Some non-game changing ideas

[mainmap]

I see a lot of ideas here that fundamentally change the game, these are not such.

I've been playing this game for about two weeks and looking at this forum a day or two. Some of this may be covered already, I didn't search too hard but didn't find them.

1. I've turned off the "toast" pop-up for end-of-fight stuff, so instead I get a small rounded-corner rectangle at the bottom of the screen. I find this less intrusive, BUT I also find it covers my health bars so I don't know if I need to quaff some potions before the next fight. This was less of an issue at lower levels, now I'm places where even if I don't move something is likely to come to me and start a fight. Can that box not be on top of my health?

2. I've turned off the "toast" pop-up and disabled the rounded-corner rectangle unless something drops. But it never tells me what dropped, just how many of things there were. Could it at least show me the names, perhaps ordered by quest item, then rarity level?

3. Why doesn't the combat log show what dropped and how much xp I earned from the last fight? Isn't that log worthy?

4. When I get info on a monster, it shows me a bunch of statistics about armor class, etc. But it doesn't show a count of how many of these bad boys I've killed. The game is clearly tracking that, so as to show me a top five, but why can't the monster stats box expose the kill count for anything?

[Gonk]

Hello Mainmap,

Thank your for these ideas. No 1 wilm be hard because the toasts are an android system feature and they behave exactly that way. But the other ideas should be possible.

Greetings
Chris

[Lacrom]

Another idea, particularly useful for collectionners : could we have the option to sort our items in different bags ? Because we only have 1 bag and when we have 350 items it begins to be really boring when we're looking for one specific item in all those we have.
Then we could have several information per bag (i.e. number of items, type of items, etc...) and it may be possible to create a bag, limited in number of items (like a limit of 20 items), which could be "secured" in order that no one could steal some of those objects.

By the way I really like mainmap's suggestion n°4 ! It would be nice !

[Antison]

Then we could have several information per bag (i.e. number of items, type of items, etc...) and it may be possible to create a bag, limited in number of items (like a limit of 20 items), which could be "secured" in order that no one could steal some of those objects.

What is wrong with sorting by type?

[Lacrom]

Because even by sorting by type there is still 350 items in the list, and when you're looking for a specific pair of gloves you have to look for half an hour because sorting by type does not put the gloves all together, gloves are considered as armors... I personnaly have 391 different items in my inventory (yes I did count them) and it's a lot but it is not really convenient.

Anyway, that's only an idea, if it is not possible, no matter, this game is still awesome

[rijackson741]

I would prefer to improve the sorting by type.

[Grim Reaper]

I would prefer to improve the sorting by type.

same here, it feels like we would have it easier if there were more categories...

[rijackson741]

IMO, Jewelry should be separated from armor, and potions should be separated from food.

[QQkp]

I've opened a PR to address #3 here. I think similar logic could be used for #2 as well, but I'd prefer to wait for feedback on the PR before going down that route in case significant rework is necessary.

I've been thinking about #4 - there's a sort of snag here that I'm worried about. In some cases, enemies that appear indistinguishable to the player are distinct in the code.

For example (spoilers: Stoutford):

In the Stoutford castle there is an enemy called "Erwyn's soldier". When you initiate combat with them, there are 3 possible dialogs:

"What do I seee? A mortal? Your bonesss shall be clattering on the ground soon enoughhh!" -> "How about you show me what that would look like?"
"Ah, your ssskull will be my favorite cup!" -> "Yes, but I also like it very much. So I'd rather keep it."
"Bonesss! Niccce little bonesss!!" -> "But not for you, sorry."

It turns out that in the game data, these are actually 3 different NPC types (erwyn_soldier, erwyn_soldier2, erwyn_soldier3 in monsterlist_stoutford_combined) with identical stats and identical name, but a different dialog.

Lord Erwyn himself is also implemented as 2 different enemies - one that reincarnates if you fight him before you get Tahalendor's coins, and one that dies permanently after you get Tahalendor's coins. The same is true for the guards at the deserter camp just north of Stoutford.

There may be other cases of this, but I'm not aware of them offhand.

Regardless, this means that in some niche cases, the kill counts will appear to be wrong, since the game occasionally presents distinct enemies as identical. This doesn't really matter in the current implementation, since only the top 5 are user-facing and the affected types tend to be unique/quest-related.

Possible ideas I can think of:

1. Just do it anyway - the exceptions are rare enough that it'd still be interesting to see and unlikely to cause much confusion
2. Hide the data for enemies with the "unique" flag set - that'll take care of all the affected enemies I know of, but it would also subtly tip the player off to what enemies the game considers unique or not
3. Hard-code a fix for aggregating the affected enemy types - not pretty, but maybe effective if this sort of thing is rare enough
4. Don't display the data

Any thoughts?

[Gonk]

Thank you for the PR for #3. We will check and merge it. I am not sure about the best solution for #4.