I am looking to get some numeric data from the user in the easiest way possible. My map is just a simplistic puzzle type map, and isn't even really a game, so I don't need it to be fancy or anything, just easy.
So what would be the easiest way to do this? Text message input? Dialogs? Any other ideas?
To be fair I didn't look to closely at it, so I probably shouldn't have made that assumption before judging your map, and I'm sorry. Believe me, you have a lot more skill than I do when it comes to terraining.
Also, define "fine" when referring to my CPU. Would it it make a large difference to replace it with something better, say a 3.2 ghz? I could get a combo deal on newegg if that is the case.
I believe that forcefields do not send a message to the units they are blocking that they are there, so the units trying to walk through them don't recognize they are there, so when their movement fails and they try to recalculate, they will just try and go through the forcefield again.
So I would guess you would need to change the movement section of the unit tab, but I'm not sure. There is probably a flag somewhere that sets the forcefield to have that property, I'm just not sure where it is.
Currently I have a Phenom II 2.8 ghz quad core processor, 4 gigs of ram, a radeon 4650 graphics card, and a decent motherboard.
However, this runs on high graphics, and sometimes lags there. Would replacing the graphics card with a radeon 6850 do the trick, or what I need to upgrade my processor as well? Would I need more ram? Also, could a crossfire a radeon 4650 with a 6850, or do they need to be the same card?
Sorry, I have no idea what I'm talking about, I just need to know what I should do. A lot of reviews said the 6850 is a great for its price, would that do the trick?
I don't want to criticize anyone because I suck at terrain and probably shouldn't be talking, but I noticed a lot of the changes were just taking pretty much the exact same map and then just changing the variations... For example the zerg rundown, all I saw was the buildings changed from the regular to the infested models, and then a couple zerg units added. The water valley to the volcano I saw was mostly a change in a couple (or just deletion) doodads and changing the water model from water to lava.
So I guess my point is maybe there could be some more creativity? Just a suggestion, because although I such at terraining, I do specialize (in real life programming, not SC2) in visual effects and designs.
There is a difference between unrealistic and impossible. I mean, the whole "zerg" thing in general is unrealistic. Saying that Lurkers are unrealistic because they shoot spines underground is like saying that Star Wars is unrealistic because you can't breathe in space... I mean come on, a giant alien that can shoot spines out of who knows where (hydra) and a flying "thing" with no realistic way of staying in the air that shoots "glave wurms" out of a mouth that comes out of its... tail is it? And you are calling a lurker unrealistic, because it can shoot spines while underground? How is tunneling underground faster than someone can run with acceleration of an unrealistic ability in the first place (charge) any better?
No offense, but when it comes to Starcraft, "it needs to be more realistic" is not something that you can argue.
Now back to what really matters. Like I said, you should always start with the functions that a unit should have, and their priamry purpose, and then add visuals and decide which unit that is going to be. In my opinion, I think that the game is good without a lurker. It's function has been replaced with, in some senses, a baneling, and in other senses, the roach. Zerg doesn't have any unit that can attack while being invisible (with the exception of the baneling" and I do not think that was an accident.
Alright cool thanks! Still am working on trying to figure out how to terrain myself though, its in my opinion the easiest to do, by far the hardest to master when it comes to the editor.
Sorry but I would have to agree with Aenigma. Don't ever think of what would make a unit more realistic, or what would make a unit "cooler". Don't think of what other races have, and look how to add them to the race that doesn't. If they did that, there would be no differences between the races but visuals.
I liked the analogy that Anenigma used with the dark templar. Don't think of "what unit would be cool to add" instead think "what function should a unit have to counter an op feature of another race".
There are many ways for a zerg to counter a terran wall in. Although I suck at melee in general, I know that early game banelings can easily be cost effective against a wall-in. Also, protoss has this ability too with sentries. Zerg doesn't but zerg can also make a new main buildings for 100 minerals less, and make more than 1 worker at once from each.
What would make more sense is to think, "what could I add to make the game more interesting?" For example, maybe have the lurker be able to spawn an egg of a unit out of it's back while burrowed? So like a mobile hatchery? Then after that, what can I add to the other races that could counter this? That doesn't mean adding a unit that does the same thing, that means making something that can counter it. For example, maybe give the terran bunker a behavior that will cause all units inside the bunker to be given a 4 or 5 armor reduction, but a 50% decrease in damage overall. Then this would be an excellent counter to the lurker, because then these bunkers would be able to kill the eggs that are being hatched.
One again, this is just my mindless brainstorming. But that is the process you need to go through, not "What would make this unit much cooler or realistic?". And if you do something like that, make sure that that question will not influence the actual function of the unit, only the visuals.
Hey would you mind if I use this terrain for a map that I am making?
I will literally credit every single one of you, and the SC2Mapster community.
By all means, reject me and call me a selfish jerk (I would not blame you), but truly I would love to turn this into a fully functional map, if someone isn't doing that already.
When you make a forum post, be more specific. I was not trying to be mean, and I'm sorry if it came off that way, it is hard to show your emotions in text if you know what I mean...
Anyways what I was saying is that you most likely would have gotten more responses if the question was easier to understand. I go through a lot of posts, and if I don't understand the question because it is vague or worded poorly, I will not answer. That had happened a bunch of times in a row and I am sorry that I was getting frustrated...
I mean this in the most constructive way, so please don't get mad at me... But if you are expecting people to read and think about your post, and then post their response on top of that, at least have the courtesy to write a detailed explanation on what you are trying to do.
Damn I sound like a jerk... Sorry, not my goal. I just want to answer your questions, but I can't if you don't give me something to work with you know?
So what I am seeing is that you want a blink ability that blinks to the target on an autocast? Or you have made a blink that targets a unit? Please give me some more information, and I will help you.
You can't convert text to a string, no matter if you use raw code or not.
What is commonly misunderstood is that the raw code is no different than the preset options in the editor. Writing your own code is for your own convenience only. There are a couple of things that are made easier with code, and some things that aren't even possible without it. However, none of these things include items that Blizzard does not support, and converting text to a string is one of them. The difference between a text value and a string value may seem very similar, but they are quite different in nature. Also, someone mentioned banning this for the purposes of that Blizzard doesn't want blacklists, which is also very possible.
I strongly recommend doing what I have suggested, as it works well and also gives the user much more flexibility and customization.
Also, note that I program in Java, not Galaxy Script, so some of the information posted above may not be entirely true. However, I do know that no matter what language you are programming in, converting text into a string is much more difficult than it seems.
(In case you were wondering or didn't know, universally a text value is considered a value with color, indents, size of text, UI formatting and other data, whereas a string value is a, well, string of characters that each have a "value" to them. For example, you can't return a particular character in a text value, but you can in a string value)
Have players enter their name into the game before the game starts, and then use that as their name in the game instead of their Bnet one. Then store that into the bank as a string.
Then when someone talks, have their "game name" in parenthesis next to the chat area, just in case they decide to change their name to something different than their Bnet name.
if you want, you could even have a system that will check and make sure that no one else has that name currently. Because there are no global high scores, it doesn't matter if someone changes their name per game, as long as that data can be taken from the bank and then changed if it needs to be.
Not sure exactly what is happening with that, but I would assume something having to do with an attack validator. Changing all the flags to another unit that works can sometimes be effective in the short term, but it is better to understand what you are doing. I would recommend looking under all of the effects, weapons, and other items attached to your unit, and check for validators. If there are non, check for other flags. Check the unit's damage tab, for flags like damage response. A lot of these problems may stem from the unit, not the weapon.
Also, it sounds like, if the rockets you are describing are custom, that they are being destroyed by your own units. You can think of missiles as units; they can be destroyed, so make sure that you have them set to invulnerable.
0
I am looking to get some numeric data from the user in the easiest way possible. My map is just a simplistic puzzle type map, and isn't even really a game, so I don't need it to be fancy or anything, just easy.
So what would be the easiest way to do this? Text message input? Dialogs? Any other ideas?
