[RDY] Enhancement - Extinguishers reduce chance of machines exploding #1648
Conversation
50/50 if there is an extinguisher present in the room with a machine about to break
|
I feel that 50% is too generous given how inexpensive and small extinguishers are. Maybe 10-25% Thoughts? |
|
I don't have a problem per se reducing percentage but given the catastrophic nature of earthquakes I would say reducing it too much would nullify any effect of this enhancement.
|
|
What about 33%? If it survives one use, it's second use puts the chance at ~11%. (Even though that's technically not real maths) |
|
This is why I indicated what the original code does as the chance starts out say between 11% and 25% of crashing, to 80-90% and then guaranteed. The stronger a machine is - the more researched it is - the more likely its to survive. Could have something like 20% chance for each use above the strength value and potentially additional extinguishers, reduce that by 5%, maybe or diminishing return for each extinquisher. Obviously have to track additional information to record this. |
|
Do we want a calculation of that complexity these days? That's my own concern. |
|
I like the escalating chance for all machines with a slight reduction for extinguishers. As I said, I don't think the effect of extinguishers should be nearly as pronounced as this PR makes them; and that would also help balance against earthquakes a bit. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
As to be more accurate to original game.
|
I have implemented the old TH method as above. I think we might need to cap the grant from extinguishers in the room; as currently it reduces explosion chance by 5% for every extinguisher in the room. Maybe it should be capped at 4, so there is still 5% chance of exploding minimum. |
|
That looks like a reasonable compromise between the too harsh now and the original, that was my suggestion and not exactly how TH works - there appears increased surivability chances with TH as strength is used in the calculation. An approximation to that would be to change the 0.25 constant to roughly 2 / strength instead. |
|
Sounds like a good consideration to me (a constant of 0.05 is still needed to offset the first extinguisher). I would also like to ensure that explosion_chance can never get to 0 though. So I would suggest there's a minimum value of 0.05 at all times. And maybe also maxing out at 0.95 until we reach the guaranteed explosion conditions... |
Calculation now 2/strength Also explosion_chance capped to not go below 0.05 or exceed 0.95. Guaranteed explosion reserved for the must explode criteria.
|
This is ready for review again |
Noticed they weren't matching up with coding change
lewri
changed the title
|
Marking as ready as I don't perceive we need any more changes here |
Would resolve #994
PR will implement a variable saved_by_extinguisher to each machine/object defaulted at 0.
When machine threshold falls <1, the variable is recalculated by math.random(0,1) to see if an extinguisher in the room will save the room (saved_by_extinguisher == 1 is a success). Variable is saved until the machine is next used (inc. earthquake tick), in which case it sets back to 0.
The addition of self.saved_by_extinguisher may not be needed in object.lua... it was added more as a safeguard.
As for machine_dialog.lua nothing needs to be changed. The health marker in the dialogue is not affected if the number of times a machine is used is higher than its strength.