Ensure control points using "recovery" and "decay" work as intended #915
Conversation
Signed-off-by: BT (calcastor/mame) <43831917+calcastor@users.noreply.github.com>
e165d22 to
2262e57
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice catch, didn't notice we weren't complying with the 1.9+ pgm standard when we used these names.
For reference, the original names were definetly recovery and decay:
https://github.com/OvercastNetwork/ProjectAres/blob/master/PGM/src/main/java/tc/oc/pgm/controlpoint/ControlPointParser.java#L77
|
It seems this PR has broken the dropper maps which use |
Correct me if I'm wrong, but while the 1.9+ PGM docs state that |
#864 reintroduced decay and recovery rates to control points from 1.9+ PGM, while also introducing the possibility for already captured control points to decay from a captured state. However, ControlPointParser only recognizes and parses
recovery-rateanddecay-rate, despite 1.9+ PGM's implementation usingrecoveryanddecay. This PR ensures compatibility with maps previously made for 1.9+ PGM by making surerecoveryanddecayare also recognized.I've also made sure that
owned-decaycan also be used alongsideowned-decay-rate, to keep wording consistent between all 3 attributes.