• 0

    posted a message on Make issue order intelligent?!

    It fires a missile, which, is basically a unit, but unselectable and can behave in any number of ways. It should follow the target until it detonates.

    I remember it would get stuck on ground units/buildings/mineral fields sometimes, and would kind of "move back and forth" along the length of the unit before finding a path, and then reach its target where it would explode, dealing AoE damage.

    Here's a video where the reaver is seen. Just skip the video to about 8:30. You will notice that the Scarab gets caught by probes, and "hangs" there, or will move around the unit to reach its intended target.

    Embed Removed: https://www.youtube.com/v/GmycYiQf3tw?fs=1

    God damn... those Dragoon sound effects are badass.

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on Favorite movie scene or short clip?

    One of my faves for sure. Not like the BS horror of nowadays, which is all Hockey Mask wearing immortal zombies, or Killer Dream Demons, but the horror that is the fractured human mind.

    Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere's Johnny!!

    Embed Removed: https://www.youtube.com/v/WDpipB4yehk?fs=1
    Posted in: Off-Topic
  • 0

    posted a message on Are we immortal?

    If our soul is immortal, well I can't say if it's a good thing or a bad thing, because I cannot know what "life" is like on the other side, or if our perception of time changes, or if we lose our body/brain, do we still react the same? Do we get depressed/happy/angry if there's no chemicals being released?

    If I had a choice to make my body immortal, I would chose no. I'll risk death one day to find out if there is something beyond death. If not... not like it mattered.

    Besides, I think most people nowadays, with the 85 year life span we have, would find it extremely daunting, overwhelming, and just downright depressing to have to live "forever". Our psyches is not tailored to extremely long life spans. Humanity has a long way to go before we live to be several hundred, if not thousands of years.

    Life expectancy has basically double since 1900. With science/robotics/cybernetics/genetics advancing at the rate it is, I don't think it's a far cry that in no time at all, we'll be around for 150 years. People used to get married at 13 years old back in the day and have kids right away, the life expectancy was approximately 48, so we were "on the fast track" and really had no time.

    Now people stay in school till they are 18, then go off to college for several years. Doctors and whatnot go for an extra 7 years. 25 years old before they're done school. The "timing" of life is extending. People are having their first child even well into their 40s, or in some cases even later. Family generations are extended, with even 4 generations being alive at the same time. Great Grandmother, Grandmother, Mother, Daughter.

    So, do I believe we are immortal?

    I believe there's something after "life as we know it". What it is, I cannot say. Will it be different? I believe it will be. We lose our body, our chemical reactions, our "limitations".

    Posted in: Off-Topic
  • 0

    posted a message on (Solved) Multiple Power Level Problem

    The wiki doesn't really point to the fact that you can link more than 1 Power User and/or Source to each other. The way I read it, was Each Power Source and Power User needed the same Power Link. Since the Protoss basically get all their Power Source from the Pylon, it's easy to make 1 Power User and give it to every building/warpable, which is how SC2 is setup.

    The fact that I overlooked the Warp Prism at first, and how it is setup, lead me to believe that Power Level 1 Source and User had to be together, and Power Level 2 Source and User had to be using their own Power Link, which in fact, I found out you can have multiple Levels connected any which way you really want.

    Besides, your Power Lines map, has 1 User and 1 Source that share 1 Level. It wouldn't have enlightened me. Unless of course there's an updated file somewhere in those 14 pages of hundreds of map updates/uploads in that Community Project thread.

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on (Solved) Multiple Power Level Problem

    @DrSuperEvil: Go

    I know. I was just pointing out that they Power User and Power Source must both share the same Power Link string to interact. I did some testing, leaving one blank and what not and it didn't work.

    Looks like I am going to have to use a hacky method... Or... maybe there's a way of "upgrading" a power source?(As in, not replacing PowerLevel1 with PowerLevel2, but modifying the field through an upgrade) Hmm, I'll take a look now.

    EDIT: Ok... the only field modifiable for Power Behaviors(Source or User) is Requirement... so you cannot modify the Radius or Minimum Power Level through upgrades....

    EDIT2: Solved! Wow... so damn simple, why didn't I think of it earlier.

    So, I have 5 Power Source Behaviors, each with a radius and Minimum Power Level. Level 1 has smallest radius and minimum power level 1, while level 5 has the largest radius and minimum power level 5

    5 Power User Behaviors, each requiring a Minimum power level of that level.

    Instead of having Power User1 and Power Source1 share the same PowerLink PowerLevel1, and Power User2 and Power Source2 have PowerLevel2 in the PowerLink, I just made ALL User and Source have the SAME PowerLink. I just called it PowerLevel, and all 10 behaviors have the identical PowerLink, and it works perfectly while testing random combinations of what should obviously not work and what should work.

