I have triggers that tell the game to remove these units depening on the difficulty chosen in the game lobby.
That's pretty much what I'd like to do since I can't find any other way, but I have around 100 units in the map (and there will be much more when the 2nd half is done)... It would require 6 triggers (one for each difficulty level) telling which of the 100 units should appear or not... 600 lines split in 6 pointless triggers, just for difficulty detection?!?! There has to be a better way.
I would do a "pick each unit" if I could, but not only there are 100 units, there are also 5 types of them and they are everywhere on the map. Some of them appear in a difficulty level, then do not show on the next level and finally are here again in the highest levels... Which means I'll have to check 100 units one by one, just to know when they show, and add a line in each of the 6 triggers to remove this unit or not... This is madness, it will take hours for almost nothing and I will obviously make a mistake at some point.
Isn't there ANY way to grab the values of the AI level of the unit, so that I can do a "pick each unit in (AI difficulty X)" and show/hide them? There seems to be something to check the "available for attack waves" option through triggers, so maybe we can get the AI level value somehow? I searched in triggers and libraries but couldn't find anything...
You can't do 2 layers of footprint on a doodad, so it means it can't recognize both the surface of the bridge and the surface under the bridge. You will either have units walking on ground that move instantly on the bridge, or units on the bridge who fall down on ground. The issue exists since Warcraft 3, and unless we could someday have 2 layers of footprint in a doodad it will never work properly. Maybe you can fake it, but it will be bugged anyway.
Check the "Modify Map Bounds" option, and use the arrows on the side of your map preview image. You can then move the limits of your map, and when you click OK it will tell you it can't be undone (so be sure to crop your map properly before applying).
It's so easy I shouldn't even have to tell you this, there are video tutorials on SC2Mapster already covering such basics... I wonder how you could have done "a lot of work in triggers and data" without even checking options in the standard menus first... *sigh*
Thanks, but I've already done this and it doesn't really work. It looks like it does, but it doesn't. Let me explain why:
This is what I want:
(unit NOT appearing unless you're at least on Hard)
This is how my custom variant shows in the lobby:
(in this example, I tried to play on Very Hard to prove my point)
This shows that my trigger (which is like yours) actually apply the difficulty settings when ingame:
And THIS, my friend, is a huge WTF moment:
(the unit which is supposed to show in Very Hard doesn't... yet it does when I launch the map from the editor after setting the preferences)
As you can see, the difficulty is set, but the units shown are only those in Medium difficulty, not those of the difficulty chosen in the lobby. I tried to modify the game variant default value to Insane (to check if it uses the default or just spawn Medium units everytime) and it seems to always use Medium. Which is weird, since the difficulty is set to whatever I choose in the lobby AND units spawned through triggers work with the difficulty settings I selected. The only problem is that pre-placed units won't show properly.
We only use 10% of our brains... What if we used 100%?? Would we even have to figure anything out? Not bloody likely.
People using more than 10% of their brain will eventually turn mad (schizophrenic, mostly). Rare cases of people using unknown part of the brain have a problem elsewhere (motricity, elocution, autism,...). The brain spend most of his time slowing your whole body down or you would turn crazy because of the mass of information your brain sends and receives.
Science is about finding FACTS to prove or disprove. Believing god doesn't exist without 100% proof positive that he doesn't is not very scientific.
Science has never reported any fact proving that the existence of a god might even be true. Weird phenomenons exist, but most of them are interpretations (the face of Jesus seen in the moisture on a wall is just an misinterpretation of the form we see). If an alien comes on Earth and we study his UFO, we would probably not understand how it works. Doesn't his UFO exists even if we can't explain with 100% proof how he made it?
I believe in a god yet love science. I'm sure I am not the only one, regular joe or scientist or whatever.
Scientists claiming themselves to be scientists and not believing in something, and then saying(with strong conviction) that god doesn't exist is just the stupidest thing ever. Again, not very scientific of them.
Speaking of UFOs, this is probably the only "weird" thing I believe. And yet, I'm pretty sure if we need with an alien race someday, they won't give a f* about our god(s). I'm not even sure they would understand the concept of believing in an entity.
Anyways thats enough from me, I hate debating Science - Religion... it's just oh-so-much-bullshit =D and oh-so-recycled. I've debated science vs religion too many times over the years. Ahwell. Enjoy.
True enough. I'll join you (yes, I know I already said that twice).
