It seems to be the fog. You can change it in the Data under Terrain Set, find the terrain set you are using and change the Fog options. There is one for density i believe or something like that, that if you set to 0 it will remove fog.
Its the "Distance - Shadow Clip" in the camera settings that you probably have to set to something bigger. You could set it to like 16000 and all shadows no matter how far you look will be shown. (Or should be..) Note however that if you make a playable game and it's a cinematic that zoom out really far, it could get intensive for low end computers if there is many shadows to make plus the units / doodads, etc.
From a terraining perspective, if this is meant to be a playable area, it is too dark. You could tune the lights to something darker than day light, but still be able to clearly see units and stuff. If you cannot clearly see, this is a gameplay problem. As a comparaison, remember the "Left to die" map with day/night cycle, well you get the feeling that it's night, but you still clearly see.
They made a forest with 200 trees, and then they made the same one with half and it looks almost the same. You get the same feeling of forest without having to use that many trees. Same goes with lighting, but for visual ease, you don't have to make the screen black to show people that they are in a cave. If the terrain is well made and the lighting is just enough "darker than usual" they will understand.
You could use different techniques to amplify the idea of beeing in a cave such as DrSuperEvil suggestion to attach lights to some units which will show the player the different between what is bright and the rest of the map beeing darker.
You could make the camera slightly closer to unit, just like if it had to be "in" the cave with the units.
You could make the map with a black mask instead of grey one so the top of the cliffs are not revealed when passing nearby.
You could do terraining to add glowing stuff like, burning stuff that lights the paths... maybe it's a special building that scv build that are kind of firecamps or light spots so you can see along the ways...
But in the end, that lighting to me is too dark. It's very hard to see anything.
I'm not sure that this solution will work well. The problem here is that when the lag happend, both event, both triggers will run at the same time and both will check if the variable is false or true, whatever the way it is set to prevent extra unit creation and both triggers will create the unit.
Another way could be adding the player to a player group variable and have another trigger that during the selection it checks if the player group variable is empty, if not look which player has choosed. This way you make sure even during a lag, the player will be added to the player group variable (the players that are choosing) and it will cycle.
Such system also allows hero picking for many player at the same time that can prevent 2 or more players picking the same because of lagging ui. Both players would get added at the same time in the player group in some order, but will not get both the same hero as the first one will get it, the other will be discarded as already picked.
Nice change with the icons. The idea behind my marks was only to have a global idea of which links are still usefull. I went as deep as reading / watching the tutorials and see how usefull they are. I put myself in the place where "I'm a beginner that wants to learn the editor and see the tutorial page, I don't know what I want other than learn stuff, so I look around and click on a tutorial and do it; would that tutorial be helping me learning?" On that idea I marked some as outdated when there are too many missing images, the text is hardly readable, it was made long ago when things where different. I marked some as still relevant because even if it's outdated, the information found inside is enough relevant to learn more things and is enough close to what you would need to do in order to do what is found in the tutorial. Say if you have to duplicate a Unit, it would be the same steps overall now just as 5-6 years ago.
So yeah, it's kind of hard to evaluate eatch tutorial, it's pretty arbitrary but I go through to mark it the best possible so it takes time (which is why I'm not done) but the long term idea is to simplify the tutorial page to something more efficient, where eatch tutorial is worth alot for learning new stuff.
My idea is:
Mark eatch tutorial for easier referencing of what is good from what is outdated
Move apart all broken tutorial, see if they can still be usefull by finding back links, images, etc through the internet's Archieve or whatnot
Update all worthy tutorials that are outdated by re-adding images, rewriting, making better, combining with other tutorials, etc.
Which include moving the tutorial to the Wiki, adding links to terms like triggers, data, variables, etc. So when you go through the tutorial and you are not sure of something you can check it up easily.
Simplify the tutorial divisions so there are not like 16 divisions. If the tutorial are better explained and combined, the less we need many divisions.
Move the best tutorials up in the list.
