R/S/M Wish List and Discussion

[Solifuge]

Posting to follow. Some really neat balancing ideas here!

As a relative newbie to the hacktics scene, what sort of tools do people use to create ASM hacks such as these? I'd love to try my hand at implementing a few of these, and am not afraid to dive into hex-editing.

Also, is there anywhere folks have submitted completed ASM hacks that aren't packed with FFTorgASM? Some more examples would be spiffing.

[Pickle Girl Fanboy]

This is a little beyond hex editing.  You need to learn PlayStation 1 assembly language, which is also known as MIPS R3000A.

There's a bunch of stuff disassembled on the wiki, and it's a good place to go, after you read some ASM tutorials.

[formerdeathcorps]

Dualcast

By itself it won't do a damn thing so you can easily fit it into a blank slot.
Here's my idea. I was just thinking that the reason that no one has done a proper Dualcast ability is partly due to how difficult it is to hack command menus. So why not do it as a general hack that checks for a specific RSM? I'm thinking that one could hack the turn resolution routine to check for the use of spells + the Dualcast RSM. Then make it not end the unit's action phase and grey-out non-magic menus if both conditions are met. Is that doable or is it like ridiculously hard?

This is challenging, even for me, because you have to have the game store two spells with different charge times.

[Vanya]

Challenging, but impossibly so? Would it be easier if you took the average of the two CTs or just used the larger of the two?

[Pickle Girl Fanboy]

Or make 1 start charging after the other ends?

[formerdeathcorps]

Or make 1 start charging after the other ends?

This may be feasible, but for balance and coding reasons, we'd still want to cast the spell at the speed of the slower spell's charge time.  Also, there's no logical definition of what a spell is or isn't, so you'll need a flag to clarify it (though I guess the silence flag works too if you don't turn it into addle).

[Pickle Girl Fanboy]

How about the "Calculate" flag?

[Vanya]

That's a good idea because it would already limit the usable spells in a way that jives with vanilla out of the box. Of course including instructions on how to change which flag this hack checks would be much more flexible in general.

[Pickle Girl Fanboy]

I want a Calculator and a Red Mage, and I'm okay with them both using the Calculate flag.

[Dokurider]

So here's my idea for a berserker. Just hand them a reaction that reacts to everything in range and I mean everything is flagged. Even just moving up to them. Ideally, they should counter when the unit tries to leave their range as well. Grey out Secondary and Reaction, call it a day.

[The Damned]

(Oh, right. This is the last thing that I kept forgetting to do.)

All this talk of Calculate reminds me that I'm still not sure if it's possible to limit individual parameters to stop the AI (or the player) from whoring certain things.

Anyway, since Pickle Girl Fanboy was telling me to try to be more willing out of the current limits, two things have occurred to me:


1. Given my (very minor) "grievance" with Abandon and other evasion-related "reactions", I was wondering if those abilities would still function the same as Supports as exactly as they are now. I still don't really understand why they're reactions and it occurred to me that one of my newer ideas--perhaps combining Arrow Guard with Catch and Throw Item--further blurs that line of Reaction and Support. (Ignore the fact that it's probably a stupid idea and that I don't have Throw around yet/still/anymore.)

2. Would there be any objection to combining Short Charge and Half of MP if they were both reduced by half effectiveness to about 75% and caused the spell/ability used to also become about a quarter less-effective? Too much one way or the other just in idea alone? (I realize this is difficult to assess in a vacuum.)

Now for individual replies:


@Dokurider: Completely unrelated to this thread, but I saw your question with regards to the RP awhile. I haven't read most of it, hence why I haven't answered, but I'll try to do that by the end of the Friday after next. Sorry if it seemed like I was outright ignoring it.

@formerdeathcorps: I should tell you know that I'm "borrowing" your Expose(d) status. I had only thought of doing a Geomancy support, but I had also mistakenly thought it would step all over my plans. Having it be a status makes a lot more sense on multiple fronts, though.

Seeing your Curse (and Astra) actually makes me want to weaken my own slightly more, though. I'm not sure whether I want Astra or something more...neutral in opposition to Curse(d), honestly.

(Yes, I'm still aware that I owe you that ASM answer.)

Totally missed your post, due to excessive Ctrl + F "Damned".  I've no idea, ask FDC.

Yeah, sorry about that Vanya. I tend to invoke this.