@EternalWraith: Go
Funny. They reach the Godwin point and turn the answers and questions to their advantage (2 choices of answer per question is not enough to be accurate)... I personally don't believe rape is a good thing yet you can't tell it's absolute moral sense. Molesters don't feel guilty about it, because they fancy young people and this is their way to prove it... It doesn't mean I want them to keep on doing this, it just mean there is a reason to how they act, and we shouldn't only blame them for this (funny, there was not any button to give this answer in the test)... Of course society thinks it's bad (meaning >98% of us), but they don't. I know what is common sense but I also learned to be cautious about that: Many people believe in god, this is not enough of a reason to make me believe it exists. If 98% of us would believe the moon is made of cheese, would you join them? I won't, BECAUSE I know people proved it isn't. I don't believe in god because what science found is enough for me to consider god doesn't exists. If someday science proves the contrary, I'll probably reconsider the question.
-Hmm, where's the proof that it doesn't? Just sayin'.
Baaaaaah, can't help it. I need to answer this... Sorry for the wall of text.
The whole point of science, its very existence in the beginning, is to prove god doesn't exist by trusting FACTS. The main objective of science is to explain what people used to attribute to a god. Believers thought of demonic possession, while science proved it was seizure. Believers burned redheads because they thought their hair color was from Hell. Believers thought of life after death because people who had a Near Death Experience saw Jesus or whoever... Science proved that the NDE is a moment of extremely high activity of the brain, which also means what people saw is what they wanted to see (it's almost as if you were dreaming while being completely high). Science also proved Moses never splitted water in half. He just used a natural phenomenon which actually still exists nowadays (it's in the Nile Delta, I think). And I'm pretty sure Jesus never actually walked on water either, he just walked on the Dead Sea, where anyone nowadays can go to do the same.
There are still mysteries science can't explain of course, but it doesn't mean it's an act of god anyway: I'd most likely think science doesn't have the tools yet to explain what it is (criminal investigation constantly make these kinds of progress, why wouldn't it apply to other researches?). Science helps the whole humanity to make progress (medicine, for example). What did religions do in the interest of humanity? Colonizations, extermination of indigenous tribes, arbitrary crimes based on beliefs, wars... and proverbs, maybe.
Belief is only a creation from people who wanted to explain what they can't.
How was Jesus born already? Oh yeah, I remember! From a virgin. That totally makes sense! From "immaculate conception", right? Another mystery to explain a mystery! Religion is some kind of melting pot where everything weird in life is assumed as an act of someone we can't see, we can't hear, we can't touch, we can't smell, and we can't even talk to. Starting from there, of course, there is nothing we could do against it because there is no way to prove something DOESN'T exist. It's pure logic, yet it's totally absurd.
ex: I believe there is a giant mouse somewhere in space which is made of gouda, and she sent edam on Earth to let our planet know she is a superior being. Prove me I'm wrong. You can't? Of course you can't, because there is no way to go far enough in space and be sure we checked EVERYWHERE for that giant mouse. As long as you don't prove me you checked everywhere, I'll still see hope somehow and stick to my belief. The same way, NOBODY can prove god exists, but we can at least trust facts that will help us get the right from wrong. It is more likely that god doesn't exists though, because facts are against it while there are only assumptions on the fact that he exists.
Anyway, you're right when saying science makes assumptions. But it's a normal process when your goal is to discover truth behind mysteries. You can't reach truth (based on facts) in the first try... You need to focus on something and see how it sticks, but it takes time, it's a full process of trial and errors. Science always assumed that, while believers always claimed "if you don't do as god tought us, you'll be in a lot of trouble". People are ready to fight each other for something NOBODY has yet been able to prove... How could I agree with that, seriously? The whole religious teaching sounds childish to me, it sounds EXACTLY the same way as "eat your vegetables or your dad will be angry!"...
The only dynamic thing which can be done with terrain (as far as I know) is a "crater" effect, by raising/lowering the terrain level at some point, but you still can't create/modify cliffs dynamically.
Is there any solution to create a walkable plattform, where units can pass trough under it too?
No, there is not.
This topic was already discussed at least 4 or 5 times (you should have done a search before posting) and, as for the Warcraft 3 editor, you can't make units pass under AND over of a bridge. Bridges are objects, objects collide with units, and the only way to make sure a unit does not collide with a bridge is to edit the footprint. But it doesn't allow to use depth, so the walkable path is in 2D. No matter how you do it, it will never work fine.
