Hit Sounds in the Core

Here you can post threads requesting help on the official POL Ultima Online Emulator Core 097.
Note: Core 097 is no longer officially supported.

Moderator: POL Developer

Post Reply

How should the core handle damaged sounds?

Poll ended at Sun May 25, 2008 5:17 pm

It should do that or if it is an npc use a 'DamagedSound' property.
3
21%
It should do that or if it is an npc, use a 'DamagedSound' and have another config setting to toggle if the core or script handles this.
6
43%
It should be removed from the core entirely and handled purely script side.
5
36%
 
Total votes: 14

User avatar
Austin
Former Developer
Posts: 621
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:30 am

Hit Sounds in the Core

Post by Austin »

Damaged sound

Currently when a mobile is damaged the core plays a sound effect.

Code: Select all

do_imhit_effects()
{
        if (gender == GENDER_MALE)
		play_sound_effect( this, SOUND_EFFECT_MALE_DEFENSE );
	else
		play_sound_effect( this, SOUND_EFFECT_FEMALE_DEFENSE );
     ...
}
Vote on the poll... ill let it run for 4 days.
User avatar
ncrsn
Grandmaster Poster
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:15 am

Post by ncrsn »

I'd like to know reasons behind the votes casted. I, myself, voted "should be removed from the core entirely", because I like to be able to control how things work out: if stuff is coded in the core, modifying stuff tends to require heavy packethooking. Why not lend a hand to advanced users and give others an another reason to use core + distro?
User avatar
*Edwards
Forum Regular
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:19 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada

Post by *Edwards »

Honestly, I would handle the DamagedSound by myself. Well, that's for my part.
User avatar
OldnGrey
POL Expert
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:26 pm

Post by OldnGrey »

I am still a fan of the idea of optionally enabling something to be handled by script. A good example for me is decay.

I guess it just lessens the impact of a core change whilst allowing a scripter to deal with it when they are ready.
Yukiko
Distro Developer
Posts: 2825
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 1:41 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Contact:

Post by Yukiko »

I am in favour of having the ability to handle as much scriptside as possible.

I vote with OldNGrey on this one. It is nice to have the option.

I'd say default to core handling it unless the setting, I assume it would be in serverspecopts or whatever that file is named, is set to hand it off to scripts.

Now if having an option adds much processing overhead to the server then let core pass it to scripts with no option.
User avatar
ncrsn
Grandmaster Poster
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:15 am

Post by ncrsn »

OldnGrey wrote:I am still a fan of the idea of optionally enabling something to be handled by script.
Well okay, I could live with that.

-- edit:

Way to go Austin!
Post Reply