General Development

[simplex]

What about making hostile entities non-packagable? I'd prefer the staff to be used to help avoid threat long-term, not short-term. I also feel that the varied health damage on certain things might confuse the player if they don't understand what's going on, and that they may fear using the staff. We at least want the players to use everything we create, and I'd worry that this may confuse them enough to put them off using it.

 

I agree with that. There's something amusing about packing harmless mobs like rabbits, but moving hostile (or potentially hostile) mobs feels strange.

 

This mods still alive?

 

Wow.

Yes. It germinated from its grave and is now reaching for the sky.

Edit: Has anybody else the problem that if you follow a topic you actually don't get an info for being quoted in that thread anymore?

Yeah, I have that. I don't have an issue with it though, and in fact prefer it, since then notifications are not doubled. Mentions still pop up independently, though.

[debugman18]

What about making hostile entities non-packagable? I'd prefer the staff to be used to help avoid threat long-term, not short-term. I also feel that the varied health damage on certain things might confuse the player if they don't understand what's going on, and that they may fear using the staff. We at least want the players to use everything we create, and I'd worry that this may confuse them enough to put them off using it. 

 

I agree with those points.

 

 

 

I agree with that. There's something amusing about packing harmless mobs like rabbits, but moving hostile (or potentially hostile) mobs feels strange.

 

 

How will we address potentially hostile mobs like pigmen and bees? Do we simply exclude things that have a hostile tag? That wouldn't nearly cover all our bases, though. For instance, Tallbirds don't have the hostile tag, but they're certainly hostile. Or we could make an actual blacklist, and check it before packaging something.

 

Also, unnamed objects show up as "Packaged MISSING NAME" again.

 

This mods still alive?

 

Wow.

 

 

Edited April 1, 2014 by debugman18

[ArcticFox789]

How will we address potentially hostile mobs like pigmen and bees? Do we simply exclude things that have a hostile tag? That wouldn't nearly cover all our bases, though. For instance, Tallbirds don't have the hostile tag, but they're certainly hostile. Or we could make an actual blacklist, and check it before packaging something.

 

On that particular example, I would say Bees but not Pigmen, for pretty obvious reasons.

 

Probably for the 'neutral' category of mob, we're actually gonna have to choose, rather than letting the game code decide for us.

[simplex]

How will we address potentially hostile mobs like pigmen and bees? Do we simply exclude things that have a hostile tag? That wouldn't nearly cover all our bases, though. For instance, Tallbirds don't have the hostile tag, but they're certainly hostile. Or we could make an actual blacklist, and check it before packaging something.

I'd rather exclude everything with a combat component.

Also, unnamed objects show up as "Packaged MISSING NAME" again.

Isn't that what's supposed to be shown? If an item has no name, being referred to in game as "MISSING NAME", i find "Packaged MISSING NAME" to be quite appropriate. What did you have in mind for this case?

[debugman18]

I'd rather exclude everything with a combat component.

Isn't that what's supposed to be shown? If an item has no name, being referred to in game as "MISSING NAME", i find "Packaged MISSING NAME" to be quite appropriate. What did you have in mind for this case?

Excluding the combat component works, I think.

 

As for Packaged MISSING NAME, I think it's kind of odd to see. For instance, I packaged a pillar from the caves, and it has no name string, so it shows as that. I was thinking Mysterious Package or something similar. Or we could exclude nameless objects, but I don't see the harm in having them.

[simplex]

As for Packaged MISSING NAME, I think it's kind of odd to see. For instance, I packaged a pillar from the caves, and it has no name string, so it shows as that. I was thinking Mysterious Package or something similar. Or we could exclude nameless objects, but I don't see the harm in having them.

I think "Mysterious Package" makes it sound way too cool for a mere placeholder name used for items which were not deemed important enough to receive a name.

Maybe "Nameless Package", or something like that?

[debugman18]

I think "Mysterious Package" makes it sound way too cool for a mere placeholder name used for items which were not deemed important enough to receive a name.

