[All] auto-destroy unwanted items.... PLEASE
Spec
enough that it warrants more attention.
Simply put, the single most needed feature for any variant (or vanilla)
isn't a new quest system, revised combat, etc etc ... but rather a feature
of convenience.
There should be an option to auto-destroy 'unwanted' items on pickup. This
is similar to Z's auto-destroy worthless items option, except you can have a
user-defined list to determine what is destroyed. This would not affect
play balance ONE BIT since the generation of items is not affected by this
code, and the game is not choosing for you which items to destroy, it is
merely using a filter that the player has created. If you decide at a later
point you need some of those items, remove them from the filter so you can
pick them up again. Things the coders would have to sort out is if you add
a "Short Sword (1d6) {average}" to the list, would it only destroy short
swords pseudo-id'd as average, or any short sword picked up, or short swords
1d6 +0 +0 bought from store, etc etc... but you get the point of the
idea --- if I'm level 40 and cruising in the 2000's depths, and am trying to
clean out a vault after killing all the monsters, I simply do not want to
sort through rings of sustain charisma or potions of cure light wounds and
rations of food.
*band is a great game. IMHO, its biggest current drawback is the
tediousness of sorting through items you know you will never want; as they
come in great quantity. It's really a significant percent of your total
playtime.
So lets hear from the developers (and the current [O] bugfix maintainer, as
I dont think anyone would mind if he did an unofficial development of [O])!
It seems like this feature could be easily added to Z's 'destroy worthless
items' option, and other variants could hack in the Z code. Players, let
your tired destroy item fingers be heard!
And umm, if someone has already announced this is in the works, or knows a
way to do it with the current macro system, please post your reply and
disregard this post ;)
-Brian
Dark Tyger
>ok, this was covered a bit in another thread, but I think the idea is good
>enough that it warrants more attention.
>
>Simply put, the single most needed feature for any variant (or vanilla)
>isn't a new quest system, revised combat, etc etc ... but rather a feature
>of convenience.
[SNIP]
Something that'd probably be easier:
"Pick up a <foo>? (y/n)"
Cange that to "(y/n/k)", k being for kill/destroy.
--
Darkhalf. I use Mindspring. You figure it out.
Angband Code
(http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/harris/angband/code.html):
Z/A+(O) W !H D c-- f- PV+ s- TT- d P+ M+
C S I+ So-- B- ac GHB- SQ RQ++ V F:Random Quests
You laugh because I'm different--I laugh because you're all the same
Otto Martin
>Players, let your tired destroy item fingers be heard!
I'm not that tired about useless stuff...
>And umm, if someone has already announced this is in the works, or knows a
>way to do it with the current macro system, please post your reply and
>disregard this post ;)
I don't think this is what you mean, but I've got one button in all my
pref files of different variants (Finnish keyboard, o with two dots on top
- useful as no *band uses it) macro'ed to crush a single item in
lower-case and a stack (999) in upper-case. Now if only I could create one
to crush multiple different items on one floor tile... =)
(Both existing ones also clear the messages from destroying something from
the top of the window)
BTW, I really love the fact that I can, with a few minutes modifications,
copy my pref files from one variant to another. (I like a more solid
character than # for walls, I've got a yen sign for trees etc)
Otto Martin
--
... "whose ape-descended life forms are so amazingly primitive that they
still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea."
The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, preword, Douglas Adams
Gwidon S. Naskrent
>There should be an option to auto-destroy 'unwanted' items on pickup. This
>is similar to Z's auto-destroy worthless items option, except you can have a
>user-defined list to determine what is destroyed. This would not affect
Yes, it wouldn't. Unfortunately, it would still annoy people who have
to walk among all that junk and stomp lowly items out of existence.
>a "Short Sword (1d6) {average}" to the list, would it only destroy short
>swords pseudo-id'd as average, or any short sword picked up, or short swords
>1d6 +0 +0 bought from store, etc etc... but you get the point of the
You see? It isn't that easy to implement, never mind the interface.
You would have to settle on eliminating unwanted rings, potions,
wands, but not weapons as they may prove strong egos/artifacts.
>*band is a great game. IMHO, its biggest current drawback is the
>tediousness of sorting through items you know you will never want; as they
>come in great quantity. It's really a significant percent of your total
>playtime.
The large amount of items is a consequence of a huge dungeon, combined
with massive monster drops. Live with it or move to NetHack.
>It seems like this feature could be easily added to Z's 'destroy worthless
>items' option, and other variants could hack in the Z code. Players, let
>your tired destroy item fingers be heard!
