51 and the immunity bit is with regard to the bonus damage 04:09:35 could stand to be more clear in the comment 04:09:43 agreed 04:09:58 MH_HOLY is a type of holiness, yeah 04:10:11 anyway, if holy-holiness monsters angered their aligned god that would obviously fix all the issues within 04:10:15 but unfortunately that is not the case 04:10:38 I think ely ones actually do something 04:10:51 if you kill an Apis, ely doesn't exactly do wrath. She does scold you, though. 04:11:13 strange 04:12:13 ok so 04:12:31 for the attitude conversion on holy monsters, all it does is use the is_holy function 04:12:41 which checks to see if the holiness of the monster is MH_HOLY 04:12:53 (in addition to other things) 04:13:39 should check to see if it's aligned to a good god maybe? a bit weird for a tso worshipper to convert xom daevas 04:13:51 yeah that would be odd 04:14:40 it only checks whether or not the monster can see you, whether it's statused (asleep/confused/para'd), holy, will attack you, and whether ornot it's failed a change attempt 04:14:58 it doesn't appear to look at all at the alignment (which i'm not sure where that is even assigned) 04:15:16 it only looks to see whether it's holy holiness and whether or not it's aware of what's going on 04:16:54 galehar: hmm, what if instead of doing it by tides, you just did it by depth? floor -> lightcyan -> cyan -> lightblue -> blue, from shallowest to deepest (with the latter two being deep water) 04:17:03 I'd guess that defeats the purpose of the extra colours 04:17:39 I am doing it by depth 04:17:52 I use dgn_height_at 04:18:22 oh ok (I was just looking at it in game, somehow I got the wrong idea) 04:20:24 anyway, i was thinking about the issue of having any kind of obligatory or semi-obligatory holy level with undead and demonspawn being so crippled by it 04:20:29 -!- syllogism has joined ##crawl-dev 04:20:46 and it definitely seems like it would be an issue 04:21:15 galehar: yeah, it's more clear to me now. I think this effect would be useful if you could see which squares will eventually be floor (or which deep water will be shallow), but I am unsure how useful it is the way it is now 04:21:44 evilmike: although, maybe I just need to adjust the limit, it seems to work better with -19 or -18 04:21:58 SevenDeadlySins: It's good if it's an extra challenge for those characters, but it probably shouldn't be impossible 04:22:12 right, that was my thought 04:22:12 galehar: if there's a way to get it to be a close approximation, that's good 04:22:23 evilmike: but the stide still leaves some patches of shallow water in the middle of sand. I think it's intentional 04:22:38 has there ever been any thought put into having some kind of rHoly attribute in the game 04:22:45 SevenDeadlySins: do you know if it actually would be an issue? Also note that undead players will get torment immunity in the other extended endgame branches so you can think of holy vulnerability in this branch like a counterbalance 04:22:49 I think those little patches are supposed to be tidal pools, yeah 04:23:11 yes but torment immunity is counteractable by the most consistent endgame builds through necromutation 04:23:21 SevenDeadlySins: It'd be better to balance it otherwise, and not make it a quest to collect rHoly :) 04:23:38 yes and no, there are already branches where the quest is pick up rpois 04:23:43 note: ghouls, mummies etc have been known to clear the holy pan level 04:23:48 Having less of that would be good, yeah 04:23:53 they need to be very careful, and stay away from pearl dragons etc. but its doable 04:23:58 evilmike: Sounds good to me! 04:24:07 SevenDeadlySins: the most consistent engame builds? 04:24:09 gehenna and cocytus are "have rF/rC or have a sad, sad time" 04:24:12 I mean, if you're careless, this can happen: 04:24:13 casters 04:24:19 !lg * killer=silver star max=dam x=dam 04:24:19 SevenDeadlySins: I see a lot of extended, and I hardly ever see necromutation 04:24:19 4. [dam=124] Sky the Farming Archmage (L27 HEWz), worshipper of Sif Muna, blasted by a silver star (beam of golden light) in Zig:17 on 2012-02-27, with 1354183 points after 236399 turns and 11:49:41. 