Increase crafting distance to 6. #5279
Conversation
|
Increased distance is nice, but will this enable player character to craft with components from the other room when locked in? Are there any mechanic in place to prevent this exploit? |
|
This is addressed by #4904. Increasing the size to an arbritrary number does not simulate shelf/rack functionality or provide a reason for the players to make them. |
|
@infectedmochi: yes |
|
I'm in favor of this, but I'm also still in favor of #4904. |
|
6 is a little too much, don't you think?Does the character have extremely stretchy arms? I'm perfectly fine with 2. |
|
@tyrael93 It had a bug that broke a lot of crafting in it, so it had to be pulled. Once it was fixed no one pulled it back in. |
Stretchy arms? Is it really asking too much to assume that the hero's feet aren't nailed to the floor while crafting? Like, in the time that they spent crafting perhaps they were bright enough to move around a little and pick up the necessary materials? |
|
Crafting distance 6, just because we can? NO. Pull #4904 in and we'll have the same thing but in a more intuitive and logical way. |
|
The only reason #4904 is still open is in case someone proposes a change to it that addresses the problems I have with it. As it is it's not going in, I've been extremely clear about this at every step of the process. |
|
You're the only one with a problem. Are you going to stop everything that the community wants if it doesn't fit your view? That sort of defeats the community aspect of it all. |
|
This is very much a community project, but the final decision is mine, not vote or consensus or what have you. It's my decision because I'm doing a huge amount of work, anyone who feels like stepping up and taking on that workload is free to make a fork. |
|
Then why didn't you do this the first time the request was up, before it was pulled. Before the author of the request fixed the bug that was with it then and resubmitted it? Why didn't you just plainly say no and instead drag things out into over a month of debate? |
|
Oi, cut the hostile tone. I said it wasn't ok on IRC before there was an implementation at all, I reiterated it in the PR at #4904 (comment), again at #4904 (comment). It's not my fault if people state that they disagree with my rationale and then ignore it. No new argument has come up, so I'm not going to keep arguing the same point repeatedly. As for the first PR, AD merged it before I had a chance to comment on it, and then I had to revert it. |
|
While I'm in favor of #4904 getting merged, I just want to say that I'm perfectly fine if we work together and find a middle-ground, rather than bickering among ourselves and not getting anything done. Constructive debate is good, but there a fine line between a constructive and a meaningless one. |
|
So is Cataclysm Kevin Granade's game, or a community effort? Because I was hoping to Gryph would have gotten a chance to give feedback on #4904, however it was closed it before he could do so. Thus far, the only issue with #4904 was that one dev would/could not accept how it made sense, and did not care that everyone who bothered to comment wanted that feature. This PR only addresses one of the reasons why #4904 was a dammed good contribution. |
|
My tone is not hostile. As much as text can have a tone anyways. What I said was if this is your game, and you didn't want input, you should have been more clear about it, instead of waiting for months to do this. I was under the impression that this was not the case, and I wish I knew it in the past. |
|
I find it kind of weird that one person is rail-roading the project. I thought this was a community project? I'm kind of pissed because I donated for Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead, not Kevin Granade's Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead. "It's a community project, except only I get to say what goes in." is a bit disingenuous. That makes it not a community project, it makes it a project where other people do work for you. |
|
Kev, you're really digging your grave here. There's only one thing you can do to save your face, revert this and enable #4904 . Everyone loves that, nobody loves this except for you. also: kevingranade commented a day ago
|
|
Guys chill out. I agree that it should be merged but y'all should be nicer to Kevin if it wasnt for him and the other core devs we wouldn't have DDA. I say Kevin's opinion matters a great deal however if many people want it in the game and people dont seem to have a problem with it then why veto it. If we add it and people like it thats good but if people dont like it then we can simply remove it from the game. Also Killer-of-lawyers your not helping very much your just adding fuel to a fire your comments arent even really about the damn thing you want merged. |
|
