Many new mappers (including myself a while ago) suffer from the same problem: you duplicate a unit and it comes out wrong... Well, in this tutorial I go and duplicate a photon cannon and show all of the missing links and how to fix them!
Part 1:
Right click the video and click watch on youtube to get widescreen/fullscreen.
The actual right way to duplicate a photon cannon: in the XML data, replace every instance of "PhotonCannon" with "#id#", then turn that XML data into a template. Then use my tool (http://www.sc2mapster.com/assets/starcraft-2-data-manager/) to duplicate that template as many times as you want, while filling in the value of #id# each time.
Lol good marketing job on our threads... but I wouldn't say it's right or wrong... using your tool doesn't make the regular way 'not right'. It may help though :)
You're right; there is no right way of doing things. But clearly, the easiest way of doing things is the one people should care about, especially if the easy way reduces a lot of dev time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Many new mappers (including myself a while ago) suffer from the same problem: you duplicate a unit and it comes out wrong... Well, in this tutorial I go and duplicate a photon cannon and show all of the missing links and how to fix them!
Part 1:
Right click the video and click watch on youtube to get widescreen/fullscreen.
Part 2 is in the description.
@OneTwoSC: Go
THX! But i think there is still part 2 missing :)
@Mestad: Go
? Part 2 exists...
The actual right way to duplicate a photon cannon: in the XML data, replace every instance of "PhotonCannon" with "#id#", then turn that XML data into a template. Then use my tool (http://www.sc2mapster.com/assets/starcraft-2-data-manager/) to duplicate that template as many times as you want, while filling in the value of #id# each time.
@MaskedPoptart:
Lol good marketing job on our threads... but I wouldn't say it's right or wrong... using your tool doesn't make the regular way 'not right'. It may help though :)
You're right; there is no right way of doing things. But clearly, the easiest way of doing things is the one people should care about, especially if the easy way reduces a lot of dev time.