04:24:26 i've found that it's a lot easier to get casters through/to endgame 04:24:34 er 04:24:35 not that 04:24:42 but through endgame, yes 04:24:53 SevenDeadlySins: (all but one of my extended characters aren't necromutated either) 04:24:59 whether or not i have necromutation has a big effect on whether or not i am willing to do stuff like tomb 04:26:08 honestly I think you're generalizing your personal experiences far too much 04:26:09 idk, it just seems like a holy branch would be absurdly difficult for demonspawn/undead 04:26:12 this could be true 04:26:21 but it's just something to think about 04:26:32 have you ever done the holy pan on demonspawn/undead? how would you know it'd be absurdly difficult? 04:26:37 hearsay? 04:27:12 this seems awfully attack-like for something i am just considering a potential issue 04:27:32 sorry 04:27:33 and no i haven't 04:27:42 but i do know 04:28:03 that as demonspawn running into an enemy with holy wrath is utterly terrifying 80% of the time 04:28:32 note that the things you are saying (such as terrifying) are subjective; they apply to you but maybe not to others 04:28:44 (terrifying also sounds pretty exciting :)) 04:28:45 thus why i am saying potential issue 04:28:57 going through a holy branch (note: nothing like this is planned) would be like going through tomb on a character that has trouble with torment 04:28:58 maybe i'm generalizing, maybe i'm not 04:29:00 it's hard, but doable 04:29:04 you are generalizing 04:29:12 it's ok to admit it 04:29:14 ok yeah i am 04:29:22 but it might not be unfair 04:29:26 i'm not sure 04:29:36 i am just highlighting a potential thing to consider 04:29:47 what evilmike said about the current status sounded good to me - hard, but doable 04:29:49 i would love to be wrong 04:30:05 I think it's more important to worry about somethign being too easy 04:30:09 03galehar 07shoals_colours * ra8dedc7cf44d 10/crawl-ref/source/dgn-height.h: Adjust the shore limit. 04:30:12 eg, letting a tso follower go through a pacified holy branch 04:30:19 well yeah 04:30:22 but i thought about that too! 04:30:30 thus my question of whether or not holiness of monsters can be modified 04:30:48 or if that's not preferred, then implementing actual tracking of monster worship status 04:31:10 making monster pacification check god status rather than holiness 04:31:18 or in addition to holiness 04:31:43 it is actually tracked; just not used 04:31:43 wrong word 04:31:43 but yes 04:31:43 that 04:31:53 i did notice places where it was used 04:32:07 specifically when determining whether a monster with the priest flag was considered a holy monster 04:33:42 because the is_holy() function has special handling for priests of good gods 04:34:37 it might actually be a good idea to add a check to the monster convert and penance functions 04:35:07 so that they don't convert / incur penance if the monster isn't following a good god 04:35:42 it actually probably wouldn't be that hard to implement, just add an additional flag to check in two places 04:36:07 -!- Patashu is now known as Patashu[Zzz] 04:36:09 -!- Patashu[Zzz] is now known as Patashu 04:39:06 yeah it'd literally be a one line change in godconduct.cc and attitude-change.cc 04:39:22 it would also stop daevas of xom from becoming neutral to tso followers 04:41:05 i will bring this up again when it is not 3 in the morning on the west coast =D 04:41:16 hey, its only 2:40 04:41:22 tru fax 04:41:58 but more people commenting would be nice 04:43:16 make a tavern post if you want, that will get more general discussion. just be prepared to take the good ideas with the bad 04:43:22 well yeah 04:43:50 the main reason i'm here is because i wanted a bit more fleshed out idea before i presented it anywhere 04:44:44 galehar: shoals_colours seems nicer now, although i am still noticing places where there is quite a lot of dark blue water, that eventually becomes shallow 04:46:10 although, autoexplore as