øAslickproductions.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=q4c29v6tmbbnv0gvgpv2lv9nn7&topic=1891.15e:/My Web Sites/Slick Productions - FFIV Message Board/slickproductions.org/forum/index781e.htmlslickproductions.org/forum/index.php?board=13.160e:/My Web Sites/Slick Productions - FFIV Message Board/slickproductions.org/forum/index781e.html.zx”@g^ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÈ…¬©sOKtext/htmlISO-8859-1gzip@øÕ©sÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿTue, 10 Mar 2020 07:40:26 GMT0ó°° ®0®P®€§²ð®“@g^ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿz5©s Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within

« previous next »
Pages: « 1 2

Author Topic: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within  (Read 4673 times)

assassin

  • Bane of Retards
  • *
  • Posts: 1,033
  • space bears are not gentle!
    • View Profile
    • My Barren Webpage
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #15 on: October 10, 2013, 11:36:23 AM »
i'd be inclined not to mess with it.  making it extend to equipment outside of the one with the actual Immunity is a bit overreaching.  as is having normal Weaknesses involved.

there's already a nice parallelism (as seen in 03/9A69 and 03/9A78): Resist gives Weak to the "opposite" element, and Immune gives Very Weak to the "opposite" element.  greater magnitude in one direction is matched by larger in the other.

(out of curiosity: do they work the same in reverse?  will initial Weak give Resist to opposite, or Very Weak provide Immune to opposite?)

i understand the desire to try and "complete" an item like Glass Helm that has a bit set.  but it's always possible that it was set for no good reason, or that whatever aborted plan the designers had in mind with it simply can't be discerned from available information.

a couple of items in FF6 -- Paladin Shield and Memento Ring, iirc -- have a mystery bit set that does jack squat.  it can be fun to speculate on why it's there, but there's no actionable info.  and it's possible that whatever goal the designers had for it was eventually accomplished by one of the items' many other data fields.
Logged

Deathlike2

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3,538
  • I'm looking at you, bitch!
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #16 on: October 10, 2013, 12:02:26 PM »
Quote from: assassin on October 10, 2013, 11:36:23 AM
(out of curiosity: do they work the same in reverse?  will initial Weak give Resist to opposite, or Very Weak provide Immune to opposite?)

It does. However, physical elemental attacks operate completely differently than magical elemental attacks.

The FireDog example I use often reflects this. If you give Yang the FireClaw, he will do half damage than normal. If you give him the IceClaw, he will do 4 times as much damage than normal (the target is very weak to Ice). If you equip both the Fire AND Ice Claws, he will expose the monster's elemental weakness, despite having a weapon that reacts to the monster's resistance.

Quote
i understand the desire to try and "complete" an item like Glass Helm that has a bit set.  but it's always possible that it was set for no good reason, or that whatever aborted plan the designers had in mind with it simply can't be discerned from available information.

Having seen how the Cursed Ring works, where elemental equipment benefited from the effects of the Cursed Ring (resistance to elemental -> Absorbs elemental), Immune ideally would reflect this. Say you had an Ice Shield + Cursed Ring combo... all Fire elemental magic attacks would be absorbed (think Rubicante). Having an Ice Shield + Flame Armor would allow you to absorb both.

Quote
a couple of items in FF6 -- Paladin Shield and Memento Ring, iirc -- have a mystery bit set that does jack squat.  it can be fun to speculate on why it's there, but there's no actionable info.  and it's possible that whatever goal the designers had for it was eventually accomplished by one of the items' many other data fields.

It is possible that the Paladin Shield was intended for a small story bit or event bit (perhaps from the guy you get it from)... or perhaps some mechanism to get more Cursed Shields. For the Memento Ring, you figure some story/event thing would occur somewhere along the line... ideally with the fight with Wrexsoul (3rd Memento Ring). Even if you didn't have Locke, the Thief Knife would have provided an opportunity for Shadow to steal it... imagine if the entire Dream World for Cyan changed just a little bit if you had Shadow+Relm involved (and perhaps Strago, for some better context). It would be nice if the 3rd Memento Ring was usable by Strago as a result.
Logged
Working on the next Yet To Be Named FF4 "Hardtype" Hack Download Latest: v1.48

Video Demos: #1 #2 #3

Grimoire LD

  • FF4 Hacker
  • *
  • Posts: 1,684
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #17 on: October 10, 2013, 05:35:22 PM »
Quote from: assassin on October 10, 2013, 11:36:23 AM
i'd be inclined not to mess with it.  making it extend to equipment outside of the one with the actual Immunity is a bit overreaching.  as is having normal Weaknesses involved.

there's already a nice parallelism (as seen in 03/9A69 and 03/9A78): Resist gives Weak to the "opposite" element, and Immune gives Very Weak to the "opposite" element.  greater magnitude in one direction is matched by larger in the other.

