Aslickproductions.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=5f0fck550j2m4m2fpbtkj2vkm1&topic=1642.0e:/My Web Sites/Slick Productions - FFIV Message Board/slickproductions.org/forum/index8140.htmlslickproductions.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=5f0fck550j2m4m2fpbtkj2vkm1&board=8.220e:/My Web Sites/Slick Productions - FFIV Message Board/slickproductions.org/forum/index8140.html.zx&h^OKtext/htmlISO-8859-1gzip8:Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:02:32 GMT0 0P&h^" Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution

« previous next »
Pages: 1

Author Topic: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution  (Read 3212 times)

Ronnen

  • Karlabos
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« on: July 02, 2011, 12:09:43 PM »
Making this thread so as to not clutter up dark's thread concerning his project (though I hope he'll participate here)

Since Assassin's Brushless Sketch patch and my Fanaticism patch both modify the code block responsible for checking Magitek / Fanatics Tower command changes, they don't work together.

I'm not sure I can make a Limited version that is compatible without using free-space (which I'm loathe to do), but I have a non-limited version that does seem compatible with his brushless patch.

An IPS for this is attached (apply after his brushless patch), as well as the asm to generate.

This version "turns on" the following "normally available" commands when in the fanatics tower / in magitek armor:
Runic, Lore, Sketch, Dance, Summon

It also turns on a slew of not-normally available commands like health, etc... as this isn't really a limited version...

Dark, since I'm really making this patch with you in mind so to speak, here are some choices:

I can trivially make it not allow Runic. This has no down side.

I can also turn off Dance... if you don't care if I always replace the first item with Magitek / Magic no matter what is there (only really is a negative for Gogo as this makes him unable to Mimic) and always do nothing to the 4th slot (again only really a "negative" for Gogo as everyone else should have Item there anyway)

Or I can try and find some empty space and potentially break other patches you are using, and you'll probably have to wait longer for a resolution :)
Logged

darkmage

  • Phantom Train
  • *
  • Posts: 339
  • Skating the Razor
    • View Profile
Re: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« Reply #1 on: July 02, 2011, 01:18:12 PM »
Actually, that works for me - Dance is a form of Magic, and I had forgotten about it. Runic could conceivably be dungeon-breaking, but since Runic can absorb magic from both sides of the field, I think some strategic planning would be involved to use it that way.

I'm OK with testing this out and seeing how it works. Thanks again for working this out, Ronnen!    :happy:


:edit:
So far I can battle through the first Magitek battles. Looking promising!
« Last Edit: July 02, 2011, 02:48:29 PM by darkmage »
Logged

Ronnen

  • Karlabos
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« Reply #2 on: July 02, 2011, 02:50:16 PM »
Alright cool.

Well assuming it works (or once it eventually does) and I get the "okay" from assassin, I'll add that version of the patch to the distro I submitted to this site.
Logged

assassin

  • Bane of Retards
  • *
  • Posts: 1,033
  • space bears are not gentle!
    • View Profile
    • My Barren Webpage
Re: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« Reply #3 on: July 02, 2011, 07:07:34 PM »
it looks like it'll coexist with my patch.  so functionally, is this some sorta hybrid between your original Fanaticism and Fanaticism Limited patches?  i'm a bit confused about your new treatment of the Slot command.  "Fanaticism.asm" skips to NextSlot when that's the command, whereas "Fanaticism_assassin.asm" has a special check to clear the command when it's Slot (0Fh).  also, Morph and Revert have had their treatment changed, but that's probably due to space constraints.
Logged

Ronnen

  • Karlabos
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« Reply #4 on: July 02, 2011, 07:24:58 PM »
Quote from: assassin on July 02, 2011, 07:07:34 PM
so functionally, is this some sorta hybrid between your original Fanaticism and Fanaticism Limited patches?

In short, yes. I was aiming to make a limited option since that is what he was trying to use originally when the conflict was found. Since I'm more or less making this for dark...

Quote from: assassin on July 02, 2011, 07:07:34 PM
i'm a bit confused about your new treatment of the Slot command.

