New encumbrance

[Zireael]

[quote=“IcedPee, post:7, topic:9211”]>No more 0-encumbrance items

Wearing 2 long-sleeved shirts puts encumbrance at BLOODY ELEVEN

What the fuck?! How are we even supposed to MOVE?![/quote]

Eleven equals old one, so no need to yell.

[Vorchar]

[quote=“Coolthulhu, post:6, topic:9211”]It is a bug.

PR’d a fix: https://github.com/CleverRaven/Cataclysm-DDA/pull/11742[/quote]
What about the fact that we can no longer wear 2 items with no penalty on same layer? When you wear 2 long leeve shirts (encumbrance 0) you get enc penalty of 1. You used to be able to wear 2 items on same layer without any layer penalty.

[Valpo]

That must have been a bug or a special case. If usualy you wear 2 items on the same layer you will get a penalty. It was always this way.

[Coolthulhu]

What about the fact that we can no longer wear 2 items with no penalty on same layer? When you wear 2 long leeve shirts (encumbrance 0) you get enc penalty of 1. You used to be able to wear 2 items on same layer without any layer penalty.

This is a result of them no longer being 0 encumbrance when not fitting. The code currently explicitly checks for 0 encumbrance. If the item isn’t 0 encumbrance, it’s encumbrance is lowered by 10. If that goes negative, it is set back to 0.

It could be easily fixed by decreasing the layering penalty by half of the negative encumbrance.
However Kevin wants to get rid of layer penalty altogether.

Not sure if I should fix this now or wait until the rework. I don’t know if the layering penalty is about to get removed soon or in a week or a month or anything, except that it’s supposed to be removed some day.

[Vorchar]

That must have been a bug or a special case. If usualy you wear 2 items on the same layer you will get a penalty. It was always this way.

Yes this was always like this on THIRD item now it happens on second item: "The formula appears to be T=((N-1)(1/2)) + E, where" from wiki not it basically is :T=((N)(1/2)) + E

[Valpo]

In my memory it was on the second. Like when i wore 2 trenchcoats i got penaltys even when wearing nothing else.

Either i recall it incorrectly or its not the same for every item or the item you are reffering to was bugged(and so other might have been to nd it has been fixed)

i know you could wear certain items twice… like drop leg pouches. but those were special.

[Vorchar]

[quote=“Valpo, post:14, topic:9211”]In my memory it was on the second. Like when i wore 2 trenchcoats i got penaltys even when wearing nothing else.

Either i recall it incorrectly or its not the same for every item or the item you are reffering to was bugged(and so other might have been to nd it has been fixed)

i know you could wear certain items twice… like drop leg pouches. but those were special.[/quote]

You could wear 3 drop leg wear since they had “layers easily” tag that made layering penalty to 0.5 (0.5*3 = 1.5 => 1.5-1 = 0.5 > 1).

[Valpo]

No i could not as far as i remember. I maxed my inventory and i never wore more then 2 because it gave me encumbrance to wear 3.
Unless i missremember which i very much doubt you must have experienced a bug.
3rd pouch gave me 1 layering encumbrance. That or i had a bug.

[Vorchar]

[quote=“Valpo, post:16, topic:9211”]No i could not as far as i remember. I maxed my inventory and i never wore more then 2 because it gave me encumbrance to wear 3.
Unless i missremember which i very much doubt you must have experienced a bug.
3rd pouch gave me 1 layering encumbrance. That or i had a bug.[/quote]

If you had anything that did not have “Layers easily” tag and was fitted to strapped layer you could only wear 1 drop puch. I think there were some armors that were fitted to strapped layer. Also note that you could not wear 3rd puch because there is only 2 of a kind allowed, rule for wearing items.

Here’s a quick example I did with 0.B stable build

[Valpo]

Okay but i can t remember ever beeing able to wear 2 trench coats at once w/o penalty. This was always something rerved for special items with the layers easy tag. Also there where other items that did not have this and could still be worn twice so i asumed its a bug.

edit:

I remember wearing kneepads like that too.

I was contemplating whether it had something to do with the total coverage of all items on the same layer-.

[Coolthulhu]

Internally, “Layers easily” is not a tag. It is only a message - it is displayed when the item fits and had 0 encumbrance before fitting.

Notice that many items no longer “layer easily” - this is because their base encumbrance (before fitting) is no longer 0.

You can wear 3 items that layer easily before the first point of penalty. Or you can wear 1 item that layers easily and 1 that doesn’t.

[Valpo]

Faszinating .
To bad that i can not use this wisdome anymore

[Murphy]

It was silly anyway to wear 2 pairs of drop leg pouches, 2 survivor belts, 2 harnesses and somehow cargo shorts + cargo pants.

[Vorchar]

It was silly anyway to wear 2 pairs of drop leg pouches, 2 survivor belts, 2 harnesses and somehow cargo shorts + cargo pants.

You still can and propably should do it actually. With current encumbrance rules it seems that running with 2x harnesses/runner packs is better than having a backpack.