(out of curiosity: do they work the same in reverse?  will initial Weak give Resist to opposite, or Very Weak provide Immune to opposite?)

i understand the desire to try and "complete" an item like Glass Helm that has a bit set.  but it's always possible that it was set for no good reason, or that whatever aborted plan the designers had in mind with it simply can't be discerned from available information.

a couple of items in FF6 -- Paladin Shield and Memento Ring, iirc -- have a mystery bit set that does jack squat.  it can be fun to speculate on why it's there, but there's no actionable info.  and it's possible that whatever goal the designers had for it was eventually accomplished by one of the items' many other data fields.

I think DeathLike2 explained it in a better way than I could. I still don't fully grasp why Square took this path in particular. The easiest thing to do would have been to make 80 on the normal elemental byte be read as Immune (rather than set up an entirely separate byte for it) and add an exception for it if this Immune bit is triggered to (BMI) instead to use Very Weak instead of Weak elemental figurings. But 80 on the normal elemental byte does nothing.

But no, there is nothing called "Initial: Weak" in FFIV. No piece of equipment will make the player weak to a specific element with having a corresponding resistance. Weakness alone only exists with Monsters and they never deal with Resistance/Immune Weak/Very Weak bytes in the way that characters do. They're just set at the start of battle. There is one interesting exception but its not related to weaknesses. Enemies that are considered weak to Air are always considered Floating, so that's their workaround for that.

I wouldn't mind trying to think up a way to make Glass Mask unique, but I think that may be best to try with an Auto-Reflect, since its gained from the most Reflect intensive foe in the game And it is called "Glass".

There are mystery bits like that in weapons in FFIV as as well. Bit 1 seems to make it impossible to get Critical Hits (and I still have no idea where this is stored), Bit 2 is attached only to Cid's hammer, but again, no noticeable changes. Bit 4 is unknown, Bit 8 is unknown, Bit 10 is unknown, Bit 20 is Long Range, Bit 40 is Throwable, and Bit 80 is Magnetic.

So FFIV has its fair share of "possibly" useless bits. (Granted I think it would be neat to try and hack some purpose in for them)
Logged

Deathlike2

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3,538
  • I'm looking at you, bitch!
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #18 on: October 10, 2013, 07:21:48 PM »
Quote from: Grimoire LD on October 10, 2013, 05:35:22 PM
But no, there is nothing called "Initial: Weak" in FFIV. No piece of equipment will make the player weak to a specific element with having a corresponding resistance. Weakness alone only exists with Monsters and they never deal with Resistance/Immune Weak/Very Weak bytes in the way that characters do. They're just set at the start of battle. There is one interesting exception but its not related to weaknesses. Enemies that are considered weak to Air are always considered Floating, so that's their workaround for that.

Well, technically there is, but it's exposing a bug.

If you have a save file and equip the Adamant Armor on Paladin Cecil (and perhaps Kain as well)... then reset the game. Start a new game.

Fight the Mist Dragon battle and trigger the Cold Mist counterattack. This attack will deal twice as much damage to DK Cecil (and possibly Kain as well). The ColdMist attack is actually an ice elemental attack (like the MomBomb's "explosion" is actually a fire elemental attack).

One of the things that doesn't get cleared out properly is Cecil's natural stats on a reset... (some things may not get reset properly in fact, under such circumstances).

That is besides the point though...

The Ice/Flame Shield/Armor provide an interesting case of trading weakness for resistance. The problem though is that for physical elemental attacks, this becomes a real problem... as the Icebrand or the even the Flametongue are weapons that would deal more damage than they normally should on something that wields the Protect Ring (which protects against both). Fortunately this is addressed in FF4A... I don't believe it was fixed in the Wonderswan version (I'd have to actually check).
Logged
Working on the next Yet To Be Named FF4 "Hardtype" Hack Download Latest: v1.48

Video Demos: #1 #2 #3

Grimoire LD

  • FF4 Hacker
  • *
  • Posts: 1,684
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2013, 07:28:41 PM »
Those bytes aren't cleared? What? Bah, Square that's just lazy... in any case the Physical Attack property is an odd one, I wonder if that's part of the reason that enemies don't have any Elemental Physical Attacks in the normal FFII, despite the system fully supporting it? I can't think of any fix to that one either.
Logged

Deathlike2

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3,538
  • I'm looking at you, bitch!
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2013, 08:00:36 PM »
Quote from: Grimoire LD on October 10, 2013, 07:28:41 PM
Those bytes aren't cleared? What? Bah, Square that's just lazy... in any case the Physical Attack property is an odd one, I wonder if that's part of the reason that enemies don't have any Elemental Physical Attacks in the normal FFII, despite the system fully supporting it? I can't think of any fix to that one either.

It is very much the reason. Imagine taking twice as much damage as normal on physical attacks... which are "unexplained" to the trained player.

I abuse this understanding in my hack... giving more meaning to non-elemental protection (sometimes less elemental protection may be preferable). Otherwise it is easy to take minimal physical damage otherwise.

If any armor (particularly the Crystal Armor set) had Holy/Darkness resistance.... imagine how monsters would twist Crystal Armor into "Cecil is my biatch".
Logged
Working on the next Yet To Be Named FF4 "Hardtype" Hack Download Latest: v1.48

Video Demos: #1 #2 #3

Grimoire LD

  • FF4 Hacker
  • *
  • Posts: 1,684
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #21 on: October 10, 2013, 08:22:41 PM »
That is an interesting idea, not that any enemy ever uses a Dark Elemental attack, but if the Crystal Armor resists Dark it would be weak to Holy, leaving him vulnerable to seven big end-game foes.
Logged

assassin

  • Bane of Retards
  • *
  • Posts: 1,033
  • space bears are not gentle!
    • View Profile
    • My Barren Webpage
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2013, 11:51:14 PM »
Quote from: Deathlike2 on October 10, 2013, 12:02:26 PM
Having seen how the Cursed Ring works, where elemental equipment benefited from the effects of the Cursed Ring (resistance to elemental -> Absorbs elemental), Immune ideally would reflect this. Say you had an Ice Shield + Cursed Ring combo... all Fire elemental magic attacks would be absorbed (think Rubicante). Having an Ice Shield + Flame Armor would allow you to absorb both.

are the Resists still retained in their original RAM byte?  will they still cause Weak to their "opposite" element, or will having been reclassified as Absorb prevent that from happening?  iow, order of operations might matter if the answer to the first question is "no".

also, is there any further Penalty for Absorb?  e.g. will opposite elements become Very Weak (or instant death ;) )?

------

Quote from: Grimoire LD
I still don't fully grasp why Square took this path in particular. The easiest thing to do would have been to make 80 on the normal elemental byte be read as Immune (rather than set up an entirely separate byte for it) and add an exception for it if this Immune bit is triggered to (BMI) instead to use Very Weak instead of Weak elemental figurings. But 80 on the normal elemental byte does nothing.

that would make things a bit all-or-none, no?  suppose you have one piece of equipment that Resists ElementX, and another that is Immune to ElementY.  in your scenario, i think that ElementX and ElementY would wind up both being treated as Immune.

ah, maybe that's what you were striving for.

but i see merit to the existing way (with your bugfix to stop lingering Very Weak applied, of course) of having Resists and Immunities alongside one another, along with their varying penalties of Weaks and Very Weaks.  obviously, maintaining multiple categories has more precision.  and as i mentioned in my prior post, there's a nice parallelism to this system.

i would say that Square took this path because they wanted you to be able to have Resists and Immunities co-existing.  it is a departure from what they did with Absorb, but still plenty logical.  despite Absorb and Immune starting off as bits in the same data byte, they indeed had different systems employed for their implementation.  it's hard to pick one method over the other (though i find the Absorb way less intuitive).

---------

Quote from: Algorithms Guide
[for physical attacks]
FF2/4/4ET (SNES)
Weakness > Immunity > Absorb/Resistance

Quote from: Grimoire LD
Weakness and Very Weak are kept separate with Very Weak taking precedence where applicable.

if both of these are true, then is Adamant Armor garbage against elemental physicals in FF4DS?  or does that game use the GBA elemental priority:

Quote
FF4A (GBA)
Immunity > Weakness > Absorb/Resistance
?
« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 12:02:52 AM by assassin »
Logged

Deathlike2

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3,538
  • I'm looking at you, bitch!
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #23 on: October 11, 2013, 01:24:18 AM »
Quote from: assassin on October 10, 2013, 11:51:14 PM
Quote from: Deathlike2 on October 10, 2013, 12:02:26 PM
Having seen how the Cursed Ring works, where elemental equipment benefited from the effects of the Cursed Ring (resistance to elemental -> Absorbs elemental), Immune ideally would reflect this. Say you had an Ice Shield + Cursed Ring combo... all Fire elemental magic attacks would be absorbed (think Rubicante). Having an Ice Shield + Flame Armor would allow you to absorb both.

are the Resists still retained in their original RAM byte?  will they still cause Weak to their "opposite" element, or will having been reclassified as Absorb prevent that from happening?  iow, order of operations might matter if the answer to the first question is "no".

I believe the answer is yes? The order of operations as described in my algo guide is pretty much what shows precedence though...

Quote
also, is there any further Penalty for Absorb?  e.g. will opposite elements become Very Weak (or instant death ;) )?

Instant death by elementals can be coded into the monster's script... but actually it also means Drain weaponry (Blood Sword, Blood Lance) or Drain based physical attacks deal half damage (but not the spells based on that behavior, oddly, like Drain and Osmose).

It is technically "possible" to make a monster very weak vs Absorb/Drain attacks... and yet if Drain/Osmose were coded to factor in the Absorb bit, it would be able to resist half the damage (but since it's not coded that way, it doesn't).

------

Quote
Quote from: Grimoire LD
I still don't fully grasp why Square took this path in particular. The easiest thing to do would have been to make 80 on the normal elemental byte be read as Immune (rather than set up an entirely separate byte for it) and add an exception for it if this Immune bit is triggered to (BMI) instead to use Very Weak instead of Weak elemental figurings. But 80 on the normal elemental byte does nothing.

that would make things a bit all-or-none, no?  suppose you have one piece of equipment that Resists ElementX, and another that is Immune to ElementY.  in your scenario, i think that ElementX and ElementY would wind up both being treated as Immune.

ah, maybe that's what you were striving for.

but i see merit to the existing way (with your bugfix to stop lingering Very Weak applied, of course) of having Resists and Immunities alongside one another, along with their varying penalties of Weaks and Very Weaks.  obviously, maintaining multiple categories has more precision.  and as i mentioned in my prior post, there's a nice parallelism to this system.

i would say that Square took this path because they wanted you to be able to have Resists and Immunities co-existing.  it is a departure from what they did with Absorb, but still plenty logical.  despite Absorb and Immune starting off as bits in the same data byte, they indeed had different systems employed for their implementation.  it's hard to pick one method over the other (though i find the Absorb way less intuitive).

They don't really coexist though... not in this game. Absorb and Immune have precedence depending on the game port, and whether it is physical and magical. In FF5, FF6, and onwards, there is a distinction intentionally made. Just not this game.

---------

Quote
Quote from: Algorithms Guide
[for physical attacks]
FF2/4/4ET (SNES)
Weakness > Immunity > Absorb/Resistance

Quote from: Grimoire LD
Weakness and Very Weak are kept separate with Very Weak taking precedence where applicable.

if both of these are true, then is Adamant Armor garbage against elemental physicals in FF4DS?  or does that game use the GBA elemental priority:

Quote
FF4A (GBA)
Immunity > Weakness > Absorb/Resistance
?

Dragonsbreathren would be a better person to answer this question.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 01:30:19 AM by Deathlike2 »
Logged
Working on the next Yet To Be Named FF4 "Hardtype" Hack Download Latest: v1.48

Video Demos: #1 #2 #3

assassin

  • Bane of Retards
  • *
  • Posts: 1,033
  • space bears are not gentle!
    • View Profile
    • My Barren Webpage
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #24 on: October 11, 2013, 02:59:28 AM »
Quote from: Deathlike2
They don't really coexist though... not in this game. Absorb and Immune have precedence depending on the game port, and whether it is physical and magical. In FF5, FF6, and onwards, there is a distinction intentionally made. Just not this game.

i mean they can coexist in that a character will resist ElementX and be immune to ElementY.  this is relevant should they be attacked with the two elements separately.  that distinction wouldn't be possible with the hypothetical change i was responding to, as both'd simply be Immune.

anyway, i realize it's different when both elements are in one attack.  i read about your Ice and Fire Claw example..  that's just weird.  are the weapons not treated as separate strikes?
Logged

Grimoire LD

  • FF4 Hacker
  • *
  • Posts: 1,684
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #25 on: October 11, 2013, 07:43:54 AM »
Quote from: assassin on October 10, 2013, 11:51:14 PM

are the Resists still retained in their original RAM byte?  will they still cause Weak to their "opposite" element, or will having been reclassified as Absorb prevent that from happening?  iow, order of operations might matter if the answer to the first question is "no".

also, is there any further Penalty for Absorb?  e.g. will opposite elements become Very Weak (or instant death ;) )?

Having something classified as Absorb does nothing to the corresponding weakness, indeed.

------

Quote from: assassin on October 10, 2013, 11:51:14 PM

that would make things a bit all-or-none, no?  suppose you have one piece of equipment that Resists ElementX, and another that is Immune to ElementY.  in your scenario, i think that ElementX and ElementY would wind up both being treated as Immune.

ah, maybe that's what you were striving for.

but i see merit to the existing way (with your bugfix to stop lingering Very Weak applied, of course) of having Resists and Immunities alongside one another, along with their varying penalties of Weaks and Very Weaks.  obviously, maintaining multiple categories has more precision.  and as i mentioned in my prior post, there's a nice parallelism to this system.

i would say that Square took this path because they wanted you to be able to have Resists and Immunities co-existing.  it is a departure from what they did with Absorb, but still plenty logical.  despite Absorb and Immune starting off as bits in the same data byte, they indeed had different systems employed for their implementation.  it's hard to pick one method over the other (though i find the Absorb way less intuitive).

Indeed, it does make things all or none, but seeing the behavior of the Cursed Ring, I can't help but think that may have been their original intention before they implemented in the Immune system. In any case you bring up a fair point, it is less versatile and the game does respond positively to having multiple resistances and immunities of different sorts.

Quote from: assassin on October 10, 2013, 11:51:14 PM
Quote from: Algorithms Guide
[for physical attacks]
FF2/4/4ET (SNES)
Weakness > Immunity > Absorb/Resistance

Quote from: Grimoire LD
Weakness and Very Weak are kept separate with Very Weak taking precedence where applicable.

if both of these are true, then is Adamant Armor garbage against elemental physicals in FF4DS?  or does that game use the GBA elemental priority:


Quote
FF4A (GBA)
Immunity > Weakness > Absorb/Resistance
?

FFIV:DS uses a slightly altered system which, in my opinion, is more balance oriented and in that game enemies have Elemental Physicals enabled and to my recollection I recall nothing bad about them in that game. I believe they either avoided the origin or just coded it in a different fashion.

We can take a look at my documented Fight Routine and see if that is indeed the case in FFIV though...

And... it is.

Code: [Select]
$03/C650 A9 02 LDA #$02 A:0000 X:0300 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Load a 02 into A.
$03/C652 8D FE 38 STA $38FE  [$7E:38FE] A:0002 X:0300 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Store A at 7E38FE (presumably a data altering field x2 (Default) Power)
$03/C655 8D FF 38 STA $38FF  [$7E:38FF] A:0002 X:0300 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Store A at 7E38FF (as above)
$03/C658 AD 99 26 LDA $2699  [$7E:2699] A:0002 X:0300 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Load A from Caster's Attack Elemental Copy Data.
$03/C65B 8D 00 36 STA $3600  [$7E:3600] A:0008 X:0300 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Store A in 7E3600.
$03/C65E 2D 21 27 AND $2721  [$7E:2721] A:0008 X:0300 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Check the value of A against the Target's Very Weak Elemental.
$03/C661 F0 07 BEQ $07    [$C66A] A:0000 X:0300 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Branch if there is no match to 03C66A.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$03/C663 A9 08 LDA #$08 A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Load a 08 into A.
$03/C665 8D FE 38 STA $38FE  [$7E:38FE] A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Store A in 7E38FE (Presumably a data altering field - x4 Power)
$03/C668 80 2B BRA $2B    [$C695] A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Always Branch to 03C695.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$03/C66A AD 99 26 LDA $2699  [$7E:2699] A:0000 X:0300 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Load Caster's Attack Elemental from Data Copy into A.
$03/C66D 2D 20 27 AND $2720  [$7E:2720] A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Check the value of A against the Target's Elemental Weakness.
$03/C670 F0 07 BEQ $07    [$C679] A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Branch if there is no match to 03C66A.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$03/C672 A9 04 LDA #$04 A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Load 04 into A.
$03/C674 8D FE 38 STA $38FE  [$7E:38FE] A:0004 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC Store it at 38FE (x2 Power)
$03/C677 80 1C BRA $1C    [$C695] A:0004 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Always Branch to 03C695.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$03/C679 AD 99 26 LDA $2699  [$7E:2699] A:0000 X:0000 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Load Caster's Elemental Attack from Data Copy into A.
$03/C67C 2D 26 27 AND $2726  [$7E:2726] A:0000 X:0000 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Check it against Target's Elemental Immunity.
$03/C67F F0 07 BEQ $07    [$C688] A:0000 X:0000 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Branch if there is no match to 03C688.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$03/C681 A9 00 LDA #$00 A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Load 00 into A.
$03/C683 8D FE 38 STA $38FE  [$7E:38FE] A:0000 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Store A in 38FE (x0 Power=1 Damage no matter what)
$03/C686 80 0D BRA $0D    [$C695] A:0000 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Branch to 03C695.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$03/C688 AD 99 26 LDA $2699  [$7E:2699] A:0000 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdiZC - Load A from Caster's Elemental Attack Data in Data Copy.
$03/C68B 2D 25 27 AND $2725  [$7E:2725] A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Check it against the Target's Resistance Byte in Data Copy.
$03/C68E F0 05 BEQ $05    [$C695] A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Branch to 03C695 if there is no match.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$03/C690 A9 01 LDA #$01 A:0008 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC - Load 01 into A.
$03/C692 8D FE 38 STA $38FE  [$7E:38FE] A:0001 X:0400 Y:0000 P:envMxdizC Store it in a damage altering field (x1 (1/2) Power
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Very Weak/Weak/Immune/Resistance, as has been said.

