stochaztic / lttp-tracker

Item tracker for link to the past randomizer
MIT License
10 stars 8 forks source link

Added 2 major glitches to the logic. #17

Closed emerald000 closed 6 years ago

emerald000 commented 6 years ago

Walk on Water to access the Waterfall of Wishing and Fake Powder to access the Mad Batter item.

stochaztic commented 6 years ago

How feasible are these to perform? Any videos of them around? My main concern here is I don't want to mark things as glitchavailable if the glitch required is out the realms of feasibility for the sort of runner who is still using an item tracker. Dark rooms are about the upper limit of how far I want things to stretch. Basically, if someone new-ish saw the dark green and came into chat asking how to get it, would it be able to be explained to them or would the answer be "you're probably not capable of doing it"?

emerald000 commented 6 years ago

The Powderless Powder video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5M8LRlN9iQ. Basically you use Somaria when out of magic, then switch to mushroom and use it. Some good programming later you get the item. It might take a couple of tries to get the rhythm down, but it is pretty easy.

The Walk on Water glitch is an alternative way to Fake Flippers. If you dash on a corner of a hole then jump into the water, you'll walk on it instead. The second part of the Fake Flippers tutorial by superSKUJ explains how it works (https://youtu.be/D6zkcrc9PwM?t=590).

stochaztic commented 6 years ago

I don't totally get the first, but if you're confident it'd be teachable to a new-ish player who asked in chat, I'm fine with it.

With the second, I assume that's a typo in the code change and it should be boots? That also seems fine.

emerald000 commented 6 years ago

facepalm Yes, that's boots.

And yeah, the first one is weird. But it's pretty easy to pull off, even if it doesn't make any sense.

stochaztic commented 6 years ago

Cool, if you can just check in a fix for that I'll get this merged and pushed out to prod.

emerald000 commented 6 years ago

Fixed that. "No need to test the new logic. The code is so simple. There couldn't possibly be an error in it." —Past me

stochaztic commented 6 years ago

Thanks!