Upon further investigation, there is now Macros, that allow you to just run them and they can contain actor actions (with terms). There is an actor action to just run one. This is even more flexible then macros, because you can run multiple actions without having to repetitively use the same event for a package of actions.
To chime in, not only are they basically reusable/struct like setups of actor messages (and note, they can technically be used in different actor types, though using messages that will work in such contexts will be difficult), you can still template them, and make different macros for different categories of things. I do this in NOTD 2, by having event macros that I can then fill in with tokens to handle different armor swaps for different armor pieces on characters.
There is also a newish event macro, even macro runnable, which I haven't played around with as much, but I think it allows you to package and dispatch multiple actor messages in a single go to another actor.
1) So you have a Unit actor, that has an attached invisible actor (what type?) that has a Model actor attached to that.
I would suggest that you check the scope bearing tracking. I would hazard to guess that the Cannon model is getting its bearings (direction) from the unit, not the turret.
2) You need to check the Action actor associated with the launch missile effect. Since the missile is created from the scope of the caster, you will need to adjust which actor it considers the launch from. I'll look into this more later.
i will make sc2mapster great again and build a wall around the bots
and ban everyone and delete the projects and assets i dont like
i just noticed you called me alice
Hahahaha. Alevice Mod 2016 amirite? Can you ban Zolden, I think his account got hacked, now is a adbot for Unity (JK, love you too Zolden, though vi >>> emacs).
Anyhow, to the topic at hand. That's unfortunate, but such is life. I wish you luck on your future endeavors Mozared.
Yes. As part of playing any animation, in the actor messages, there is a dropdown for setting the time scale. It can scale 4 ways (this is off memory, don't remember the precise names)
1) No Scaling. Pretty self explantory
2) Scaling locally. This will scale the animation, with no regard to the global animation scale
3) Scale normally. This WILL use global animation scaling. So if you scale it to 2x, and the global animation scaling is 2x, your animation would play 4x as fast
4) Scale to duration. This dynamically forces the scaling to match the duration you specify. So if the animation was 5 seconds long, and you set the duration to 10 seconds, it would apply a 0.5x scaling to make it happen.
When playing an animation, it requires a name be set for the playback, so it can be identified for stopping it, and this same method is used to send set animation scale messages, that can update the scaling at any time.
The issue is that it won't be 12k. It will be 150k minimum. Between the contract, the implementation, the time needed away from other tasks. Blizzard can certainly do this, but it is a matter of manpower and time, which are always in short supply. In my experience, money is usually not the problem, its time.
The primary difference for CPU/GPU is their approach to decision making.
CPU's have pipelines, out of order execution and branch prediction. As you can imagine, that is great for sequential instructions and terrible for parallelization. As a result, branching basically crushes GPU performance, it drops off a cliff.
There is a flag that should control the facing of the model when it is placed. It is possibly in the Model data, because in the sunken colony case, the actual unit facing has no impact (since it can't turn and its weapon doesn't require turning to fire)
I am happy to see all of the comments, quite insightful, I've never considered making a campaign, likely because my lore writing is shyt.
I wonder how many of you have considered making an RPG? I feel as though a campaign and RPG are very similar in concept, with the RPG focusing much more on a single unit, or team. It would require more trigger and data work, but really not that much more.
Not trying to sway anyone, just curious. RPGs tend to do well in the arcade, even poorly made ones. I'm yet to play an RPG with a more immersive story than tower defense tycoon. I see a lot of the great campaign work on here (which isn't my cup of tea) and want to play it more, but it just ain't for me.
The difference is making a campaign vs an RPG is the scaling.
A campaign can be built incrementally, one level at a time. Furthermore, many parts of a level can be iterated and expanded upon after the release (side missions, cutscenes, voice work).
An RPG is an all or nothing, to have even a semblance of an RPG requires the following systems be constructed
1) Skill system
2) Inventory System
3) Item system
4) Progression system (which can tie into any of the above systems)
5) Enemy skill mechanics
That's the foundation, that doesn't cover any actual game scripting, or game logic.
Furthermore, to add anything to the game (Item, Hero, Enemy, Story) requires modification of multiple systems.
I won't even go into balancing issues.
A level in an campaign lacking voice work will appear shoddy if all the other levels have it, but it won't break the gameplay, just the game flow. RPG is far less forgiving and requires every system be present or the gameplay comes apart pretty quickly.
So pretty much the data editors types are classes?
Yes, but they are more strict. Although under the hood there are classes, they are also fairly immutable, you notice that values are static, they can not take functions (I can't put a damage effect value to be some combination of other values). This is called Data Oriented Design.
