Open
Conversation
|
A commit has changed the seeds. View the diff here. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#1425 introduced demand for seed parity with JP, and in order to achieve that I need to make
inGameIDoptional, which causes a mess as bonus tracks are currently defined as tracks in the ID range [7000, 8000) because I was too stingy about theisUnrankedflag (now re-introduced asisBonusTrack). This is closer to the original impl which should have stayed like that.Re:Fresh folders get screwed by this change, but older versions are complete so they can stay as they are. New folders have the same chart counts as old ones so everything seems alright I guess. I don't remember
inGameIDbeing needed for anything else.This PR will be followed by a seed PR with reliable data, just without
inGameIDs.