From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18183 invoked by alias); 30 Sep 2004 02:05:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18119 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2004 02:05:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sccrmhc13.comcast.net) (204.127.202.64) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 30 Sep 2004 02:05:58 -0000 Received: from [192.168.181.128] (c-67-172-156-222.client.comcast.net[67.172.156.222]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with ESMTP id <20040930020557016001911de>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 02:05:58 +0000 Message-ID: <415B69EF.9040605@phy.cmich.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:55:00 -0000 From: Eric McDonald User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca CC: Lincoln Peters , Xconq list Subject: Re: Transports that affect protection? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg01291.txt.bz2 mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > Hm. I had a vague idea that there were a lot of tables for occupants' > effects on their transports, but it looks like I may have been thinking of > your proposal rather than what's actually implemented. All I can find now > is occupant-combat, which actually goes the other way (transport > affecting occupants, as the original poster wanted) and it seems to be > unimplemented. I looked at that the other day. As I recall, it is checked, but does not work in the way advertised. Even though it is supposedly a percentage table, the code only treats it as a boolean (i.e., merely checks to see if it is 0 (false) or not). One more thing to fix.... Eric Xconq - it's all about pushing onto todo stacks at a rate faster than they are being popped.