How would you set it? Best I can imagine is reading a list of k_info
numbers from a .prf file. You'd probably want to keep a few of these
for different game stages, and load them interactively.
>And umm, if someone has already announced this is in the works, or knows a
>way to do it with the current macro system, please post your reply and
>disregard this post ;)
Macros wouldn't work (guess why).
--
Gwidon S. Naskrent (nask...@artemida.amu.edu.pl)
GSNband - http://artemida.amu.edu.pl/~naskrent/index.html
GEU/J d- s+:+ a-- C+++ ULB++>++++ P- E W++ N+++ o? K? w+ O-- M-- V--
PS++ PE- Y PGP->++ t-- 5-- X- R* tv- b+ DI-- D++
Dr. Andrew White
Wait wait wait, you totally missed something here. Follow these
instructions carefully:
1. load the game
2. hit =
3. hit 1
4. look at the third and fouth items on the list. It says something like
"prompt for floor selection,,,"
OK these two things keep you from picking junk up. No one will force you
to crush an unwanted item. Simply don't pick it up in the first place.
Andrew
John I'anson-Holton
> >enough that it warrants more attention.
> >
> >Simply put, the single most needed feature for any variant (or vanilla)
> >isn't a new quest system, revised combat, etc etc ... but rather a feature
> >of convenience.
> [SNIP]
>
> Something that'd probably be easier:
>
> "Pick up a <foo>? (y/n)"
>
> Cange that to "(y/n/k)", k being for kill/destroy.
This should be implemented.
John
Ed Cogburn
>
> ok, this was covered a bit in another thread, but I think the idea is good
> enough that it warrants more attention.
>
> Simply put, the single most needed feature for any variant (or vanilla)
> isn't a new quest system, revised combat, etc etc ... but rather a feature
> of convenience.
>
> is similar to Z's auto-destroy worthless items option, except you can have a
Why does everybody want a manual auto-destroy option? Why not
eliminate the junk so you never see it? Or as Julian Lighton said,
you can think of it as your character "ignoring" what he knows to be
junk.
--
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." - Voltaire
Ed C.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Gwidon S. Naskrent
<jia...@milbank.com> wrote:
>> Something that'd probably be easier:
>>
>> "Pick up a <foo>? (y/n)"
>>
>> Cange that to "(y/n/k)", k being for kill/destroy.
>
>This should be implemented.
I'm confused (since you mailed this to zangdev as well - where should
I reply?)
Anyway, saying 'this should be implemented' doesn't get us anywhere
without also implementing a) a screen interface to view which objects
are banned, b) means to dump this to a file, c) means to load that
info back in the next game.
And like I said, it's hard inventing a system that'd work for weapons
or armour without endangering the possible ego items. Maybe if you are
only hunting for artifacts you don't need other stuff, though.
GSN
Peter Ellis
>
>Anyway, saying 'this should be implemented' doesn't get us anywhere
>without also implementing a) a screen interface to view which objects
>are banned, b) means to dump this to a file, c) means to load that
>info back in the next game.
>
This is true. I think what he meant was that the prompt for picking up
items should become (y/n/k), so you don't have to spend an extra turn
destroying the unwanted item. This would I think be very easy to
implement.
>And like I said, it's hard inventing a system that'd work for weapons
>or armour without endangering the possible ego items. Maybe if you are
>only hunting for artifacts you don't need other stuff, though.
My suggestion was that auto-destroy should work on pseudo-ID-ed items; and
that pseudo-ID shoould be improved such that at higher character levels
they can pseudo-ID on sight.
Thus, the pseudo-ID code would be called immediately before giving the
option to pick up, and anything under a user-defined threshold
auto-junked, with an appropriate message...
You ignore a Sword {average} -more-
Pick up a Tanto {excellent}? (y/n/k)
The options for setting the thresholds could be built into a single
screen, with options for each equipment slot, one for missiles, one for
food. Magic items and rings would probably have to stay as-is, excepting
only the (y/n/k) on pickup, since it's difficult to subdivide these in the
way that pseudo-ID does.
The setting screen would look like:
Object : Threshold for destruction: (a)verage, (g)ood, (e)xcellent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
a) Hand weapon (g)
b) Missile weapon (a)
c) Ammunition (a)
d) Shield (e)
.
.
.
.
.
... etc.
So, if you have Soulsword, and are only looking for artifact weapons, set
the auto-destroy to (e). You're looking for boots of Speed, so set the
"boots" slot to (g), retaining excellent and artifact boots. You want any
ammo above par, so only destroy (a)verage. Food divides nicely into three
categories too..
average = rations
good = waybread, mushrooms of CLW etc.
excellent = good mushrooms
You could try and create similar trinary categories for amulets, rings
etc., (perhaps in a .prf file), but that would be very tricky to
implement.
Since this only operates on identified or pseudo-identified items, it's
not giving any extra information, merely automating the destruction you'd
do *anyway*. Also, low-level characters can't abuse it to sum for stuff,
since their pseudo-ID takes too long and it too limited.
But once ID is no longer a problem (you can afford thousands of scrolls,
of have the spell at 5% fail), then pseudo-ID becomes pointless. It
should be rescued from this obscurity and used to make life easier for the
high-level characters, rather than forcing them to sift shit manually.
Peter
Martin Christensen
Or just dont play with Automatically Pick Items Up (or something like that,
cant remember the exact wording
James W Sager Iii
auto-destroy unwa.. by Ed Cog...@greene.xtn.ne
> eliminate the junk so you never see it? Or as Julian Lighton said,
> you can think of it as your character "ignoring" what he knows to be
> junk.
Manual: You can specify more junk.
Auto ($ wise): You either can't squelch alot of items, or you start
loosing low cost items (potions of speed) when you raise you $ amount
too high.
James W Sager Iii
> >>
> >> "Pick up a <foo>? (y/n)"
> >>
> >> Cange that to "(y/n/k)", k being for kill/destroy.
> >
> >This should be implemented.
>
> I'm confused (since you mailed this to zangdev as well - where should
> I reply?)
>
> without also implementing a) a screen interface to view which objects
> are banned, b) means to dump this to a file, c) means to load that
> info back in the next game.
>
> or armour without endangering the possible ego items. Maybe if you are
> only hunting for artifacts you don't need other stuff, though.
Yes, its useless the system posed.
There should be a view/edit screen of all items you've found.
And the ability to dump the squelch list to a file, and reload.
There is NO reason it should be added into the standard character file.
It could be tagged to a character like macros are, but not part of it.
I could argue 3 good reasons why this is for every one someone else has
of the other way.
I could code this up pretty fast in fact. Prolly would only take me ten
hours... Which if I ever wanted to play *band again, I would do for my
own sake as junk searching for a winner easily wastes over 10 hours.
Maybe as insentive for coding this, they could be added into the game.
John Doe the ultimiest dungeon cleaner. It wanders the dungeon
destroying usesless items, and it just recently tagged you to squelch.
Dark Tyger
S. Naskrent) wrote:
>On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 15:48:30 +0800, John I'anson-Holton
><jia...@milbank.com> wrote:
>
>>> Something that'd probably be easier:
>>>
>>> "Pick up a <foo>? (y/n)"
>>>
>>> Cange that to "(y/n/k)", k being for kill/destroy.
>>
>>This should be implemented.
>
>I'm confused (since you mailed this to zangdev as well - where should
>I reply?)
>
>Anyway, saying 'this should be implemented' doesn't get us anywhere
>without also implementing a) a screen interface to view which objects
>are banned, b) means to dump this to a file, c) means to load that
>info back in the next game.
>
>And like I said, it's hard inventing a system that'd work for weapons
>or armour without endangering the possible ego items. Maybe if you are
>only hunting for artifacts you don't need other stuff, though.
Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
implement than a kill filter
--
Dark Tyger... My Email's still darkhalf. That's at mindspring dot com
Michael Barnes
junk to detect creatures which pick up items.
--
Campaign For The Proper Use Of Swearwords
http://www.litening.dircon.co.uk/iswear.html
Gwidon S. Naskrent
<sag...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
>Yes, its useless the system posed.
>There should be a view/edit screen of all items you've found.
>And the ability to dump the squelch list to a file, and reload.
Sure, now write an implementation of that. What I'm talking about all
the time, anyway?
>There is NO reason it should be added into the standard character file.
>It could be tagged to a character like macros are, but not part of it.
>I could argue 3 good reasons why this is for every one someone else has
>of the other way.
Maybe, it surely eliminates problems with savefile extensions. OTOH,
the player has to reload the settings every time the program starts,
automatically via pref files of course. No way to make it run smooth
(over several characters).
>I could code this up pretty fast in fact. Prolly would only take me ten
>hours... Which if I ever wanted to play *band again, I would do for my
>own sake as junk searching for a winner easily wastes over 10 hours.
We're ready to be impressed.
>Maybe as insentive for coding this, they could be added into the game.
