Would it be possible to have it be implemented using randomness? I.e. if shallow water is defined as having 100L water, then each 0.25L draw could toss a 1/800 coin for it drying up.
wouldnāt a simpler approach be to define shallow water as furniture (like a bathtub but unsmashable) that fills up in rain (like a container with a funnel), and spawns full of water?
i found solution:the game usually keeps a variable named starting_turn. ex.if you made a fire,and leave it from your reality bubble, then go back,it calculates fire according starting turn.
I assume you mean that it would be possible to implement a fast-forwarding calculation of what āhad happenedā while you were away based on the time stamp you mentioned, as returning to a fire weeks or months later in 0.E2 stable just continued it as if no time had passed?
If so, I agree that fast-forwarding of a lot of things when they finally are covered by the reality bubble again would make sense and could be a partial solution to the larger problem. However, they would still have to be implemented.
However, there are complications: Assume you light a fire in a forest, leave the area, and then return a lot later. You walk through the forest until suddenly the started fire enters the reality bubble. If you fast-forward it, the forest around you suddenly (possibly after the game stutters while performing the fast-forwarding) turns to ash as the fast-forwarding calculates the spreading of the fire and ārealizesā that the whole forest actually was burned down long ago. To mess up this scenario further, while approaching the location of the original fire you may have foraged berries from plants that then turns out to have been burned down before you picked themā¦
and what if the game doesnt protect you during that fast forwarding? youāre walking through a forest and then suddenly its all ash and the game tells you youāre dead.
No, you wouldnāt suddenly be dead, because the fast-forwarding would affect the static situation, and youāve been on that tile for zero ticks. However, you may well die very shortly, because the forest didnāt turn to ash (which is harmless), but everything around you is on fire instead (which will kill you in a small number of turns).
This, however, indicates that this kind of logic probably wonāt work well, so instead spreading fire (and mycus [and mycus on fire]) would need to have their own reality bubbles, probably light-weight ones.
what would happen with the way reality bubbles work is that the cells that are loaded would be fine until you hit the cell with the fire which fast forward would be burnt to ash and possibly start fires in the surrounding cells. you would never be in danger because the cell you are actively in is always already up to date.
a simpler solution would be logic for the overmap to be able to identify an uncontrolled fire and then process the fire at the overmap level. on a given tile this burn pattern would be
normalā>burningā>burnt
when loaded in game:
- ānormalā is as it is currently
- āburningā has a mix of burnt items, burning terrain/furniture and ash where flammable items was
- āburntā has the vast majority of the flammable items/terrain/furniture replaced with ash, with sound suppressed on loading to hide building collapse noises.
while in the burning phase there is a chance the fire spreads to burnable overmap tile types next to it. that can be burnt. but the chance is low enough that it will more likely burn itself out before burning the entire forest/city down
No. Unless Iāve misunderstood it, the reality bubble is a 60 tile radius around the PC, which means that the effect of a fire canāt be applied until the fire comes inside the bubble. This means that if every tile is subjected to retroactive calculation when it comes into sight a fire could only spread away from the PC (apart from ācurrentā spread to the immediately surrounding tiles) if retroactive calculations are made as it comes into the bubble, and it could spread only if it was still on fire when you take another step, in which case retroactive calculations could determine that it spread to those new tiles X ticks ago.
You canāt mark overmap tiles as on fire and try to process it on that level, as fire spread between adjacent tiles with material that can burn, and stops when there is nowhere left to spread. This means that when you make a fire in a forest it burns down only the area the fire can reach through tile to tile hopping, and when you set fire to a house only that house is burnt down (there may be some cases where there are paths along which fire can spread adjacent houses).
You could treat overmap tiles as lightweight reality bubbles that were processed at some intervals if they were marked as having that kind of activity in them. Such activity would have to include processing of activities spreading to neighboring tiles. In addition to that, theyād also have to have some level of processing of critters on their tiles: animals penned up, for instance, would be burnt to death while animals that could flee would move to other tiles, and mycus critters ought to be burnt as they donāt flee from fire.
1 Like
If you want to make it realistic than it should also affect creatures. So zombieās should either turn into scorsed versions or dissappear completely while every other creature is actueally afraid of fire and should be moved to adjasent unburned maptiles.
Racked vehicles severely affect water drag of watercraft.
Experiment:
90kg me + 81kg body: water drag = 19
150kg 2tile motorcycle without me or that body: water drag = 39
I suspect that the code still counts those tiles when calculating drag, even though logic dictates that the things would be racked above water instead of in water. The same does not happen with air drag. It stays the same.
EDIT: I couldnāt be bothered properly fixing this, so just fixed hull_coverage to 1.0. Itās still a bit worse (water drag = 22) than just adding weight to trunks, since it counts racked vehicles towards vehicle width, but not nearly as bad. I suppose Iām satisfied, as the game doesenāt count racked vehicles towards air drag shrug.
āIt is possible to recycle the core of heavy artillery.
There are many craters on the map. We should find some good things there!
āThe bullet should have aftereffect.
When the enemy shoots, the bullet will be punctured or placed in the body, causing infection.
āHeavy guns need to have strong penetrating power.
When shooting zombies, if you stand in a row (considering the Zombieās variant and rotten body), it should be enough to continuously penetrate three enemies.
āBuilding stress should be more reasonable.
āThe distance between cities should be increased, and highways and tunnels should be added to the game.
ļ¼When can we start the train?ļ¼
āBuildings should be on fire or smoking, not in good condition.
ļ¼I know, there are collapsed buildings, but is that all?ļ¼
On that last point I heavily disagree.
