Stardew Valley: Fixed potential softlock with walnut purchases if Entrance Randomizer locks access to the field office #2261
Conversation
…n order to be allowed to spend significant amounts of walnuts
agilbert1412
changed the title
ThePhar
added
the
is: bug/fix
Yes, I believe stuff like |
|
Berserker expressed a belief that this PR was "waiting for action" on my end, so I figured I'd clarify. The above comments about what is slow or what should be cached are not relevant to this PR. I have made a second PR since, which does cache these rules and many more, to drastically improve performance both on the field office code and on everything else. So as far as I'm concerned, there is nothing more to do for this PR specifically, unless someone reviews and requests more changes. |
|
Well Black Silver also stated that the function shouldn't be moved in this PR |
I disagree with that suggestion, but most importantly, I disagree with the notion that the world dev should not have control over where his functions are placed. So while he can suggest that, I believe I'm allowed to disagree and not do that kind of change. |
|
It really shouldn't be in here as restructuring code should not be part of a bugfix unless the restructuring makes the bugfix easier/nicer. This is after you already said there will be a major update and we are in maintenance phase of the current Stardew Valley world. Anyway, simply "marking as resolved" isn't good enough for me to see that you plan to ignore my suggestion. |
black-sliver
added
the
affects: release/blocker
…rance Randomizer locks access to the field office (ArchipelagoMW#2261) * - Added logic rules for reaching, then completing, the field office in order to be allowed to spend significant amounts of walnuts * - Revert moving a method for some reason
What is this fixing or adding?
There was a missing logic rule when checking for different walnut areas, to verify if the player can obtain enough walnuts for purchases. The system is designed so that it is impossible for a player to make the "wrong" purchases and get stuck. But since the Field office contains 20 potential walnuts, and wasn't being checked, it was possible for a bad entrance randomizer roll to create a scenario where a player could misspend their walnuts and get softlocked
How was this tested?
Ran existing tests, but did not add any new one for this rule, as I am not sure how to simulate a specific entrance randomizer roll under the current system. After ProfByte's rework of the entrance randomizer, I'll be adding tests for cases like this