@ZealNaga: Go
I need some explanations, I'm not sure to catch your cynism/irony here. Anyway, I know my belief is not the belief of other people. If you believe in something, you should know that I also have the right to believe in something else than what you believe in. Trying to prove I'm intolerant is just a proof that you're not either, in a way...
Religion is a business. They make much more money than you can think of, just look at the Vatican. Because "in the name of <whoever>", believers are ready to give their money. They are so fascinated by the mystery of faith (it leads to so many questions and yet no answer), that they are ready to pay someone for giving any kind of an answer... As long as the answer makes a little bit of sense, they will agree. I'd rather bet on science, which gave answers (with proof) to much more things in a century than faith in more than 2000 years... And trusting science helps me keeping away from sects, which is really REALLY close to how most religions behave nowadays.
In the case of this website, they try to answer the question "what will happen to your pets when we all go to Heaven?"... They have no answer (and if you're not dumb you know they can't possibly do anything), but believers will still pay for it because they believe in anything as long as someone knows how to "promote" the thing. Fundamentally, believers will trust people without having the need of an evidence. Yes, blind trust. You just need to tell them "I will take care of your dog when you're in Heaven", and they will trust you. Even if you leave their dog in the streets. And you don't care because when the guy will be gone, there's no way he'll be able to know you're doing what he paid you for. He just lost his money for nothing, "in the name of his god".
@OneSoga:
Even believers who don't bite to the whole "I'll take care of your pet" thing can still be considered naive. Just the fact of believing in someone that doesn't even exist, is naive. Where is this "god" everybody talks about? How could war be a proof that god is challenging us? So many questions, no real answer... When I hear believers talking about faith, I almost have the impression of hearing kids creating their story. When no one has the same point-of-view abouth faith, it's most likely than none of them is right... There is no god, faith is just a way of reassuring oneself when we have to face the hardness of real life. By the way, almost every single war that happened in History was based on religious beliefs.
People who can't face real life will claim it's a challenge from god. How could your own problems in life be the matter of an omnipotent being? Seriously... If you believe in god, and assuming he is a symbol of humility and wisdom, you're supposed to behave the best you can, to come closer to his teachings. So, tell me, how are wars in the whole world a proof of wisdom? How is believing that we, mere humans, will go to Heaven a proof of humility? If we were humble, we should take into consideration that going to Heaven is something we can't afford. So, cynical or not, believers = naives. So many questions, no answer.
Hmm, by the way... I know that wasn't the point of the topic, but I'm pretty sure arguing about religion can't be avoided... So I'll try not to participate in this topic anymore, because no one will change his point of view and it's better if we keep cool. This site doesn't have anything to do with religion, I'd rather keep it that way (and I don't want people here to hate me just because I can't believe in any god, whatever is the reason). Cheers. :)
You create invisible units (units without model, no movement and no enemy detection) and place them where you need them. Then use the tutorial about beams. This is the only way I can think of.
You can find "Map Bounds" under the Map menu. In this window you will see a picture of your map, and 2 check boxes under it. One which allows to modify camera limits, and one which allows to modify the map size. Check the box for the map size, and use the small arrows on the side of your map picture to cut the parts you don't need anymore.
By the way, you would have done better searching in the forums before creating a thread, I'm pretty sure there are already 3 or 4 complete tutorials about this (with lots of other beginner tips).
You gave the solution yourself: your camera is focused on the unit. Unlock the camera (there are actions in the triggers list to prevent the camera from focusing on a unit, but I can't remember their name right now) and it will work as you wish.
You mean you want the 3D model of the unit in your Dialog boxes? I'm not sure it can be done yet, I was expecting it can only be done with one of the next patches to come (as for mouse pointer detection)... Maybe you can include Portraits in the dialog boxes, which would make it possible by just changing the portrait model to the entire model of the unit. It wouldn't show properly to people who deactivated the use of 3D portraits though, so I assume they would only see a stretched 2D portrait (which is totally ugly).
So is paying for anything about <name your god here>. I always thought believers where the easiest guys to scam (with amateurs of art) because they don't even know what they're talking about. As long as you have a way with words (or at least more than them), they accept whatever you say even if it's total bullshit... This is also how sects work, by the way.
It's funny though... Those guys claim they're atheists, so why would they "protect" your pets for something they don't even believe in? Money, obviously. And I'm pretty sure it will work, because as I just said before, people would buy anything as long as you have a way with words. In their case it's even more treacherous because they try to give a caring image of their business. Only naive people would buy that. Believers = naives in my opinion, so I'm pretty sure this business could be very, VERY lucrative...
0
That's pretty much what I'd like to do since I can't find any other way, but I have around 100 units in the map (and there will be much more when the 2nd half is done)... It would require 6 triggers (one for each difficulty level) telling which of the 100 units should appear or not... 600 lines split in 6 pointless triggers, just for difficulty detection?!?! There has to be a better way.
I would do a "pick each unit" if I could, but not only there are 100 units, there are also 5 types of them and they are everywhere on the map. Some of them appear in a difficulty level, then do not show on the next level and finally are here again in the highest levels... Which means I'll have to check 100 units one by one, just to know when they show, and add a line in each of the 6 triggers to remove this unit or not... This is madness, it will take hours for almost nothing and I will obviously make a mistake at some point.
Isn't there ANY way to grab the values of the AI level of the unit, so that I can do a "pick each unit in (AI difficulty X)" and show/hide them? There seems to be something to check the "available for attack waves" option through triggers, so maybe we can get the AI level value somehow? I searched in triggers and libraries but couldn't find anything...
0
@michaelknives: Go
You can't do 2 layers of footprint on a doodad, so it means it can't recognize both the surface of the bridge and the surface under the bridge. You will either have units walking on ground that move instantly on the bridge, or units on the bridge who fall down on ground. The issue exists since Warcraft 3, and unless we could someday have 2 layers of footprint in a doodad it will never work properly. Maybe you can fake it, but it will be bugged anyway.
0
Go in Map > Map Bounds
This window will show:
Check the "Modify Map Bounds" option, and use the arrows on the side of your map preview image. You can then move the limits of your map, and when you click OK it will tell you it can't be undone (so be sure to crop your map properly before applying).
It's so easy I shouldn't even have to tell you this, there are video tutorials on SC2Mapster already covering such basics... I wonder how you could have done "a lot of work in triggers and data" without even checking options in the standard menus first... *sigh*
0
Thanks, but I've already done this and it doesn't really work. It looks like it does, but it doesn't. Let me explain why:
This is what I want:
(unit NOT appearing unless you're at least on Hard)
This is how my custom variant shows in the lobby:
(in this example, I tried to play on Very Hard to prove my point)
This shows that my trigger (which is like yours) actually apply the difficulty settings when ingame:
And THIS, my friend, is a huge WTF moment:
(the unit which is supposed to show in Very Hard doesn't... yet it does when I launch the map from the editor after setting the preferences)
As you can see, the difficulty is set, but the units shown are only those in Medium difficulty, not those of the difficulty chosen in the lobby. I tried to modify the game variant default value to Insane (to check if it uses the default or just spawn Medium units everytime) and it seems to always use Medium. Which is weird, since the difficulty is set to whatever I choose in the lobby AND units spawned through triggers work with the difficulty settings I selected. The only problem is that pre-placed units won't show properly.
0
People using more than 10% of their brain will eventually turn mad (schizophrenic, mostly). Rare cases of people using unknown part of the brain have a problem elsewhere (motricity, elocution, autism,...). The brain spend most of his time slowing your whole body down or you would turn crazy because of the mass of information your brain sends and receives.
So the existence of the word proves the existence of the concept? Take care of minotaurs on the roads...
Science has never reported any fact proving that the existence of a god might even be true. Weird phenomenons exist, but most of them are interpretations (the face of Jesus seen in the moisture on a wall is just an misinterpretation of the form we see). If an alien comes on Earth and we study his UFO, we would probably not understand how it works. Doesn't his UFO exists even if we can't explain with 100% proof how he made it?
Speaking of UFOs, this is probably the only "weird" thing I believe. And yet, I'm pretty sure if we need with an alien race someday, they won't give a f* about our god(s). I'm not even sure they would understand the concept of believing in an entity.
True enough. I'll join you (yes, I know I already said that twice).
