You can send signals to actors via trigger just fine. Actors are asynchronous, which means you can't get information from them, but you're welcome to send them as much as you like.
Well, thats just a shame..
I suppose you cant do local UI changes either, because UI uses trigger, right?
The problem with melee is that its too static.
The simple idea of a build order, and optimum strategy means the game will become repetitive.
I do still enjoy the non-typical games, where both sides mostly annihilate each other, possibly killing off income potential for one or both sides, then having limited units available, which pretty much cannot be lost, where normally they can be replaced relatively quickly.
Oh, and the *cool* units, that are end-tier, are all too often countered by early tier tech, or are otherwise non-viable.
Possibly however, you could give the unit a zero delay for shield regeneration, but have a behavior, that activates after taking damage, with a duration of 5/6/7 so on second, that suppresses shield regeneration.
Thanks for the reply. Yea, I figured I was pretty well stuck with the tools available. I tried a few different no-fly zone setups. I had them positioned as smoothly as possible but I find the AI just isn't smart enough to negotiate them, I eventually just retooled the map I was working on...now air power will change the coarse of the battle. I hope blizz will eventually make no fly zones pathing the same way normal pathing works. It would make things much easier. For now, I just have to design my maps with the no fly zone in mind.
I was highly disapointed that they removed the pathing layers from Wc3. In Wc3, you had, Water, Land, Air, and Buildable pathing, with some units also being Amphibious (water + land), and Buildings requireing buildable pathing for construction.
In sc2, We have, Land, Cliff, and Buildable pathing. (Cliff for Reaper/collosus) And some crappy pathing blockers, that dont work half the time.
Alright. The Modified part, aside from the model size and attachment points (which was working correctly with attachment to the persistant) and so on, Is the two events
Not sure if that is correct or not. I do know that that is the correct behavior, and that it toggles on and off correctly, and is definitely on the unit that it should be.
Maybe it needs initilized somehow? I looked at fire-suppression system's actor, and it looked the same, and works similarly, so I am unsure what the problem is.
Mostly. The behavior also had been creating a dummy persistant effect, to display the shield effect, based on guardian shield. I was trying to remove that however, and refer to the behavior directly, but It refused to show up afterwards.
The create healer part, as well as an applied buff to boost shield capacity is right, and working now.
Not sure what you mean by model behavior. I am using an actor, linked to the shield behavior, but I think it might need more than the events changed to refer to behaviors instead of persistants. Going to do research on hosting site ops, because I dont know what that is, but it sounds like it may be the problem.
Uhm, The problem is i cannot see how the effect would cause the model to show up at all, because the shielding unit does not shield itself, and the model is attached to the actualy generator, which does not have any effects applied to it.
Basically, Want to attach guardian shield to the shield generator, as long as it has the shield field behavior, but have it disappear when the shield field behavior turns off (via validator suppression, like terran burndown uses) and then reappear after shileds regen and the behavior comes back on.
Problem with that is that the ability is given by an item behavior, which also deactivates (including the animation in theory) when shields drop below 25%
0
Well, thats just a shame..
I suppose you cant do local UI changes either, because UI uses trigger, right?
0
And is it possible to refer to said desynced actor via triggers?
0
Possible, but unlikely. They certainly did not do that with Wc3, when Frozen throne came out.
0
Does anyone know exactly what Open game list means? because I cant tell, reading the article.
0
The problem with melee is that its too static. The simple idea of a build order, and optimum strategy means the game will become repetitive. I do still enjoy the non-typical games, where both sides mostly annihilate each other, possibly killing off income potential for one or both sides, then having limited units available, which pretty much cannot be lost, where normally they can be replaced relatively quickly.
Oh, and the *cool* units, that are end-tier, are all too often countered by early tier tech, or are otherwise non-viable.
0
As soon as blizzard gives us cross region support, OR the internet community stops stealing credit, I imagine everyone would agree.
0
Sounds like you need to look in actor data. I dont know what it will be called, but I know wc3 called them Ubersplats (no idea why)
0
@Deeweext: Go
No good ideas GTFO
Who do you think you are?
0
@rodon1: Go Hmm, Interseting. I thought that was answered already, but actually, It must have not been.
It should be obvious that everyone shares the same base however, with shared control over the base (but not the scvs)
Ofc, that really ought to be in the op.
0
@Bilxor: Go
Wouldn't be smooth.
Possibly however, you could give the unit a zero delay for shield regeneration, but have a behavior, that activates after taking damage, with a duration of 5/6/7 so on second, that suppresses shield regeneration.
0
I was highly disapointed that they removed the pathing layers from Wc3. In Wc3, you had, Water, Land, Air, and Buildable pathing, with some units also being Amphibious (water + land), and Buildings requireing buildable pathing for construction.
In sc2, We have, Land, Cliff, and Buildable pathing. (Cliff for Reaper/collosus) And some crappy pathing blockers, that dont work half the time.
So yea, I am disappoint.
0
Alright. The Modified part, aside from the model size and attachment points (which was working correctly with attachment to the persistant) and so on, Is the two events
Behavior.SmallShieldProjector.On AtCaster Create
Behavior.SmallShieldProjector.Off Atcaster AnimBraketStopBSD
Not sure if that is correct or not. I do know that that is the correct behavior, and that it toggles on and off correctly, and is definitely on the unit that it should be.
Maybe it needs initilized somehow? I looked at fire-suppression system's actor, and it looked the same, and works similarly, so I am unsure what the problem is.
0
@DrSuperEvil: Go
Mostly. The behavior also had been creating a dummy persistant effect, to display the shield effect, based on guardian shield. I was trying to remove that however, and refer to the behavior directly, but It refused to show up afterwards.
The create healer part, as well as an applied buff to boost shield capacity is right, and working now.
Not sure what you mean by model behavior. I am using an actor, linked to the shield behavior, but I think it might need more than the events changed to refer to behaviors instead of persistants. Going to do research on hosting site ops, because I dont know what that is, but it sounds like it may be the problem.
0
@DrSuperEvil: Go
Uhm, The problem is i cannot see how the effect would cause the model to show up at all, because the shielding unit does not shield itself, and the model is attached to the actualy generator, which does not have any effects applied to it.
Basically, Want to attach guardian shield to the shield generator, as long as it has the shield field behavior, but have it disappear when the shield field behavior turns off (via validator suppression, like terran burndown uses) and then reappear after shileds regen and the behavior comes back on.
0
@DrSuperEvil: Go
Problem with that is that the ability is given by an item behavior, which also deactivates (including the animation in theory) when shields drop below 25%