|
|
|
 |
|

November 18th, 2007, 01:53 PM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 5,425
Thanks: 174
Thanked 695 Times in 267 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Agrajag, probably. I have no idea of how the Dom3 internals work in this respect, so I can't say with any authority how it is. Even if JK gave me access to the source code and all the tools to analyze it, I'd still be worthless since I would not understand much of anything of it.
As far as what JO said, it does not talk about the mechanics of the RNG or the debug output at all. JK is the coder, so he is the one who would know what makes things tick.
|

November 18th, 2007, 02:16 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Israel
Posts: 1,449
Thanks: 4
Thanked 8 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Quote:
Edi said:
As far as what JO said, it does not talk about the mechanics of the RNG or the debug output at all. JK is the coder, so he is the one who would know what makes things tick.
|
Good point 
__________________
I'm in the IDF. (So any new reply by me is a very rare event.)
|

November 18th, 2007, 03:24 PM
|
 |
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Forlì, Italy
Posts: 322
Thanks: 15
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Quote:
vfb said:
Do you still think it's huge positive damage from a DRN roll?
Each flagellant did negative 71 "dmg". You just need average DRN rolls to get this. It's not a bug in the RNG, it looks like a calculation bug.
The negative 71 "dmg" turns into:
Strength 7 Flagellant: 36 damage
Strength 11 Flagellant: 32 damage
|
The Manchaka player asked me to answer this:
Thank you vfb,
in my opinion your theory fits perfectly.
Probably the bug is about managing high negative damage scores.
Hope the dev will take care of this.
I've wasted an axperienced King of Elemental fire(together with his unquenched sword, barrier, and aseftik's armor) to a flagellant, and it's not funny.
I know that sometimes it's only matter of bad luck, but in the same game I've lost another King of elemental fire with al least 23 MR (together with his equipment, magebane and aegis) to a mind hunt by a simple starspawn without any penetration bonus.
Don't you think it's enough?
Enne,
The machaka player
|

November 18th, 2007, 04:22 PM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Eastern Finland
Posts: 7,110
Thanks: 145
Thanked 153 Times in 101 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Quote:
vfb said:
Do you still think it's huge positive damage from a DRN roll?
Each flagellant did negative 71 "dmg". You just need average DRN rolls to get this. It's not a bug in the RNG, it looks like a calculation bug.
The negative 71 "dmg" turns into:
Strength 7 Flagellant: 36 damage
Strength 11 Flagellant: 32 damage
|
I finally understood what you meant by the "negative 71 dmg". You got that wrong. The flagellants didn't deal negative damage, but had negative modifier to their damage (the flail's damage ration minus the King's prot value)
The lines similar to:
hitunit 221 16083 dmg-34 spec96 ba2
happen before the flagellant's attack roll. It means that IF the flagellant hits THIS body part, the damage dealt by his str+random is lowered by 34. It is done for both parts of the body every time an attack hits. The damage that is actually dealt is stated on this line:
damage 36 on King of Flames, spec0x60 ba2
The first flagellant dealt 36, the second 32 points of damage through the armor. Neither dealt negative damage.
The hits would have had to deal total of about 70 points of damage, or about 60 without strength counted in. That's about 14 re-rolls on the dice, even if the protection roll gave straigth ones.
However, this also means that to overflow from the negative side, the defender's roll would have had to be much higher than the attacker's. The overflow point can't be -32, because SCs would hit that all the time - the King's base protection was better than that. The next lowest exponent of 2 would be 2^6 or 64, and going under -64 would take the defender a roll of 32. This would take about 6 rerolls in optimal case, less than 0.1% chance - so even if the bug was in negative roll-over, it would be VERY rare, but much less so that the chance of a unit dealing damage through extreme protection.
However, as I said before, I think overflow bug is VERY unlikely, given that the positive damage can go up to 1000 or so at least. Besides, if a human-form Dragon gets hit in dominion 10 under Gift of Health, he gets (dragon's hp - human's hp) amount of "negative damage". All shapechanges work that way. That's why you can see -50 damage coming from an elemental that went from size 6 to size 5, or from a Hunter Spider whose rider died.
|

November 18th, 2007, 07:18 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4,463
Thanks: 25
Thanked 92 Times in 43 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Also, don't forget thet fatigue increases at triple levels when your pretender has a name that starts with an F, B, M or Q. This might lead the Fire King to have enough fatigue to have his protection value halved. There is also a chance that The armor is negated if the sum of the attack skills during one turn is less than the sum of the alphabetical positions of the units name. Hence it is all pretty obvious it was not just bad luck, but an expected outcome of the battle.
|

November 18th, 2007, 07:25 PM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 5,921
Thanks: 194
Thanked 855 Times in 291 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Good point KO.
|

November 18th, 2007, 07:31 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Japan
Posts: 3,691
Thanks: 269
Thanked 397 Times in 200 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Endo, thanks for clearing up the meaning of dmg. Sorry, I didn't understand what that number represented. So it does look like 2 massive DRNs at the moment. If I get a bit of time, I might duplicate the battle in the simulator map, and see what happens.
__________________
Whether he submitted the post, or whether he did not, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed— would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper— the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever.
http://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods/index.php?
|

November 19th, 2007, 11:35 AM
|
 |
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 724
Thanks: 93
Thanked 37 Times in 27 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Quote:
Kristoffer O said:
Also, don't forget thet fatigue increases at triple levels when your pretender has a name that starts with an F, B, M or Q. This might lead the Fire King to have enough fatigue to have his protection value halved. There is also a chance that The armor is negated if the sum of the attack skills during one turn is less than the sum of the alphabetical positions of the units name. Hence it is all pretty obvious it was not just bad luck, but an expected outcome of the battle.
|
I have never previously encountered a reference to an alphabetical relationship to any skill or game factor. (Maybe I have't read the manual closely enough.) Please explain.
Also, does the alphabetical relationship apply to the unit name i.e "Fire King" or the units individual name? And if it is the individual name, if I change the units name will that work?
You reference letters with negative connotations, are thee letters with positive influences?
Or are you just pulling my leg?
__________________
Men do not quit playing because they grow old; they grow old because they quit playing.
Oliver Wendell Holmes
|

November 19th, 2007, 11:51 AM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 5,425
Thanks: 174
Thanked 695 Times in 267 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Quote:
Edratman said:
Quote:
Kristoffer O said:
Also, don't forget thet fatigue increases at triple levels when your pretender has a name that starts with an F, B, M or Q. This might lead the Fire King to have enough fatigue to have his protection value halved. There is also a chance that The armor is negated if the sum of the attack skills during one turn is less than the sum of the alphabetical positions of the units name. Hence it is all pretty obvious it was not just bad luck, but an expected outcome of the battle.
|
I have never previously encountered a reference to an alphabetical relationship to any skill or game factor. (Maybe I have't read the manual closely enough.) Please explain.
Also, does the alphabetical relationship apply to the unit name i.e "Fire King" or the units individual name? And if it is the individual name, if I change the units name will that work?
You reference letters with negative connotations, are thee letters with positive influences?
Or are you just pulling my leg?
|
The latter. Wherever it is that you got your sarcasm detector, go there and get a refund. The thing is obviously broken. 
|

November 19th, 2007, 01:14 PM
|
 |
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 724
Thanks: 93
Thanked 37 Times in 27 Posts
|
|
Re: Very serious combat bug?
Quote:
Edi said:
The latter. Wherever it is that you got your sarcasm detector, go there and get a refund. The thing is obviously broken.
|
OUCH. GOT ME. Now I know why I didn't get a Noble prize again this year, extending my steak to 56 consecutive years.
Actually this game has so many enjoyable quirks that it would not be a major surprise to find out that there was an alphabetical surprise hidden in the code.
I've gotten a Hall of Fame hero awarded the "Dumbass" medal and once had a hero that gave his troops leprosy. I think the only thing I haven't encountered (yet) is a female commander who gives the clap to her troops. 
__________________
Men do not quit playing because they grow old; they grow old because they quit playing.
Oliver Wendell Holmes
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|