We need to consider the āstarting dayā each person sets for their game. Personally I always start on Spring 1 Day 0. People wouldnāt just go around burning buildings down for no reason - if anything, the ānaturalā response would be to get on their cars and flee to the nearest shelter. If buildings are on fire (for any reason) that would cause several issues:
- spread quickly and ruin the city;
- cause massive performance issues (the game with mandatory Z levels already makes mildly populated areas sluggish enough, I donāt believe we need more processing involved to make it worse);
Although there are buildings that get raided/destroyed over time (Mil Surplus, Grocery Stores, Gas Stations, Dollar Shops, āsomeā gun stores, etc).
Granted I still believe weather needs to be looked at. If the game is moving towards ārealismā and to a more āpresent dayā presentation, are we going to finally have less extreme weather? I donāt believe that New England offers -60C during winter and early spring, as well as I very much doubt it provides its inhabitants with +60C for the duration of Summer and early Autumn. (Plus, if the reason for lack of rain / literally no rain was ābecause RLā, I think it should be consistent all around, and not arbitrary).
2 Likes
Iāve encountered an office tower on fire in 0.E2 stable. It was on fire when I first saw it, and I have no idea what started it. Due to the wonky way fires work, the fire didnāt stop until several months later after I had cleared out the town AND spent time crafting next to it to advance the time.
However, fire donāt spread (usually) to nearby buildings because fire spreads from tile to neighboring tile in the game (no wind blown pieces on fire and no sideways collapses of buildings on fire). In addition to that, most buildings are not made of highly flammable materials, as opposed to the old times when whole cities were burned to the ground because the streets were narrow and all buildings were made out of wood (Rome being burned down, for instance, with enemies blaming Nero for it).
Zombies can smash up buildings to get to something they want to attack, but the major smashing zombie types are later evolutions, so there is no reason for buildings to be destroyed on a large scale. Looters would smash their way in if the doors are locked and take the things they want, but I wouldnāt expect them to either waste time and effort on setting buildings on fire, or have an interest in doing so if thereās a chance to get back and get more later.
Note that post apocalyptic looters have different motives than current day riot looters. Riot looters may be a mix of criminals who use the riot as a cover for their theft, opportunists who grab stuff they want when the chance to do so with little or no risk of getting caught (and others already stealing things freely around them) politically motivated arsonists who want to stick it to the capitalists (or whatever their muddled thinking is), plus some people who just want to cause destruction because they can get away with it. The last group is probably going to kill themselves off fairly quickly in the apocalypse if they remain that way, with the second last group attacking an extinct opponent, which makes little sense (although their motives doesnāt make much sense pre apocalypse eitherā¦).
1 Like
Racked vehicles intentionally count towards water drag so that you can use racked boat hulls as pontoons. This has the disadvantage that racked vehicles without boat hulls worsen your hull coverage. Iād be happy to see a coding solution that ignores racked parts without boat hulls, but thatād be a pretty complicated special case in vehicle::coeff_water_drag() so I donāt think Iām going to write it.
Ah, ok. I did briefly consider converting shopping carts from casters to boat hulls, but thatād make them hard to drag around base and random places of raiding. My plan for an amphibious vehicle is to make a ātransporterā that is 3x10 - 5x12 of mostly light frames and boat hulls, with bike racks on all sides. Optimised for long trips at high speeds (low water/air drag), but cumbersome to navigate through tight terrain. Thatād be done with a racked motorcycle, that is also equipped with bike racks for carrying carts around.
It is probably also not good to ignore all tiles without hulls when calculating drag. Tiles that have wheels or other things mounted under the frames should have a negative impact.
EDIT: Is there a high-level overview of how the vehicle code does the vehicling?
There are help files that explain it some, the player wiki gives a little more detail, and then src/vehicle.cpp and src/vehicle*cpp have comments. I can give more details if you want specific things explained.
Would it perhaps be easier to allow a bike rack to be placed on the same tile as a boat hull, for storing bikes on aquatic vehicles?
this is already allowed.
1 Like
Should markers be more realistic?
You use a charcoal stick to write on the ground. Reality permits this, too. But then you use the stick to erase the marks. Reality denies my attempts to erase charcoal with charcoal; it is not realistic. Itās so unrealistic that is actively counterrealistic. You could use your hand to erase charcoal marks. Just walking on it would disperse the marks a bit. A charcoal stick is one of a few things that would not erase charcoal marks.
Omitting the feature would be even less realistic, though; not in itself, but in its effects on gameplay and immersion [for certain players]. The gameās interface is reductive, whether weāre talking alphabet soup of curses, or even tiles. In reality, people have much more to go on to understand and recall their environment. Markings help cope with the game interfaceās reduced information. If players couldnāt mark the terrain and items, itād be harder in game than in reality, to navigate around and use things.
Not the most controversial realism topic, perhaps. I just thought it was a nice example of how a very straight-forward feature can be specifically unrealistic, yet make the game feel more real.
2 Likes
I like the idea of a proficiency system a lot but I think the reasoning wierd:āThe sling is balanced because not many people are knowledgeable about it.ā I used to sling a lot in my youth and thereās not much to it. With more training you get more accurate but excluding your muscle growth from throwing stones real hard all day the force you generate will be about the same from the first rocks you sling to the thousandth one. And here I have to agree that itās a little too weak. For early throwing lvls itās probably okay because you can excuse low damage by grazing hits and limb shots but as soon as you start hitting the torso let alone head reliably it should increase drastically. Cast lead projectiles would help accuracy and damage even more.
Either way through proficiencies or straight damage increases, Iām on team ābuff slingsā
1 Like