@EternalWraith: Go Funny. They reach the Godwin point and turn the answers and questions to their advantage (2 choices of answer per question is not enough to be accurate)... I personally don't believe rape is a good thing yet you can't tell it's absolute moral sense. Molesters don't feel guilty about it, because they fancy young people and this is their way to prove it... It doesn't mean I want them to keep on doing this, it just mean there is a reason to how they act, and we shouldn't only blame them for this (funny, there was not any button to give this answer in the test)... Of course society thinks it's bad (meaning >98% of us), but they don't. I know what is common sense but I also learned to be cautious about that: Many people believe in god, this is not enough of a reason to make me believe it exists. If 98% of us would believe the moon is made of cheese, would you join them? I won't, BECAUSE I know people proved it isn't. I don't believe in god because what science found is enough for me to consider god doesn't exists. If someday science proves the contrary, I'll probably reconsider the question.
0
Baaaaaah, can't help it. I need to answer this... Sorry for the wall of text.
The whole point of science, its very existence in the beginning, is to prove god doesn't exist by trusting FACTS. The main objective of science is to explain what people used to attribute to a god. Believers thought of demonic possession, while science proved it was seizure. Believers burned redheads because they thought their hair color was from Hell. Believers thought of life after death because people who had a Near Death Experience saw Jesus or whoever... Science proved that the NDE is a moment of extremely high activity of the brain, which also means what people saw is what they wanted to see (it's almost as if you were dreaming while being completely high). Science also proved Moses never splitted water in half. He just used a natural phenomenon which actually still exists nowadays (it's in the Nile Delta, I think). And I'm pretty sure Jesus never actually walked on water either, he just walked on the Dead Sea, where anyone nowadays can go to do the same.
There are still mysteries science can't explain of course, but it doesn't mean it's an act of god anyway: I'd most likely think science doesn't have the tools yet to explain what it is (criminal investigation constantly make these kinds of progress, why wouldn't it apply to other researches?). Science helps the whole humanity to make progress (medicine, for example). What did religions do in the interest of humanity? Colonizations, extermination of indigenous tribes, arbitrary crimes based on beliefs, wars... and proverbs, maybe.
Belief is only a creation from people who wanted to explain what they can't.
How was Jesus born already? Oh yeah, I remember! From a virgin. That totally makes sense! From "immaculate conception", right? Another mystery to explain a mystery! Religion is some kind of melting pot where everything weird in life is assumed as an act of someone we can't see, we can't hear, we can't touch, we can't smell, and we can't even talk to. Starting from there, of course, there is nothing we could do against it because there is no way to prove something DOESN'T exist. It's pure logic, yet it's totally absurd.
ex: I believe there is a giant mouse somewhere in space which is made of gouda, and she sent edam on Earth to let our planet know she is a superior being. Prove me I'm wrong. You can't? Of course you can't, because there is no way to go far enough in space and be sure we checked EVERYWHERE for that giant mouse. As long as you don't prove me you checked everywhere, I'll still see hope somehow and stick to my belief. The same way, NOBODY can prove god exists, but we can at least trust facts that will help us get the right from wrong. It is more likely that god doesn't exists though, because facts are against it while there are only assumptions on the fact that he exists.
Anyway, you're right when saying science makes assumptions. But it's a normal process when your goal is to discover truth behind mysteries. You can't reach truth (based on facts) in the first try... You need to focus on something and see how it sticks, but it takes time, it's a full process of trial and errors. Science always assumed that, while believers always claimed "if you don't do as god tought us, you'll be in a lot of trouble". People are ready to fight each other for something NOBODY has yet been able to prove... How could I agree with that, seriously? The whole religious teaching sounds childish to me, it sounds EXACTLY the same way as "eat your vegetables or your dad will be angry!"...
0
Enough said. Modify terrain YES, raise/lower cliffs NO.
0
No, there is not. This topic was already discussed at least 4 or 5 times (you should have done a search before posting) and, as for the Warcraft 3 editor, you can't make units pass under AND over of a bridge. Bridges are objects, objects collide with units, and the only way to make sure a unit does not collide with a bridge is to edit the footprint. But it doesn't allow to use depth, so the walkable path is in 2D. No matter how you do it, it will never work fine.
0
@ZealNaga: Go I need some explanations, I'm not sure to catch your cynism/irony here. Anyway, I know my belief is not the belief of other people. If you believe in something, you should know that I also have the right to believe in something else than what you believe in. Trying to prove I'm intolerant is just a proof that you're not either, in a way...
EDIT: ... and it serves my point.
