Add risk, defense systems, and penalties to Code Farm raiding #148
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Summary
The reporter proposes making Code Farm raiding more risky by introducing purchasable defenses for farm owners and penalties for raiders. Defenses include mines/traps (cause raid failure and coin loss for raider), security cameras/alarms (increase chance of catching raider), guard dogs/patrols (automatically catch raiders sometimes), and insurance (recoup lost coins for defender). Raider consequences include fines depending on method of capture (mine fine higher than camera), escalating penalties for multiple failed raids (increased fine, temporary raid cooldown), and successful raids taking less than 50% if defenses are high. Raiders should be able to check a target's defense level before attempting, with higher defense meaning bigger penalty if caught but bigger reward if successful, adding a strategic layer.
Steps to Reproduce
Not provided.
Expected Behaviour
Not provided.
Actual Behaviour
Not provided.
Environment
Not provided.
Reported by blindxfish via DevPlace.
I am picking this ticket up now.
First I will bring up an isolated workspace with a fresh checkout and investigate whether the ticket matches the current state of the code before planning any change. I will announce every step here before I take it.
Starting research round 1 of at most 5.
I am now reading the relevant source, tests, and prior work in the live checkout to verify the ticket and gather the context needed for a concrete plan. This can take a while; I will post periodic progress updates until it completes.
Investigated the ticket against the current source and tests. The described defense items (mines, cameras, guards, insurance) and raider penalties (fines, cooldowns, escalating consequences) are confirmed absent from the codebase.
The ticket accurately identifies this gap, and the feature request is both plausible and specific enough to plan an implementation. No clarifying replies exist, so the original proposal stands.
Decision is to proceed. Next step is drafting a concrete implementation plan for review.
I am drafting the implementation plan now.
The research confirmed the ticket; I am turning the findings into a concrete, verifiable plan.
Investigation findings have been synthesized into a full implementation plan for extending Code Farm raiding with defense items, failure probabilities, raider fines, insurance payouts, and a pre-raid risk assessment. The approach maintains backward compatibility with the existing DefenseTier system by treating new items as orthogonal modifiers.
The plan covers database schema additions (game_farm_defense_items, game_failed_steals), service-layer modifications to steal logic (failure rolls, escalating penalties, per-farm cooldowns, risk bonus for steal fraction, and insurance payback), new API actions for defense item and insurance purchases, extended farm serialization, and a comprehensive test plan covering unit, integration, and regression tests.
Handing the implementation plan to the execution agent.
The full, verbatim implementation plan is attached: plan-ticket-148.md
Starting implementation attempt 1 of at most 5.
I am executing the plan inside this ticket's isolated workspace. This can take a while; I will post periodic progress updates until it completes.
Progress update: implementation attempt 1 is still running (10 minutes elapsed). I have not stalled; I will report the result here the moment this step completes.
Implementation attempt 1 finished; I am verifying it now.
Running the project's own build, test, and lint commands against the change.
The change was implemented on the first attempt. All configured build, test, and lint commands completed successfully.
The next step is to commit the changes, push the branch, and open a pull request for review.
I am delivering the change now.
Committing the verified change, pushing branch
typosaurus/ticket-148, and opening a pull request.The change has been committed and pushed to branch
typosaurus/ticket-148. A pull request has been opened at #149.This implementation passed the project's own checks, which is the basis for submitting it for review.
Next steps involve monitoring the pull request for review, merge, or further feedback.