Fort Ludios
Douglas Mendum
was wondering if there is anything in there that could pose a problem to
my Valk with an AC of -25 and the +0 Mjollnir?
--
Douglas Mendum
Boudewijn Waijers
Apart form the fact that there are a *lot* of soldiers there, one of whom
may accidentally have been created with a wand of death, not really. This
can happen everyuwhere, of course, but with that many creatures, the
chance is proportional bigger. And watch out if there's a black dragon
around, even if it will normally stay in the vicinity of the moat.
Anyone know why the dragons tend to stay near the moat? Is it because of
what's inside the towers?
--
Boudewijn Waijers (kroisos at home.nl).
"Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others."
Dylan O'Donnell
[Fort Ludios]
> Anyone know why the dragons tend to stay near the moat? Is it because of
> what's inside the towers?
Yes.
--
: Dylan O'Donnell http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/ :
: "Merely corroborative detail, intended to give artistic :
: verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative" :
: -- W.S. Gilbert, "The Mikado" :
Boudewijn Waijers
> "Boudewijn Waijers" <kro...@REMOVETHIS.home.nl> writes:
> [Fort Ludios]
>> Anyone know why the dragons tend to stay near the moat? Is it because
>> of what's inside the towers?
> Yes.
I suspected that, but I think it's a misfeature. Dragons shouldn't be able
to detect gems through walls.
I can understand why rock moles can "smell" gold through earth, since it's
their natural habitat, but for dragons, it's not logical.
It's like those pets that can smell a tripe rations through shop walls,
while they cannot detect it when it's in your sack.
Happy hacking!
Dylan O'Donnell
> Dylan O'Donnell, cunningly disguised as psmit...@spod-central.org wrote:
> > "Boudewijn Waijers" <kro...@REMOVETHIS.home.nl> writes:
>
> > [Fort Ludios]
>
> >> Anyone know why the dragons tend to stay near the moat? Is it because
> >> of what's inside the towers?
>
> > Yes.
>
> I suspected that, but I think it's a misfeature. Dragons shouldn't be able
> to detect gems through walls.
The DevTeam agrees with you (it's one of those round tuit misfeatures
that Topi Linkala doesn't believe exist); the code that already
handles this for pets, can_reach_location(), has the comment "/* a
full check would probably be useful in m_move() too. */" (ie, for
general monster movement rather than just pets).
Topi Linkala
> "Boudewijn Waijers" <kro...@REMOVETHIS.home.nl> writes:
>
>>Dylan O'Donnell, cunningly disguised as psmit...@spod-central.org wrote:
>>
>>>"Boudewijn Waijers" <kro...@REMOVETHIS.home.nl> writes:
>>
>>>[Fort Ludios]
>>
>>>>Anyone know why the dragons tend to stay near the moat? Is it because
>>>>of what's inside the towers?
>>
>>>Yes.
>>
>>I suspected that, but I think it's a misfeature. Dragons shouldn't be able
>>to detect gems through walls.
>
> The DevTeam agrees with you (it's one of those round tuit misfeatures
> that Topi Linkala doesn't believe exist); the code that already
> handles this for pets, can_reach_location(), has the comment "/* a
> full check would probably be useful in m_move() too. */" (ie, for
> general monster movement rather than just pets).
I only did what Dylan asked me to do. Grep for BUG, TODO and FIXME.
The whole comment in dogmove.c is this (reformatted for shorter line
lenght):
/* Hack to prevent a dog from being endlessly stuck near an object that
* it can't reach, such as caught in a teleport scroll niche. It
* recursively checks to see if the squares in between are good. The
* checking could be a little smarter; a full check would probably be
* useful in m_move() too. Since the maximum food distance is 5, this
* should never be more than 5 calls deep.
*/
No TODO nor FIXME.
In monmove.c in function m_move() there is a comment:
/* Actually, this whole section of code doesn't work as you'd expect.
* Most attacks are handled in dochug(). It calls distfleeck(), which
* among other things sets nearby if the monster is near you--and if
* nearby is set, we never call m_move unless it is a special case
* (confused, stun, etc.) The effect is that this ALLOW_U (and
* mfndpos) has no effect for normal attacks, though it lets a confused
* monster attack you by accident.
*/
No TODO nor FIXME here either. Nor is there any TODO, FIXME or BUG
comment in that function elsewhere either.
When Dylan told me to check for those three keywords I had asked about
list of misfeatures. Nobody told me that there is a misfeature in
movement of dragons. I have not made any comment on misfeatures that
haven't been labeled with those three keywords in the source code.
I state that I don't have time to check through the whole source code
for misfeatures. I will gladly tackle them if they are pointed out to
me. Of those that devteam have pointed out I've made my comments. If you
want more comprehensive comments I can do that.
And if you want I might look how to code the proper dragon movement in
m_move().
