User talk:CommanderC

re hand-and-a-half...from my edit summary: "due to bugs introduced in 0.10 they have functioned as 1handers since then, and are formally removed in 0.12)", not really sure what you're taking issue with, the info as stated on the page I edited was not valid for 0.11

You also made another edit about blowguns, which is not true for the current stable version. I think that if you see someone making an incorrect edit, you should either talk with that person or revert/correct the information. Didn't mean to offend you. --CommanderC 21:51, 18 January 2013 (CET)

Thanks!

Thank you for digging out those great old idea of "glamour" ability. No matter that it is obsolete now, the humor is among the best I ever met in DCSS. -- Bwijn 11:07, 21 January 2013 (CET)

Re: The Spell Set Update

That process went a lot smoother than I expected it to. Thanks for putting that tool together. That being said, I noticed today that some spell casting monsters weren't updated: I just added a spell set to the Cherub page, but I'm wondering why it was left out at all, and which other monsters weren't affected. Any ideas? --MoogleDan 19:35, 27 January 2013 (CET)

It seems that Cherubs don't know any spells and they can't heal any monsters. But, they have an ability: they can sing hymns. It's basically a variant of the "battle-frenzy" used by orcish knights. Holy monsters with lower HD are roused by these hymns and they do a 30% more damage in melee. This ability is completely useless and never used, because Cherubs have the lowest HD among all the holy monsters. (silly devs) --CommanderC 21:25, 27 January 2013 (CET)

Glyph templates

Nice work on the glyph templates! I think it might also be useful to put the glyph templates into a category, maybe Category:Monster glyphs or Category:Monster glyph templates and that category would then go under Category:Glyph templates. Do you think you can get your bot to do that? --Flun 23:23, 15 June 2013 (CEST)

Done! --CommanderC 14:05, 16 June 2013 (CEST)

Aptitude Modules

I will admit that I don't really get how these work. However, I have a minor request, that I hope is fairly simple: can we display positive aptitudes with a + in front of them? That just makes them immediately stand out, for example, if you're looking at the skill pages to find a species with a positive aptitude in some skill you want to play with. -Ion frigate (talk) 11:24, 20 September 2013 (CEST)

Done. The key to understand Module:Apt is the function mw.loadData. That function returns the m object we defined in Module:Table_of_aptitudes, because the last line of that module was return m. --CommanderC (talk) 15:20, 20 September 2013 (CEST)

Thanks! And I just realized that the skill tables are missing from the weapon skill pages for some reason. I'll go ahead and add them, I think I see how.

Oh, and another request: might we be able to do a flavour bot, similar to the monster stats bot, once 0.12 comes out? The devs seem to enjoy adding vaguely relevant quotes all the time and we might as well grab them. -Ion frigate (talk) 08:38, 21 September 2013 (CEST)

I will see what I can do. --CommanderC (talk) 17:56, 21 September 2013 (CEST)

Special count logging

I ask you as the best coder in the wiki team. Do you think it is possible to have a formula in my RC file (=> collecting info for '#' prompted log file) that just tells me and others how many identifiable magical items are still unknown at any given XL? Exampe given: 10/15 wands at XL10. Or is it necessary to beg the developers to include this small feature? - Background of my wish is to prove that not only some rings or wands but even base use items like scrolls of remove curse are too frequently not available for long times. You can get to Lair:8 and still 8 of 20 scrolls didn't appear, or only 1 amulet and 2 rings while exploring 20+ levels. The Random number generator is no longer providing a balanced game as for item frequency. Ashenzari piety is near impossible to advance if you can't find enough suitable scrolls. Well, don't care for my background musings and tell me your diagnosis if a mini script formula could provide the 'x/y items at z XL' logging info I want? And if yes, could you help out to write it? Thank you in advance. -- Bwijn (talk) 19:43, 17 December 2013 (CET)

Sorry, but it cannot be implemented. Scripts are allowed to take notes, but they can only obtain information about individual items, not about item types or subtypes. Have you tried the \ command? --CommanderC (talk) 22:06, 17 December 2013 (CET)

A pity that it can't be logged by implementation as you say. Yes, of course I use the \ command ingame frequently. - The underlying idea was to make visible the increasingly missing balance of item generation. No ad hoc notes, only logged information matters for my intention. -- Bwijn (talk) 22:36, 17 December 2013 (CET)

About the 'potion' of vulnerability

I must have mistook the scroll of vulnerability for a potion. Thanks for giving me a message, I really couldn't understand why it wasn't on the Potions page...

Will be / May be?

Hi, I noted you're making a lot of notations "[X] will be added in 0.14". Sometimes, though, these things don't get added after all (e.g. "Lava Orcs will be added in 0.13."). Perhaps it would be better to say "[X] may be added in 0.14" or "[X] is being considered for addition in 0.14" or "[X] is being tested in the 0.14 alpha"? -- Xerxes314 (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2014 (CET)

Indeed, that is something that can happen (lava orcs, djinn, forest), but the vast majority of changes are not reverted or disabled. I would rather not write the note in the history section, than write it using may be. --CommanderC (talk) 22:11, 5 February 2014 (CET)

2014 Tourney

Psssst... You interested in competing this year? --MoogleDan (talk) 16:44, 6 April 2014 (CEST)

I have less time, and it's been several months since I played crawl, but let's try to get a couple of wins. --CommanderC (talk) 19:08, 6 April 2014 (CEST)

Uniques spawning location

Hello, how could I find some info about uniques' spawning location? I've seen you updated couple of them for 0.14. I've tried some source diving, but no luck. Could you please tell me where did you get this info? -- Derrek (talk) 10:30, 3 May 2014 (CEST)

crawl-ref/source/dat/des/builder/uniques.des --CommanderC (talk) 14:24, 3 May 2014 (CEST)

Thanks a lot! I was greping through the source folder, not data. -- Derrek (talk) 17:48, 3 May 2014 (CEST)

Are there any good reasons for your revert??