    If only I would have cross referenced the Warp Prism's power behavior(I forgot that Prism's also gave off power)... it's Power Link is the same as the Pylon, thus allowing any protoss building to be built inside the Power radius of the Prism.

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on (Solved) Multiple Power Level Problem

    @Deadzergling: Go

    You cannot "AND" or "OR" power behaviors... At least not that I've been able to.

    EDIT: OH jeez, I just got what you meant. It's not an AND, requiring both. It's an AND, as in, I gave it both this AND that. Think of it like a set effect, where you have multiple "effects" in the set. I gave it multiple Power Level Requirements in the field

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on (Solved) Multiple Power Level Problem

    Going back to some old WDE's that I never finished/never started, and ran into a problem for the "Show me how you build" WDE.

    Problem

    • I've got Building A start off with Power Level 1.
      • Power Level is upgradable. Each upgrade increases the radius a small amount, as well as the Power Level by 1 each time(Level 2 Replaces Level 1, etc)
    • Building B requires Minimum Power Level 1.
    • Building C requires Minimum Power Level 2.
    • If I upgrade to Power Level 2, I can no longer construct Building B.

    Test 1

    • Gave Building A Power Level 1 and 2.
    • Can only construct Building B within the radius of Level 1.
    • Building C can be built anywhere within the radius of Level 2/1

    Test 2

    • Gave Building A Power Level 2.
    • Gave Building B "Require Power Level 1" and "Require Power Level 2"
    • Cannot build Building B (Removing Require Power Level 1 fixes this, but then cannot be build in Power Level 1)

    In the end, I want to be able to build Building B(which needs Minimum Power Level 1) anywhere within the radius of Power Level 5.

    Suspicions

    • Power Source and Power User behaviors share a field Behavior: Power Link. For all intents and purposes, Level 1 User and Level 1 Source both have the same Power Link(PowerLevel1).
    • I tried adding extras to the field, but it must be typed out manually and I'm not sure if I am doing it right(or if I can even link multiple Power Links)
    • Tried PowerLevel1,PowerLevel2
      • tried adding a space after the comma
    • Also tried leaving it blank, but it wont work
    • For the Power User behavior, the tooltip for the Power Link field states Types of power sources that will power this behavior, which leads me to believe I CAN specify more than 1 power source for it to function, but might just be a broad generalization.

    Anyone have an idea? I really don't feel like doing a hacky method... there's already alot of work just to have a Power Visual show up for each Power Source behavior level.

    Thanks for any input!

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on Using an ability causes the unit's weapon to disappear?

    Make sure your Damage effect's filters are setup properly. EXCLUDE Items. Your AoE ability is likely hitting/targetting the equipment.

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on Tofu Arena Closed Beta

    I'll hopefully be able to make it. I know Dry does some awesome data work, so I'm looking forward to it!

    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on Actors associated with SCV repair

    If you take a look at SCV itself, in the actor events, it creates the RepairSound.

    The animation WORK creates the sparks.

    If an Actor creates another actor, it often doesn't link that actor to the original.

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on Weekly Data Exercise #23 - It came from the vents

    @AtikLYar: Go

    In general, keep to the theme, but do what you must :)

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on Attack the ground?

    Have on Behavior: Effect Expire, do an Issue Order on the Catapult to Stop? Likely wouldn't work...

    Or... Give the Catapult Weapon a 4.x second cooldown? So that if you DID use the weapon first and the buff expires, you still have a tiny window of opportunity to decide if you want to bombard or just continue with the auto-target/attack.

    There are many possibilities.

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on Attack the ground?

    Bombard the ground.

    I'm basically thinking like, Warcraft 3. Catapults were powerful, but if you wanted to be sneaky, you could also attack the ground, removing trees and creating another path to come at your enemy unexpectedly.

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on Attack the ground?

    Have the attack/weapon also apply a buff on the catapult, that disables the ability for 4 seconds.

    Have the ground attacking ability apply a buff on the catapult, that disables the main weapon for 4 seconds.

    So... no matter if it uses the weapon or the ability, it gets a 4 second "cooldown". You can use the same buff, just disable both the weapon & the abiliity.

    Posted in: Data
  • 0

    posted a message on Unable to select unit? (Model/Actor problem?)

    @Kueken531: Go

    Oh? Would selecting the hit test sphere attached to the force field bring up the force field stats?? That was my thinking behind it...

    Posted in: Data
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.