The only way I could enable the things that make sense to enable (lore and sketch) was to enable a big block. "Down" didn't make sense because it includes a ton of stuff that should probably be avoided like Steal, Blitz, SwdTech, etc.

So I had to go "Up", which of the things one would want to avoid in a limited patch is Control, Slot, Rage, Leap, Dance, Jump, X-Magic, GP-Rain, Summon, Health, Shock, Possess, and Magitek...

Rage and Leap are already handled out by other code

Jump, X-Magic, GP-Rain, Summon, Health, Shock, Possess, and Magitek are "irrelevant" since they are not normally available in the game as "pre-relic processing" commands.

That leaves Dance and Slot...given the space I had, I could only do the one (and of the two Slot "makes the least sense") without ditching other functionality of this code block (per the options I outline in my initial post) or without spending more time to try to find unused free space to build a sub routine that wouldn't conflict with his other patches.

Quote from: assassin on July 02, 2011, 07:07:34 PM
also, Morph and Revert have had their treatment changed, but that's probably due to space constraints.

More or less. Though again, in the limited version of my patch, Morph and Revert weren't allowed... so I probably wouldn't do so here either even if I had space.
Logged

Lenophis

  • Forum Overlord
  • *
  • Posts: 1,688
  • Gender: Male
  • I sad
    • View Profile
    • Slick Productions
Re: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« Reply #5 on: July 02, 2011, 10:17:48 PM »
Since this conflicts with assassin's patch, there stands a good chance (100%?) that it'll conflict with my Summon This! patch as well. I swear I'll be updating it soon, but RL has been a real kick in the nuts for me lately.
Logged

119 bugs fixed and counting.

Ronnen

  • Karlabos
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« Reply #6 on: July 03, 2011, 11:44:14 AM »
Quote from: Lenophis on July 02, 2011, 10:17:48 PM
...but RL has been a real kick in the nuts for me lately.

Sorry to hear that! Hope things become less nutty for you (or perhaps less kick-y)...

Quote from: Lenophis on July 02, 2011, 10:17:48 PM
Since this conflicts with assassin's patch, there stands a good chance (100%?) that it'll conflict with my Summon This! patch as well. I swear I'll be updating it soon...

The original versions of Fanaticism affect:
C2/535A -> C2/539D

The "Brushless" version of Fanaticism affects:
C2/5352 -> C2/538B

Your Summon This! patch affects:
C2/4E49 -> C2/4E4B
C2/52C6 -> C2/52DA
C2/53CB -> C2/53DD
C2/64B7 -> C2/64E7

So there is no conflict between Fanaticism and SummonThis! patches, regardless of version. Other than the fact that my patch makes Summon available in Fanatics tower, while yours does not.

The reason the Brushless sketch patch affects yours is because Brushless optimizes a lot of data to make space for its additional functions rather than just use free space elsewhere. While there is nothing wrong with this per se, it does mean that almost any patch that alters the availability / visibility of commands in battle (as yours does to a degree and mine does nothing but) will conflict with assassin's patch.

I say we both just blame assassin and ride off into the sunset...    :laugh:

(assassin) --> :omghax:  .   .    .   .   .   .  :cycle:  <-- (us)
« Last Edit: July 03, 2011, 11:49:49 AM by Ronnen »
Logged

assassin

  • Bane of Retards
  • *
  • Posts: 1,033
  • space bears are not gentle!
    • View Profile
    • My Barren Webpage
Re: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« Reply #7 on: July 03, 2011, 01:12:34 PM »
Quote from: Ronnen on July 03, 2011, 11:44:14 AM
I say we both just blame assassin and ride off into the sunset...    :laugh:

(assassin) --> :omghax:  .   .    .   .   .   .  :cycle:  <-- (us)

how romantic.  which one of you will be Andrew McCarthy piloting the motorcyle, and which one will be the Kim Cattrall mannequin?

my patch is from 2004!  you weren't even weaned back then!  i have precedence!!
Logged

darkmage

  • Phantom Train
  • *
  • Posts: 339
  • Skating the Razor
    • View Profile
Re: Fanaticism / Brushless conflict resolution
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2011, 02:25:43 PM »
I think we've gotten off-track here...

/Locke

 :cycle:
Logged
Pages: 1
« previous next »