Topi
--
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are
always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
- Bertrand Russell
"How come he didn't put 'I think' at the end of it?" - Anonymous
Seraphim
> Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
>
>> "Boudewijn Waijers" <kro...@REMOVETHIS.home.nl> writes:
>>
>>>Dylan O'Donnell, cunningly disguised as psmit...@spod-central.org
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Boudewijn Waijers" <kro...@REMOVETHIS.home.nl> writes:
>>>
>>>>[Fort Ludios]
>>>
>>>>>Anyone know why the dragons tend to stay near the moat? Is it
>>>>>because of what's inside the towers?
>>>
>>>>Yes.
>>>
>>>I suspected that, but I think it's a misfeature. Dragons shouldn't be
>>>able to detect gems through walls.
>>
>> The DevTeam agrees with you (it's one of those round tuit misfeatures
>> that Topi Linkala doesn't believe exist); the code that already
>> handles this for pets, can_reach_location(), has the comment "/* a
>> full check would probably be useful in m_move() too. */" (ie, for
>> general monster movement rather than just pets).
>
> I only did what Dylan asked me to do. Grep for BUG, TODO and FIXME.
Actually, if you go and check his comment you'll note he said "For
a start, grep the source..." he never gave any sort of indication that
following his advice would give any sort of comprehensive list of
misfeatures in the game.
Topi Linkala
Yes, but if you read my response to Dylan's post it says that amongst
those marked as BUG, TODO and FIXME I only found...
I have not commented on any other part of the source code where the
devteam might have made comments than those that were clearly marked
with BUG, TODO or FIXME.
So saying that I don't belive that others exist is a blatant lie. Of
course I believe that they exist but I don't know. So why can't you tell
me when you find other misfeatures so that I may compile a comprehensive
list of them, instead of accusing me of something that I have not done.
Dylan O'Donnell
[unfixed misfeatures in the NetHack code]
> I have not commented on any other part of the source code where the
> devteam might have made comments than those that were clearly marked
> with BUG, TODO or FIXME.
>
> So saying that I don't belive that others exist is a blatant lie. Of
> course I believe that they exist but I don't know.
This is an apparent change of attitude from your comments in the other
thread, where you seemed to be stating that the persistence of a game
feature from release to release was proof that the DevTeam intended it
to work that way. "If there is a misfeature in the game it is always
possible to eliminate it."
> So why can't you
> tell me when you find other misfeatures so that I may compile a
> comprehensive list of them, instead of accusing me of something that I
> have not done.
I don't know about anyone else, but the way I find them is no
different from the way anyone else might find them: happening to
notice the comment when browsing through that bit of code for whatever
purpose. Systematically hunting through a couple of hundred kloc for
such cases to compile a list isn't a project that I have any immediate
intention to undertake; you're very welcome to take on the task.
--
: Dylan O'Donnell http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/ :
: N - Bethnal Green E - Swiss Cottage :
: S - Caledonian Road W - Knightsbridge :
: [East to play, Mornington Crescent in 3] :
Topi Linkala
> I don't know about anyone else, but the way I find them is no
> different from the way anyone else might find them: happening to
> notice the comment when browsing through that bit of code for whatever
> purpose. Systematically hunting through a couple of hundred kloc for
> such cases to compile a list isn't a project that I have any immediate
> intention to undertake; you're very welcome to take on the task.
Neither have I. That's why I'm asking to tell me if you find something.
If everybody would report me when they find something, I could double
check and incorporate into my list that I'm working on.
The list is based on what I found by scanning those keywords. I've
already added the comment on monster moves.
But others?
And then there are the ones that are not even mentioned in the sources.
How should we tackle them? Get a vote on how many actually think that
it's a misfeature? Ask from the devteam?
Richard Bos
> Douglas Mendum, cunningly disguised as Dou...@k-mendum.demon.co.uk wrote:
>
> > For the first time I found a vault with the portal to Fort Ludios. I
> > was wondering if there is anything in there that could pose a problem to
> > my Valk with an AC of -25 and the +0 Mjollnir?
>
> Apart form the fact that there are a *lot* of soldiers there, one of whom
> may accidentally have been created with a wand of death, not really.
Well... one of them could also have been created with a wand of
lightning, destroying your rings and wands. This happened to me once.
I've never ventured into Ludios without reflection since.
I think if you've got reflection, there shouldn't be any problem at all.
Richard
Dylan O'Donnell
> And then there are the ones that are not even mentioned in the
> sources. How should we tackle them? Get a vote on how many actually
> think that it's a misfeature? Ask from the devteam?
Mail the DevTeam and say "this doesn't work the way I think it
should". They may disagree or agree with you; in the latter case, they
may or may not think it worthwhile to do anything about it; in the
latter case of _that_, they may or may not incorporate a patch should
you submit one to them.