Skip to content

Removes TWitch bullet immunity; gives TWitch a reasonable recipe. #6449

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
May 18, 2025

Conversation

PineappleMan929
Copy link
Contributor

@PineappleMan929 PineappleMan929 commented Apr 23, 2025

About The Pull Request

Removes TWitch bullet immunity
Gives TWitch an actually interesting (and doable) recipe
Removes the huge admin warning, due to the fact TWitch bullet dodging no longer exists.

(p.s. Please do tell me if I've fucked one or multiple things up, this is my first time making a PR)

Why It's Good For The Game

TWitch is a fun chem, and there really isn't a reason to degrade it to being admin only just because there's one part of it that's a bit overpowered.

Changelog

🆑
balance: TWitch no longer lets you dodge bullets.
balance: TWitch is now feasibly makeable.
admin: Removed warning for admins about TWitch letting you dodge bullets, as it no longer does.
/:cl:

Removes TWitch bullet immunity
Gives TWitch an actually interesting recipe
Removes the huge admin warning, due to the fact TWitch bullet dodging no longer exists.
Readds bullet dodging code, will disable it though
This time I'm actually KEEPING the code instead of deleting it.
Fixed the typo.
@Kitsunemitsu Kitsunemitsu added the Balance perfectly balanced as all things should be label Apr 23, 2025
Removes the description about the gods banishing it from the realm, replaces it with saying the gods decreed for it to be weakened.
Reverts taste to Television static
@PineappleMan929
Copy link
Contributor Author

What the

this should fix shit
@Absolucy Absolucy added the Approval: awaiting admin review PR is awaiting admin approval label Apr 26, 2025
@Ice-Type
Copy link
Contributor

I'd say probably remove the direct reference to the admins from the description - when it was adminium the funny joke made sense but now it's a regular chem it's probably better to give it a more normal explanation, like it being diluted because of costcutting or something.

@Veth-s Veth-s added Approval: admin approved PR is approved by admins and removed Approval: awaiting admin review PR is awaiting admin approval labels Apr 30, 2025
@PineappleMan929
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'd say probably remove the direct reference to the admins from the description - when it was adminium the funny joke made sense but now it's a regular chem it's probably better to give it a more normal explanation, like it being diluted because of costcutting or something.

Changed it

Copy link
Contributor

This PR has been inactive for long enough to be automatically marked as stale. This means it is at risk of being auto closed in ~ 7 days, please address any outstanding review items and ensure your PR is finished, if these are all true and you are auto-staled anyway, you need to actively ask maintainers if your PR will be merged. Once you have done any of the previous actions then you should request a maintainer remove the stale label on your PR, to reset the stale timer. If you feel no maintainer will respond in that time, you may wish to close this PR youself, while you seek maintainer comment, as you will then be able to reopen the PR yourself

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label May 18, 2025
@Absolucy Absolucy removed the Stale label May 18, 2025
@Absolucy Absolucy merged commit 44c2133 into Monkestation:master May 18, 2025
25 checks passed
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request May 18, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Approval: admin approved PR is approved by admins Balance perfectly balanced as all things should be
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants