i find powder in the bottle.
powder i may get to deconstruct landmines.
I think that the storage of the powder in the bottle a much more convenient than in the form of powder is poured into a backpack or some other pockets of clothing.
Can such a way to save space in your inventory, as an empty bottle and full bottle take inventory the same volume - respectively - more efficient to keep the bottle is not empty but filled with something. do anything - pour into them from paper bags flour or cereal, freeing up space in your inventory.
will now be a little blackmail
Incidentally emerges another dimension. I am here at a forum saw a fight between those who argue that the fluid can be collected and those who argue that it is impossible to collect the liquid. as well as you, claiming that the liquid can not collect such incident - powder and flour from the floor you somehow gather without losing anything.
It may then be done non-rising and powder and other particulate matter. flour, powder, cereals. No I’m not saying that if the solid material is poured a handful of his quite impossible to collect. I say that it is impossible to collect without loss. and the more the greater the loss to pour.
let’s say if we are emptying flour heap on the floor capacity of let’s say 100 units that raise it off the floor, we can not say more than … let us say… 90 units for the rest of the meal will be soiled.
so - could be worth permit those who want to raise the liquid from the floor with a mop - still do it? Or at least make a half-hearted decision to allow to take into account the liquid on the floor in a recipe?
to explain the unexplainable (how to raise the liquid from the floor) - it is possible to refer to the example of David Blaine walked past and gave us a street magic and gave us local time paradox, when the liquid was poured and we do not change your mind :)) and all hush-hush ok i’m just kidding
but nevertheless - in every joke there is only a fraction jokes.
I say that it is necessary to introduce a mechanism for the loss of bulk materials, caused by their contact with the dirt of floor.
and - to make sure that it was possible to fill particulate in the container independently and not only by discharging.
Okay so wow. The joke part aside this is very confusing. I get that you speak russian but really parts of this post just seem so out there. Most I can get out of it is that you want to pick up most or some of the volume of liquids with a mop, and be able to use liquids on the ground for recipes. I know this has been suggested before and I think by you. Do you have a clear idea on how to do this code wise?
It’s google translate. He wrote it in russian, that’s why it’s so confusing.
He basically wants to be able to hold powders in bottles (to save space, since bottles take space even when empty) and he says that it should not be possible to collect the powders from the floor/backpack, just as it’s the case with liquids.
So he suggests that somebody implements a loss in powders (such as flour and others) used when not in a container.
For some reason it all makes sense now. I thought it was about liquids. Well not all of it makes sense but its better. Sorry Vivat, I’m trying here.
What does it mean “powder I may get to deconstruct landmines”? I know he means the byproduct from deconstructing a landmine, but is he talking about gun powder or what?
He’s probably talking about all sorts of powders. Gunpowder, sugar, lye powder, flour, etc… there’s a lot of these. I agree, if you have 100 units of sugar on the floor, picking it up might only give back 90 units. The remainder would be ‘soiled’ or just too hard to pick up without getting dirt mixed with it. Carrying powders loose in your backpack is most efficient, but makes no sense. Cardboard boxes are bulky so I always unpack any food contained by those. The result? I have a backpack full of various loose powders and cookies, and none of it mixes. No loss? Strange.
Sadly I do not have any idea how to code it either. ¦:(
[quote=“deadmerits, post:4, topic:10152”]For some reason it all makes sense now. I thought it was about liquids. Well not all of it makes sense but its better. Sorry Vivat, I’m trying here.
What does it mean “powder I may get to deconstruct landmines”? I know he means the byproduct from deconstructing a landmine, but is he talking about gun powder or what?[/quote]
that phrase I attempted to build itself (as it seemed to me was simple and short).I admit guilt, but trying to not give up as Google translator - also say openly - not always take those words which could come in the individual case.
that is, there are even some phrases that Google after I have yet to refine
now i will google it.
gunpowder we can get disassembled bomb (bomb that after we deconstruct it, give us 200 bullets and 72 units of gunpowder - excluding scrap-metal)
Unfortunately, these words sound like a death sentence.
the idea - and that if, considered as the capacity of the ENTIRE inventory which piled all the other things? and unload bulk materials from the THIS container to ANOTHER as we determine?
… hmm. idea - of course - is not as good as i wish.
I’m afraid it will lead to a global rethinking of inventory.
but it seems to me - then we will have and backpacks in which we can download the thing and reset together with things.
if we consider the inventory as a file system.
we have ROOT-directory (main inventory) which can be mounted only to CHARACTER (and not may be dismount from them) and there are virtual folders (bags, rueksacks and vice versa) that we can move anywhere, anywhere - along with its contents.
can be entered in the properties of things the “way” or “point of attachment” which determines the location of things?
gunpowder in our inventory recorded like this
and you can record it and so
but you can so
[quote=“Pthalocy, post:5, topic:10152”]He’s probably talking about all sorts of powders. Gunpowder, sugar, lye powder, flour, etc… there’s a lot of these. I agree, if you have 100 units of sugar on the floor, picking it up might only give back 90 units. The remainder would be ‘soiled’ or just too hard to pick up without getting dirt mixed with it. Carrying powders loose in your backpack is most efficient, but makes no sense. Cardboard boxes are bulky so I always unpack any food contained by those. The result? I have a backpack full of various loose powders and cookies, and none of it mixes. No loss? Strange.
Sadly I do not have any idea how to code it either. ¦:([/quote]
you’re right, he gave the example of the landmine, that you can disassemble and get gunpowder, but he’s actually speaking about all sorts of powders, in general.
I must admit that i find it very comfortable as it is, i , too, tend to unload the items from cardboards, but it’s very unrealistic, it is :).
The way I under stood it he wanted to be able to do what you guys are talking about, but he also seemed to think that picking up powders off the floor would best be done with an ALREADY wet mop. Which would be great in the case of thing on say… a linoleum floor, but would be worse then just scooping with your hand most of the time when dealing with the powder being on carpet or dirt. All in all, it just seems like an overly complicated way to not really achieve much.
I have long since stopped paying attention skeletons and necromancers - to hell with them, let them be. for fun. the benefit of all our interaction with them is their murder. but gasoline water or other liquids are spilled on the floor and that has not evaporated, and we can not use it - just eat away my brain his monstrous illogical. it’s necessary - the liquid that is lying on the floor and does not evaporate or that the liquid lying on the ground, and is not absorbed. the mind boggles!
I think many will agree with me - not because of the fact that gasoline or water to people sorry. and for the reason that - that there is water, but you can not take it. Here gasoline - but they can not fill the car! You can reach before refueling or to the nearest lake but then that’s it - is not gone. YOU CAN NOT DO IT THIS WAY !!! :)))
as illogical and therefore unfair !!!. :)))
Of course the museum is much that we can not but take it - with some exceptions. we do not go to museums every day
I think - one of the good ways to stop such long flames about liquids on the floor - it is to take and simply vaporize them. they evaporate like the morning dew evaporates.
all liquids must have flag “EVAPORATED_WHEN_NOT_IN_CONTAINER” - and voila!
liquids on the floor - is liquids NOT in container - and from that - liquid evaporates.
must write code for evaporating. maybe on the
ok. stop flaming about liquids - ok?
it may be possible in each class to make a liquid-like setting parameter which have food. food at the “rot”. Let the liquid will have the “volatility” or “volatility”. and the procedure that will calculate the condition … stop! no !. extra complexity - just “let the liquid evaporate” ANY! Simultaneously!
but as we work say that acid is sprayed from the zombies that we killed? it also evaporates very quickly!
some kind of procedure it handles.
rather, the procedure processes the tile on which poured acid.
but because - as on that tile, it appears and disappears as well.
unless it is impossible to apply the same method for other liquids not only for acid?
acid - it is after all the liquid. also. surprisingly. and why the water does not evaporate like acid? why gasoline does not evaporates like acid?
Evaporation tag for uncontained liquids on the ground would be pretty great, and also believable. I like it! Yes, it could rot/decay/evaporate after some time, just like food rots. Some items like cooking oil would not evaporate, maybe.
Acid attacks might behave differently. I don’t know if acid evaporating is from the attack’s code or part of the liquid’s code.
It would be nice if (a)ctivating a mop on a spilled liquid made the mop wet with the liquid. You could (a)ctivate a Mop (wet: gasoline) to fill a container in your inventory. You would only get a very small amount back, but it would be better than nothing. Mop (wet: blood) might be really gross, maybe you could (a)ctivate the mop to either 1) ‘wring it empty’ OR 2) ‘fill a container’.
Would this be more trouble than it’s worth to code?
The only problem I can think of in terms of being realistic is you could pick up the liquid with the mop, wring it out on the ground for less liquid, and then rinse and repeat until the liquid just… disappears.
in theory - and should be - in the bank - the more you distill money between accounts, the sooner your money runs out - the bankers take the money for the operation
Acid attacks might behave differently. I don't know if acid evaporating is from the attack's code or part of the liquid's code.
I think that - and that if you use previously written procedure that calculates the acid damage and at the same time engaged in “evaporation” acid?
I hope the quantity of acid damage is not sewn tightly into the procedure and passed to the outside? if so then there is nothing easier. when you call this procedure informs her acid damage = 0 and let the procedure or trying to have any thing to bite as it will get.
if anything it is unclear - please, ask the written rubbish to finish - I will finish. this game is important and interesting to me and I want to enclose too in it a little myself. let not programming so at least ideas.