Please explain your reasons why you reverted my randart edit. (Hunger-: This ring provides energy to the wearer, so that need to eat appears less often. Basically like a ring of sustenance.) I still think it is a perfectly correct contribution. The background is that I found a randart ring with just this 'Hunger-' description while playing 0.14.1. The existing 'Hunger(+)' line doesn't cover this fact. Are there any good reasons that you can name why the 'Hunger-' shouldn't be added? The text BTW is near to that of the Learn Db. -- Bwijn (talk) 18:34, 9 August 2014 (CEST)

Randart rings keep the properties of their base type, which may or may not be valid randart properties. Randart properties are those ones that are added to mundane items when they are transformed into randarts.

In this case, Hunger- is one of the properties that belong to the item's base type. The Hunger- property will never be added to any item and can only be found on artifact rings of sustenance and the Black Knight's horse barding. A similar case is Clarity, which can only appear in the autumn katana, the orange crystal plate armour and artifacts whose base type is an amulet of clarity.

Furthermore, the game adds these basic properties to the list of auto-inscriptions, as if they were randart properties, contributing to this confusion. For example, randart amulets of warding will receive a "rN+" inscription which may lead you to think that they are granting you two levels of positive energy.

In the game, the only way to know whether a property is a randart property or not, is to look at the randart's description: the first paragraph will always correspond to the base item, and the second paragraph to the list of randart properties. --CommanderC (talk) 19:33, 9 August 2014 (CEST)

Okay, you convinced me that it was not an act of caprice but represented the intern logic of DCSS's feature. Thank you. Well, as you say yourself: "the list of auto-inscriptions, as if they were randart properties, (are) contributing to this confusion". Would you mind to help reducing that confusion by adding the explanation to the randart article? I would do it by making use of exactly this 'hunger-'example that was the original starting point of my edit. -- Bwijn (talk) 19:00, 10 August 2014 (CEST)

Done! That should clear up any future confusion. --MoogleDan (talk) 21:04, 10 August 2014 (CEST)

Please explain

Please explain why you reverted Formicid and Enchanter. What's your argument? - Just have a look on skill table of Formicid: Hex +2 and also on Enchanter: Hex: 3. That are top aptitude values. Don't you agree? Given the facts, due to lacking manpower Crawl wiki still holds not updated articles at version 11/12/13 and develz.org is not at all up to date in its info publishing. The species Formicid was introduced just for 0.14 a few months ago. Some adaptations seem necessary. I still think this is one of them. Well, what are the facts you see holding against it? -- Bwijn (talk) 11:53, 2 September 2014 (CEST)

You misunderstand the nature of the Recommended Backgrounds section entirely. Those are not the backgrounds that the members of the CrawlWiki community endorse. Those are the backgrounds that Crawl's developers recommend for each species, which you can find by attempting to play as one of those species. All the backgrounds that are displayed in white are Recommended Backgrounds. In this case we have no capacity to add our personal opinions - we're simply copying over what the game suggests. Besides, enchanters require the ability to escape when an attempt at disabling a foe goes sour, and formicids are not particularly good at escape. The +2 aptitude would help, certainly, but their mutations are very much opposed to the background. --MoogleDan (talk) 13:56, 2 September 2014 (CEST)

IMHO Formicids have one of the best means of escape possible: dig a shaft in no time and be gone. Okay, there's eventually the bottom of the branch or the risk to drop into a bunch of even nastier monsters because you sometimes drop some levels deeper. But it's basically the same as uncontrolled teleporting. -- Bwijn (talk) 16:26, 2 September 2014 (CEST)

0.15/0.16 Monster Update

Hey, CC? I know you said before you were pretty much done with Crawl, which is fine. I was wondering if you'd be willing to show me how to operate the mass monster stat updater (or, if it's too complicated, just give it a run today). The wiki's functioning Mostly Properly once more, and we're horribly behind on those details. --MoogleDan (talk) 14:34, 2 December 2014 (CET)

Special:Contributions/CC_Bot. Remember that the program will not touch any pages in Category:Monsters no bot.

Running the monster-trunk program after it has been compiled is the easy part. The problem with monster-trunk is that it depends on the source code of crawl, so each time the devs change something in the game there is a possibility of breakage in monster-trunk. Right now it doesn't work with trunk, but I'll try to fix that before 0.16 is released. --CommanderC (talk) 18:55, 2 December 2014 (CET)

Talk:Potion card

Hey Commander, I miss your presence. You didn't quit the wiki team, true? Would you mind to code dive Potion card and investigate the precise effects facts about which we are walking in a fog cloud ;-) in Talk:Potion card? -- Bwijn (talk) 11:38, 18 July 2015 (CEST)