Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Minimum/Maximum Encumberance on Extra-Dimensional Pockets #46629

Closed
GyprockGypsy opened this issue Jan 8, 2021 · 6 comments
Closed

Minimum/Maximum Encumberance on Extra-Dimensional Pockets #46629

GyprockGypsy opened this issue Jan 8, 2021 · 6 comments
Labels
stale Closed for lack of activity, but still valid. <Suggestion / Discussion> Talk it out before implementing

Comments

@GyprockGypsy
Copy link

When using the new CRIT Expansion, I recently found a new peice of armor with a "Dimensional Pocket". At first I thought this was awesome, even if it only had a limit of 12L making it useless for even putting heavy things into it in first place. As soon as I put single CBM into it though, It took my encumbrance from 25 to 39, at which point I realized the Max Encumbrance listed in the description was 65!!

Upon further inspection, I found that the armor article in question (CRIT Engineering Suit) didn't have a max encumbrance defined, just a basic encumbrance. So I followed what I assumed to be the model for encumbrance at the moment, and set it at 15:30.

I assume what was happening before was that the game was assuming the max encumbrance based off of max weight value, which was 1000kg, but was scaling that based on the amount of used volume.

My proposal is making the encumbrance of items on clothing a calculation for volume v. mass. I'm thinking of using mass as a basic unit, volume as a scalar, and pocket capacity as a ceiling.

If someone wanted to point me in the direction of the CRIT forums/disco, I'd love to help out. I'm no Nostradamus of programming, but I can copy and paste with the best of them!

Versions and configuration

  • OS: Win10 Pro
  • Game Version: current experimental (11346 as of writing this)
  • Graphics version: I See Undead People!
  • Ingame language: Farts
  • Mods loaded: Aftershock, CRIT, MagiCrazyClysm, Dino
@BrettDong BrettDong added the <Suggestion / Discussion> Talk it out before implementing label Jan 8, 2021
@GyprockGypsy
Copy link
Author

GyprockGypsy commented Jan 8, 2021

It may also be easier to create a definition for pockets that allows the programmer to define whether volume and/or weight should be used in the calculating effective encumbrance. Might also solve any future problems with these types of objects.

@Salty-Panda
Copy link
Contributor

The purpose seems to be the same as #45621

@Maleclypse
Copy link
Member

Please put a PR together with your suggested fix and tag me in it. I'll review it and offer any suggestions I think are needed. I try to help with CRIT as possible.

@actual-nh
Copy link
Contributor

Some statistics on current pocket capacities (including factoring in pockets limited to particular items) could be useful. E.g., what's the median encumbrance associated with items having X (total) volume/weight/length capacity.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented May 2, 2022

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. Please do not 'bump' or comment on this issue unless you are actively working on it. Stale issues, and stale issues that are closed are still considered.

@stale stale bot added the stale Closed for lack of activity, but still valid. label May 2, 2022
@Night-Pryanik
Copy link
Contributor

Closing as stale, since stalebot can't do this by itself.

@Night-Pryanik Night-Pryanik closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Dec 1, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
stale Closed for lack of activity, but still valid. <Suggestion / Discussion> Talk it out before implementing
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants