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

health scanner obsucation #5124

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Trilbyspaceclone
Copy link
Collaborator

About The Pull Request

Medical scanners (the hand held ones) now have a bit of OBSUCATION YAY!
Having the perk for OBSUCATION or ADVANCED MEDICAL removes this obscuration

Requested PR

Tested with and with OBSUCATION perk

@Trilbyspaceclone Trilbyspaceclone added Enhancement Improves or Adds upon a system or content Balance Improves on fairness labels Mar 22, 2024
@Lamasmaster
Copy link
Contributor

This does leave regular scanners untouched right ?
Those already got way higher investement in bio and obviously require entire machine / not portable

@cdb-is-not-good
Copy link
Collaborator

So fucking zased

@cdb-is-not-good cdb-is-not-good added the Test Merged A RP that is test merged before added to the code itself label Mar 23, 2024
@ChefDoggo
Copy link
Contributor

i don't get why handheld scanners obsucation is perk locked with zero bio bypass if 90% of medical items (including the much larger supposed "advanced" scanners that require a lot more bio to use) have a stat bypass, how are you gonna convince me that someone that can accurately read a much larger/advanced scanner is incapable of reading a handheld smaller scanner

@cdb-is-not-good
Copy link
Collaborator

cdb-is-not-good commented Mar 23, 2024

I'm not a huge fan of there being any bypass to be honest. It kind of defeat the purpose of moving away from hard numbers so people stop saying shit like " 20 brute to the arm" since clearly we can't expect people to role play or something like that, we have to do it by code.

@king5327
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not particularly a fan of this recent shift toward more 'fuzzy' readouts.

@cdb-is-not-good
Copy link
Collaborator

If staff would enforce roleplay standards this would be a non issue. We could rely on them to keep players to be kept in check and not straight up spout game terms

@king5327 king5327 removed the Test Merged A RP that is test merged before added to the code itself label Apr 1, 2024
@Trilbyspaceclone Trilbyspaceclone added the Test Merged A RP that is test merged before added to the code itself label Apr 1, 2024
@Dimasw99
Copy link
Contributor

Dimasw99 commented Apr 2, 2024

Hilariously enough. This change makes it so that examining a person gives you exactly the same amount of information as using a health scanner now. I would suggest making the damage threshold more granular.

An even better solution would be to have a word output and a number output at the same time. To guide people to tell which damage case is what tier, while also not completly removing any instant feedback that otherwise just feels fustrating.

@Trilbyspaceclone Trilbyspaceclone removed the Test Merged A RP that is test merged before added to the code itself label Apr 4, 2024
@cdb-is-not-good
Copy link
Collaborator

Hilariously enough. This change makes it so that examining a person gives you exactly the same amount of information as using a health scanner now. I would suggest making the damage threshold more granular.

An even better solution would be to have a word output and a number output at the same time. To guide people to tell which damage case is what tier, while also not completly removing any instant feedback that otherwise just feels fustrating.

This would be a good way to do it. K5 suggested making it percentage based rather than direct damage numbers and putting that side by side with the actual terminology would be good.

@hex37
Copy link
Collaborator

hex37 commented Jul 16, 2024

I'd prefer it if a high BIO would also be usable in place of perk requirements.

@@ -55,6 +56,10 @@
to_chat(usr, SPAN_WARNING("Your biological understanding isn't enough to use this."))
return

if(user.stats?.getPerk(PERK_NO_OBFUSCATION) || user.stats?.getPerk(PERK_ADVANCED_MEDICAL))
Copy link
Collaborator

@hex37 hex37 Jul 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
if(user.stats?.getPerk(PERK_NO_OBFUSCATION) || user.stats?.getPerk(PERK_ADVANCED_MEDICAL))
if(user.stats?.getPerk(PERK_NO_OBFUSCATION) || user.stats?.getPerk(PERK_ADVANCED_MEDICAL) || user.stat_check(STAT_BIO, STAT_LEVEL_EXPERT))

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Balance Improves on fairness Enhancement Improves or Adds upon a system or content
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants