Jump to content

Join our Slack

Talk to other users and have a great time
Slack Server

Welcome to our Community

Click here to get your Exiled Bot license
Donation Store
bonebox

Settings that significantly speed up items pickup from a stack

Recommended Posts

Re-post from before the site reset which wiped it! These changes to pickit.ini make a big improvement to the speed of finding items when there's a stack down. Must be a reason for the defaults but I can't see the logic so I worked some new ones. Please helpfully tell me why I'm wrong if you can see something! And please feedback if you try this so we know if all ok.

Try it, create a big stack at say solaris with a mixture of stuff it'll pick and stuff it won't. Then edit pickit.ini with notepad or whatever text editor and change the following settings, then close and re-open bot as I don't know if F11 will pick these changes up (note the file is per bot profile):


What:

1) number_of_try_on_right_location; default is 8, mine is 2

2) pickup_try_offset_y; default is 7, mine is 14

3) try_range; default is 30, mine is 28


Why (if you want it):

1) Why click 8 times in the same place, if it's not there the 1st surely not the 8th? Maybe it's an alt key press timing thing? I've gone for 2 in case and seems to not miss anything. So this bit takes 1/4 of the time.

2) Measured the item labels and they're 14 pixels deep. As labels don't overlap can't see point in setting anything other than this, 7 will just click on each label twice. So this bit takes 1/2 the time.

3) Total range looked over is try_range*offset, default was hence 210 pixels (30*7), I've gone for 392 (28*14) because noticed sometimes with a big stack what it's looking for is on extremity and it doesn't reach it, so does that up and down loop. Anything outside the total range will cause this, so make this value higher if you want to cover a bigger range each time and minimise the chance of that, but that will also potentially take longer each time. So this bit does a max of 28 clicks instead of 30 but over nearly twice the range.


Combined, these probably make the sequence on average take ~1/3 of the time, quicker if you factor in the stuck loops with the defaults.

Edited by bonebox
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been running a few days with this now and have upped the try_range to 28 as was still getting a few loops because of high iiq drops (strongboxes mainly). Not a great diff in performance as only an extra max 3 clicks on way up wasted sometimes but covers an extra 84 pixels (which is over an extra 10% screen depth)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...