Bug - Not A Bug Clownosity Maximizer

[Lxndr]

http://prntscr.com/9z2odg

This is what has happened the past few times I try to maximize my clownosity over the past month. As you can see from the screenshot, my actual clownosity is 4/4 (so Mafia is calculating it right). but the Maximizer says my "best score" is 1, and my "current score" is 1.

 

[darkcodelagsniper]

From the maximizer help:

The only bitmap modifiers that currently appear useful for maximization are Clownosity and Raveosity, so they are allowed as a special case. The weight specifies the required minimum value; only one value is actually meaningful for each keyword, so 4 clownosity and 7 raveosity are the only useful forms.

 

[Veracity]

Correct. As the documentation says, you have to say "4 clownosity". If you leave off the "4", that is the same as asking for "1 clownosity".

 

[lostcalpolydude]

I asked you repeatedly in /hardcore what you were actually trying in the maximizer that wasn't working. Either you stopped reading chat after complaining, or you have me on /ignore because you don't actually want mafia help in chat.

 

[Lxndr]

I asked you repeatedly in /hardcore what you were actually trying in the maximizer that wasn't working. Either you stopped reading chat after complaining, or you have me on /ignore because you don't actually want mafia help in chat.

I don't have you on ignore. I must have missed those questions. My bad.

 

[Laserrobotics]

From the maximizer help:

Which leaves me curious as to why Mafia doesn't simply assume you mean 4 clownosity or 7 raveosity if you leave off the integer. If the only use for each stat is to meet a certain number and going over doesn't provide any benefits, why not?

 

[Bale]

Because every single keyword in the maximizer has a default weighting of 1.

This is not an exception. I can see why making an exception is a feature to be considered, but that would still be a new feature.

 

[Veracity]

Right. As opposed to a "Bug" which is what happens when the code is not behaving the way the developer wanted it to behave, as opposed to how YOU want it to behave, when that differs.

Which is not too dissimilar from what was reported to me when I reported a KoL bug and was told "it is behaving the way it was coded to behave". Which is NOT they same as "it is coded the way it was INTENDED to behave". I agree that the latter is "Not a Bug" but not about the former.

In this case, it behaves "the way it was intended to behave".

Feel free to make a Feature request to change that intended behavior.

 

[Lxndr]

Since I fucked up and faceplanted on reporting this "bug", I'll leave it up to someone better suited to request a feature.

 

[Bale]

Made a feature request for this HERE and it has already been implemented.

 

[Crowther]

I reported a KoL bug and was told "it is behaving the way it was coded to behave".

ugh