0
Congrats, you have demonstrated
1) Persistence
2) Arrogance
3) Easily manipulated/provoked
4) Ignorant of computer security
0
Upon further investigation, there is now Macros, that allow you to just run them and they can contain actor actions (with terms). There is an actor action to just run one. This is even more flexible then macros, because you can run multiple actions without having to repetitively use the same event for a package of actions.
0
To chime in, not only are they basically reusable/struct like setups of actor messages (and note, they can technically be used in different actor types, though using messages that will work in such contexts will be difficult), you can still template them, and make different macros for different categories of things. I do this in NOTD 2, by having event macros that I can then fill in with tokens to handle different armor swaps for different armor pieces on characters.
There is also a newish event macro, even macro runnable, which I haven't played around with as much, but I think it allows you to package and dispatch multiple actor messages in a single go to another actor.
0
1) So you have a Unit actor, that has an attached invisible actor (what type?) that has a Model actor attached to that.
I would suggest that you check the scope bearing tracking. I would hazard to guess that the Cannon model is getting its bearings (direction) from the unit, not the turret.
2) You need to check the Action actor associated with the launch missile effect. Since the missile is created from the scope of the caster, you will need to adjust which actor it considers the launch from. I'll look into this more later.
0
Hahahaha. Alevice Mod 2016 amirite? Can you ban Zolden, I think his account got hacked, now is a adbot for Unity (JK, love you too Zolden, though vi >>> emacs).
Anyhow, to the topic at hand. That's unfortunate, but such is life. I wish you luck on your future endeavors Mozared.
0
Yes. As part of playing any animation, in the actor messages, there is a dropdown for setting the time scale. It can scale 4 ways (this is off memory, don't remember the precise names)
1) No Scaling. Pretty self explantory
2) Scaling locally. This will scale the animation, with no regard to the global animation scale
3) Scale normally. This WILL use global animation scaling. So if you scale it to 2x, and the global animation scaling is 2x, your animation would play 4x as fast
4) Scale to duration. This dynamically forces the scaling to match the duration you specify. So if the animation was 5 seconds long, and you set the duration to 10 seconds, it would apply a 0.5x scaling to make it happen.
When playing an animation, it requires a name be set for the playback, so it can be identified for stopping it, and this same method is used to send set animation scale messages, that can update the scaling at any time.
0
I would be interested, if nothing else to learn from it. Would love to try to take a stab at improving it too :D
0
@KorvinGump: Go
The issue is that it won't be 12k. It will be 150k minimum. Between the contract, the implementation, the time needed away from other tasks. Blizzard can certainly do this, but it is a matter of manpower and time, which are always in short supply. In my experience, money is usually not the problem, its time.
0
Graduated a little over a year ago. But then again, took much longer in college. Ultimately worked out for the best,
0
The primary difference for CPU/GPU is their approach to decision making.
CPU's have pipelines, out of order execution and branch prediction. As you can imagine, that is great for sequential instructions and terrible for parallelization. As a result, branching basically crushes GPU performance, it drops off a cliff.
Ultimately it really comes down to Amdahls law.
0
There is a different unit info screen that is used when channeling spells.
0
There is a flag that should control the facing of the model when it is placed. It is possibly in the Model data, because in the sunken colony case, the actual unit facing has no impact (since it can't turn and its weapon doesn't require turning to fire)
0
The difference is making a campaign vs an RPG is the scaling.
A campaign can be built incrementally, one level at a time. Furthermore, many parts of a level can be iterated and expanded upon after the release (side missions, cutscenes, voice work).
An RPG is an all or nothing, to have even a semblance of an RPG requires the following systems be constructed
1) Skill system 2) Inventory System 3) Item system 4) Progression system (which can tie into any of the above systems) 5) Enemy skill mechanics
That's the foundation, that doesn't cover any actual game scripting, or game logic.
Furthermore, to add anything to the game (Item, Hero, Enemy, Story) requires modification of multiple systems.
I won't even go into balancing issues.
A level in an campaign lacking voice work will appear shoddy if all the other levels have it, but it won't break the gameplay, just the game flow. RPG is far less forgiving and requires every system be present or the gameplay comes apart pretty quickly.
0
Sounds like Unity has a wrapper for OpenCL/CUDA, which ends up doing that or PhysX.
Note, it doesn't use it like a CPU, it is solely for stuff that GPU's can handle well, that are easily paralleized and have no branching.
0
Yes, but they are more strict. Although under the hood there are classes, they are also fairly immutable, you notice that values are static, they can not take functions (I can't put a damage effect value to be some combination of other values). This is called Data Oriented Design.