Questioning the previous author's assumption, that i built on, about the maximum value of a pot's contents. Has anyone ever seen / can learn from the source code if you can actually get 2 gems in a pot?

Considering removing comment about max value anyway?

-original editor of "max value" comment- I've played over 1,400 games and yes, I have smashed many pots with double gem drops in them (totalling >3000 gold), but it is obviously quite rare. I'm assuming the game first rolls to see whether the pot will contain anything at all, perhaps twice. Then for the the amount of times that it is positively checked, it chooses from a table what will appear out of all possible drops (including enemies).

just conjecture, but it seems like that's the case. (the actual POINT of the "potential value of a pot" comment is not to catalogue that value, but to prove the point of the incentives to regularly breaking pots) --MechanisMs 02:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Well answered on both counts, more than happy to leave it as is. Thanks! --Oatmeal2k 03:06, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

This may actually be a bug. I'll post a quick analysis to the Questionable Behavior part of the Bugs article detailing what seems to be going on here. --Anonymous Editor 12:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know how much documentation/experimentation you've done to determine that pots cannot doubledrop if thrown, but at least in .99.5 I can recall a thrown pot depositing both a snake AND a spider. If you are implying that no pots should ever contain double drops, I would say that it isn't exactly a balance off-putting bug, and surely it would've been stricken far earlier by Derek if he thought it was game breaking. However, if the implication is that thrown pots should be checked to see if they can double drop and be ensured that they can, then by all means, this is a bug worth pursuing--MechanisMs 14:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

You're assuming Derek noticed it in the first place -- it's not a very noticable feature unless you look for it. At the very least, it's an inconsistency with little reason behind it, so whether all pots need double treasure or all need single treasure is up for Derek to decide. And the source for 0.99.5 and 0.99.8 is rather clear on how many times treasure is rolled for when a pot breaks: once only. The exception is that the code is duplicated when the pot collides with the whip, where the treasure code is duplicated and then the pot is destroyed (which then calls the normal pot destruction code which generates a *second* set of debris and treasure). Throwing a pot won't call that code, so it should only produce one set of treasure. I've done some in-editor testing as well, and every time I threw a pot, I got a single drop, whilst every time I whipped a pot, I got double drops. (There's something like a 33% chance that nothing will come from any single drop, but that still gives around a 45% chance that if a pot can drop double, it *will* drop both items) --Anonymous Editor 16:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
As an aside, I'll note that the easiest way to tell whether a pot is 'dropping double' is to count the pot shards that are generated, which are always doubled when whipped. There should be no more than 3 brown dots shattering when the pot breaks normally. Whipping it, however, produces 6 instead (because it runs a duplicate of the breaking code within the Whip collision code). --Anonymous Editor 16:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.