Hello everyone, Zack here, after a long recess of starcraft 2 editing I decided to come back with the recent patch to joining custom games. It's a hell of alot easier to host and find games so I feel it's about time for me to return to focus on my map.
At any rate in the brink of all the inspiration I've had from all the idea's I've seen I feel that the alot of the idea's I have are over my head for figuring out on my own. So I have decided to cast aside my pride request some assistance here.
Now for the concept, on my Civilization (stylish) map I decided I want military units that the players control to be in a more controlled unit, I don't want players having billions of units scattered around the entire map, at least not in the way Starcraft handles it by default.
The concept I want is for the military units to have to stay joined together in a single army, and they all have to follow the army in a cohesive squad. For references think about the squads in company of heroes, dawn of war 2, or even the army stacks in civilization. The way I have it impictured is, players will create an army (which acts as a flag holder, or leader) and then they train the troops that compose of that army. If the troops are trained without their leader they stay uncommandable near their barracks until enlisted by a leader. Obviously the amount of leaders a player can control is limited depending on their research so this is where it comes into purpose.
When the troops join the army, I want them to follow them around, I have a general follow effect in testing now from the tutorials I've seen here but I'm still getting it to work the way I want. I want the troops the sort of follow the leader from behind or just hug them if fully necessary. Basically the Army is the only thing the player has control over at the moment, all the troops are uncommandable and simply follow the leader.
Then when the army encounters an enemy army or something of similar, both army becomes unmoveable (but still commandable for abilities) and it's army becomes commandable and fighting then occurs between the two armies. The troops in both armies cannot stray too far away from the battlefield, which is determined by a area created around both of the army leaders (I have not decided the shape yet so it might just be circular, nor have I created the code that keeps them from straying)
While the armies are in turn fighting like this the leaders or basically flag holders have abilities that can change the fight, they can either engage another enemy army that might be within engagement range, or they can call to retreat, which is an attempt to break away from the fight and flee (at a cost)
The reason I want to have this over the top setup is to keep combat in a more controlled and dramatic setup. I have plans to code in flanking, where an army is engaged from 2 separate sides, such as from east and west, or from north and south. I also have plans to create ambush's, where the flag holder can literally turn themselves and their army invisible in preparation for an enemy advance, ambush the enemy army causing them to temporarily lose vision and control due to being surprised.
So, the resources I have for making this are completely open, I am willing to use data, trigger, and a combination of both in making this concept. My map is designed with an indexing system, so I can store variables on individual units if I really need too, however I'm hoping someone has a simple way of doing this, or at least can help me get all of the easy parts out of the way so I can focus on the parts that truly need the attention. (I want to avoid making a trigger for something that could be made extremely easy in the data editor.)
And once again, thank you everyone at SC2Mapster for your help, you've been great at helping me before and I'm glad to be part of this community.
Well jeez... I went crazy today. Here's the fruit of my labor... The Hulking Horror.
Background "Story": A Top Secret Viking of massive proportions codenamed "Frigg" [ Haha see what I did there... Odin... Frigg... get it.... no???? :'( ] was being developed at an undisclosed location when the Zerg invaded the planet said base was located on. The Zerg overran the planet, and Kerrigan, realizing the power and uses this could have, decided to have it infested. This is the Hulking Horror released upon the Starcraft Universe.
why are you calling it uber?..... its a custom ability name the topic as such.....
I'm calling them uber as a parody of the Uberlisk. Figure I'd give the whole group of them the title Uber's to mark how unnecessarily powerful they are.
But it's not just if the unit has high stats or does high damage, it's how ridiculously wild the attacks are. Or basically, how visually appealing they are to watch.
But mostly, they are just fun to make. I feel like making a competitive map involving all these uber's and make it a sort of "godzilla" type map where the objective is to cause the most destruction. Mostly though, these are just unit's made through exploring the data editor, each one helps me get a better idea on what I want to make as the fun factor.
I would like to know if someone comes up with a solution to this because I've been looking long and hard for a solution. Unfortunately I think we'll need to wait for the DOTA map blizzard will release to get such features in the data editor.
This is pretty much the best idea. Rather than make work arounds, let's just see if blizzard fixes it with their next big update. That way we can continue using the easy route. Also seeing if they address hero inventory and maybe other aspects of the hero portion in the editor.
And if they don't fix it, then we can use a work around. Seeing as how most workarounds might end up being more work than is necessary. There are quick fix's too but I'd rather wait till blizzard pops in a flag called "Display Behavior Stack Count".
How did you get the attached units to "rock" with the battlecruiser. The battlecruiser rocks slowly from side to side in its stand animation.
They do that because they are attached to the battlecruiser obviously. Every uber made here was done completely without triggers, done entirely by the data editor.