>John Doe the ultimiest dungeon cleaner. It wanders the dungeon
>destroying usesless items, and it just recently tagged you to squelch.
Maybe a new flag KILL_USELESS_ITEM?
GSN
Gwidon S. Naskrent
wrote:
>Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
>"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
>whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
>implement than a kill filter
In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
don't).
GSN
Andreas Fuchs
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2000 21:17:13 GMT, "Spec" <h...@heh.com> wrote:
>> pickup. This is similar to Z's auto-destroy worthless items
>> is destroyed. This would not affect
> Yes, it wouldn't. Unfortunately, it would still annoy people who have
> to walk among all that junk and stomp lowly items out of existence.
That is what the filter would be for. People who don't want it need
not use it.
>> A "Short Sword (1d6) {average}" to the list, would it only destroy
>> short swords pseudo-id'd as average, or any short sword picked up,
>> or short swords 1d6 +0 +0 bought from store, etc etc... but you get
>> the point of the
> You see? It isn't that easy to implement, never mind the interface.
> You would have to settle on eliminating unwanted rings, potions,
> wands, but not weapons as they may prove strong egos/artifacts.
So, why not just make a text filter (or even regexp? please regexp!)?
For example, you specify:
to be killed:
Sword ([4-9]d[5-9]) (+[0-9][0-9], +[0-9][0-9])
Armor [[3-9]?[0-9],+.*]
to be kept (just the reverse of the above, compare grep -v):
^the .*$
although this would be redundant, since artifacts can not be
destroyed, but the autodestroyer would try to auto-kill artifacts in
every round. Maybe leave these rules there implicitly?
>> It seems like this feature could be easily added to Z's 'destroy
>> worthless items' option, and other variants could hack in the Z
>> code. Players, let your tired destroy item fingers be heard!
> How would you set it? Best I can imagine is reading a list of k_info
> numbers from a .prf file. You'd probably want to keep a few of these
> for different game stages, and load them interactively.
Why not save them with the character? It's not only different play
stages that need different items, but different characters,
too. A Z-Monk would auto-destroy heavy armor on sight, but leave light
weapons around.
The text (regexp?) approach would save you a lot of work; no need to
save k_info numbers, etc.; just dump the regexps and that's it.
Although the above characters look unnatural, it can be read out quite
"roleplayishly", with just a little practice.
For example:
I shall not keep any Sword that does more or the same variable Damage
than the Long Sword Ringil; Never destroy artifacts; etc.
(Recommended literature: man 7 regex in any sane Unix or derivate)
My fingers hurt too,
--
Andreas Stefan Fuchs in Real Life aka
a...@ycom.at, a...@acm.org in NNTP and SMTP,
antifuchs@#debian.de, #linux.de and #unix in IRC and
Relf Herbstfresser, Male 1/2 Elf Priest in AD&D
Dark Tyger
Kinda seems silly not to. 90% of the things I walk over I don't want
to pick up. Seems more trouble to have to drop or kill it than to just
not pick it up...
John I'anson-Holton
>
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2000, Gwidon S. Naskrent wrote:
> >
> >without also implementing a) a screen interface to view which objects
> >are banned, b) means to dump this to a file, c) means to load that
> >info back in the next game.
> >
>
> items should become (y/n/k), so you don't have to spend an extra turn
> destroying the unwanted item. This would I think be very easy to
> implement.
Absolutely - easy to implement, useful utility and won't conflict with
any of the other, broader auto-destroy solutions I've seen proposed.
John
John I'anson-Holton
>
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 16:18:02 GMT, goa...@nospam.com (Dark Tyger)
> wrote:
>
> >Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
> >"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
> >whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
> >implement than a kill filter
>
> In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
> don't).
Really? I'm surprised. Most people I know play with auto-pickup and the
prompt. Fot those people, including me, this is a very neat solution to
a recognised problem.
John
Jason Willoughby
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 22:58:58 GMT, nask...@artemida.amu.edu.pl (Gwidon
>>On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 16:18:02 GMT, goa...@nospam.com (Dark Tyger)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
>>>"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
>>>whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
>>>implement than a kill filter
>>
>>In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
>>don't).
> Kinda seems silly not to. 90% of the things I walk over I don't want
> to pick up. Seems more trouble to have to drop or kill it than to just
> not pick it up...
We also turn auto-pickup off entirely. Nothing goes into my backpack
without my hitting 'g' for it.
Is this why people are so keen for junk-busting ability? They're being
swamped by pickup prompts?