Make a "global tutorial" where it would explain how to make a map from A to Z with links giving to tutorial parts for "how to do this part".
It's definitly something that can only be done over time. It would be long, but I'm sure worth it. The current tutorial page does not feel effective for finding the tutorial someone need.
Random stuff: It would be nice a tutorial about the "new" Wizards. The thing that allow automated data creation. I always wondered where this is now, if people made some usefull one, etc. and maybe we could even add those through some tutorials so it simplify a bunch of stuff. Option 1: Run Wizard, Option 2: Go through that long tutorial. Haha.
Here is my try. I'm out of time. I still had some inspiration. I could have add streetlights and more park areas, more details on many things, maybe add a blimp, and all those kind of stuff. Could have worked the lighing (which i did not cause of time). But overall, I'm very happy about it.
Many if not most of them are no more really active.
I agree that tutorial does not always need visual, but those which I flagged as that would be better with it... at least some coloration or something.
I agree that we could try to find back those old videos if we can, but some are really broken and no longer accessible.
What do you think about this... I imagined a big tutorial that goes through making a map in details but refering to appropriate tutorial(s) for eatch parts. I have not yet elaborated a structure about how I would organise that, but it would be like:
Making a map: General info, general tutorials, tips, commands, shortcuts, etc.
Making the terrain: Going from raw terraining to detailled texturing, doodads and so on.
Making the triggers: how to structure them, what are the variables etc.
and so on. So you can always have a good reference to eatch parts about making a succesfull map, in a more organised way than just listing all available tutorials under categories like "triggers" "data" etc. (Although I would definitly keep both) Just an idea though.
Went through the Presets. I did structure it a little more into table for more readability and added the missing parts.
Edit: I'm also going through the Tutorial list currently and just trying to identify which are still enough recent or still contain usefull content and those that are broken. Basicly here is how I identify them.
Broken -> Link is dead or video file is dead
Outdated -> Content mostly outdated, contain broken image file, it doesn't mean everything is useless, but it could be rewrited into a better well structured tutorial combined with other similar tutorial
Outdated-OK -> It might be outdated and containing broken image, but overall, it still contains usefull information.
No Visual -> Could be a good tutorial but is just plain text, thus very hard to follow.
Without a prefix -> These a good tutorial worth going through. Generally well written and imaged.
I'm not done yet, it's quite long going through and judging if it's still usefull enough to be kept or if it could be incorporated to another tutorial in a better way.
The idea will be to gather similar information and make a great tutorial out of that within the wiki containing links to the refered triggers, data, etc. Many tutorial could be reworked and made better.
The buff idea seems interesting, could it be applied with an effect when the unit is attacked to check the alliance of the attacking unit and do an issue order to stop? Then it would stop using only data? Just random thought.
I've seen most of these before. I always liked those old pictures. It gives an idea of what are the "unused structure" found in 3rd party editor and stuff like that. There are also legacy stuff that could have been a thing, but did not, like an upgrades that affect building armor, worker's damage, storm damage, etc.
Another cool thing is adding a scarab to a specefic player to make the whole game engine run faster (like on a replay x2 x4 or x8) although in-game x8 is buggy, x2 is stable and quite funny to see... a vulture with Iron Thrusters and the map in x2 or x4 can cross diagonally a 256x256 is a few sec, like lighting-fast. haha.
I've been able in the past to install the beta, but never played it, same as stratostygo, can't pass the b.net. Because you have to kind of create your own server, and the beta does not have a single player enabled... So it kind of sucks, but its still really fun to see the game actually works... one day someone will get it back working. Always cool to see so old legacy stuff. :D
Just saying, for me, such point system removes the idea of creating content for the community. I mean, I really feel such system to be inapropriate on a website like this one. It's not about making good content "for points" it's about making good content ''for us''. When saying "it's on you to advertise your content" this means at some point it will do like youtube, facebook or any "up voting system" where the "the most shared content" is not always the "best quality content". So it's not about advertising (and just the idea of having to advertise makes me sick)... because "you" advertised your stuff more than someone else's good content, you might end up with much more reward even though it is not as good, just like false news spreading like powder on social media, its not the most shared news that is necessarly the "true" one. Earning based on advertising your content feels wrong to me. And just the idea of "points" for "content". To me, if someone makes something awesome, it will get known no matter what.
That's just what I'm thinking, I don't mind different opinion, just want to share my point of view, and maybe find that some other people feels the same.
0
It seems to be the fog. You can change it in the Data under Terrain Set, find the terrain set you are using and change the Fog options. There is one for density i believe or something like that, that if you set to 0 it will remove fog.
0
Seems like my post was flagged as spam, probably because of the external link... at least now you can see my points.
0
Its the "Distance - Shadow Clip" in the camera settings that you probably have to set to something bigger. You could set it to like 16000 and all shadows no matter how far you look will be shown. (Or should be..) Note however that if you make a playable game and it's a cinematic that zoom out really far, it could get intensive for low end computers if there is many shadows to make plus the units / doodads, etc.
0
From a terraining perspective, if this is meant to be a playable area, it is too dark. You could tune the lights to something darker than day light, but still be able to clearly see units and stuff. If you cannot clearly see, this is a gameplay problem. As a comparaison, remember the "Left to die" map with day/night cycle, well you get the feeling that it's night, but you still clearly see.
It's similar to blizzard's tip about doodads here: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/20097658
They made a forest with 200 trees, and then they made the same one with half and it looks almost the same. You get the same feeling of forest without having to use that many trees. Same goes with lighting, but for visual ease, you don't have to make the screen black to show people that they are in a cave. If the terrain is well made and the lighting is just enough "darker than usual" they will understand.
You could use different techniques to amplify the idea of beeing in a cave such as DrSuperEvil suggestion to attach lights to some units which will show the player the different between what is bright and the rest of the map beeing darker.
You could make the camera slightly closer to unit, just like if it had to be "in" the cave with the units.
You could make the map with a black mask instead of grey one so the top of the cliffs are not revealed when passing nearby.
You could do terraining to add glowing stuff like, burning stuff that lights the paths... maybe it's a special building that scv build that are kind of firecamps or light spots so you can see along the ways...
But in the end, that lighting to me is too dark. It's very hard to see anything.
0
I'm not sure that this solution will work well. The problem here is that when the lag happend, both event, both triggers will run at the same time and both will check if the variable is false or true, whatever the way it is set to prevent extra unit creation and both triggers will create the unit.
Another way could be adding the player to a player group variable and have another trigger that during the selection it checks if the player group variable is empty, if not look which player has choosed. This way you make sure even during a lag, the player will be added to the player group variable (the players that are choosing) and it will cycle.
Such system also allows hero picking for many player at the same time that can prevent 2 or more players picking the same because of lagging ui. Both players would get added at the same time in the player group in some order, but will not get both the same hero as the first one will get it, the other will be discarded as already picked.
0
Hey fishy77!
Nice change with the icons. The idea behind my marks was only to have a global idea of which links are still usefull. I went as deep as reading / watching the tutorials and see how usefull they are. I put myself in the place where "I'm a beginner that wants to learn the editor and see the tutorial page, I don't know what I want other than learn stuff, so I look around and click on a tutorial and do it; would that tutorial be helping me learning?" On that idea I marked some as outdated when there are too many missing images, the text is hardly readable, it was made long ago when things where different. I marked some as still relevant because even if it's outdated, the information found inside is enough relevant to learn more things and is enough close to what you would need to do in order to do what is found in the tutorial. Say if you have to duplicate a Unit, it would be the same steps overall now just as 5-6 years ago.
So yeah, it's kind of hard to evaluate eatch tutorial, it's pretty arbitrary but I go through to mark it the best possible so it takes time (which is why I'm not done) but the long term idea is to simplify the tutorial page to something more efficient, where eatch tutorial is worth alot for learning new stuff.
