someone to make an overlord map that can be traveled like a traditional tactics game... it will probably use planets though
I'm curious to know what you mean by this. Do you mean a planetary map via which you can travel to different planets? This is certainly possible, but I should warn you that the game is limited to 8 terrain textures, so your "planets" would have to make do with a limited terrain selection.
What you will want to do is have your ability apply a behavior that uses modification - height and modification - height time to lower the mothership core to the ground.
Hint: the first index of height time is how long it takes to change the height, and the second index is how long it takes to change it back. A value between 1 and 2 seconds would probably make it look pretty smooth.
At the end of the day though, they are just hiddens forms of another stat: armor and spell resist are two different reductions to damage that goes towards your main health pool. I agree they are different conceptually, but again, the end result is that your hp is drained by x.
Just because health is the one constant factor in any damage equation doesn't mean that the end result is always the same. Every other factor varies, including the type of the damage. Specialized resistances naturally follow from that and the end result is that you are stronger against some things and weaker against others. That's not just a conceptual difference.
I also disagree with this statement, the idea here is to not overload the player with similar heroes and similar items, but to create less, more distinct heroes and items. You can only have 4 of 16 items, that's a possibility of almost 4000 different item combinations. When each item plays a different role, you'll need to use different items for different situations.
Limiting the selection to just 16 items is an unnecessarily extreme response. You can have a decent item selection without being as ridiculous as DotA. Such choices as opting for sustainability (regen/lifesteal) versus large pools (health/mana), burst damage (pure damage) versus sustained damage (attack speed) are going to be totally neglected in Blizzard All-Stars. That ties heavily into the lack of stat choices as well.
Really all this did was give a more refined role to heroes that are good a pushing lanes and keeping the pressure on (i.e: Nature's Prophet, Tinker, etc).
Again, that wasn't my goal here, at this point in time, ;). In the future, once we've all gotten a chance to thoroughly delve into the content will I take a more analytical approach.
To each his own. The point of my post wasn't really to actually argue the points (sorry, I probably overdid that). I just meant to say that your videos didn't really come across as stating Blizzard's point of view so much as advocating it. I wanted to watch them to get informed but got irritated when I continually disagreed with what you were saying. :P
I don't want to offend, but your series gives off this huge sense of fan-boy-ism. I mean, it makes sense, and it's fine to be really devoted to one particular company's products, but you failed to acknowledge any other point of view.
I for one disagree with many of the things said both by you and Blizzard. Things like "armor is just a hidden form of health" or "weapon speed is just a hidden form of damage" are totally ignorant. A variety of stats and item effects increases the uniqueness of gameplay by more than the sum of its parts.
Ex.:
Weapon speed is more useful to heroes with abilities that proc on attack or items that proc on attack.
Armor and Spell Resist are not just hidden forms of health. They make you strong against some enemies but the investment leaves you weak against others.
Things like lifesteal and health regeneration provide sustainability but again, the investment means you may be lacking in damage or health, which, as an example, may leave you weak to burst damage.
Without this variety there will never be a reason to vary your item selection... One set of items will always be best on a particular hero, even moreso if you can only buy four items.
Also, the notion of a siege hero was based on very faulty premises. Yes, the objective of the game is to destroy the enemy's base, but the purpose is not to do that by outranging towers. Such an idea, at least in my opinion, takes the fun out of the game. Yes, you can say that if a siege hero is attacking your tower uninhibited, then it is your fault for not defending it - but then, if you always defend against these siege heroes, they have no purpose. So they are a subtraction from the game in both cases.
I know your video series was meant to be informational, but a truly informational series would present more than just one point of view. You raised no questions.
Well, I'm not sure what you're asking. It isn't possible to have a shared bank, you would have to manually load, merge, and then save the information between players each game.
I like your new idea, though. It's particularly nice because it provides incentive to play more and as early game items become cheaper making the boring parts of the game faster.
I've thought about stuff like this before. There are additional issues.
Let's say that Player Z plays with Players A, B, C, and D, and puts an item up for sale. Then Player A plays a game with Player X, and Player X buys the item. At the same time, Player B plays a game with Player Y, and Player Y buys the same item.
Player X and Player Y both just bought the one item that Player Z put up for sale, because they played with different players who had both played with Player Z recently.
This would be a fairly common occurrence. You would have to create some sort of system to at least prevent Player Z from getting paid twice in the event that he/she ran into both Players X and Y in the future. There would be no way to prevent the spawning of multiple copies of the same sale, but at the least you could prevent double payments.
Edit: Also, these bank files would get pretty massive.
