00:10:29 <06m​umra> sure 00:58:56 -!- indigaz29 is now known as indigaz2 03:32:37 Experimental (bcrawl) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.23-a0-5261-gd9800d219b 05:34:49 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.34-a0-904-g9f382c6 (34) 05:51:07 03SentientSupper02 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4751 * 0.34-a0-780-g8a6ff367a7: Improve tabcasting behavior with iood 10(26 minutes ago, 1 file, 12+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/8a6ff367a7d7 05:51:07 03SentientSupper02 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4751 * 0.34-a0-781-g8b0d0a4afd: Slightly reduce max duration of -MCast status 10(6 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/8b0d0a4afdd7 06:55:01 03SentientSupper02 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4751 * 0.34-a0-782-g28972d6657: Rework tabcast inscription cost 10(15 minutes ago, 6 files, 17+ 71-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/28972d6657cb 08:14:49 03SentientSupper02 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4751 * 0.34-a0-783-gf9fcbd09cf: Don't print tabcast spell message on game start 10(69 seconds ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/f9fcbd09cfba 15:38:14 03dolorous02 07* 0.34-a0-905-g5901921300: Reword ego descs to consistently be first-person. 10(11 minutes ago, 1 file, 74+ 80-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/59019213008e 15:39:27 Unstable branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.34-a0-904-g9f382c6734 (34) 15:41:26 03dolorous02 07* 0.34-a0-906-g94098a172f: Make Rampage ego desc match artprop ego desc. 10(2 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/94098a172fc0 15:59:32 03Medrano8302 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4815 * 0.34-a0-862-g3418b14cae: Fix fortress talisman description in small screens 10(6 days ago, 1 file, 4+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/3418b14cae1e 16:08:25 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> I'm... not exactly sure how well it'll come off to be giving Moths a visible experimental branch; every dev that has personally looked at and tested them has thought the numbers, play patterns, and severe code burden for tabcasting are all quite clunky, even outside of each of our then-further separate concerns as to whether it's a good enough design in the first place. (I am sorry I haven't provided follow-up feedback for 16:08:25 the PR: outside of my own Crawl work, I've been also busy with my own parts of Draco's upcoming projects.) Soliciting player feedback especially won't really clean up the restructuring of dozens of differing spells to support tabcasting, nor handle the burdens it places on any future spells. We may have a long, long history of experimental branches from both devs and non-devs not working out (Igni Ipthes, Wudzu, Wulndraste, Bearkin, Basajaun, Cherufe, 16:08:26 Lactertilians, Plutonians...) without people clamouring eternally for them to be immortalized like Pakellas (mostly for making it into trunk), but those are quite ancient in Crawl's history. Steel Elves may set a more recent and public example, but dual-wielding isolated to one species was considered far more viable by active devs than tabcasting, and they still needed a very thorough amount of both dev discussion and rapid iteration to end up getting 16:08:26 anywhere at all. More pressingly, it also feels like a strange degree of tacit endorsement to set up a public branch mostly because one non-dev has been spamming #dcss (compared to e.g. PR #3996, changelings, being left to collect dust). It sets a pretty poor precedent for people to be rewarded for spamming to get dev attention, I guess? 16:16:43 <03i​mplojin> i didn't really touch on this in my moth feedback in the other discord but i also share worries about the future code burden that tabcasting branch will create 16:17:33 <03i​mplojin> probably i should write up something more formally in the pr itself 16:58:29 <12g​e0ff> The changeling PR definitely shouldn't collect dust, as it should be closed. It's too ambitious, too unfinished, and with the massive code burden for every new monster added. 17:24:06 <09g​ammafunk> > More pressingly, it also feels like a strange degree of tacit endorsement to set up a public branch mostly because one non-dev has been spamming #dcss (compared to e.g. PR #3996, changelings, being left to collect dust). It sets a pretty poor precedent for people to be rewarded for spamming to get dev attention, I guess? This is a valid concern, but given that anyone who wants to have an experimental on CDI (which realistically is 17:24:07 the only game in town as far as hosts go) has to go through me, I'm not too concerned. I have fairly short patience for people who make demands. There did also seem to be serious effort on the part of the contributor and something approaching general interest from devs as a whole. 17:25:41 <09g​ammafunk> I wouldn't worry too much about any optics of getting half baked things accepted. I did mention that having an experimental is not guaranteeing any eventual merge. If there's a uniform belief among devs that the concept really can't progress further, I can certainly just tell the contributor instead of hosting the branch 17:27:13 <09g​ammafunk> And yeah, any further feedback in the PR is obviously good. They haven't actually gotten back to me to accept the offer of hosting, so it's not clear yet that we'll go forward 17:29:20 <09g​ammafunk> It should be mentioned that the contributor did make significant changes to the mechanics of the species after that first round of feedback (from DO and r-i) 19:02:56 -!