Ed Cogburn
>
> Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.roguelike.angband: 12-Feb-100 Re: [All]
> > Why does everybody want a manual auto-destroy option? Why not
> > eliminate the junk so you never see it? Or as Julian Lighton said,
> > you can think of it as your character "ignoring" what he knows to be
> > junk.
>
> Manual: You can specify more junk.
> Auto ($ wise): You either can't squelch alot of items, or you start
> loosing low cost items (potions of speed) when you raise you $ amount
> too high.
I'd use a more precise selection mechanism than based on the item's
value. Select things by category where that works (weapons/armor) and
select by specific sval for the other stuff (magic items).
--
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." - Voltaire
Ed C.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Gwidon S. Naskrent
>So, why not just make a text filter (or even regexp? please regexp!)?
Yeah, regexps. What next, a voice command recognition module?
>For example, you specify:
>to be killed:
>Sword ([4-9]d[5-9]) (+[0-9][0-9], +[0-9][0-9])
>Armor [[3-9]?[0-9],+.*]
>
>to be kept (just the reverse of the above, compare grep -v):
Nifty, but I suppose people less versed in awk/grep/perl would find it
too difficult to use effectively.
>> How would you set it? Best I can imagine is reading a list of k_info
>> numbers from a .prf file. You'd probably want to keep a few of these
>> for different game stages, and load them interactively.
>
>Why not save them with the character? It's not only different play
>stages that need different items, but different characters,
>too. A Z-Monk would auto-destroy heavy armor on sight, but leave light
>weapons around.
I suppose so, but people want it the other way round (killing info
tied to the user, not the character).
>The text (regexp?) approach would save you a lot of work; no need to
>save k_info numbers, etc.; just dump the regexps and that's it.
I don't need no stinkin' k_info numbers because I eliminated them long
ago.
>Although the above characters look unnatural, it can be read out quite
>"roleplayishly", with just a little practice.
Yeah, so write a function that will take a regexp and translate it to
plain English.
GSN
Michael Barnes
John I'anson-Holton <jia...@milbank.com> wrote:
> Gwidon S. Naskrent wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 16:18:02 GMT, goa...@nospam.com (Dark Tyger)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
> > >"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
> > >whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
> > >implement than a kill filter
> >
> > In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
> > don't).
>
> Really? I'm surprised. Most people I know play with auto-pickup and the
> prompt. Fot those people, including me, this is a very neat solution to
> a recognised problem.
When I see something I don't want to pick up I press - and step over it.
Andreas Fuchs
> On 13 Feb 2000 00:33:14 +0100, Andreas Fuchs <a...@acm.org> wrote:
>> So, why not just make a text filter (or even regexp? please regexp!)?
> Yeah, regexps. What next, a voice command recognition module?
There are librx and others. They are free, some are available for other
platforms than unix, too, and they make matching REs a piece of cake.
[REs]
> Nifty, but I suppose people less versed in awk/grep/perl would find
> it too difficult to use effectively.
I could do a small introduction to REs as used in angband, as soon as
it is being implemented. That's still better than hitting ^D, letter
(or k, letter) over and over again (-:
Alternatively, using only a text matcher should not be too much
trouble; it just means more typing is involved for the user.
>> Why not save them with the character? It's not only different play
>> stages that need different items, but different characters,
>> too. A Z-Monk would auto-destroy heavy armor on sight, but leave
>> light weapons around.
> I suppose so, but people want it the other way round (killing info
> tied to the user, not the character).
This _is_ a problem, of course. Opinions seemed to differ in the
thread before this, too. Maybe a poll can help; I dunnae not know what
everybody wants.
>> The text (regexp?) approach would save you a lot of work; no need to
>> save k_info numbers, etc.; just dump the regexps and that's it.
> I don't need no stinkin' k_info numbers because I eliminated them long
> ago.
Ok. In the Posting before that, you proposed them being used. Sorry
for maintaining your point.
>> Although the above characters look unnatural, it can be read out quite
>> "roleplayishly", with just a little practice.
> Yeah, so write a function that will take a regexp and translate it to
> plain English.
No, that was not what I meant.
> Gsn
regards,
--
Andreas Stefan Fuchs in Real Life aka
a...@acm.org, asf...@gmx.at, a...@ycom.at in NNTP and SMTP,
antifuchs in IRCNet and
Dave O'Brien
> swamped by pickup prompts?
Actually I spend much of my mid/late game time detroying objects so my
cached goodies don't get aced by a (Compacting Objects) Msg. Increase
the object aray tolerances by a factor of 10 and include easy_stack from
oang, and I surely don't care for a junk filter, even though I think it
would be more elegant than the present masses of crap and the play
balance people are overstating the danger.