All I did was set the pylon models to attach to pre-existing attachment points on the battlecruiser. Afterwards the battlecruiser itself has weapons/effects/and actors that create the thunder attack effects and the ubercannon thunder effects. The pylon's are not units, simply models that show up at the attachment points. The pylons are just model addition actors, they are just for visual effect. If I take away the pylons the ubercruiser will still fight normally. But the visuals might be screwed up (lightning fireing from underneath the battlecruiser and such).
If you follow the tutorial I linked it can show you how to attach the model's accordingly, it will stick onto the battlecruiser's model where you specify. And any movement that occurs from the attachment point will in turn move the grafted model as well.
Yeah I agree, the other's I made aren't as epic so much as they were just thrown together, most of those were in development before I even made the Uber Cruiser 2.0. I did try to make the Uber Carrier, but it doesn't function as fluidly as I thought it would.in theory, I got it to work but I couldn't get it to look visually appealing.
If this hasn't been answered yet, thought I might answer it, in Brood lord Abilities, modify the Brood Lord Hanger ability.
Go into -Info
Scroll down to Time where it says 2.5
This is the broodlings build time, lower that to make them build faster, also you can adjust the count's and count start to change how many broodlings can be made.
Dang, I was hoping this thread would be more popular, are you guys seriously telling me you would rather be productive than spend time making pointless super units?
Oh well, was fun while it lasted, time to continue on my map.
Well that would be true, if they just copy and pasted the concept of campaign creation from warcraft 3, but this isn't warcraft 3 it's starcraft 2 they could find a way that might make it work, like maybe allow players to play on each of the different maps at once, and remove the loading screens by preloading before/after game starts and storing them in memory (might be taxing on memory)
They could potentially fix the map size issue by just raising it, but whos to say they won't think of a way to let maps bond together and serve as multiple terrains, while one acts as the host providing the objects from the data editor and trigger editor. We have doodad's from every single terrain available, but our tilesets are limited in choice.
Again when I said it would probably never work/happen, that's pretty much why I said that, the idea is ludicrous, would be awesome if it were possible, but too ludicrous to make it worth the workload.
Though I would still very much like the ability for multiplayer campaigns.
Well, there was this random guy at the panel that brought up the bonus campaign of TFT, about how the map transitioned between maps via campaigns, and popped the idea of allowing that on multiplayer (Multiplayer campaigns anyone?). Would be nice if they find a way to let you bunch together multiple maps in 1 map, it probably would never work/happen but that would DEFINATELY solve the map size limitations.
0
Hello everyone, Zack here, after a long recess of starcraft 2 editing I decided to come back with the recent patch to joining custom games. It's a hell of alot easier to host and find games so I feel it's about time for me to return to focus on my map.
At any rate in the brink of all the inspiration I've had from all the idea's I've seen I feel that the alot of the idea's I have are over my head for figuring out on my own. So I have decided to cast aside my pride request some assistance here.
Now for the concept, on my Civilization (stylish) map I decided I want military units that the players control to be in a more controlled unit, I don't want players having billions of units scattered around the entire map, at least not in the way Starcraft handles it by default.
The concept I want is for the military units to have to stay joined together in a single army, and they all have to follow the army in a cohesive squad. For references think about the squads in company of heroes, dawn of war 2, or even the army stacks in civilization. The way I have it impictured is, players will create an army (which acts as a flag holder, or leader) and then they train the troops that compose of that army. If the troops are trained without their leader they stay uncommandable near their barracks until enlisted by a leader. Obviously the amount of leaders a player can control is limited depending on their research so this is where it comes into purpose.
When the troops join the army, I want them to follow them around, I have a general follow effect in testing now from the tutorials I've seen here but I'm still getting it to work the way I want. I want the troops the sort of follow the leader from behind or just hug them if fully necessary. Basically the Army is the only thing the player has control over at the moment, all the troops are uncommandable and simply follow the leader.
Then when the army encounters an enemy army or something of similar, both army becomes unmoveable (but still commandable for abilities) and it's army becomes commandable and fighting then occurs between the two armies. The troops in both armies cannot stray too far away from the battlefield, which is determined by a area created around both of the army leaders (I have not decided the shape yet so it might just be circular, nor have I created the code that keeps them from straying)
While the armies are in turn fighting like this the leaders or basically flag holders have abilities that can change the fight, they can either engage another enemy army that might be within engagement range, or they can call to retreat, which is an attempt to break away from the fight and flee (at a cost)
The reason I want to have this over the top setup is to keep combat in a more controlled and dramatic setup. I have plans to code in flanking, where an army is engaged from 2 separate sides, such as from east and west, or from north and south. I also have plans to create ambush's, where the flag holder can literally turn themselves and their army invisible in preparation for an enemy advance, ambush the enemy army causing them to temporarily lose vision and control due to being surprised.