- Changesite1 is now known as Changesite 19:41:23 03SentientSupper02 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4751 * 0.34-a0-784-gecbfe43676: Rename Moon Moths to Mothkin 10(66 seconds ago, 20 files, 32+ 30-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/ecbfe43676d9 20:59:43 03SentientSupper02 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4751 * 0.34-a0-785-gd73e07d483: Tweak an inscribe description 10(42 seconds ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/d73e07d4837e 21:10:03 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> "[S]omething approaching general interest from devs as a whole" feels... extremely generous towards numerous devs busy with other work giving mostly negative feedback on the core premise of the species. I'll state it quite bluntly: we already have a species that combines attacking and firing off spells simultaneously with substantially less complexity and codebase burden because it does it the other way around, and I don't see 21:10:03 a lot of benefit in perpetually raising questions about how one species casts half of the non-destructive spells versus just finding more designs for outsourcing this of to design like Spellforged Servitor and Shadow Mimic. DracoOmega fully agrees with this sentiment. The significant efforts from SentientSupper don't inherently reflect positively on the matter, either; Bultungin and Ieoh Jian as player-lead projects both ended up getting wild complete 21:10:04 revisions from various devs after they were merged, to the severe dissatisfaction of their submitters. The fact that on top of managing an ailing codebase, decade-old structuring, and fitting indefinitely more content into a game with a completely depleted simplicity budget, we also have to politely manage a nearly completely open suggestion box from anybody who can program at all and act as community representatives while doing so, is both exhausting 21:10:04 and pretty flawed. PRs response rate has been notably slow over the past two years in direct correlation to the number of repeatedly active devs shrinking to the fingers on one hand, but this also doesn't really mean any random non-dev should have full rights to constantly try to redirect the very development of crawl away from the limited devs' focuses and commandeer the channel devs talk the most in. 21:10:34 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> (We've been working on extremely sizeable things, as we usually are- trying to directly deal with the shields versus two-hander balance qualms by adding entire new systems and brands to provide new levers and dials to adjust such with, or correcting extended branch designs that have been dissatisfaction points amongst devs for a decade like infinite Pan and one-note Tomb.) 21:13:59 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> (...It's also not like we've been neglecting player submissions in general, either, as the many hours spent on 011df5c can attest to.) 21:16:16 <02D​arby> I have to admit, the sheer scope and scale of that push put a lot more work on her plate than I'd accounted for at the time 21:21:35 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> It was, of course, entirely fine by me- one of my three remaining projects keeping me here has been for years "significantly flesh out what vaults and branches can use to be more distinct instead of just leaning on branches grabbing from one another", and new wall + floor tiles was a literally requested part of helping out with such. 21:26:05 <02D​arby> (I can't really say much about mothkin myself since I've neither played them nor am an effective judge of code, but I definitely personally felt on seeing the pitch and following their critiques that they overlapped heavily with revenants, but that "cast on attack" is higher-complexity in implementation and rules, while also sounding like less gameplay depth than I'd already gotten out of playing a hybrid melee blaster revenant) 21:27:05 <02D​arby> to speak with more confidence on that part, though, I too would need to take time out of my own current crawl efforts 21:27:18 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> (I'd like to further emphasize that his rapid responses never really some of the biggest core issues of the species, like how mage starts are inherently some of the weakest D:1 any combos get on a species entirely emphasizing a spell-based gimmick.) 21:28:17 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> (Nor did they address needing constant special-case code for spells already structurally burdened by being written in a case-by-case basis.) 21:29:29 <03i​mplojin> fwiw on this point specifically, one of the recent commits claims to have enabled tabcasting from a spellcasting trigger along with assorted tweaks targeted at early starts. (i have not played the latest version and can't say how well it works at present.) 21:29:54 <03i​mplojin> re: not addressing the fundamental structural issues: i agree 21:31:29 <09h​ellmonk> gotta admit I'm not optimistic about the gimmick actually being workable in the crawl codebase, but I suspect it'll end up playing differently enough from revenant for that to not be an issue if it did somehow end up being workable 21:42:09 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> I haven't played it either, but the immediate responses of "wow I get to cast my level 1 spell once, then have to hope my fists hit at all to proc a 33% chance to cast the spell again", when nearly all level 1 spells have is range and being able to consistently put damage in at the start of the fight, aren't exactly filling me with much confidence. 21:43:38 <03i​mplojin> i also agree. the playtesting i did a couple of days ago before this latest batch of commits did not have me enthusiastic about the design itself. i wrote some things up on the other discord but i haven't posted them yet on github, i'm going to try to do so at some point after looking more thoroughly at the latest set of changes 21:48:41 <03i​mplojin> from a wider perspective, it's beneficial to not immediately run off folks who are enthusiastic to contribute to crawl, though: obviously this has happened in the past repeatedly with failed species and it may very well happen again here, but it might be nice to try and give this one as fair of a chance as we can for the community perception of it. you've mentioned we're down to one hand of active devs, and i'd like to encourage 21:48:41 community ideas where reasonable rather than shooting them down because we don't have time to try to find a way for them to work 21:50:03 <03i​mplojin> (please don't take this as demanding your participation!) 21:50:24 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> Was it a good look to encourage continued work on a community-sourced idea that none of the devs endorse the implementation of, from somebody who posted daily about how we should do nothing more than pay attention to him? 21:55:28 <09g​ammafunk> Those criticisms of the degree of positiveness of the response and the state of the species design are fine, but I take issue with a couple of things: > The significant efforts from SentientSupper don't inherently reflect positively on the matter, either; Bultungin and Ieoh Jian as player-lead projects both ended up getting wild complete revisions from various devs after they were merged, to the severe dissatisfaction of their 21:55:28 submitters. > Those projects both evolved into things that are generally well regarded now: Gnolls and Wu Jian. The development paths were certainly tortured and it would have been great if they were more straightforward. But this species feels far more likely to either get ultimately rejected or at least follow a less byzantine path than than gnolls or Wu. And the original authors were ultimately reasonably happy with the final outcome, even if the 21:55:29 Wu Jian contributor probably would have liked a grander vision to have worked out. It's just the case that an occasional project might not work out or might take a long time to ever do so. On that note: > this also doesn't really mean any random non-dev should have full rights to constantly try to redirect the very development of crawl away from the limited devs' focuses and commandeer the channel devs talk the most in. I don't think some attention on 21:55:29 this branch is going to completely sap crawl development, especially since there's enough expressed concern about the concept that it will now have some major hurdles to overcome. We don't have any particular need to keep the roguelikes dcss channel free of too many types of dev discussion. And I don't think we have anything really like a completely open suggestion box 22:02:24 <03i​mplojin> i think that right now the author is spectating and interacting with players of the experimental and seems eager to make improvements. whether that will cross the point of being worth it to merge this, who can say, but they've been warned repeatedly that an experimental does not mean a trunk merge 22:04:09 <09g​ammafunk> But regarding optics, sometimes you do have to give contributors time to learn a bit about the push and pull of collaboration on a game, particularly one with a design as mature as DCSS. I think almost every dev here has had to evolve their approach in that regard from when they first started working on the project. I do agree that SentientSupper needs to be more patient at times, and we shouldn't give them the impression that merging 22:04:09 content is about complaining the most etc, but I don't think that will happen here. 22:17:05 <06r​egret-⸸nde※> "Giving them time to learn about development" is also pretty generous for somebody who submitted three previous major species gimmicks, all of which were also all rejected after repeated discussion and feedback from other devs. 22:20:55 <09g​ammafunk> Some people are slow learners! (Three is a lot of rejected species, didn't realize they had that many...) 22:22:20 <02D​arby> Sif to a lesser extent 22:35:39 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.34-a0-906-g94098a172f (34) 22:38:31 tbh that needs more than a fork; it needs a significant redesign of how monsters relate to each other and to players 22:38:46 not that crawl couldn't use such… 22:59:20 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.34-a0-906-g94098a172f 23:13:18 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.34-a0-906-g94098a172f (34) 23:55:54 Monster database of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.34-a0-906-g94098a172f