Bay 12 Games Forum

Quote from: TheDorf on September 24, 2014, 09:17:54 am

Code: (In my Wizard Creature's raws) [Select]

[CAN_DO_INTERACTION:CONJURE]
[CDI:ADV_NAME:Conjure Bound Dagger]
(CDI:INTERACTION:CONJURE)
[CDI:TARGET:A:SELF_ONLY]
[CDI:MAX_TARGET_NUMBER:A:1]
[CDI:VERB:conjure a bound dagger:conjures a bound dagger:NA]
[CDI:WAIT_PERIOD:86400]

Not sure if this is the problem, but "(CDI:INTERACTION:CONJURE)" is not the same as "[CDI:INTERACTION:CONJURE]".

Yeah, I tried with the [] before, but then I "commented" the line out because I believe the CDI:INTERACTION token is only required in syndromes that allow the interaction. Thanks though
The verb prints out nicely and everything, so I'm pretty sure I've got bad syntax in my onLoad.init, or I've put the onLoad.init in the wrong place or something like that.

Isn't there a dfhack script to give armor syndromes?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure there is, and has been for atleast a few months. I believe the one I saw is outdated though.


I believe you should be able to do it with item-trigger and add-syndrome. Now, I'm just starting to learn how to use DFHack scripts, but I believe you'd pretty much use item-trigger to launch add-syndrome to add or remove syndromes when items of a specific material are equiped or unequiped. I also believe it should be possible to use them to trigger syndromes on attack targets.

I could actually go ahead and take a look at this as soon as I manage to get my DFHack spells to work.

It would be neat if the towers had window-like openings on the highest floor, allowing skilled climbers to climb their way in. Now, I'm not sure if the towers are made out of blocks, but if they aren't, they should be. It would be awesome to have a few options of how to go about getting your hands on secrets.

Personally, I haven't managed to become a necromancer in the 0.40.xx versions. Starting out as a peasant doesn't really help either. :p

Quote from: scamtank on September 24, 2014, 12:55:07 am

Quote from: Pirate Bob on September 23, 2014, 05:39:15 pm

I might be off, but I am pretty sure the number "3" is the number of game ticks between attack steps.  A decimal would be meaningless, as there cannot be fractional game ticks.  If Toady wanted to allow 10 times more ticks between attack steps while keeping the speed of attacks the same relative to other actions, he would have to make all game ticks 10 times slower, which would slow down the game by about a factor of 10.

That's right, the numbers aren't just purely relative to each other. Upping them would slow the fighting down.

But doing it to everything at the same time, cranking up the values carefully a little bit at a time, maybe leaving the upper limit at 15 or so? The pace of the battles would be more like realistic trading of blows rather than two running kitchen mixers jamming their blades together AND you'd make some room for weapons to be different over one another.

That certainly sounds quite reasonable.  I think Toady chose 3 because that kept things about where they were in 34.11, but a moderate decrease in combat speed doesn't seem like it would be bad.  Certainly not in Dwarf mode.  It might be annoying in adventure mode if, say, attacks are slow enough that if you constantly have your opponent move out of the way before you can hit them (this already happens fairly often if something is running away).

That being said, I'm not sure I agree that with 3 and 3 there isn't currently room to fine-tune weapons quite a bit.  By changing each one by 1 independently, you can adjust overall attack speed by increments of 17%, which is already small enough that it's probably barely noticeable.

For example, someone suggested that maces should attack faster because you don't have to aim carefully.  You could decrease the prepare number to 1, leave recover at 3, and maces would get to attack 1.5 times for every 1 time other weapons attack.  I suspect that this would bring their overall power up to the same level as warhammers, with better results against unarmored targets, and worse against armored ones.  Such a weapon would be especially useful for pulping the undead.

The main problem with slowing down attack speeds is that ranged combat would remain unaffected. And - as you said - enemies will move out of range more frequently.

Anyway, if anyone feels like they are up to the task of rebalancing weapons and their speeds in a somewhat realistic, but mostly balanced fashion, I would definitely try the mod out. It's really kind of dull how a 2-hander is as fast as a dagger. I'm not feeling confident enough about weapon modding just yet though, but I'm sure it could quickly get really interesting though. Daggers could be great for turning unarmored targets into pale pincushions, while they would barely be able to scratch armour, while a 2-handed sword could easily cleave most targets in half - unless you get brained while preparing for the attack.

As for maces, I believe Pirate Bob's idea sounds like a good one. Upping the attack speed should allow for quick disposal of undead.

You need spaces before and after all [

Code: [Select]

modtools/interaction-trigger -onAttackStr "are surrounded by a barrage of ice" -command [ wrapper -script [ special/falling -unit \\DEFENDER_ID -item BOULDER -mat STEEL -number 1 -height 15 ] -plan 9x9_O -center false -delay 10 -chain 7 -maxtargets 3 ] *should* work

Thank you, I really appreciate it! Thank you for the awesome scripts - now I'm off to create a few awesome spells



Edit: Ran into some more trouble while trying to create my awesome spells :c I put it all in a spoiler not to steal too much space, but if anyone has time to help, it'd be greatly appreciated. c:

If you have createitem.lua you are using an older version of the scripts.

Silly me :x Downloaded the new version of the scripts now. So any dashes in file names are replaced by slashes?

Does the wrapper.lua script call the others as required? Or was the wrapping made more complex with the new scripts?

Anyway, I've experimented a little bit with the wrapper but can't seem to be able to get it to work. I've put the following in dfhack.init:
modtools/interaction-trigger -onAttackStr "are surrounded by a barrage of ice" -command [wrapper -script@special/falling -args@unit\\DEFENDER_ID;item BOULDER;mat STEEL;number 1; height 15 -plan@9x9_O -center@false -delay@10 -chain@7 -maxtargets@3]
But it says I'm passing invalid arguments. At the moment, DFHack is whining about the first argument, "script@special/falling". :s

...\hack\lua\utils.lua:595: error: invalid arg: 5: script@special/falling

Edit: I've also tried
modtools/interaction-trigger -onAttackStr "are surrounded by a barrage of ice" -command [wrapper -script special/falling -args [-unit \\DEFENDER_ID -item BOULDER -mat STEEL -number 1 -height 15] -plan 9x9_O -center false -delay 10 -chain 7 -maxtargets 3]
Which seems sensible to me after reading a bit in the utils.lua script. This doesn't work either, though, and gives me the same error.

...\hack\lua\utils.lua:595: error: invalid arg: 5: script

Question for those that might be interested in using the "Civilization" scripts.

It is currently possible to add metals to entities (they will show up to trade bars of said metal), but the flags for what metals they can make armor/weapons out of are seperate from just having access to the metal. Presumably this means you could have a civ that only ever trades steel weapons, but can't trade steel bars, or vice-versa.

The question is, should I keep these separate, or should I make it that if you give a civ access to steel, it not only gives them access to the bars, but also weapons and armor made of steel?

What this means functionally is the difference between

Code: [Select]

[LEVEL_ADD:INORGANIC:METAL:STEEL]vs

Code: [Select]

[LEVEL_ADD:INORGANIC:METAL:STEEL]
[LEVEL_ADD:ITEM_METAL:WEAPON:STEEL]
[LEVEL_ADD:ITEM_METAL:ARMOR:STEEL]
[LEVEL_ADD:ITEM_METAL:AMMO:STEEL]
[LEVEL_ADD:ITEM_METAL:PICK:STEEL]
[LEVEL_ADD:ITEM_METAL:RANGED:STEEL]
[LEVEL_ADD:ITEM_METAL:ANVIL:STEEL]
Thoughts?

As for an update, I am thinking by October 1st I will have a working civilization system and preliminary events, if things go really well I will have a preliminary journal system as well.

While I personally haven't used any DFHack scripts in mods yet, I believe having more options is generally better. Now, I'm pretty clueless here, but wouldn't it be possible to make yet another token that essentially works like all of them, but still keeping the possibility to just give them access to parts of it?




On an unrelated note: How would I go about using your scripts in interactions? The ones that are for reactions come with examples, so I think I understand how I would go about using them, but I'm clueless about the createitem script. If anyone could come with an example of an interaction that uses the script, that'd be awesome.

Quote from: KingMurdoc on September 21, 2014, 09:07:28 pm

[ETHIC:EAT_SAPIENT_OTHER:ACCEPTABLE]
[ETHIC:EAT_SAPIENT_KILL:ACCEPTABLE]

It might lead to less wars with elves and more wars with humans.

Elves are already cannibals, they will only eat you if they kill you in battle though. Also Im not sure it works after that. Think there was something about dwarves never butchering intelligent beings or atleast other dwarves despite changing ethics in fort mode, could of course be wrong since it was some time ago that I modded.

Could this have changed with the 40.x releases though? Seeing as adventurers can now eat intelligent beings, I guess this is a possibility that should atleast be tried. Science might have already been done on the topic though, not sure.