I suppose my tones were a little harsh too, but my point still stands. As I said in #4904 too, you can either let this slide, or if you think it's worth it make a poll for all the devs working on the project. Yes or no to merging this. This is the simplest and most reasonable solution, in my humble opinion. |
|
I'm not adding fuel to any fire unless people are wanting to be fired up. I'm just trying to confirm if this is Kevin's show or not, and that's a valid thing to ask. |
|
Just a heads-up, Kevin's starting his new job in Seattle so will likely be busy for a few days. He said as much on the IRC last night. Kevin's the lead merger; along with GlyphGryph (the repo owner, forum admin, and Kickstarter head) he's first among equals so far as I know. (Asking to poll the devs is tricky. Define dev: Anyone with something merged? Anyone with X items merged, or X items over Y time? Anyone with merge authority? Anyone with Contributor or Admin status on the forums?) |
I think anyone with merge authority should have a vote, but not be forced to vote, he/she just has the possibility to do so. Just open a new issue called "Voting poll for #4904 and #5279 ". |
|
I thought my previous posts were sufficiently clear, but I guess not. _I've had to make a hard call literally a handful of times, vs over 10,000 |
|
There's been no substantive discussion on this for a month because a consensus has already been reached a month ago, albeit one that does not include you. Consensus means general agreement, not unanimous agreement. Quite simply, literally everyone who has bothered to comment thinks that #4904 is a good commit and should be merged, except for you. There was quite a bit of discussion about how it encouraged base-building, helped with immersion, and gave furniture like counters or lockers a purpose other than flavour. We're not trying to impose some sort of committee on you, but leaders do need to listen to what their people say. |
|
You aren't trying to tell me what to do, but I should do what you say, if |
|
Are you serious? This is Github, Kevin, not Rapture. There's a difference between orders and friendly advice. |
|
You've got to be fucking kidding me, granade. Your pathetic scream for your so called "freedom" which chains and binds everyone else to your will if they ever disagree with you, is nothing but a disgusting and twisted dictatorship, made by a man who is no more worthy than anyone else to direct a project like cataclysm. We're nothing. You're nothing. And this is just a videogame. Go get some goddamn fresh air, get a cool drink and stop bitching. |
|
And... this is getting ridiculous. People, would you please stop spamming github with images? I came here to see meaningful discussion and all I see was flamming. |
|
Guys come on this is getting silly. All this over one PR. |
|
I know this is no longer the pull request discussion, but quick look in the code shows several potential issues caused by the use of PICKUP_RANGE in places other than just form_from_map calls:
There are probably other similar issues as well, the above were all I could think of after looking in the code for 10 minutes. In general it seems the whole "inventory from map" thing is more or less broken, but this is not very noticeable with the current PICKUP_RANGE of 2. I'm pretty sure that setting it to 6 will cause a bunch of issues. |
|
@v-ti and THAT is good information to have. Thanks. |
|
The only issue with open source is in the end of the day you'll still be a slave as long as you contribute. Your work will be merged and used, and what you don't like will still be in the fork. The only way to not be a slave would be to quit. The only leader, if anyone, should be Glyph, since he's proven he won't babble about slavery and nonsense to protect his ego. I'm not even going to touch how terrible it is for a white male to be babbling about being a slave in this day and age. |
|
While I agree with both sides, I think there should be an agreement between the "community" and the "developers". Both solutions are equally flawed. Kevin's solution is just a quick hack to "solve this issue" and focus on other goals, but it's too lazy and wouldn't feel good. On the other hand, RabbitB's method of letting the container decide how craft-friendly it is doesn't really make sense. A good middle ground might be being able to use whatever items are in sight without crossing the room's boundaries (doors and windows) nor exceeding the PICKUP_RANGE (6?). This would be like a range-limited "Look all items around the player" (V) The player should be able to open/close lockers and other containers that don't let you see inside unless you're close to it. There could be time penalty, adding the time it would normally take to walk to each item and back to the original place. (the crafting time should be shown before starting) |
|
Other than the time penalty, what you describe is what this does (modulo a |
|
Then I think there's nothing wrong with your solution. |
|
Does it handle the containers that don't let you see inside from a distance? |
…access items at a given map location.
