What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Create new Character, ignore building rules for convenience
2. Set AGI = 5, REA = 5, Nuyen 50 points
3. Add Synaptic Booster 1
4. Add Heavy Military Armor
5. Check Common TAB, no penalty for REA but not for AGI
6. Remove Synaptic Booster
7. Check Common TAB, penalty for REA and AGI
What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
The REA attribute should receive the same penalty as AGI
What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
Version 0.0.0.458
Please provide any additional information below.
Checking the corresponding Code in the frmCareer.cs I find that Values SHOULD
be applied correctly:
// Remove any Improvements from Armor Encumbrance.
_objImprovementManager.RemoveImprovements(Improvement.ImprovementSource.ArmorEncumbrance, "Ballistic Encumbrance");
_objImprovementManager.RemoveImprovements(Improvement.ImprovementSource.ArmorEncumbrance, "Impact Encumbrance");
// Create the Armor Encumbrance Improvements.
if (_objCharacter.BallisticArmorEncumbrance < 0)
{
_objImprovementManager.CreateImprovement("AGI", Improvement.ImprovementSource.ArmorEncumbrance, "Ballistic Encumbrance", Improvement.ImprovementType.Attribute, "", 0, 1, 0, 0, _objCharacter.BallisticArmorEncumbrance);
_objImprovementManager.CreateImprovement("REA", Improvement.ImprovementSource.ArmorEncumbrance, "Ballistic Encumbrance", Improvement.ImprovementType.Attribute, "", 0, 1, 0, 0, _objCharacter.BallisticArmorEncumbrance);
}
if (_objCharacter.ImpactArmorEncumbrance < 0)
{
_objImprovementManager.CreateImprovement("AGI", Improvement.ImprovementSource.ArmorEncumbrance, "Impact Encumbrance", Improvement.ImprovementType.Attribute, "", 0, 1, 0, 0, _objCharacter.ImpactArmorEncumbrance);
_objImprovementManager.CreateImprovement("REA", Improvement.ImprovementSource.ArmorEncumbrance, "Impact Encumbrance", Improvement.ImprovementType.Attribute, "", 0, 1, 0, 0, _objCharacter.ImpactArmorEncumbrance);
}
Giving AGI and REA the same penalty!
Having a look at the definition of Synaptic Booster and for example Reaction
Impovement (which doesn't result in this "bug" as I know so far) they have the
same definition:
<bioware>
<name>Synaptic Booster</name>
<category>Cultured</category>
<rating>3</rating>
<ess>Rating * 0.5</ess>
<capacity>0</capacity>
<avail>(Rating * 6)R</avail>
<cost>Rating * 80000</cost>
<bonus>
<initiativepass>Rating</initiativepass>
<specificattribute>
<name precedence="1">REA</name>
<val>Rating</val>
</specificattribute>
</bonus>
<source>SR4</source>
<page>347</page>
</bioware>
<cyberware>
<name>Reaction Enhancers</name>
<category>Bodyware</category>
<rating>3</rating>
<ess>Rating * 0.3</ess>
<capacity>0</capacity>
<avail>(Rating * 5)R</avail>
<cost>Rating * 10000</cost>
<bonus>
<specificattribute>
<name precedence="1">REA</name>
<val>Rating</val>
</specificattribute>
</bonus>
<source>SR4</source>
<page>342</page>
</cyberware>
So I can find nothing wrong in the sourcecode and definition of the items.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
[email protected]on 11 Apr 2013 at 8:54