a merfolk still goes through it, so I guess it's ok 04:52:01 No warning when targeting unaware monster with LRD under TSO (https://crawl.develz.org/mantis/view.php?id=5881) by sanka 04:52:07 SevenDeadlySins: people tend to use the tavern for that, but it usually devolves into pointless and endless discussion. maybe you got it right, coming here first. :) 04:53:46 that's what i figured- refining thoughts before postig tends to reduce the amount of "have you thought of this?" posts 04:53:52 keeps things more focused 05:00:02 OSX builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.11-a0-2696-gd0ca5e9 05:02:22 evilmike: yes, dark blue mens it won't become floor, but it can become shallow 05:02:52 ah, right 05:03:01 evilmike: also, mf can cross deep dark water just fine, but it won't try to explore it 05:03:14 evilmike: it's treated is if it were already explored 05:03:21 as if 05:03:44 by deep dark water, you mean the stuff around the level edges, right? 05:03:55 no, that's high sea 05:04:09 i mean blue dark water. Not lightblue 05:04:22 Ok, I see 05:04:54 also, I'm thinking of doing the floor counterpart. Sand that will eventually become water is wet sand. And use yellow/brown for colours 05:05:33 have to go though 05:05:35 'later 05:06:14 -!- Fa has joined ##crawl-dev 05:06:18 03evilmike * r29e154082a8f 10/crawl-ref/source/dat/des/branches/crypt.des: One more Crypt arrival vault. (Grunt) 05:11:31 -!- ToBeFree has joined ##crawl-dev 05:33:30 -!- ainsophyao has joined ##crawl-dev 05:58:09 buggy death messages caused by inner flame (https://crawl.develz.org/mantis/view.php?id=5882) by nagdon 06:08:20 03evilmike * r98e3c13d26ab 10/crawl-ref/source/mon-data.h: Make giant leeches scary. 06:08:20 03evilmike * raf8e1f520734 10/crawl-ref/source/mon-pick.cc: Prune the Swamp monster list. 06:08:20 03evilmike * rf1b74687c390 10/crawl-ref/source/mon-pick.cc: Do not randomly spawn butterflies anywhere. 06:10:30 -!- evilmike has quit [Quit: sleep] 06:12:19 -!- Claws has joined ##crawl-dev 06:12:35 -!- Claws is now known as HangedMan 06:14:19 -!- HangedMan has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 06:14:39 -!- GreatOrbOfEyes has joined ##crawl-dev 06:15:57 -!- GreatOrbOfEyes is now known as HangedMan 06:23:09 -!- ainsophyao has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 06:24:24 -!- mikee_ has quit [Quit: HydraIRC -> http://www.hydrairc.com <- Po-ta-to, boil em, mash em, stick em in a stew.] 06:27:10 -!- edlothiol has joined ##crawl-dev 06:29:07 -!- SkaryMonk has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 06:30:04 -!- SkaryMonk has joined ##crawl-dev 06:30:36 -!- Pingas has joined ##crawl-dev 06:32:38 -!- Thann has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 06:37:28 -!- Thann has joined ##crawl-dev 07:08:24 -!- ainsophyao has joined ##crawl-dev 07:58:57 -!- SevenDeadlySins has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:04:13 robotron1971 (L13 DsAK) ASSERT(smc) in 'mon-util.cc' at line 1403 failed. (Lair:6) 08:20:10 <|amethyst> galehar: re ballistos, see f05ae9da from 2010 08:22:49 heh. The reasoning was "annoying" at the time, not abusable. Times change :) 08:25:15 -!- MarvinPA has joined ##crawl-dev 08:53:53 -!- st_ has joined ##crawl-dev 09:04:18 03|amethyst * rf5771d8f0ff0 10/crawl-ref/source/mon-stuff.cc: Correct death messages from inner flame (#5882) 09:12:06 -!- Grunt has joined ##crawl-dev 09:12:13 -!- cbus has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 09:12:56 -!- cbus has joined ##crawl-dev 09:17:51 -!- Patashu is now known as Patashu[Zzz] 09:19:59 -!- SkaryMonk has left ##crawl-dev 09:37:38 -!- ainsophyao has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:37:42 why does lightning rod's targetting display / blast cover walls? 