My idea is:
It's definitly something that can only be done over time. It would be long, but I'm sure worth it. The current tutorial page does not feel effective for finding the tutorial someone need.
Random stuff: It would be nice a tutorial about the "new" Wizards. The thing that allow automated data creation. I always wondered where this is now, if people made some usefull one, etc. and maybe we could even add those through some tutorials so it simplify a bunch of stuff. Option 1: Run Wizard, Option 2: Go through that long tutorial. Haha.
0
More images because of the 5 limit, and I don't know if you can still attach the map, which sucks if not.
0
Here is my try. I'm out of time. I still had some inspiration. I could have add streetlights and more park areas, more details on many things, maybe add a blimp, and all those kind of stuff. Could have worked the lighing (which i did not cause of time). But overall, I'm very happy about it.
0
I very like the animation on that tempest! Do all these units have such anim? Btw they are amazing.
0
Many if not most of them are no more really active.
I agree that tutorial does not always need visual, but those which I flagged as that would be better with it... at least some coloration or something.
I agree that we could try to find back those old videos if we can, but some are really broken and no longer accessible.
What do you think about this... I imagined a big tutorial that goes through making a map in details but refering to appropriate tutorial(s) for eatch parts. I have not yet elaborated a structure about how I would organise that, but it would be like:
and so on. So you can always have a good reference to eatch parts about making a succesfull map, in a more organised way than just listing all available tutorials under categories like "triggers" "data" etc. (Although I would definitly keep both) Just an idea though.
0
Went through the Presets. I did structure it a little more into table for more readability and added the missing parts.
Edit: I'm also going through the Tutorial list currently and just trying to identify which are still enough recent or still contain usefull content and those that are broken. Basicly here is how I identify them.
I'm not done yet, it's quite long going through and judging if it's still usefull enough to be kept or if it could be incorporated to another tutorial in a better way.
The idea will be to gather similar information and make a great tutorial out of that within the wiki containing links to the refered triggers, data, etc. Many tutorial could be reworked and made better.
0
The buff idea seems interesting, could it be applied with an effect when the unit is attacked to check the alliance of the attacking unit and do an issue order to stop? Then it would stop using only data? Just random thought.
0
I've seen most of these before. I always liked those old pictures. It gives an idea of what are the "unused structure" found in 3rd party editor and stuff like that. There are also legacy stuff that could have been a thing, but did not, like an upgrades that affect building armor, worker's damage, storm damage, etc.
Another cool thing is adding a scarab to a specefic player to make the whole game engine run faster (like on a replay x2 x4 or x8) although in-game x8 is buggy, x2 is stable and quite funny to see... a vulture with Iron Thrusters and the map in x2 or x4 can cross diagonally a 256x256 is a few sec, like lighting-fast. haha.
I've been able in the past to install the beta, but never played it, same as stratostygo, can't pass the b.net. Because you have to kind of create your own server, and the beta does not have a single player enabled... So it kind of sucks, but its still really fun to see the game actually works... one day someone will get it back working. Always cool to see so old legacy stuff. :D
0
That's nice ! I like it. It'd agree for slightly different opening sounds, but the visual is awesome. Feels almost like Harry Potter's intro haha.
0
Just saying, for me, such point system removes the idea of creating content for the community. I mean, I really feel such system to be inapropriate on a website like this one. It's not about making good content "for points" it's about making good content ''for us''. When saying "it's on you to advertise your content" this means at some point it will do like youtube, facebook or any "up voting system" where the "the most shared content" is not always the "best quality content". So it's not about advertising (and just the idea of having to advertise makes me sick)... because "you" advertised your stuff more than someone else's good content, you might end up with much more reward even though it is not as good, just like false news spreading like powder on social media, its not the most shared news that is necessarly the "true" one. Earning based on advertising your content feels wrong to me. And just the idea of "points" for "content". To me, if someone makes something awesome, it will get known no matter what.
That's just what I'm thinking, I don't mind different opinion, just want to share my point of view, and maybe find that some other people feels the same.