0
Religion is a business. They make much more money than you can think of, just look at the Vatican. Because "in the name of <whoever>", believers are ready to give their money. They are so fascinated by the mystery of faith (it leads to so many questions and yet no answer), that they are ready to pay someone for giving any kind of an answer... As long as the answer makes a little bit of sense, they will agree. I'd rather bet on science, which gave answers (with proof) to much more things in a century than faith in more than 2000 years... And trusting science helps me keeping away from sects, which is really REALLY close to how most religions behave nowadays.
In the case of this website, they try to answer the question "what will happen to your pets when we all go to Heaven?"... They have no answer (and if you're not dumb you know they can't possibly do anything), but believers will still pay for it because they believe in anything as long as someone knows how to "promote" the thing. Fundamentally, believers will trust people without having the need of an evidence. Yes, blind trust. You just need to tell them "I will take care of your dog when you're in Heaven", and they will trust you. Even if you leave their dog in the streets. And you don't care because when the guy will be gone, there's no way he'll be able to know you're doing what he paid you for. He just lost his money for nothing, "in the name of his god".
@OneSoga:
Even believers who don't bite to the whole "I'll take care of your pet" thing can still be considered naive. Just the fact of believing in someone that doesn't even exist, is naive. Where is this "god" everybody talks about? How could war be a proof that god is challenging us? So many questions, no real answer... When I hear believers talking about faith, I almost have the impression of hearing kids creating their story. When no one has the same point-of-view abouth faith, it's most likely than none of them is right... There is no god, faith is just a way of reassuring oneself when we have to face the hardness of real life. By the way, almost every single war that happened in History was based on religious beliefs.
People who can't face real life will claim it's a challenge from god. How could your own problems in life be the matter of an omnipotent being? Seriously... If you believe in god, and assuming he is a symbol of humility and wisdom, you're supposed to behave the best you can, to come closer to his teachings. So, tell me, how are wars in the whole world a proof of wisdom? How is believing that we, mere humans, will go to Heaven a proof of humility? If we were humble, we should take into consideration that going to Heaven is something we can't afford. So, cynical or not, believers = naives. So many questions, no answer.
Hmm, by the way... I know that wasn't the point of the topic, but I'm pretty sure arguing about religion can't be avoided... So I'll try not to participate in this topic anymore, because no one will change his point of view and it's better if we keep cool. This site doesn't have anything to do with religion, I'd rather keep it that way (and I don't want people here to hate me just because I can't believe in any god, whatever is the reason). Cheers. :)
0
You create invisible units (units without model, no movement and no enemy detection) and place them where you need them. Then use the tutorial about beams. This is the only way I can think of.
0
You can find "Map Bounds" under the Map menu. In this window you will see a picture of your map, and 2 check boxes under it. One which allows to modify camera limits, and one which allows to modify the map size. Check the box for the map size, and use the small arrows on the side of your map picture to cut the parts you don't need anymore.
By the way, you would have done better searching in the forums before creating a thread, I'm pretty sure there are already 3 or 4 complete tutorials about this (with lots of other beginner tips).
0
You gave the solution yourself: your camera is focused on the unit. Unlock the camera (there are actions in the triggers list to prevent the camera from focusing on a unit, but I can't remember their name right now) and it will work as you wish.
0
You mean you want the 3D model of the unit in your Dialog boxes? I'm not sure it can be done yet, I was expecting it can only be done with one of the next patches to come (as for mouse pointer detection)... Maybe you can include Portraits in the dialog boxes, which would make it possible by just changing the portrait model to the entire model of the unit. It wouldn't show properly to people who deactivated the use of 3D portraits though, so I assume they would only see a stretched 2D portrait (which is totally ugly).
0
So is paying for anything about <name your god here>. I always thought believers where the easiest guys to scam (with amateurs of art) because they don't even know what they're talking about. As long as you have a way with words (or at least more than them), they accept whatever you say even if it's total bullshit... This is also how sects work, by the way.
It's funny though... Those guys claim they're atheists, so why would they "protect" your pets for something they don't even believe in? Money, obviously. And I'm pretty sure it will work, because as I just said before, people would buy anything as long as you have a way with words. In their case it's even more treacherous because they try to give a caring image of their business. Only naive people would buy that. Believers = naives in my opinion, so I'm pretty sure this business could be very, VERY lucrative...