[Celdia]

combining Arrow Guard with Catch and Throw Item

Would you mind terribly if I stole this idea, Damned?

[The Damned]

(Ugh, I am so horrible at scheduling anything.)

Something just occurred to me: Could the Support that currently adds Defend be used to add any status or status separately? Because I'm not seeing an easy/obvious location to change in FFTPatcher, but it seems you should be able to....

Would you mind terribly if I stole this idea, Damned?

Ha, like you have to ask someone who "steals" so regularly from others.

I appreciate the sentiment, but, sure, go ahead.

[Vanya]

No worries.

[Pickle Girl Fanboy]

1. Given my (very minor) "grievance" with Abandon and other evasion-related "reactions", I was wondering if those abilities would still function the same as Supports as exactly as they are now. I still don't really understand why they're reactions and it occurred to me that one of my newer ideas--perhaps combining Arrow Guard with Catch and Throw Item--further blurs that line of Reaction and Support. (Ignore the fact that it's probably a stupid idea and that I don't have Throw around yet/still/anymore.)

Instead of thinking of it in broad terms of Reaction, Support, and Movement, think of them in terms of their actual effects (many R/S/Ms have several effects), and categorize these effects as:
*Reactive (activates once in response to certain stimuli)
*Conditional (a passive effect, which is turned on only when certain conditions are met, but does not respond to stimuli beyond the conditions required to turn it on - ie, it responds to conditions, not stimuli)
*Passive (on all the time)

Break every effect of every R/S/M (including those on your wish list) along these terms, and you will have a much easier time thinking about them.

Since so many R/S/Ms combine often combine Reactive, Conditional, and Passive effects, I intend to let the Reaction Slot allow Reactions and Supports, and the Movement Slot allow Movements and Supports.  It's either that, or flag every ability as Reactive, Conditional, and Passive, and have only one slot for each.

Or maybe make some kind of crap where you can only have one Reactive and once Conditional equipped at any one time, but all three slots can equip any RCP (R/S/M, whatever).  So you can run one Reactive and two Passives, or 3 Passives, or one Reactive and one Conditional and one Passive, or one Conditional and two Passives.

2. Would there be any objection to combining Short Charge and Half of MP if they were both reduced by half effectiveness to about 75% and caused the spell/ability used to also become about a quarter less-effective? Too much one way or the other just in idea alone? (I realize this is difficult to assess in a vacuum.)

It's exactly the opposite of Double MP.  Halve MP, with an additional "cost" being reduced - the cost of spell CT.  It sounds like a good idea, but you may want to make Double MP increase CT slightly.  I personally would never use either of these ideas, and I'd especially never implement both of them, because what if the AI uses both of them?

[The Damned]

(Well today was a complete waste.)

Yes, I am aware of your own plans to bleed the lines between Reactions, Supports and Movements and many other people's plans to at least blur the lines between Supports and Movements. Even as "adventurous" as I'll allow myself to get now, I still don't intend to do that at present: Reactions will be Reactions only, Supports will be Supports only and Movements--of which I need a hell of a lot more of--will be Movements only.

Thinking of them as Conditional, Passive and Reactive is interesting, though.

It's exactly the opposite of Double MP.  Halve MP, with an additional "cost" being reduced - the cost of spell CT.  It sounds like a good idea, but you may want to make Double MP increase CT slightly.  I personally would never use either of these ideas, and I'd especially never implement both of them, because what if the AI uses both of them?

Assuming you mean both of them as once, correct? As I said above, since they would both be Supports, that would be impossible since the only way to have more than one Support would be me to manually do that. While I may admittedly allow that to happen for purposes of testing to sate my curiosity, a unit would never be able to have both of them in the final product, at least with my current "plans".

[Pickle Girl Fanboy]

Reactive = the vanilla reactions, like Counter, HP Restore, and Vanilla Speed Save
Conditional = my versions of PA/MA/SP save, which gives a static boost to a stat as long as the conditions for that boost are met (low HP)
Passive = Abandon, Weapon Guard/Parry, and all the rest of the supports

[Dokurider]

Counter Tackle: Activates when you attack someone, as opposed to being attacked.

Discuss.

[Pickle Girl Fanboy]

Then it's a support, since it adds a new attack.  Even if it activates at (Brave/100) %

Interesting idea for a support, though.  Might steal it.

[Dokurider]

It's must be equippable as a reaction, otherwise it's shit.