So, the resources I have for making this are completely open, I am willing to use data, trigger, and a combination of both in making this concept. My map is designed with an indexing system, so I can store variables on individual units if I really need too, however I'm hoping someone has a simple way of doing this, or at least can help me get all of the easy parts out of the way so I can focus on the parts that truly need the attention. (I want to avoid making a trigger for something that could be made extremely easy in the data editor.)
And once again, thank you everyone at SC2Mapster for your help, you've been great at helping me before and I'm glad to be part of this community.
0
Excuse me, I have to go change my underwear
0
I'm calling them uber as a parody of the Uberlisk. Figure I'd give the whole group of them the title Uber's to mark how unnecessarily powerful they are.
But it's not just if the unit has high stats or does high damage, it's how ridiculously wild the attacks are. Or basically, how visually appealing they are to watch.
But mostly, they are just fun to make. I feel like making a competitive map involving all these uber's and make it a sort of "godzilla" type map where the objective is to cause the most destruction. Mostly though, these are just unit's made through exploring the data editor, each one helps me get a better idea on what I want to make as the fun factor.
0
This is pretty much the best idea. Rather than make work arounds, let's just see if blizzard fixes it with their next big update. That way we can continue using the easy route. Also seeing if they address hero inventory and maybe other aspects of the hero portion in the editor.
And if they don't fix it, then we can use a work around. Seeing as how most workarounds might end up being more work than is necessary. There are quick fix's too but I'd rather wait till blizzard pops in a flag called "Display Behavior Stack Count".
0
They do that because they are attached to the battlecruiser obviously. Every uber made here was done completely without triggers, done entirely by the data editor.
I learned how to attach them by using this tutorial http://forums.sc2mapster.com/resources/tutorials/8926-data-working-with-attachments-beginner-difficulty/
All I did was set the pylon models to attach to pre-existing attachment points on the battlecruiser. Afterwards the battlecruiser itself has weapons/effects/and actors that create the thunder attack effects and the ubercannon thunder effects. The pylon's are not units, simply models that show up at the attachment points. The pylons are just model addition actors, they are just for visual effect. If I take away the pylons the ubercruiser will still fight normally. But the visuals might be screwed up (lightning fireing from underneath the battlecruiser and such).
If you follow the tutorial I linked it can show you how to attach the model's accordingly, it will stick onto the battlecruiser's model where you specify. And any movement that occurs from the attachment point will in turn move the grafted model as well.
0
@BorgDragon: Go
Ehh, I think with a little sprucing it can be epic enough.
I have to say it's pretty funny hearing a parasited siege tank or parasited marauder.
0
Well? Is this possible at all? Did blizzard not implement a single way to show the behavior count on the buff icons?
0
@BorgDragon: Go
When I get the ability too, i'll make a video and post it for ya.
0
Whoa, found an Uber while surfing on youtube. Posting a video and crediting the author.
0
Well if anyone is interested in referencing what I did, I uploaded the map so everyone can look into it and use it for their own educational purposes.
0
@s3rius: Go
Yeah I agree, the other's I made aren't as epic so much as they were just thrown together, most of those were in development before I even made the Uber Cruiser 2.0. I did try to make the Uber Carrier, but it doesn't function as fluidly as I thought it would.in theory, I got it to work but I couldn't get it to look visually appealing.
0
@godakuma: Go
If this hasn't been answered yet, thought I might answer it, in Brood lord Abilities, modify the Brood Lord Hanger ability.
Go into -Info
Scroll down to Time where it says 2.5
This is the broodlings build time, lower that to make them build faster, also you can adjust the count's and count start to change how many broodlings can be made.
0
Dang, I was hoping this thread would be more popular, are you guys seriously telling me you would rather be productive than spend time making pointless super units?
Oh well, was fun while it lasted, time to continue on my map.
0
@Colt556: Go
Well that would be true, if they just copy and pasted the concept of campaign creation from warcraft 3, but this isn't warcraft 3 it's starcraft 2 they could find a way that might make it work, like maybe allow players to play on each of the different maps at once, and remove the loading screens by preloading before/after game starts and storing them in memory (might be taxing on memory)
They could potentially fix the map size issue by just raising it, but whos to say they won't think of a way to let maps bond together and serve as multiple terrains, while one acts as the host providing the objects from the data editor and trigger editor. We have doodad's from every single terrain available, but our tilesets are limited in choice.
Again when I said it would probably never work/happen, that's pretty much why I said that, the idea is ludicrous, would be awesome if it were possible, but too ludicrous to make it worth the workload.
Though I would still very much like the ability for multiplayer campaigns.
0
@Colt556: Go
Well, there was this random guy at the panel that brought up the bonus campaign of TFT, about how the map transitioned between maps via campaigns, and popped the idea of allowing that on multiplayer (Multiplayer campaigns anyone?). Would be nice if they find a way to let you bunch together multiple maps in 1 map, it probably would never work/happen but that would DEFINATELY solve the map size limitations.