09:37:58 is it just an inevitable side-effect of the targetting it tries to do 09:57:27 <|amethyst> galehar: #5850 seems to be related to your stash changes 09:58:11 <|amethyst> galehar: it happens when you view an unvisited stack of two items for the second time---the top one is doubled in the stash 09:58:21 indeed 09:58:33 <|amethyst> galehar: because of stash.cc:360 09:58:33 are you implying that I should fix it? 09:58:34 ;) 09:58:46 <|amethyst> not necessarily :) 09:58:58 just spawn another item in that case 09:59:01 what could go wrong 09:59:12 <|amethyst> I though about adding an if (!are_items_same(first, item)) around that line 09:59:54 <|amethyst> but then if a monster drops an item on top of a single item of the same kind, you only see one of them in the stash 09:59:59 the question is, how does it meet the condition at line 332 10:00:12 <|amethyst> items.size() > 1 != item_stack 10:00:21 <|amethyst> the stash had one item, but there is a stack 10:00:37 oh 10:00:43 <|amethyst> the third time through that's false, which is why it doesn't keep growing 10:01:59 -!- Pingas has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 10:02:00 how about adding a boolean to the stash class, to remember if it was a stack? 10:02:30 <|amethyst> hm 10:02:30 and use it instead of items.size() > 1 10:03:00 <|amethyst> wouldn't that still miss things... if you have an unvisited stack with a foo on top, then kill a monster that drops a foo on the stack 10:03:12 <|amethyst> ideally your stash should have two foos in that case 10:03:36 you mean if it happens in LOS? 10:03:44 <|amethyst> oh right 10:03:49 <|amethyst> if it's out of LOS you wouldn't know 10:03:50 because otherwise, you're not supposed to know that it's not the same foo 10:04:52 <|amethyst> I guess adding an if (!are_items_same()) around the last add_item call would work then 10:05:22 <|amethyst> s/last // 10:05:42 also, even if it happens in LOS, sometimes you can't know. Is this jackal dropped a corpse on this stack of jackal corpses when I killed it? 10:06:59 we can give it a try (adding the are_items_same check) 10:07:43 the problem is, this function made a lot of assumption to work properly. Adding the functionality of visiting sacrificiable items had a lot of side effects 10:08:10 I've tried to simplify it a bi 10:08:12 bit 10:08:56 <|amethyst> I saw something wierd-ish with items dropping off the bottom of the stack but apparently that's intentional 10:09:08 <|amethyst> just a few lines above 10:09:22 the swap? 10:09:29 <|amethyst> // If this is unverified, forget last item on stack. This isn't 10:09:30 <|amethyst> // terribly clever, but it prevents the vector swelling forever. 10:09:39 <|amethyst> I noticed it because I *had* verified the lower items 10:09:40 -!- moxian_ has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 10:09:50 <|amethyst> but then a monster dropped something on top 10:10:04 yeah, I'm not sure what's the point of it 10:10:14 it's a bit messed up 10:11:26 <|amethyst> I guess it's because verification is per-stack, not per-item 10:11:36 that's why I'm saying that if adding another workaround creates another side effect we'll have to considering storing item_stack in the stash and simplifying the mess 10:11:58 <|amethyst> I guess that's probably worth doing to begin with 10:12:10 <|amethyst> anyway, it's later than I had thought, so I have to go 10:12:22 alright 10:12:24 <|amethyst> I'll be back in a few hours 10:12:26 <|amethyst> thanks 10:26:45 -!- nonethousand_ has joined ##crawl-dev 10:28:18 -!- nonethousand has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 10:28:25 -!- nonethousand_ is now known as nonethousand 10:30:40 -!- absolutego has quit [Quit: leaving] 10:53:58 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.11-a0-2701-gf5771d8 (33) 10:54:49 -!- Adeon has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 11:03:01 -!- ainsophyao has joined ##crawl-dev 11:09:09 -!- dtsund has joined ##crawl-dev 11:14:01 -!- Dixie has joined ##crawl-dev 11:14:45 <|amethyst> I guess that wasn't "a few" hours 11:14:57 <|amethyst> galehar: I added a summary of our discussion to the bug 11:24:48 -!- ussdefiant_ has joined ##crawl-dev 11:32:24 -!- Ragdoll has joined ##crawl-dev 11:33:47 -!- alefury has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.85 [Iceape 2.0.11/20120421074340]] 11:34:43 -!