Everyone has ID at a certain point. Even fighters. Who spend a lot of
time on pseudoing everything and carry 100 lbs worth of ID magic, but
they have it.
Anything that reduces the amount of time taken to deal with logistics is
a major advance.
I personally think there should be an option to have DSM's and ammo
combine (destructively) where the +'s don't match, but I just played a
18M exp ranger with too much armor, I may not be rational.... ;)
Dave
Johan Kullstam
> > Is this why people are so keen for junk-busting ability? They're being
> > swamped by pickup prompts?
>
> Actually I spend much of my mid/late game time detroying objects so my
> cached goodies don't get aced by a (Compacting Objects) Msg. Increase
> the object aray tolerances by a factor of 10 and include easy_stack from
> oang, and I surely don't care for a junk filter, even though I think it
> would be more elegant than the present masses of crap and the play
> balance people are overstating the danger.
wouldn't the real solution be a better garbage collection, i.e.,
object compactification? cursed items should go first, then worthless
junk, then plain stuff, and only then, hit magical items.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[kull...@ne.mediaone.net]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
Ed Cogburn
>
> In message <38A61FE9...@milbank.com>
> John I'anson-Holton <jia...@milbank.com> wrote:
>
> > Gwidon S. Naskrent wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 16:18:02 GMT, goa...@nospam.com (Dark Tyger)
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
> > > >"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
> > > >whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
> > > >implement than a kill filter
> > >
> > > In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
> > > don't).
> >
> > Really? I'm surprised. Most people I know play with auto-pickup and the
> > prompt. Fot those people, including me, this is a very neat solution to
> > a recognised problem.
>
> When I see something I don't want to pick up I press - and step over it.
When I see something I don't want, I don't have to press anything,
because I don't use auto-pickup. When I see something I do want I
just press 'g', and its gotten. auto-pickup just doesn't improve
things.
Gwidon S. Naskrent
<kull...@ne.mediaone.net> wrote:
>wouldn't the real solution be a better garbage collection, i.e.,
>object compactification? cursed items should go first, then worthless
>junk, then plain stuff, and only then, hit magical items.
Nope, garbage collection only occurs when there's enough junk on the
board to take ages to search through. And if cursed items were deleted
first, they'd lose their annoying (but not altogether deadly) purpose.
GSN
Gwidon S. Naskrent
>I could do a small introduction to REs as used in angband, as soon as
>it is being implemented. That's still better than hitting ^D, letter
>(or k, letter) over and over again (-:
Fine, now there's only a small problem: what to match the regexps
against? If an item is being created, it's identity is for the most
part still unknown to you (except identified wands, rods etc.) For
weapons of armour, you have to chance of telling beforehand whether
the regexp will match or not (doing it regadless of ID's state would,
of course, be cheating).
>> I don't need no stinkin' k_info numbers because I eliminated them long
>> ago.
>
>Ok. In the Posting before that, you proposed them being used. Sorry
>for maintaining your point.
That was for less advanced variants ;)
>> Yeah, so write a function that will take a regexp and translate it to
>> plain English.
>
>No, that was not what I meant.
Then what? Better yet, translate from plain English to regexpesque. I
bet users will claim they can't do it for themselves.
GSN
Werner Baer
Gwidon S. Naskrent <nask...@friko.onet.pl> wrote in message
news:38a48615...@news.icm.edu.pl...
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2000 21:17:13 GMT, "Spec" <h...@heh.com> wrote:
>
> >There should be an option to auto-destroy 'unwanted' items on pickup.
This
> >is similar to Z's auto-destroy worthless items option, except you can
have a
> >user-defined list to determine what is destroyed. This would not affect
>
> >swords pseudo-id'd as average, or any short sword picked up, or short
swords
> >1d6 +0 +0 bought from store, etc etc... but you get the point of the
You need a very very long list ...
With oanband style combat, an
Executiner Sword (4d10) (-1,-2) {cursed}
may be superior to most artifact weapons.
Werner.
Johan Kullstam
i didn't mean un-id'd cursed items. i meant known cursed items.
surely once you've identified the cursed items they could be placed
first in the reap list?
Michael Barnes
Ed Cogburn <ecog...@greene.xtn.net> wrote:
> Michael Barnes wrote:
> >
> > In message <38A61FE9...@milbank.com>
> > John I'anson-Holton <jia...@milbank.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Gwidon S. Naskrent wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 16:18:02 GMT, goa...@nospam.com (Dark Tyger)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
> > > > >"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
> > > > >whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
> > > > >implement than a kill filter
> > > >
> > > > In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
> > > > don't).
