![]() |
#1 |
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5
![]() |
Squelching
First, I'd like to say hello to everyone. I'm a long time TOME player, who recently started on Angband. I started on 3.06, but have downloaded 3.1.1. I realize it is a beta and may not be complete.
It appears you cannot destroy anything with the k command. I do respond yes to the prompts when to ignore bad objects in the future. I figure this would work like the automizer in tome (auto destroys item you designate when you pick them up). Any info on this subject would be welcome. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Adept
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 112
![]() |
If you say yes to squelch, you will never see the squelched items again (unless you unsquelch). So it's not precisely an auto destroy, more like an auto-ignore.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Scout
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 40
![]() |
I am having a lot of issues with the new squelching.
If I hit k to destroy something and I say yes to squelching it, I can't destroy it and it stays in my inventory. Can I turn of the squelching prompt from hitting k? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Prophet
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,800
![]() |
Quote:
I don't know why the hide_squelchable [ = a g ] option is not set to yes by default. Actually, I don't even know why the option exists in the first place. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Angband Devteam member
|
Because some implementations of squelch don't hide squelched stuff, they just mark it squelched and wait for you to issue a command to nuke everything so marked. EyAngband did it this way, IIRC. So the option gives you the choice of two different squelch systems.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | ||
Apprentice
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 50
![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Prophet
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,800
![]() |
Quote:
The number of items you want to destroy, but not to squelch, ought to be a tiny proportion. If you have some interest in future use, you should be dropping them instead. Asking to squelch first really ought to minimize keypresses compared to asking to destroy first. In the short run, it may seem annoying since squelch still has a long way to go, but eventually you will be able to squelch a ring of con +3 and not +4, or a dagger (1d4) (+2,+4) but not (1d4) (+1,+5) so IMO it's reasonable to set up the interface now that will be preferred in the future. Perhaps there should be an interface option specifying the order of the questions. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Adept
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 112
![]() |
one thing that would be nice for squelch questions would be a "worse than anything you currently own"
For example, suppose I have a ring of damage +8, I squelch a ring of damage +7. In the future I'll only see ring of damage +8 or better-- if I get a ring of damage +10 and drop the +8, it'll auto squelch since I don't own it anymore and now +10 is my baseline. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Squelching: some feature requests | jv123 | Vanilla | 9 | August 17, 2009 22:40 |
Squelching DSM | Colbey | Vanilla | 8 | March 15, 2008 20:48 |