- monqy has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 11:44:48 thanks 11:44:50 -!- blabber has joined ##crawl-dev 11:45:24 -!- Ragdoll has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 11:46:04 -!- Ragdoll has joined ##crawl-dev 11:49:07 |amethyst: with the workaround you suggested, if a jackal drops a corpse on top of another one, ^x would show a single corpse while you should now that there are now 2. Right? 11:51:09 <|amethyst> yes it would show a single corpse 11:51:32 <|amethyst> what it *should* show depends as you noted on whether you saw it drop 11:51:48 <|amethyst> which the stash tracker doesn't know 11:52:55 <|amethyst> my suggestion and yours would differ in the case where it drops the corpse on top of another single corpse 11:53:35 <|amethyst> if there were a stack with a jackal corpse on top, and a jackal dropped another corpse there, both of our solutions would know about only one jackal corpse 11:54:22 <|amethyst> s/know about/lead to the stash containing/ 11:54:35 <|amethyst> s/a stack/an unvisited stack/ 11:56:36 yeah, I'm talking about the case where a corpse drops on top of another single corpse 11:56:50 in this case, you know it, wether you've seen it drop or not 11:57:22 <|amethyst> hm 11:58:03 <|amethyst> if there's a stash with a single dagger, and a monster drops a corpse there out of LOS, what should be there when you next update the stash? 11:58:13 <|amethyst> both the dagger and the corpse? 11:59:16 yes, why wouldn't it? 11:59:39 you see the corpse, you see something beneath, so you can assume the dagger is still there 12:00:12 -!- Patashu has joined ##crawl-dev 12:01:35 -!- Patashu[Zzz] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 12:04:36 <|amethyst> Yeah, that makes sense... likewise with a corpse on another corpse 12:07:17 <|amethyst> I'm still a little concerned about the case of a corpse dropping on a stack topped with another corpse: I worry that if you've already visited the first corpse, autopickup might not visit the new one 12:08:41 <|amethyst> but actually, I guess verified is already false by then so it's not an issue 12:10:10 doing otherwise would be a (minor) info leak 12:10:48 a stack with a corpse on the top. You kill a monster of the same type over it, you have no way of telling if it has dropped a corpse or not 12:12:36 -!- dtsund has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 12:12:54 <|amethyst> whereas in the case of a single corpse you can tell because it is now a stack but it wasn't before 12:12:59 <|amethyst> that seems kind of weird 12:13:27 <|amethyst> but I guess the stack stuff is weird so 12:14:08 <|amethyst> (weird that you can tell the difference between one yak corpse and two yak corpses; but not if there's a needle underneath) 12:17:15 -!- thann_ has joined ##crawl-dev 12:17:20 yeah, we're aiming for consistency here, not realism 12:17:52 -!- bmh has joined ##crawl-dev 12:18:00 Could we turn up Ash piety gain in Sprint? 12:18:02 because it's impossible to see a dragon corpse if it has a needle on top of it :) 12:18:07 -!- ussdefiant_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 12:18:10 <|amethyst> yeah 12:18:17 <|amethyst> so I think your suggestion makes more sense 12:18:51 bmh: that would make sense. Sprint has a very high density. 12:19:24 galehar: I'm playing zig sprint and I thought "Gee, I'll start out as a bruiser and then use Ash's powers to turn myself into a wizard toward the end" 12:19:28 It is, however, not so :) 12:20:51 well, even with faster piety gain, you won't get anywhere if you convert late 12:21:30 The randomness is also a bit iffy. Sometimes I get centipedes in the first arena, other times I get pan lords 12:32:31 <|amethyst> galehar: testing an implementation of your suggestion 12:32:53 galehar: also -- jivvya is unplayable in sprint. The amount of console spam from mutations is unbearable 12:38:29 bmh: zigsprint is as random as zigs are, it's intentional 12:38:50 I really hated how fixed the other sprints were, that's why I made a sprint like that one 12:38:59 st_: Intentionality doesn't mean that it isn't wrong. It's a waste of the player's time to throw them into an unwinnable situation right off the bat 12:39:12 it's not unwinnable 12:39:26 you only need to move into the teleporter 12:39:59 ok -- now you're tempting me to play this as a spriggan assassin of lugonu 12:40:51 it's also extremely rare, pan has a tiny weight for the first few rooms and pan lords are w:1 for them 12:41:19 st_: Awesome sprint, by the way. It's my favorite so far 12:41:32 and jiyva is messed up yeah, a lot of the gods are 12:42:59 -!