Maybe "Nameless Package", or something like that?

Nameless Package or Unknown Package works.

[simplex]

Nameless Package or Unknown Package works.

Done, I went with Unknown Package.

[simplex]

Good news.

Worldgen screen fixed.

The issue was that the generating_cave bank was changed and was no longer compatible with our build. So I renamed the bank we were previously using to generating_cloud, and now we're using that.

I'm also thinking this is one of the screenshots we could use to showcase the mod. Here's the 1080p version.

On a somewhat related note, now worldgen for the cloud realm is taking a long time. The reason is that we are requiring at least one Moose to be present in the map for it to be accepted, but often the map is being generated without any geese. So worldgen rejects the map, and keep generating new maps one after another until a Moose is placed somewhere. We need to force the presence of a room with geese, or at least make it very common.

[debugman18]

Good news.

Worldgen screen fixed.

The issue was that the generating_cave bank was changed and was no longer compatible with our build. So I renamed the bank we were previously using to generating_cloud, and now we're using that.

I'm also thinking this is one of the screenshots we could use to showcase the mod. Here's the 1080p version.

On a somewhat related note, now worldgen for the cloud realm is taking a long time. The reason is that we are requiring at least one Moose to be present in the map for it to be accepted, but often the map is being generated without any geese. So worldgen rejects the map, and keep generating new maps one after another until a Moose is placed somewhere. We need to force the presence of a room with geese, or at least make it very common.

 

That's easy to fix. You can specify in a room how many of a particular prefab you want, rather than just a percent. I nerfed the black and white crystal spawns this way.

 

[simplex]

That's easy to fix. You can specify in a room how many of a particular prefab you want, rather than just a percent. I nerfed the black and white crystal spawns this way.

Sure, but we need to ensure whatever this room is will be used. (for most rooms, it's best to keep a percentage)

[debugman18]

Sure, but we need to ensure whatever this room is will be used. (for most rooms, it's best to keep a percentage)

Well, currently all of the rooms are used.

 

Oh, I fixed the beanstalk sapling issue. It doesn't use lock/key anymore, rather it's a trade.

 

For the whirlwind animation, by the way, we could probably recycle the Gosling spin animation.

[simplex]

For the whirlwind animation, by the way, we could probably recycle the Gosling spin animation.

The what?

[debugman18]

The what?

 

Oh, Mosslings, sorry. The baby geese monsters. I made a separate build of their spin animations, so the whirlwinds have a nice anim now.

 

Edit: Oh, and I tweaked beanlet and gnome animations. They still occasionally disappear (they shouldn't, because those animations exist) but they don't flash anymore.

Edited April 2, 2014 by debugman18

[Minik435]

Can I have newest version, if it's possible? I'm few bored in the old version. BTW it works with RoG.

[MilleniumCount]

Can I have newest version, if it's possible? I'm few bored in the old version. BTW it works with RoG.

This should be actual all the time http://forums.kleientertainment.com/topic/27745-testing-when-in-doubt-use-brute-force/?p=321128

 

or here

 

http://forums.kleientertainment.com/topic/27745-testing-when-in-doubt-use-brute-force/?p=446614

Edited April 7, 2014 by MilleniumCount

[simplex]

Can I have newest version, if it's possible? I'm few bored in the old version. BTW it works with RoG.

debugman posted the latest version here.

[Minik435]

Thanks. It's really good mod and I'm excited of that.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Minik435

[ArcticFox789]

In an effort to tidy up our subforum a bit, I've unpinned the Recaps thread and the mod Contents thread, as neither currently serve much of a purpose. If new people are gonna be enticed by this new post thing, then we probably want to just have the original thread and the FAQ's for example to be pinned.

[simplex]

I excluded what we had discussed from the viable entities for packing. The "bad list" we had come up with before was marked as globally nonpackable.