|
Currently it allows you to craft from "closed container" furniture (such as lockers) under the assumption that you can walk over and open them as needed. |
|
Ok, just gonna drop my two cents here.
|
|
@i2amroy kevingranade has stated the qualities system is ok, but as it is right now it wouldn't be used anywhere else, maybe if there were other proposals it would be mergeable. About the second point, the way kevin is doing it is quite simple and easy for the player, you spread your things around the room and it will find them. I still think there should be a time penalty to simulate the player walking around manually getting the items, so you would organize items placing the common items closer to your "crafting bench", this would close the "how long are the character's hand, anyway?" argument. |
|
I mean really, who /is/ John Galt? |
|
+1 to the suggestion that it takes time to walk around and collect necessary items; especially when an enemy is near. Maybe just a small amount proportional to total distance the character has to walk. |
|
I think both this and #4904 have their merits. This one, coupled with a time penalty (especially when enemies present) is a good idea. |
|
@kevingranade Even with the additional fixes, at least the following broken case remains, as far as I can tell (I may be wrong here, but this is how it looks from the code):
In any case, my point was not "here's a bunch of defects we get with this change, let's fix them and we're ready to go", but rather that the current implementation of "inventory from map" is broken, at least to some degree. This isn't noticeable now, when PICKUP_RANGE is just 2, but it will be when you increase it manifold. I think the sensible way to proceed is to leave it as is for now and eventually redo the whole "inventory from map" feature, taking into account things that have been proposed here like crafting time penalties for distance / piling etc. |
|
@v-tl Those scenarios would be acceptable given the proper time penalties. If you choose to use a distant tool or component, it will be inefficient. But I agree the "inventory from map" is not ready, the most obvious defect would be the dialog to pick a component when there are multiple matches, for example: Use which component: 1 scrap metal (nearby) 2) aluminum can (nearby) 3) plastic bottle It's not clear where those components are. So I propose changing this dialog to a "Look all items around the player" sidebar, filtered by the matching components/tools, it's up to the player to select the appropriate items. |
|
Looks like the mess died down. Whatever turtlicious is doing seems to be dead. I was initially worried about Kevin's judgement, but when I actually took the time to figure out what his complaints with it were, I really think he had a pretty solid reason for not merging #4904: "I know you put a lot of time into this, but the fact remains that it simply Perhaps he could have explained it better, but the logic is sound. |
|
There's certainly room for improvement in selecting which items are used for crafting, but I don't see why that should block this change, which is simply to increase the range of crafting so that people can build and use workshops instead of having to shuttle around parts or make unreasonably large piles if items simply to be able to have them all in range. This is a simple change that tackles that specific issue, we can come back later and try and bundle up location and stacking information with the crafting inventory so that we can do the time-based adjustments that everyone agrees are what we want eventually. The scenarios that are problematic are 1. avoidable and 2. will occur already because people typically pile all their stuff up so that they can craft whatever they like without having to move things around. It simply changes "don't put items you don't want to use for crafting on your crafting piles" to "don't put items you don't want to use for crafting in your crafting room" |
|
I support this PR. But I think the qualities system needs improvement. I would love to see items with more qualities, for example knives that could be used as screwdrivers, maces that could be used as hammers, and so on. The recipe would list "requires an item with hammering quality" instead of listing all the hammer items. |
|
@dwarfkoala Goons are the worst at organizing. |
|
So now that the major hostility has abated, am I going to get hate mail if I merge this? |
|
Nope. Go for it. |
Allows pulling components and tools from a room-sized area when crafting instead of just the immediate vicinity.