0
@Enexy: Go
Sounds like a lot of Catalog Field Value Set.
Sounds like fun! :P
0
@Alliram: Go
Looking to make an epic boss, eh?
0
I'm curious to know what you mean by this. Do you mean a planetary map via which you can travel to different planets? This is certainly possible, but I should warn you that the game is limited to 8 terrain textures, so your "planets" would have to make do with a limited terrain selection.
0
@Jiwolza: Go
This isn't possible using a simple damage response like the immortal's shields. The easiest way to accomplish what you want here is using triggers.
0
@Kabelkorven: Go
What you will want to do is have your ability apply a behavior that uses modification - height and modification - height time to lower the mothership core to the ground.
Hint: the first index of height time is how long it takes to change the height, and the second index is how long it takes to change it back. A value between 1 and 2 seconds would probably make it look pretty smooth.
0
Just because health is the one constant factor in any damage equation doesn't mean that the end result is always the same. Every other factor varies, including the type of the damage. Specialized resistances naturally follow from that and the end result is that you are stronger against some things and weaker against others. That's not just a conceptual difference.
Limiting the selection to just 16 items is an unnecessarily extreme response. You can have a decent item selection without being as ridiculous as DotA. Such choices as opting for sustainability (regen/lifesteal) versus large pools (health/mana), burst damage (pure damage) versus sustained damage (attack speed) are going to be totally neglected in Blizzard All-Stars. That ties heavily into the lack of stat choices as well.
More refined or more limited?
To each his own. The point of my post wasn't really to actually argue the points (sorry, I probably overdid that). I just meant to say that your videos didn't really come across as stating Blizzard's point of view so much as advocating it. I wanted to watch them to get informed but got irritated when I continually disagreed with what you were saying. :P
0
@Dzuke911: Go
The issue is the Location field. It needs to be Defender, not Attacker.
If you want the effect to happen when taking damage, it is Defender. If you want it to happen when dealing damage, it is Attacker.
0
@urzaiz87: Go
Try hitting the little check-box at the top left and reading the error message.
0
@Sixen: Go
I don't want to offend, but your series gives off this huge sense of fan-boy-ism. I mean, it makes sense, and it's fine to be really devoted to one particular company's products, but you failed to acknowledge any other point of view.
I for one disagree with many of the things said both by you and Blizzard. Things like "armor is just a hidden form of health" or "weapon speed is just a hidden form of damage" are totally ignorant. A variety of stats and item effects increases the uniqueness of gameplay by more than the sum of its parts.
Ex.:
Without this variety there will never be a reason to vary your item selection... One set of items will always be best on a particular hero, even moreso if you can only buy four items.
Also, the notion of a siege hero was based on very faulty premises. Yes, the objective of the game is to destroy the enemy's base, but the purpose is not to do that by outranging towers. Such an idea, at least in my opinion, takes the fun out of the game. Yes, you can say that if a siege hero is attacking your tower uninhibited, then it is your fault for not defending it - but then, if you always defend against these siege heroes, they have no purpose. So they are a subtraction from the game in both cases.
I know your video series was meant to be informational, but a truly informational series would present more than just one point of view. You raised no questions.
0
@Nardival: Go
Well, I'm not sure what you're asking. It isn't possible to have a shared bank, you would have to manually load, merge, and then save the information between players each game.
I like your new idea, though. It's particularly nice because it provides incentive to play more and as early game items become cheaper making the boring parts of the game faster.
0
@Nardival: Go
I've thought about stuff like this before. There are additional issues.
Let's say that Player Z plays with Players A, B, C, and D, and puts an item up for sale. Then Player A plays a game with Player X, and Player X buys the item. At the same time, Player B plays a game with Player Y, and Player Y buys the same item.
Player X and Player Y both just bought the one item that Player Z put up for sale, because they played with different players who had both played with Player Z recently.
This would be a fairly common occurrence. You would have to create some sort of system to at least prevent Player Z from getting paid twice in the event that he/she ran into both Players X and Y in the future. There would be no way to prevent the spawning of multiple copies of the same sale, but at the least you could prevent double payments.
Edit: Also, these bank files would get pretty massive.
0
@RestlessOne1: Go
I like the decor in the background.
Your terrain looks so blurry, you might consider upping your graphics settings (at least for pictures). :)
0
@ZeroX33: Go
You could do this via texture declaration. You would have to get Zeratul textures modified for each color of the blade that you wanted.
0
@SoulFilcher: Go
Hey, thanks man!
0
@DrSuperEvil: Go
It's created through a chain of Create Persistent (With Periodic Offset) -> Create Unit.