On needToZone vs using a localVar

[wrenffxi]

See #136 for context

Because localVars clear on zone, using one like this can cover the "has the character zoned" question. But with a localVar, it would also count logging out and back in as zoning, and I don't know if that's retail accurate.

So I swapped out the localVar in favor of player:needToZone().

That said, needToZone has its own gotcha, which is that it's not quest specific. Consider this situation.

• Alice is doing two separate questlines in Selbina.
• In questline RED, there is a "must zone" requirement between quests RED-1 and RED-2 at Selbina NPC(R).
• In questline BLUE, there is a "must zone" requirement between quests BLUE-1 and BLUE-2 at Selbina NPC(B).
• Alice completes quest RED-1 and must now zone before acquiring RED-2 from the same NPC(R)
• Alice zones out, which clears her needToZone flag.
• Alice zones back in to Selbina.
• Before Alice acquires RED-2, she completes quest BLUE-1 at NPC(B), and must now zone before acquiring BLUE-2.
• She then returns to NPC(R), expecting to pick up RED-2, but now can't, because her needToZone flag has been set by the blue questline.

So using a localVar lets us handle the "needToZone" question distinctly within a given questline. But it (probably) doesn't handle logout/login like retail.

While using needToZone (probably) handles logout/login like retail, but it uses a shared check across all questlines.

Thoughts? Can someone test whether logout/login counts as zoning on retail?

[TeoTwawki]

Retail has some zonings that “count” when you log out and back in and some that don’t. So we have a need for both situations.

As pointed out, needToZone is global for the player applied to - if 2 different things in the same zone would both check need to zone, they interfere with each other in ways retail would not, with local vars we use unique variables to avoid that.

So I think what we need is a replacement/overhaul of needToZone that can handle both scenarios and cleans up after itself.

[claywar]

I'm an idiot for both creating a new discussion, and originally being against this. Let the records show this. Wholly support this change.

[Xaver-DaRed]

To err is human, or so someone said like 3 centuries ago.