- dtsund has joined ##crawl-dev 12:44:23 |amethyst, for the record, I'm taking a stab at implementing 5811 as part of 5840. 12:44:31 ... 12:44:32 s/5811/5881/ 12:44:45 <|amethyst> Grunt: cool, thanks 12:45:31 <|amethyst> Grunt: IWBNI the tracer were a separate commit so it could be added to 0.11 without making LRD a monster spell just yet 12:46:23 Well, the total set of changes to spl-* could be added in without touching the mon-* code, and that would add in the tracer / targetting tweaks without letting monsters cast those spells. 12:46:39 I'll see if I can split that out properly after I'm done <_< 12:47:41 <|amethyst> cool 12:47:49 <|amethyst> I am told that git add --interactive is nice 12:49:39 <|amethyst> galehar: it seems to work... of course old stashes could still exhibit the same problems until they are verified, since we have no way of knowing whether an old single-item stash represented a stack 12:50:28 <|amethyst> I am doing is_stack |= items.size() > 1; on load to deal with old saves 12:50:37 <|amethyst> I didn't introduce a new minor tag, though 12:52:37 -!- dtsund has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 13:06:40 -!- bmh has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 13:06:41 03|amethyst * r1999034cde46 10/crawl-ref/source/ (stash.cc stash.h): Don't double tops of stacks. 13:12:47 <|amethyst> kilobyte: any thoughts on #5880 ? (off-level ctrl-f breakage because of the feature-renaming changes) 13:13:10 doubling stacks? Someone's been reading too much Erfworld again... 13:13:28 no easy way there... the data needs to be stored somehow 13:13:42 <|amethyst> kilobyte: I was thinking to store the feature description in the stash 13:13:43 hmm, actually... there's very few features saved 13:13:59 <|amethyst> hm 13:14:14 so there's no big loss to do so 13:14:15 -!- dtsund has joined ##crawl-dev 13:14:23 <|amethyst> so I guess you could store the description for every interesting feature, even if it's default? 13:14:32 yeah 13:14:42 <|amethyst> I mean, you wouldn't want to store "a floor" in every single stash 13:14:49 I wondered why ctrl-f trove never worked 13:15:12 <|amethyst> apparently ctrl-f wall was the best way to do that search :) 13:15:18 I kept thinking that you need some special syntax I never bothered to look up 13:15:21 yeah :p 13:17:15 <|amethyst> 2303 is the same thing, but with tiles instead of text 13:18:28 <|amethyst> I wouldn't imagine we'd store the tile in the stash, though 13:20:38 -!- Textmode has joined ##crawl-dev 13:24:46 <|amethyst> I've got to go for a while... I might try fixing that later (the description part, not the tile part), unless you wanted to have a go at it. My plan would be to use the current Stash::feature_description() code to set when the stash is updated, and have the new Stash::feature_description just return that string... but no clue yet how to handle old saves 13:25:10 For #2303, I think we should just not bother displaying the feature. It's irrelevant anyway 13:25:26 <|amethyst> galehar: that's what 5756 suggested 13:25:36 <|amethyst> sounds good to me 13:26:17 |amethyst: about handling existing saves with very minor things like stashes, you shouldn't bother too much. It's trunk. We should just try to make sure we don't break saves 13:26:22 non-merfolk don't get told the item is in water anyway 13:26:59 when you changed constriction implementation, you did a lot of code to upgrade existing constrictions. I would have just cleared them :) 13:27:09 <|amethyst> heh 13:27:36 galehar: I'd say breaking saves right now is neutral. 