Thanks
0
@replaywarrior: Go
To be fair I didn't look to closely at it, so I probably shouldn't have made that assumption before judging your map, and I'm sorry. Believe me, you have a lot more skill than I do when it comes to terraining.
0
@Dresnia: Go
Also, define "fine" when referring to my CPU. Would it it make a large difference to replace it with something better, say a 3.2 ghz? I could get a combo deal on newegg if that is the case.
0
@Dresnia: Go
Alright, thank you. So do you know if the two cards can be crossfired or not?
Also I did check, the card is compatible.
0
@Claymuffin: Go
I believe that forcefields do not send a message to the units they are blocking that they are there, so the units trying to walk through them don't recognize they are there, so when their movement fails and they try to recalculate, they will just try and go through the forcefield again.
So I would guess you would need to change the movement section of the unit tab, but I'm not sure. There is probably a flag somewhere that sets the forcefield to have that property, I'm just not sure where it is.
0
Currently I have a Phenom II 2.8 ghz quad core processor, 4 gigs of ram, a radeon 4650 graphics card, and a decent motherboard.
However, this runs on high graphics, and sometimes lags there. Would replacing the graphics card with a radeon 6850 do the trick, or what I need to upgrade my processor as well? Would I need more ram? Also, could a crossfire a radeon 4650 with a 6850, or do they need to be the same card?
Sorry, I have no idea what I'm talking about, I just need to know what I should do. A lot of reviews said the 6850 is a great for its price, would that do the trick?
Thanks.
0
I don't want to criticize anyone because I suck at terrain and probably shouldn't be talking, but I noticed a lot of the changes were just taking pretty much the exact same map and then just changing the variations... For example the zerg rundown, all I saw was the buildings changed from the regular to the infested models, and then a couple zerg units added. The water valley to the volcano I saw was mostly a change in a couple (or just deletion) doodads and changing the water model from water to lava.
So I guess my point is maybe there could be some more creativity? Just a suggestion, because although I such at terraining, I do specialize (in real life programming, not SC2) in visual effects and designs.
0
@mnadeau1992: Go
There is a difference between unrealistic and impossible. I mean, the whole "zerg" thing in general is unrealistic. Saying that Lurkers are unrealistic because they shoot spines underground is like saying that Star Wars is unrealistic because you can't breathe in space... I mean come on, a giant alien that can shoot spines out of who knows where (hydra) and a flying "thing" with no realistic way of staying in the air that shoots "glave wurms" out of a mouth that comes out of its... tail is it? And you are calling a lurker unrealistic, because it can shoot spines while underground? How is tunneling underground faster than someone can run with acceleration of an unrealistic ability in the first place (charge) any better?
No offense, but when it comes to Starcraft, "it needs to be more realistic" is not something that you can argue.
Now back to what really matters. Like I said, you should always start with the functions that a unit should have, and their priamry purpose, and then add visuals and decide which unit that is going to be. In my opinion, I think that the game is good without a lurker. It's function has been replaced with, in some senses, a baneling, and in other senses, the roach. Zerg doesn't have any unit that can attack while being invisible (with the exception of the baneling" and I do not think that was an accident.
0
@Mozared: Go
Alright cool thanks! Still am working on trying to figure out how to terrain myself though, its in my opinion the easiest to do, by far the hardest to master when it comes to the editor.
0
@mnadeau1992: Go
Sorry but I would have to agree with Aenigma. Don't ever think of what would make a unit more realistic, or what would make a unit "cooler". Don't think of what other races have, and look how to add them to the race that doesn't. If they did that, there would be no differences between the races but visuals.
I liked the analogy that Anenigma used with the dark templar. Don't think of "what unit would be cool to add" instead think "what function should a unit have to counter an op feature of another race".
There are many ways for a zerg to counter a terran wall in. Although I suck at melee in general, I know that early game banelings can easily be cost effective against a wall-in. Also, protoss has this ability too with sentries. Zerg doesn't but zerg can also make a new main buildings for 100 minerals less, and make more than 1 worker at once from each.
