Before you go and gut out your hard work, try disabling the effects and see if that helps with performance. You can use the FPS counter as a general guide before and after.
Having a lot of buffs, especially buffs that trigger things like search effects, can really cut into your map's performance. Find ways to eliminate buffs that really aren't necessary to the value of the game or optimize important buffs to reduce the strain on system resources. You may also be able to use upgrades to replace certain buffs to further improve on game performance.
Unfortunately the best solution to this problem might be to directly ask the player what his resolution is and explain that the correct information is VERY IMPORTANT, INDEED. Then you can bank the data and provide an option to change it later if necessary.
Though time consuming, one option you could pursue would be to use points instead of units or doodads, then create units at runtime. The doodads would have to be units for this to work, so you would need to create a dummy unit type and apply the appropriate model and footprint at runtime. This would allow you to designate the position of units and doodads at initialization, then only create the ones you want at runtime.
If you plan on doing this, I would start with the units (since they are the easiest to deal with) then the easiest doodads, only replacing doodads with points as needed.
If you're looking for a more scripted method, you can pick each burrowed zerg unit and order it to unburrow, then order it to smart move or attack. This would be better if you want to control the conditions for the ambush (like if the player activates a Xel'Naga shrine or something.)
No worries. I, too, once ignored action definitions, functions, and records. But once you begin implementing those things as a normal course of design, it's like
Why don't you use integer arrays for score, then update the leaderboard to whatever those variables are? Then you can just reference the value of the integer values when determining the winner.
AFAIK "order targeting item" is another way of targeting units (since items are units.) I don't think it can be used to execute an item's ability. Probably a relic from the unfinished item system. You can check to see if there is an item library here that would create the effect you're looking for.
Otherwise, if your validators are all tied through the item's effects rather than the item then there really isn't much extra work to do. The problem would be getting the item to activate its cooldown, which is another thing that seems unfinished. As a work-around, maybe remove the item and replace it with a dummy item that can't be activated. Once the cooldown timer expires, swap the item back in.
I don't think you can use the item directly. But you can always mimic its effects and remove the item. It should be relatively simple with an instant effect. Basically just create the item's effect at the position of the hero unit.
For such a minor issue that can be easily overcome by using custom dialogs, I can see why Blizzard would prefer not to throw real, actual money and talent at the problem, especially when fixing it could (and probably would) introduce MORE bugs into an already officially-unsupported editor. Yes, fixing bugs has the tendency to make more bugs. Sometimes it's like swatting a hornet only to aggravate the entire nest - it might be better just to accept one sting.
Well supposing one APM value is very short-term, that would mean it would frequently drop to 0 if the player were thinking about his next action or had to use the bathroom or something. One of the things you could do, then, is use a While loop to detect the current APM of each player, then increment a real or integer variable for each second the player remains below a certain threshold (10 APM or something.) If the player breaks the threshold within a time span of, say, two minutes, reset the incrementing variable to 0. Otherwise, continue counting up until the incrementing variable reaches the two-minute mark, then initiate the kick-vote process on that player.
Not sure what you mean by the APM scoring being "weird." I haven't done much work with APM myself, but AFAIK it's an average so it might never reach 0 if the player has made at least 1 action. I suspect it might be a rolling average, so it only gives the average APM for the past X seconds, but I can't confirm.
0
@TheLazzoro: Go
Before you go and gut out your hard work, try disabling the effects and see if that helps with performance. You can use the FPS counter as a general guide before and after.
0
@TheLazzoro: Go
Having a lot of buffs, especially buffs that trigger things like search effects, can really cut into your map's performance. Find ways to eliminate buffs that really aren't necessary to the value of the game or optimize important buffs to reduce the strain on system resources. You may also be able to use upgrades to replace certain buffs to further improve on game performance.
0
Unfortunately the best solution to this problem might be to directly ask the player what his resolution is and explain that the correct information is VERY IMPORTANT, INDEED. Then you can bank the data and provide an option to change it later if necessary.
0
Though time consuming, one option you could pursue would be to use points instead of units or doodads, then create units at runtime. The doodads would have to be units for this to work, so you would need to create a dummy unit type and apply the appropriate model and footprint at runtime. This would allow you to designate the position of units and doodads at initialization, then only create the ones you want at runtime.
If you plan on doing this, I would start with the units (since they are the easiest to deal with) then the easiest doodads, only replacing doodads with points as needed.
Just an idea.
0
If you're looking for a more scripted method, you can pick each burrowed zerg unit and order it to unburrow, then order it to smart move or attack. This would be better if you want to control the conditions for the ambush (like if the player activates a Xel'Naga shrine or something.)
0
No worries. I, too, once ignored action definitions, functions, and records. But once you begin implementing those things as a normal course of design, it's like
0
Welcome to my life :P
0
Why don't you use integer arrays for score, then update the leaderboard to whatever those variables are? Then you can just reference the value of the integer values when determining the winner.
0
@FunkyUserName: Go
Nice work. I wonder if they patched it since I last tried doing that or if I've just done it wrong the whole time.
0
AFAIK "order targeting item" is another way of targeting units (since items are units.) I don't think it can be used to execute an item's ability. Probably a relic from the unfinished item system. You can check to see if there is an item library here that would create the effect you're looking for.
Otherwise, if your validators are all tied through the item's effects rather than the item then there really isn't much extra work to do. The problem would be getting the item to activate its cooldown, which is another thing that seems unfinished. As a work-around, maybe remove the item and replace it with a dummy item that can't be activated. Once the cooldown timer expires, swap the item back in.
0
@Freddy2287: Go
I don't think you can use the item directly. But you can always mimic its effects and remove the item. It should be relatively simple with an instant effect. Basically just create the item's effect at the position of the hero unit.
0
I believed in you guys! ^^
0
For such a minor issue that can be easily overcome by using custom dialogs, I can see why Blizzard would prefer not to throw real, actual money and talent at the problem, especially when fixing it could (and probably would) introduce MORE bugs into an already officially-unsupported editor. Yes, fixing bugs has the tendency to make more bugs. Sometimes it's like swatting a hornet only to aggravate the entire nest - it might be better just to accept one sting.
0
@Freddy2287: Go
Well supposing one APM value is very short-term, that would mean it would frequently drop to 0 if the player were thinking about his next action or had to use the bathroom or something. One of the things you could do, then, is use a While loop to detect the current APM of each player, then increment a real or integer variable for each second the player remains below a certain threshold (10 APM or something.) If the player breaks the threshold within a time span of, say, two minutes, reset the incrementing variable to 0. Otherwise, continue counting up until the incrementing variable reaches the two-minute mark, then initiate the kick-vote process on that player.
0
Not sure what you mean by the APM scoring being "weird." I haven't done much work with APM myself, but AFAIK it's an average so it might never reach 0 if the player has made at least 1 action. I suspect it might be a rolling average, so it only gives the average APM for the past X seconds, but I can't confirm.
This topic is a bit dated but may be useful:
Retrieving APM for Triggering Player