13:28:39 bad: a possible inconvenience for current trunk games (can't get potential bug fixes). Good: lets us drop save shims, and start a new major release with a clear slate. 13:29:42 both issues are minor 13:35:52 * Grunt prods |amethyst. 13:44:25 -!- Textmode has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:44:39 -!- Textmode has joined ##crawl-dev 13:59:16 -!- Adeon has joined ##crawl-dev 14:07:20 <|amethyst> Grunt: I'm here for a few minutes before my meeting 14:07:54 <|amethyst> I see your patch... I'll take a look at it in a few hours 14:08:29 I'd bet there are still a couple of residual quirks with it on account of where it came from, but it works pretty well. :) 14:08:35 <|amethyst> gtg again 14:13:37 -!- Fa has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 14:20:46 -!- dtsund has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 14:25:05 -!- blabber has quit [Quit: Suddely: Offline] 14:36:20 -!- petete has joined ##crawl-dev 14:49:12 -!- Fa has joined ##crawl-dev 14:59:41 -!- alefury has joined ##crawl-dev 15:05:38 -!- Fa has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 15:08:25 -!- Fa has joined ##crawl-dev 15:21:21 -!- dtsund has joined ##crawl-dev 15:29:33 -!- Dixbert has joined ##crawl-dev 15:30:13 -!- thann_ has quit [Quit: Page closed] 15:33:03 -!- Dixie has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 15:33:24 -!- petete has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:34:42 -!- freefall has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 15:34:59 -!- ainsophyao has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:46:09 -!- joosa has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 15:46:17 -!- freefall has joined ##crawl-dev 15:57:28 -!- MakMorn has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 16:05:00 -!- Twinge has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 16:08:19 -!- Dixbert has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 16:09:23 -!- Dixie has joined ##crawl-dev 16:10:29 -!- MakMorn has joined ##crawl-dev 16:11:07 -!- blabber has joined ##crawl-dev 16:14:27 -!- Ragdoll has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 16:19:25 -!- Twinge has joined ##crawl-dev 16:19:29 -!- Thann has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:25:27 -!- Fa has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 16:34:47 -!- Fa has joined ##crawl-dev 16:39:14 -!- Fa has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 16:39:32 -!- blabber has quit [Quit: leaving] 16:40:31 03Grunt * r71fa800bc45c 10/crawl-ref/source/ (spl-cast.cc spl-damage.cc spl-damage.h target.cc target.h): Improve player LRD targetting. 16:40:31 03|amethyst * r3bf09e6abd62 10/crawl-ref/source/target.cc: Fix a crash and LRD bad-targetting messages. 16:41:20 |amethyst: thanks for finding the bugs in that :) 16:41:54 oh cool, someone understands the new targeter code? 16:42:18 I don't know about understand per se, but it's enough for me to do fancy things with. 16:42:28 fancy doing the same thing for ice storm and fireball? :P 16:42:36 or maybe i can figure it out from the commit 16:42:37 Point taken. :) 16:45:48 not sure if there are any other aoes that could use it 16:46:01 -!- blabber has joined ##crawl-dev 16:46:32 <|amethyst> meph etc 16:46:43 ah yeah 16:47:50 Those three are the only three I can think of. 16:47:58 I'll tinker with it in the near future. :) 16:48:08 evap i suppose 16:48:11 <|amethyst> by "etc" I meant evap :) 16:48:13 True. 16:48:14 but evap sucks 16:48:19 and we should remove it :P 16:49:23 <|amethyst> conjure flame 16:49:41 that's just a single square 16:49:45 <|amethyst> yes, but 16:49:57 <|amethyst> it doesn't tell you until you press enter that you can't cast it on a monster's square 16:50:07 ah, true 16:51:59 -!- frogbotherer has joined ##crawl-dev 16:54:54 |amethyst: on it :) 16:57:47 <|amethyst> Grunt: thanks 16:58:32 <|amethyst> hm 16:59:19 <|amethyst> I guess you should get a prompt if you try to LRD an orcish idol 17:01:06 <|amethyst> Grunt: unless others have objections, I'm planning on merging the monster spell implementations soon after the release 17:01:14 * Grunt nods. 17:03:39 -!