What would make more sense is to think, "what could I add to make the game more interesting?" For example, maybe have the lurker be able to spawn an egg of a unit out of it's back while burrowed? So like a mobile hatchery? Then after that, what can I add to the other races that could counter this? That doesn't mean adding a unit that does the same thing, that means making something that can counter it. For example, maybe give the terran bunker a behavior that will cause all units inside the bunker to be given a 4 or 5 armor reduction, but a 50% decrease in damage overall. Then this would be an excellent counter to the lurker, because then these bunkers would be able to kill the eggs that are being hatched.
One again, this is just my mindless brainstorming. But that is the process you need to go through, not "What would make this unit much cooler or realistic?". And if you do something like that, make sure that that question will not influence the actual function of the unit, only the visuals.
Kinda get what I'm saying?
0
Hey would you mind if I use this terrain for a map that I am making?
I will literally credit every single one of you, and the SC2Mapster community. By all means, reject me and call me a selfish jerk (I would not blame you), but truly I would love to turn this into a fully functional map, if someone isn't doing that already.
0
@SkedarLord:
When you make a forum post, be more specific. I was not trying to be mean, and I'm sorry if it came off that way, it is hard to show your emotions in text if you know what I mean...
Anyways what I was saying is that you most likely would have gotten more responses if the question was easier to understand. I go through a lot of posts, and if I don't understand the question because it is vague or worded poorly, I will not answer. That had happened a bunch of times in a row and I am sorry that I was getting frustrated...
I mean this in the most constructive way, so please don't get mad at me... But if you are expecting people to read and think about your post, and then post their response on top of that, at least have the courtesy to write a detailed explanation on what you are trying to do.
Damn I sound like a jerk... Sorry, not my goal. I just want to answer your questions, but I can't if you don't give me something to work with you know?
So what I am seeing is that you want a blink ability that blinks to the target on an autocast? Or you have made a blink that targets a unit? Please give me some more information, and I will help you.
0
@BasharTeg:
You can't convert text to a string, no matter if you use raw code or not.
What is commonly misunderstood is that the raw code is no different than the preset options in the editor. Writing your own code is for your own convenience only. There are a couple of things that are made easier with code, and some things that aren't even possible without it. However, none of these things include items that Blizzard does not support, and converting text to a string is one of them. The difference between a text value and a string value may seem very similar, but they are quite different in nature. Also, someone mentioned banning this for the purposes of that Blizzard doesn't want blacklists, which is also very possible.
I strongly recommend doing what I have suggested, as it works well and also gives the user much more flexibility and customization.
Also, note that I program in Java, not Galaxy Script, so some of the information posted above may not be entirely true. However, I do know that no matter what language you are programming in, converting text into a string is much more difficult than it seems.
(In case you were wondering or didn't know, universally a text value is considered a value with color, indents, size of text, UI formatting and other data, whereas a string value is a, well, string of characters that each have a "value" to them. For example, you can't return a particular character in a text value, but you can in a string value)
0
@PsychoMC:
Have players enter their name into the game before the game starts, and then use that as their name in the game instead of their Bnet one. Then store that into the bank as a string.
Then when someone talks, have their "game name" in parenthesis next to the chat area, just in case they decide to change their name to something different than their Bnet name.
if you want, you could even have a system that will check and make sure that no one else has that name currently. Because there are no global high scores, it doesn't matter if someone changes their name per game, as long as that data can be taken from the bank and then changed if it needs to be.
0
@Zolden:
Not sure exactly what is happening with that, but I would assume something having to do with an attack validator. Changing all the flags to another unit that works can sometimes be effective in the short term, but it is better to understand what you are doing. I would recommend looking under all of the effects, weapons, and other items attached to your unit, and check for validators. If there are non, check for other flags. Check the unit's damage tab, for flags like damage response. A lot of these problems may stem from the unit, not the weapon.
Also, it sounds like, if the rockets you are describing are custom, that they are being destroyed by your own units. You can think of missiles as units; they can be destroyed, so make sure that you have them set to invulnerable.