04-02-2003, 05:04 PM
Just when you think you know every inch of Diablo. . . .
Previously, I had thought barrels that explode never damage a tile that _already_ has a barrel in it WHEN THAT BARREL generates a skeleton. They'll damage barrels without skeletons, but you NEVER EVER see them destroy a barrel and release a skeleton. This would lead one to think that the tile that contains a barrel that releases a skeleton then should be impervious to explosive damage from adjacent barrels. However, with a little testing in Single Player, I found this was not the case.
I located a dungeon setup very close to this:
1 2 3 4 5
6 B S b 7
8 9 0 I Z
The numbers 1-9, O, I, and Z all are empty tiles surrounding barrels at B, S and b.
Now barrel B and b are both exploding barrels.
And barrel S has a skeleton inside it. (It is not an exploding barrel.)
If you attack barrel B from ANY empty adjacent tile, you may receive damage but the explosion it generates NEVER strikes barrel S.
If you attack barrel b from ANY empty adjacent tile, you may receive damage but the explosion it generates NEVER strikes barrel S.
Now attack and destroy barrel S, then kill the Skeleton that pops out, and then move into tile S.
From tile S, if you strike Barrel B, you WILL sustain damage!
From tile S, if you strike Barrel b, you WILL sustain damage!
To me this seems odd. Tile S receives no explosion damage (thus destroying its barrel) UNLESS you are standing IN tile S, having destroyed the barrel (and the skeleton it released). We all know that exploding barrels can hit adjacent barrels, setting off a whole string of explosions -- especially inside rooms! Yet somehow the game must factor in whether the adjacent barrel has a skeleton inside it. If it does, then the game will NOT allow the exploding barrel to destroy that particular barrel in question (and release/destroy the skeleton?).
Wierd. Anyone else notice this?
Just curious.
Attika
Previously, I had thought barrels that explode never damage a tile that _already_ has a barrel in it WHEN THAT BARREL generates a skeleton. They'll damage barrels without skeletons, but you NEVER EVER see them destroy a barrel and release a skeleton. This would lead one to think that the tile that contains a barrel that releases a skeleton then should be impervious to explosive damage from adjacent barrels. However, with a little testing in Single Player, I found this was not the case.
I located a dungeon setup very close to this:
1 2 3 4 5
6 B S b 7
8 9 0 I Z
The numbers 1-9, O, I, and Z all are empty tiles surrounding barrels at B, S and b.
Now barrel B and b are both exploding barrels.
And barrel S has a skeleton inside it. (It is not an exploding barrel.)
If you attack barrel B from ANY empty adjacent tile, you may receive damage but the explosion it generates NEVER strikes barrel S.
If you attack barrel b from ANY empty adjacent tile, you may receive damage but the explosion it generates NEVER strikes barrel S.
Now attack and destroy barrel S, then kill the Skeleton that pops out, and then move into tile S.
From tile S, if you strike Barrel B, you WILL sustain damage!
From tile S, if you strike Barrel b, you WILL sustain damage!
To me this seems odd. Tile S receives no explosion damage (thus destroying its barrel) UNLESS you are standing IN tile S, having destroyed the barrel (and the skeleton it released). We all know that exploding barrels can hit adjacent barrels, setting off a whole string of explosions -- especially inside rooms! Yet somehow the game must factor in whether the adjacent barrel has a skeleton inside it. If it does, then the game will NOT allow the exploding barrel to destroy that particular barrel in question (and release/destroy the skeleton?).
Wierd. Anyone else notice this?
Just curious.
Attika