TheMod:AddPrefabPostInit({	"walrus_camp",	"pigking",	"shopkeeper",	"cave_entrance",	"cave_exit",	"beanstalk",	"beanstalk_sapling",	"beanstalk_exit",	"adventure_portal",	"wormhole",	"wormhole_limited_1",	"houndmound",}, function(inst)	inst:AddTag("nonpackable")end)

(things with the "teleportato" or "irreplaceable" tags are already excluded by the internal logic of the Packer component, so things like teleportato pieces, the wooden thing and the eyebone are also nonpackable)

Entities with a combat component and larger than 0 damage were marked as nonpackable (so spiderdens are still packable, even though they have a combat component) as a white staff specific logic (so some other hypothetical means of packing could still in principle pack them). Birch guards are currently packable, since they don't have a combat component. We could make them an explicit exclusion, but I'm not sure that's necessary.

EDIT: Also excluded the ancient altar. And I meant to say I am not sure it's necessary to explicitly exclude birch guards .

Edited April 7, 2014 by simplex

[simplex]

@MycoLogical

Mushroom hat implemented.

(now that characters are all HD hats look a bit fuzzy when zoomed in )

With respect to the art, I think the hat is a bit too low, but otherwise very fitting.

The current effect of the hat is to randomly switch between 6 states:

HEALTH_INCREASE: health increases at 1 point per second

HEALTH_DECREASE: health decreases at -0.8 points per second

HUNGER_INCREASE: hunger increases at 1 point per second

HUNGER_DECREASE: hunger decreases at -0.8 points per second

SANITY_INCREASE: sanity increases at 0.5 points per second

SANITY_DECREASE: sanity decreases at -1.5 points per second

On average, the hat will remain on the same state for 20 seconds (though that's random, this is just the average). The current state is preserved even if you take off the hat, put it in a chest, etc. (and, of course, if you reload the game).

The above values very likely need some tuning. The way they are, the hat is on average beneficial to health and hunger, and harmful to sanity.

[ArcticFox789]

@MycoLogical

Mushroom hat implemented.

 

[Picture that looks like a 10-year just discovered Photoshop]

(now that characters are all HD hats look a bit fuzzy when zoomed in )

With respect to the art, I think the hat is a bit too low, but otherwise very fitting.

The current effect of the hat is to randomly switch between 6 states:

HEALTH_INCREASE: health increases at 1 point per second

HEALTH_DECREASE: health decreases at -0.8 points per second

HUNGER_INCREASE: hunger increases at 1 point per second

HUNGER_DECREASE: hunger decreases at -0.8 points per second

SANITY_INCREASE: sanity increases at 0.5 points per second

SANITY_DECREASE: sanity decreases at -1.5 points per second

On average, the hat will remain on the same state for 20 seconds (though that's random, this is just the average). The current state is preserved even if you take off the hat, put it in a chest, etc. (and, of course, if you reload the game).

The above values very likely need some tuning. The way they are, the hat is on average beneficial to health and hunger, and harmful to sanity.

 

I like that. Sanity is by far the most easily manageable in the Cloud Realm (Skyflowers and all), so I think it works well to harm Sanity, but to balance it out with Health and Hunger.

Edited April 8, 2014 by ArcticFox789

[simplex]

@MycoLogical

@debugman18

(and others)

Back then there was also the idea of making it release "pheromones" making hostile mobs passive for a short time (except for "epic" mobs like giants and spider queens). This can be implemented, I just fear it may be a little OP.

Another idea is to make positive effects more common when the hat is fresh, and negative ones more common when it's stale/spoiled.

[ArcticFox789]

@MycoLogical

@debugman18

(and others)

Back then there was also the idea of making it release "pheromones" making hostile mobs passive for a short time (except for "epic" mobs like giants and spider queens). This can be implemented, I just fear it may be a little OP.

Another idea is to make positive effects more common when the hat is fresh, and negative ones more common when it's stale/spoiled.

 

Not sure about the first. (Sounds very OP), but VERY much in favour of the second one.

[debugman18]

Not sure about the first. (Sounds very OP), but VERY much in favour of the second one.

Seconded. As it is used more and more, negative effects should be increased.