- dtsund has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 17:06:31 * Grunt pokes |amethyst with a rebase :) 17:08:09 <|amethyst> hm 17:08:15 <|amethyst> what message to prompt with? 17:08:38 <|amethyst> "Really desecrate this orcish idol?" is too reverent if you're not a Beoghite or at least an orc 17:09:07 -!- Wensley has joined ##crawl-dev 17:09:55 <|amethyst> "Really deconstruct this orcish idol?" might not indicate the problem 17:10:08 oh finally the reign of butterflies is over 17:10:10 <|amethyst> "Beogh is likely to be angry! Really deconstruct this orcish idol?" is a little long 17:14:41 <|amethyst> Grunt: erm 17:14:46 |amethyst: "really desecrate the effigy of beogh?" 17:15:32 <|amethyst> Grunt: does your patch really add and subtract conflict markers? 17:16:01 |amethyst: you can merge it trunk now. That will motivate kilobyte into forking the 0.11 branch :) 17:16:07 in trunk 17:16:50 galehar: the less cherry-picking, the better 17:17:26 more testing on the exact version, less conflicts to be solved, and so on 17:17:29 hey, we've been maintaining 2 branches the whole time already! 17:17:48 just stop backporting to 0.10, and do it to 0.11 instead 17:17:54 Grunt: just checked out the lrd stuff and it looks great btw, thanks :) 17:17:59 <|amethyst> heh 17:18:38 "Really insult Beogh by destroying this orcish idol?" 17:18:44 makes it way more accessible considering how many obscure special cases for different explosion sizes there are 17:19:12 <|amethyst> Zannick: I like that, except that you're not guaranteed to destroy it (and he'll be angry either way) 17:19:19 <|amethyst> Zannick: "defacing" maybe? 17:19:29 defacing sounds good 17:28:38 -!- eeviac has joined ##crawl-dev 17:31:33 -!- evilmike has joined ##crawl-dev 17:33:04 <|amethyst> Grunt: also, there will be one more commit that touches the fragmentation code, so you'll need to rebase once again, sorry :( 17:36:09 03|amethyst * r8d4e2da31dd9 10/crawl-ref/source/spl-damage.cc: Warn about LRDing orcish idols. 17:38:36 <|amethyst> kilobyte: are you planning on working on 5880 or should I take a look at that later? 17:40:00 -!- monqy has joined ##crawl-dev 17:42:10 |amethyst: not at the moment 17:42:19 <|amethyst> okay, I'll work on that tonight 17:42:37 <|amethyst> and also 2303 by removing the tile 17:42:42 cool 17:42:54 * Grunt returns. 17:43:02 |amethyst, did it really end up doing that? >:( 17:43:22 <|amethyst> Grunt: I assume, since I see +========= in the patch 17:45:22 ... 17:45:30 I'm going to try this again from scratch. 17:50:12 * Grunt pokes |amethyst with another rebase. 17:50:36 I'm really wondering how those conflict markers ended up in there, but they're gone now. 17:50:55 ...feel free to remove the old rebase to spare me the embarassment <_< 17:51:59 I deleted the old one for you 17:52:17 <|amethyst> thanks 17:52:29 you should ask someone to give you the right to delete files on mantis issues, I don't know who is able to grant that though 17:52:43 <|amethyst> I'm out for the evening... hopefully I can get "ctrl-f altar" and "ctrl-f trove" fixed tonight 17:53:19 do you, or anyone have an idea what's causing unlinked abyssal runes? I've seen a whole bunch of reports of this now (there's on on mantis) 17:53:41 Could it possibly be caused by a bad rune vault? 17:54:20 none of them look wrong to me 17:56:44 if it's an abyss vault though, it's probably hangedman_abyss_rune_treasure_dump 17:56:53 (iirc thats the only new one in 0.11) 17:58:56 I get a list of error messages fairly often on abyss entry, are these automatically reported somewhere or should I be posting them? 17:59:07 well there are unlinked other items issues, so I doubt it's solely the abyss rune 17:59:46 eeviac: in-game error messages aren't automatically reported anywhere 18:01:51 only outright crashes 18:02:13 -!- blabber has quit [Quit: leaving] 18:02:45