You get quite a lot less volume, armor and wramth from each layer now so outer layer should be a single as much armor as possible (can’t stack or you get penalty) piece of cloth.

[Kryxx]

Well it makes sense, a few belts and harnesses to attach things on or in is less restrictive than a backpack with 30lbs of gear in it dragging on your shoulders and back.

[LordHelmchen]

Greetings!
I was about to check out the experimental to get all the new features, but a look at the encumberment made me reconsider:
Copied save folder, loaded in both versions, this gives:
Torso

thermal electic outfit
flame resistant suit
scabbard
small waterskin
survivor belt
survivor trenchcoat
light survivor harness
MBR vest (empty)
Browning BLR (on shoulder strap)
Head

thermal electric outfit
flame-resistant hood
helmet netting
survivor helmet
Eyes

pair of fit-over sunglasses
survivor mask
Mouth

protective mouthpiece
thermal electric outfit
survivor mask
Arms

thermal electric outfit
flame-resistant suit
survivor trenchcoat
Hands

thermal electric outfit
pair of flame-resistant gloves
pair of light survivor gloves
Legs

boxer shorts
thermal electric outfit
flame-resistant suit
survivor cargo pants
holster
pair of drop leg pouches
leather chaps

Feet

thermal electric outfit
pair of flame-resistat socks
ankle holster
pair of survivor boots

[table]
[tr][td]location[/td][td]0.C[/td][td]experimental[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Torso[/td][td]0+2[/td][td]57+45[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Head[/td][td]3+0[/td][td]42+0[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Eyes[/td][td]1+0[/td][td]22+10[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Mouth[/td][td]1+0[/td][td]22+0[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Arms[/td][td]0+0[/td][td]17+0[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Hands[/td][td]0+0[/td][td]12+10[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Legs[/td][td]0+0[/td][td]21+10[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Feet[/td][td]1+0[/td][td]22+0[/td][/tr]
[/table]
even considering a factor 10 for conversion: Is the magnitude of the new encumberance intended? Is my loadout that unreasonable? It seems that as it stands, one is better of just grabbing a duffel bag and throw everything into that instead of carefully working out a set of bags and holsters to optimize equipment storage…

I do know that 10 is the new one, and I can accept that some numbers are still in flux and due for balancing… I guess I’m more or less wondering what the design vision is for encumberment system.

[Coolthulhu]

I do know that 10 is the new one, and I can accept that some numbers are still in flux and due for balancing… I guess I’m more or less wondering what the design vision is for encumberment system.

Kevin plans to get rid of layering penalty sometime soon. Expect the numbers to change a lot in short time.
Then, the whole round to 10 thing is supposed to be removed too.

[eccentric]

[quote=“Coolthulhu, post:25, topic:9211”]Kevin plans to get rid of layering penalty sometime soon. Expect the numbers to change a lot in short time.
Then, the whole round to 10 thing is supposed to be removed too.[/quote]Can you explain or point to the thread on getting rid of the layering penalty?

I’m about 9-10days into a game with the latest experimental encumbrance and I’m in the minority cause I like it so far. After playing with it, the ability to put items into other storage items would be a good complement feature. Easily dropping your duffel bag full to the brim with books to fight the enemy then pickup and go would be convenient.

[Vorchar]

[quote=“eccentric, post:26, topic:9211”][quote=“Coolthulhu, post:25, topic:9211”]Kevin plans to get rid of layering penalty sometime soon. Expect the numbers to change a lot in short time.
Then, the whole round to 10 thing is supposed to be removed too.[/quote]Can you explain or point to the thread on getting rid of the layering penalty?

I’m about 9-10days into a game with the latest experimental encumbrance and I’m in the minority cause I like it so far. After playing with it, the ability to put items into other storage items would be a good complement feature. Easily dropping your duffel bag full to the brim with books to fight the enemy then pickup and go would be convenient.[/quote]
As far as I unrestood Kevin is looking if you can completely remove layer penalty. Layer penalty is the penalty that you get when you equip more than one equipment on same layer (each bodypart has it’s own layers: skin, normal, outer, strapped). Each wearable over the limit gives 10 points of encumbrance. Wearing 2 long shirts would give you encumbrance like this 0+10=10. Kevin is looking if you can balance the system so that you would not have the layer penalty but each piece of cloth would have enough encumbrance to prevent player from stacking low encumbrance clothing to get very high armor/volume ratings.

The problem with new encumbrance I have is that 90% of the wearables are useless now. While a lot of them were quite useless before, it did not matter since you had so much room to play with. Quiver, sheats and waterskins actually take more than they give.

[kevin.granade]

After some discussion, I changed my mind about the layering penalty being obsolete, it still adresses issues we have.
On the other hand, I think adjusting how the layering penalty and fitting clothes works to be more continuous is called for. I’m not sure what to do about the layering penalty and very low encumbrance clothes, but for fitting I think it should be either -10 encumbrance or encumbrance / 2, whichever is larger.