Encumbrance and Outfit Rework?

Hi all, so, been playing Cata for quite a while now, and it’s my nature to dig in at the innards of things (though I’m not a great coder by any means).

Any case, I’ve been messing around with my character, decided to go the 0 encumbrance route, and noticed a bit of an exploit - wearable items with a natural 0 encumbrance which can also be fitted through tailoring have absolutely Nil encumbrance whatsoever.

[Putting the horrifying 75 item limit aside for now] I am wearing two pairs of shorts, two pairs of cargo shorts, and a pair of army pants without any encumbrance. If there wasn’t the maximum of wearing two of a kind, it sounds like I could wear an indefinite amount of shorts (which means additional volume). Of course, same thing applies to torso items: 2x under armor, 2x tank top, 2x camo tank top. Now its not much of anything really, no volume increase, but put that under a fitted trenchcoat and reinforce all of it, and you’ve got yourself a decent bullet/zombie sponge.

On wearing ridiculous amounts of items: Looking around in the .jsons, I couldn’t find the upper limit (wearing two of the same item tops), so I’m assuming that it’s internalized. If I could find that, I’m sure that things like shorts/cargo shorts and tank tops/camo tank tops could be made to fall into the same category, so you could still wear two pairs of shorts, but a combo of shorts & shorts or shorts & cargo shorts or cargo & cargo shorts would disallow from putting on another pair. It doesn’t seem realistic that I can wear four pairs of shorts AND a pair of pants and not be encumbered at all. Same thing applies to torso armor of course.

Proposition of a solution: The more ideal approach would be changing the way encumbrance works. Right now, the game accepts only integers for encumbrance values, so a value of 1.5 wouldn’t work. If that could be altered to accepting real numbers such as .3 or .5, the whole issue would be much more manageable and the clothing combinations you could wear (to reach a certain level of encumbrance, which is up to the individual player) would be much more interesting and realistic if the encumbrance values for each clothing piece were realistic (the latter is easily done through the .json). However, I don’t know how to make the game accept non-integer values for encumbrance, so I’m putting this out there for feedback.

This has been discussed on Git and has already been changed to a very reasonable version in the experimental builds by a pull request that has been merged and looks to be very solid.

Oh. Well then. Looks the community is already one step ahead. Forget I said anything. )) Well, this at least gave me a reason to get on the forums I suppose. )

I’m glad to be of service and welcome to the forums!

Here’s an even better solution, stolen straight from DF:

Add two flags, INNER and OUTER, which are applied to (almost) all clothing. The layering system would count “inner” and “outer” clothing separately; two shirts gets the usual penalty, but one shirt and one coat is fine. Untagged clothing wouldn’t count towards layering at all (the only items I can think of right now that would use this are holsters and bootstraps, but it’s nice to have nonetheless).

Technically it’s still not the best system. But it’s a much closer approximation then it used to be and it should hold until we eventually get someone to replace it with something even better. :stuck_out_tongue:

What you could do is well - just use your imagination.
Your encumberance indicator could show flowers, hippos or the american flag, the very issue is what you (we, for the gamers’ voice) want of it throughout the Cataclysm:_Dark_Days_Ahead.
There are set standards for fantasy games with millions of reworks, including the ones withing roguelike ‘subworld’. But the main stigma boils around the default player class, and default equpment he or she uses. So, essentially, “I want to be that sonuvamother when I grow up” and that’s your preferred set. That’s your code bullseye, the rounded-up 100. The only stretch you have to make is the one of class since C_DDA lacks those and encumberance within those, so imagine an archer having to put up with bulky-arse clothing like the ones of a fighter - and there you have it, the “greater-than-100”.
In my own words, the 100 is the maximum extent of your abilities and skills under a predefined set of clothing items
Really, you shouldn’t be obstructed with the sufficient clothing at all, provided you’re an average individual. But let’s take just the opposite for example - a Clown.
->Has a silly hat
->Has some dye and makeup
->Has a long-sleeved shirt, and a sized-down vest
->Has a pair of really bulky gauntlets
->Has a belt, and a silly belt buckle
->Has really, really baggy pants that are built to stay stiff
->Has funny-looking shoes

Now I’m certain he’s a jester class - and jesters are known as acrobats. Why isn’t this poor Joe one, too?
->Has a long-sleeved shirt, and a sized-down vest
->Has a pair of really bulky gauntlets
->Has a belt, and a silly belt buckle
->Has really, really baggy pants that are built to stay stiff
->Has funny-looking shoes

Ok, let’s try and understand what seems to be his problem, and start with the torso. The main issue is encumberance, because he’s wearing a ridiculous child-sized vest over everything and it is a bit obstructive. The second one is of manual dexterity - his gauntlets have both decorative and obstructive purpose - the wrists are bulky, and the hand can’t take on much more than a perfect grip of things, such as a big rope or a bat. His buckle and belt are funny worn above waist and terrible for jumping/ducking. The pants section is worth only for walking and a short dash because the bulkiness stumps every attempt of a good run. The shoes are multiple-oversized but still good for walking (because besides the length it’s the width that really fits); essentially, only for stunts.
Actually - there are three flags here: BULKY, OVERSIZED and UNFITTING. If I try and sum up everything it will look like this:


What I did here was simply adding up values and some critical factors. The overall encumberance is 2.3:1 in favor of the Clown character standing opposed to the “perfect” outfit for the class. This however is - the base encumberance. I assumed that every body part has a joint that connects it to the other one. The head could be the only “irrelevant” parameter here but it’s for a reason - it doesn’t suffer from the whole base encumberance instalment, but it adds up simply because of the sheer pressure that the weight of hats/helmets/etc can have on the neck muscles, that are also supported with the spine and upper torso; so you add a tenth of that value (here 0) to the torso. The torso also adds a tenth of its encumberance value to the arms, and the hands receive one fifth of the arms total. The legs suffer from some weight imposing on the lower back and the abdomen, so 1/20 of torso encumberance is added up to the legs enc. value. And finally, both feet have their own encumberance increased by one fifth of legs enc.

This was only a simple example, yet descriptive enough to tell you that this Clown character, even as he’s not wearing any really heavy pieces of clothing he’s got a base encumberance score of 2 and no stacks, mostly because he’s not wearing any layers. These are otherwise crucial, but here simply are not - you have a silly rag for a vest, it barely covers 30% of the torso and the requirement for the actual stacking is 50%. Let’s say you’re wearing:
Torso…Under_Armor, Sweatshirt, Leather_Vest, Rain_Coat
There are 4 layers and the following numbers (just like everywhere in this post) are an approximation, so the Torso score is:
This would also add 1 to the overall torso encumberance. So, if you had a total of, say, 340 - your base encumberance would be 3 but since torso is supporting such a heavy burden it has a stack to a total of 4. The formula, however, could be derived from the percentile coverage of the item, whereas the vest that covers something of a 70% total torso in the recurring sum would add up as:
40(the encumberance)*7/10 THEN divided with 10 and multiplied according to the corresponding layer order.

Look at Vultures breaking out the math. No idea what all that means, but… uh… good job.

Yeah, we have a “sorta” system that works like this but only once you transform into a packmule, weighing and itching from volume in colorful numbers. We forgot that, for example, if you had two sets of heavy military pants on you and only a set of sneakers on your feet - you’d barely feel your ankles and have real trouble lifting your legs and feet, because the weight actually numbs the nerve receptors so legs adapt through other body senses, and receptory memory too.