Thread: Simple Mystery Box With A Simple Rarity System.

EDIT: Nvm

Oh man.. There's a slew of ways you could have done this better.
It's better than some of the atrocities I've seen for Mystery Boxes though.

I plan on re-writing almost everything in the server I'm currently working on, I don't have Mystery Boxes but..
I wrote this in about 5 minutes, obviously I've only tested it a bit, but something like this would be 1000x better.

Class; MysteryBox

Code:

package server.model.minigames;

import server.util.Misc;

public class MysteryBox {

	public enum MysteryReward {
		COMMON {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, UNCOMMON {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, RARE {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, LEGENDARY {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		};

		public abstract void getReward();
		
		public String getRarity() {
			return name().charAt(0) + name().substring(1).toLowerCase();
		}
	}
	
}

For testing; in the Commands class

Code:

			if (playerCommand.equalsIgnoreCase("testbox")) {
				for (MysteryBox.MysteryReward mystery : MysteryBox.MysteryReward.values()) {
					int chances = Misc.randomWithRange(0, 48);
					/*if (chances <= 24) {
						mystery.COMMON.getReward();
					} else if (chances >= 24 && chances <= 36) {
						mystery.UNCOMMON.getReward();
					} else if (chances >= 36 && chances <= 42) {
						mystery.RARE.getReward();
					} else if (chances >= 42) {
						mystery.LEGENDARY.getReward();
					}*/
					if (chances >= 0) {
						mystery.getReward();
					}
				}
			}

Really haven't done anything with it though, just wrote the class and made sure the basis of it works.

EDIT: I have a thing for Enums.

Originally Posted by -Syndicate

Oh man.. There's a slew of ways you could have done this better.
It's better than some of the atrocities I've seen for Mystery Boxes though.

I plan on re-writing almost everything in the server I'm currently working on, I don't have Mystery Boxes but..
I wrote this in about 5 minutes, obviously I've only tested it a bit, but something like this would be 1000x better.

Class; MysteryBox

Code:

package server.model.minigames;

import server.util.Misc;

public class MysteryBox {

	public enum MysteryReward {
		COMMON {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, UNCOMMON {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, RARE {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, LEGENDARY {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		};

		public abstract void getReward();
		
		public String getRarity() {
			return name().charAt(0) + name().substring(1).toLowerCase();
		}
	}
	
}

For testing; in the Commands class

Code:

			if (playerCommand.equalsIgnoreCase("testbox")) {
				for (MysteryBox.MysteryReward mystery : MysteryBox.MysteryReward.values()) {
					int chances = Misc.randomWithRange(0, 48);
					/*if (chances <= 24) {
						mystery.COMMON.getReward();
					} else if (chances >= 24 && chances <= 36) {
						mystery.UNCOMMON.getReward();
					} else if (chances >= 36 && chances <= 42) {
						mystery.RARE.getReward();
					} else if (chances >= 42) {
						mystery.LEGENDARY.getReward();
					}*/
					if (chances >= 0) {
						mystery.getReward();
					}
				}
			}

Really haven't done anything with it though, just wrote the class and made sure the basis of it works.

EDIT: I have a thing for Enums.

wtf... If I were to rate code on a scale from 0 to 10, his would be -1 and, yes, yours would be 1000x better.

Originally Posted by -Syndicate

Oh man.. There's a slew of ways you could have done this better.
It's better than some of the atrocities I've seen for Mystery Boxes though.

I plan on re-writing almost everything in the server I'm currently working on, I don't have Mystery Boxes but..
I wrote this in about 5 minutes, obviously I've only tested it a bit, but something like this would be 1000x better.

... code ...

Really haven't done anything with it though, just wrote the class and made sure the basis of it works.

EDIT: I have a thing for Enums.

The proper way to do what you're trying to do would be to include the chance value and an array of items directly in the enum

Originally Posted by lare96

The proper way to do what you're trying to do would be to include the chance value and an array of items directly in the enum

Yes I know, but I wrote it very quickly and didn't have time to work on it.
I also only have one hand, boxers fracture on my dominant hand. Lolol.

Originally Posted by Max _

Was just about to say that about the arrays.

Overall the code looks pretty LQ.
You should indent.



Why are you just copying what Lare has already posted?

I linked him to it so he wouldn't have it find it. Good day!

Originally Posted by -Syndicate

Oh man.. There's a slew of ways you could have done this better.
It's better than some of the atrocities I've seen for Mystery Boxes though.

I plan on re-writing almost everything in the server I'm currently working on, I don't have Mystery Boxes but..
I wrote this in about 5 minutes, obviously I've only tested it a bit, but something like this would be 1000x better.

Class; MysteryBox

Code:

package server.model.minigames;

import server.util.Misc;

public class MysteryBox {

	public enum MysteryReward {
		COMMON {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, UNCOMMON {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, RARE {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		}, LEGENDARY {
			public void getReward() {
				Misc.println("Returned "+getRarity());
			}
		};

		public abstract void getReward();
		
		public String getRarity() {
			return name().charAt(0) + name().substring(1).toLowerCase();
		}
	}
	
}

Oh dear god. This isn't 1000x better at all.

Originally Posted by Syn-

Oh dear god. This isn't 1000x better at all.

LOL, oh really? Please elaborate.
What I posted there was literally a test to return the name of each constant.

Utilized properly, it may be slightly redundant, but that's not always a terrible thing.
The only thing that gets rather repetitive is the array that has assigned in each constants abstract method.

So, unless you just skimmed that, and assumed its redundancy meant it was worse, I don't see how you came to that conclusion.