> > >
> > > Really? I'm surprised. Most people I know play with auto-pickup and the
> > > prompt. Fot those people, including me, this is a very neat solution to
> > > a recognised problem.
> >
> > When I see something I don't want to pick up I press - and step over it.
>
>
> When I see something I don't want, I don't have to press anything,
> because I don't use auto-pickup. When I see something I do want I
> just press 'g', and its gotten. auto-pickup just doesn't improve
> things.
Having to press g every time I saw an unidentified potion at early levels
would annoy me to the point that I was distracted and made a yasd of every
new character.
Guess it's each to his own.
Sean Johnston
>Michael Barnes wrote:
>>
>> In message <38A61FE9...@milbank.com>
>> John I'anson-Holton <jia...@milbank.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Gwidon S. Naskrent wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 16:18:02 GMT, goa...@nospam.com (Dark Tyger)
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
>> > > >"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
>> > > >whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
>> > > >implement than a kill filter
>> > >
>> > > In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
>> > > don't).
>> >
>> > Really? I'm surprised. Most people I know play with auto-pickup and the
>> > prompt. Fot those people, including me, this is a very neat solution to
>> > a recognised problem.
>>
>> When I see something I don't want to pick up I press - and step over it.
>
>
> When I see something I don't want, I don't have to press anything,
>because I don't use auto-pickup. When I see something I do want I
>just press 'g', and its gotten. auto-pickup just doesn't improve
>things.
I also don't use auto-pickup. I do however use stacking (I just can't stand
the thought on missing out on something). So I often find myself wading
through a pile of stuff.
Okay, so it might be nice to not have to deal with broken skellys and slime
molds when deap down in the dungeon, but I think I'd probably miss them!
Adding the destroy option to the pick-up prompt seems the best suggestion so
far. The squelching options seem frought with the possibilities of altering
the game-play slightly. Should squelching count as an action (as destroying
does). Should squelching mean only good items get created, or that non-good
items are simply auto-destroyed (i.e. still created but never seen). The
latter seems to be the way to keep current game-play.
And what is 'good'. It seems that with O style combat, even some mundane
weapons can be extremely effective in combat.
I know that Z at least has the list of 'known' items. Possibly expanding this
so that you can flag the things on this list as to whether they should be
squelched or not.
Of course this doesn't help with armour/weapons, and I'm not sure if
pottery/spikes etc. appear in this list.
Anything more intrusive than this is likely to get annoying very quickly. I
might use this feature, but I'm likely to find only getting 3/4 items after
wading through a troll pit a bit of a let down!
Sean.
-- random-sig [v2.3 15-Feb 12:00:01] [3/8 - avian]
Avian malaria does not affect people. [New Scientist]
Sean Johnston, Logica, Bristol, UK
Johan Kullstam
> In message <38A7DA29...@greene.xtn.net>
> Ed Cogburn <ecog...@greene.xtn.net> wrote:
>
> > Michael Barnes wrote:
> > >
> > > In message <38A61FE9...@milbank.com>
> > > John I'anson-Holton <jia...@milbank.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Gwidon S. Naskrent wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 16:18:02 GMT, goa...@nospam.com (Dark Tyger)
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
> > > > > >"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
> > > > > >whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
> > > > > >implement than a kill filter
> > > > >
> > > > > In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
> > > > > don't).
> > > >
> > > > Really? I'm surprised. Most people I know play with auto-pickup and the
> > > > prompt. Fot those people, including me, this is a very neat solution to
> > > > a recognised problem.
> > >
> > > When I see something I don't want to pick up I press - and step over it.
> >
> >
> > When I see something I don't want, I don't have to press anything,
> > because I don't use auto-pickup. When I see something I do want I
> > just press 'g', and its gotten. auto-pickup just doesn't improve
> > things.
>
> Having to press g every time I saw an unidentified potion at early levels
> would annoy me to the point that I was distracted and made a yasd of every
> new character.
>
> Guess it's each to his own.
you know, you can turn autopickup on for the first part of the game
and then turn it off later. it's not a cheat option and has no
influence on your score.
what i want to know is why we would do not use autopickup are punished
by a round for having to use g. it's seldom an issue since i don't do
much gathering during combat (except arrows and bolts), but i think
this should be fixed.
Gwidon S. Naskrent
<kull...@ne.mediaone.net> wrote:
>i didn't mean un-id'd cursed items. i meant known cursed items.
>surely once you've identified the cursed items they could be placed
>first in the reap list?
Well, Z has an option of destroying known cursed items without asking,
so it seems redundant there.
GSN
Ed Cogburn
>
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 10:34:17 +0000, Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> >Michael Barnes wrote:
> >>
> >> In message <38A61FE9...@milbank.com>
> >> John I'anson-Holton <jia...@milbank.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Gwidon S. Naskrent wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 16:18:02 GMT, goa...@nospam.com (Dark Tyger)
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >Actually, I think he was referring to my suggestion. Rather than a
> >> > > >"kill filter" on items, just add "kill" to the options when prompted
> >> > > >whether to pick up any objects. Yes/no/kill. Should be a LOT easier to
> >> > > >implement than a kill filter
> >> > >
> >> > > In a way - for people who bother to turn pickup prompts on (most
> >> > > don't).
> >> >
> >> > Really? I'm surprised. Most people I know play with auto-pickup and the
> >> > prompt. Fot those people, including me, this is a very neat solution to
> >> > a recognised problem.
> >>
> >> When I see something I don't want to pick up I press - and step over it.
> >
> >
> > When I see something I don't want, I don't have to press anything,
> >because I don't use auto-pickup. When I see something I do want I
> >just press 'g', and its gotten. auto-pickup just doesn't improve
> >things.
>
Do you know there are some Angband purists around here who consider
stacking to be cheating?
> the thought on missing out on something). So I often find myself wading
> through a pile of stuff.
Yep, you and everybody else.
>
> Okay, so it might be nice to not have to deal with broken skellys and slime
> molds when deap down in the dungeon, but I think I'd probably miss them!
>
> Adding the destroy option to the pick-up prompt seems the best suggestion so
> far. The squelching options seem frought with the possibilities of altering
> the game-play slightly. Should squelching count as an action (as destroying
> does). Should squelching mean only good items get created, or that non-good
> items are simply auto-destroyed (i.e. still created but never seen). The
> latter seems to be the way to keep current game-play.
The latter, not-good items are auto-suppressed.
>
> And what is 'good'. It seems that with O style combat, even some mundane
> weapons can be extremely effective in combat.
I suppress weapons/armor based on whether they are "mundane", "good",
or great. Mundane is normal, non-magical. Good is items with
plusses. Great is ego items. Once you've got a "good" or "great"
weapon, you aren't likely to revert back to a mundane item, so at this
point you could suppress mundane weapons, or just some types of
weapons you know you'll never use (fighters are always going to use
something better than a dagger for example).
>
> I know that Z at least has the list of 'known' items. Possibly expanding this
> so that you can flag the things on this list as to whether they should be
> squelched or not.
Non-weapons and non-armor are selected individually.
>
> Of course this doesn't help with armour/weapons, and I'm not sure if
This is the difficulty: how to handle weapons/armor that has to be
IDed or pseudo-IDed before you can determine whether its any good or
not.
> pottery/spikes etc. appear in this list.
Pottery is always suppressed, while spikes are selectable.
>
> Anything more intrusive than this is likely to get annoying very quickly. I
> might use this feature, but I'm likely to find only getting 3/4 items after
> wading through a troll pit a bit of a let down!
If 3/4 of the items were junk, you'll end up with the same amount of
good items, you just avoid having to examine all the junk. I'll take
10 good items to getting 40 items, where 30 of them turn out to be
junk.
Johan Kullstam
not like i want it. i want to hit *one* key and wipe out *all*
identified cursed items *on the whole level* (personal inventory
excepted). now *that* would be destroying known cursed items without
asking.
Anthony Wesley
>
> > > > > Really? I'm surprised. Most people I know play with auto-pickup and the
> > > > > prompt. Fot those people, including me, this is a very neat solution to
> > > > > a recognised problem.
> > > >
> > > > When I see something I don't want to pick up I press - and step over it.
> > >
> > >
> > > When I see something I don't want, I don't have to press anything,
> > > because I don't use auto-pickup. When I see something I do want I
> > > just press 'g', and its gotten. auto-pickup just doesn't improve
> > > things.
> >
> > would annoy me to the point that I was distracted and made a yasd of every
> > new character.
I always play with autopickup off, and prompt-for-pickup turned off.
For me personally, it was annoying to have my inventory fill up with
junk, and I just didn't want to have to even think about picking
something up unless I had a chance to see what it was first. I found
that it doesn't add any extra penalty to the game at all.
But then, I also use the rl command set, and my favourite editor is vi,
so maybe I'm fundamentally flawed :-)
Anthony