It would be a very simple matter to reorder these to something more conducive to accurately reflect the order of which it should go. And FFIV has the strange case of branching away whenever it hits upon a certain facet. But to put it plainly. The attacks made by any dual-wielder are calculated together, including their elementals, which is why the Ice and Fireclaw work as they do. The question is, what should be the order these go in?


The Tower of Babil Docs has the way it works with spell in clear portions. (using V1.0 instead of 1.1 as my research has focused on) at the bottom of the page, and that goes Immune(+Absorb)/Resists(+Absorb)/Very Weak/Weak.

http://rb.thundaga.com/tob/spellcode.txt

Absorb Elemental is taken from a very different place in the Fight Routine and is never invoked in relation to Elementals.

[/code]
« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 05:13:19 PM by Grimoire LD »
Logged

Deathlike2

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3,538
  • I'm looking at you, bitch!
    • View Profile
Re: Immune and 99% Evade, Glitch or Design? - Documentation Within
« Reply #26 on: October 11, 2013, 02:11:28 PM »
Quote from: assassin on October 11, 2013, 02:59:28 AM
Quote from: Deathlike2
They don't really coexist though... not in this game. Absorb and Immune have precedence depending on the game port, and whether it is physical and magical. In FF5, FF6, and onwards, there is a distinction intentionally made. Just not this game.

i mean they can coexist in that a character will resist ElementX and be immune to ElementY.  this is relevant should they be attacked with the two elements separately.  that distinction wouldn't be possible with the hypothetical change i was responding to, as both'd simply be Immune.

Well, in the way it is currently set up for equipment, I guess the technical answer is yes. However, the Adamant Armor covers all the elementals that can be resisted naturally though armor (no armor resists Holy or Darkness, thus difficult to test this with.

 :edit:
Using FF4A US (GBA) to test with, apparently I could test it... but it's rather different.
There is buggy behavior that I'm using, but it's relevent... that some of the weapons are treated as armor, so the "buggy" Dragon Claw that is holy elemental would be treated as Holy resistance. Immune in the GBA port stacks (Yang was dealt 1 damage) when combined with the Adamant Armor. When I equipped the Hero Shield on Yang, Absorb overrode (or took priority over) the Immune bit.

Quote
anyway, i realize it's different when both elements are in one attack.  i read about your Ice and Fire Claw example..  that's just weird.  are the weapons not treated as separate strikes?

Physical attacks are treated radically different from magical attacks, as far as the game is concerned.

Here's the best example... the Dark Elf.

It is one of the few monsters that is weak vs an element (Holy) and absorbs the same element (Holy).

If you were to use the spell on the monster (which is not normally possible, but just for the sake of discussion), it would get healed from the Holy attack.

If you were to use a Holy elemental sword like the Legend Sword, you would deal twice as damage as you'd normally would.

I hope this explains the issue at hand.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 02:20:59 PM by Deathlike2 »
Logged
Working on the next Yet To Be Named FF4 "Hardtype" Hack Download Latest: v1.48

Video Demos: #1 #2 #3
Pages: « 1 2
« previous next »