Skip to content

Embezzler lucky #2367

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

Open
wants to merge 18 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Embezzler lucky #2367

wants to merge 18 commits into from

Conversation

Shiverwarp
Copy link
Contributor

@Shiverwarp Shiverwarp commented May 2, 2025

Problem I'm unsure how to fix: We need to count how many embezzlers we're fighting here to account for them when buffing with potions (I don't think we should actually account for them cost wise, but we are spending turns fighting them, so that might cause us to run out of turns of buffs before we finish all our copiers, so the copytargetcount might need updating to account for that?

Copy link
Contributor

@spaghetti-squash spaghetti-squash left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great first step. I think this will be a good value-add

@@ -44,6 +44,9 @@ export function meatTargetOutfit(
if (target === $location`Crab Island`) {
const meat = meatDrop($monster`giant giant crab`) + songboomMeat();
outfit.modifier.push(`${meat / 100} Meat Drop`, "-tie");
} else if (target === $location`Cobb's Knob Treasury`) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

unfortunately I think we need a more precise check for this given that wanderers can be placed in the treasury (they can't be placed in crab island)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added a check for Lucky!, hopefully that should work

Comment on lines 382 to 392
do: () => getBestLuckyAdventure().location,
prepare: () => {
if (!have($effect`Lucky!`)) {
retrieveItem($item`Eight Days a Week Pill Keeper`);
cliExecute("pillkeeper semirare");
if (!have($effect`Lucky!`)) {
set("_freePillKeeperUsed", true);
return;
}
}
},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we should use a system similar to the one you've set up in embezzler.ts and for similar reasons (that is, separate lucky source from lucky execution).

BUT, the turns field should remain on the sources rather than on the lucky adventure task.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does that cause any problems with the task itself having spendsTurn: false, but actually having a turns field?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Did this and also added counting the embezzler sources in copyTargetCount

@@ -1098,8 +1015,9 @@ export const copyTargetSources = [
];

export function copyTargetCount(): number {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this worth having two separate functions (or a boolean arg) for? is everywhere we call copyTargetCount a place where we want to include embezzlers? even if you're fighting, say, roaches?

@@ -60,18 +59,15 @@ function drivebyValue(): number {
}

function entendreValue(): number {
const targets = copyTargetCount();
const targets = highMeatMonsterCount("Scepter"); // Scepter can cause circular logic
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

could you do a quick refactor to both have highmeatMonsterCount passed in rather than calculated both times, and to deduplicate some of the logic here?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants