General Discussion

[DarkTl]

I can add such fields of course, but it's a matter of autoequipping algorithm, no? Iirc it should determine important stats for character based on her classes and figure out how suitable the item is.

[Xela]

Ok, that's all the time I have for now. Issue is prolly solved. Everything is at one place now, maybe it can be combined even more inside the func, but it's leave lines even more vague.

I've got rid of 4 or 5 old traits that lingered in items good/badtraits after you killed them off. Func seems to be working now as well.

I can add such fields of course, but it's a matter of autoequipping algorithm, no? Iirc it should determine important stats for character based on her classes and figure out how suitable the item is.

Sure, but we can do that for good/badtraits as well. Autoequip tries to do something along those lines, yeah. It's not like we can't add it if there is some great use for it in the future, we can live without it for now. We can also live without good/bad traits just as well, I just mentioned this because I realized that those did not work almost anywhere in code and when I started fixing that, I realized that game (in this case, it's absolutely do that for jobs, traits and interactions) cannot distinguish between traits and base trait generalizations at all. It could be mitigated in some cases with very clumsy code but in Warrior case, there is no good way at all...

[DarkTl]

Ok, we have SIW, Caster, Server, Warrior base occupations. And Specialist for managers.

Bartender is server, cleaner is server. They use 100% different skills.
Defender is warrior, assassin is warrior. Assassins should prefer agility over defense. Defenders should prefer defense.

There is no way to do something like picking a suitable item without complex algorithm. Unless I go over all items and write good and bad classes and occupations everywhere, in which case this algorithm is my brain 

[DarkTl]

I made a push with prebattle lines. In order to activate them atm one should include two free chars with disposition 500+ to MC team and then attack someone via harassment-escalation. In the future they probably should work before any battle outside arena and SE.

However, for some reason with two chars in the team only one speaks the line. I have no idea why.

[Xela]

I'll take a look, pulling from repo right now.

[DarkTl]

It's amazing world of pythonic jumps again...

    python:
        for member in hero.team:
            if member <> hero:
               renpy.call("interactions_protection", character=member)

Only one character speaks here even if you have two. Interactions_protection label outputs line depending on MPtrait and then returns. Call breaks "for", because it works without the call.
Suggestions? I don't wanna manually copy battle lines for every battle 

[Xela]

It's amazing world of pythonic jumps again...
Only one character speaks here even if you have two. Interactions_protection label outputs line depending on MPtrait and then returns. Call breaks "for", because it works without the call.
Suggestions? I don't wanna manually copy battle lines for every battle 

I've told you, it's not Python (renpy.call) and you're not using it right (again). Call takes you back to the prev Ren'Py statement, I've already explained that:

Code: [Select]

python:
    # 10 000 000+ lines of code
is still just one Ren'Py statement...

I'll see what's the best way of fixing it.

[Xela]

any battle outside arena and SE.

Might even pass for Arena... I like it. Code is fixed in any case.

Edit: Fixed the damn appearing on the map flashing on hover... wasn't easy (SL was acting up so I moved it off screen).

[DarkTl]

I've told you, it's not Python (renpy.call) and you're not using it right (again). Call takes you back to the prev Ren'Py statement, I've already explained that:

It doesn't look like previous statement, because it means infinite loop with for. It looks like next statement, after for.

I didn't know about call_in_new_context before, you used it literally two times in the whole game until now.

[DarkTl]

enemy_team = Team(name="Enemy Team", max_size=5)

How is it possible to have 5 team members?

[Xela]

I didn't know about call_in_new_context before, you used it literally two times in the whole game until now.

I try not to, there are some dangers involved but it's ok for this task. I would have prolly wrote that as function myself, but what we have now is perfectly fine.

How is it possible to have 5 team members?

You could have any amount of members for logical purposes. You can't do that for BE in player mode because there is no placing algorithm that goes beyond three.

[DarkTl]

def __init__(self, name="Brothel", instance=None, desc="Rooms to freck in!",

Uh, freck in? What is it even means? 

[Xela]

Uh, freck in? What is it even means? 

Expression from obscure sci-fi series they used instead of fuck. I am not giving much thought to placeholders.

Also:

You could have any amount of members for logical purposes. You can't do that for BE in player mode because there is no placing algorithm that goes beyond three.

even logical combat in BE should work with these. I may have even tested it at some point for job event.

[DarkTl]

Might even pass for Arena... I like it. Code is fixed in any case.

I'm concerned about cases when you have chars with identical MPTraits though. If they will say the same line, it won't look well, so I'll need a bit more lines and better algorithm to prevent it.

[Xela]

I'm concerned about cases when you have chars with identical MPTraits though. If they will say the same line, it won't look well, so I'll need a bit more lines and better algorithm to prevent it.

Fair enough... We can use something simpler. Or we can draw from two pools, one for opfor and another for allies.