Hm, okay. I'm trying to understand the key difference between the two modes in your description. You wrote that newly trained units would explode, but what practical difference would that make? You wouldn't actually get to use the produced units in either mode (offensively anyway) since the micro challenges are a separate thing, otherwise we're talking about just a plain old melee match (with the ability to iterate quickly, which is what SALT is for). That's why I inferred that the macro in the first mode would be very simplified.
It does seem to me like only one mode is needed. But positioning your units defensively should be part of the exercises, as well as rallying IMO. Why leave those tasks out?
Sorry, I'm just confused as to where or why to draw the line between regular melee rules and simplification. If I understand correctly, the main goal is to accelerate practice compared to just playing actual games, and to focus on specific scenarios. But doesn't SALT cover both?
As I said, maybe I'm just not your guy. Good luck finding someone!
Huh 🤔 even though there are still a lot of SC2 players? You'd think there'd be more demand & supply for this sort of thing. Did you actually ask in the Discord server? This forum has become a ghost town as I've just gathered.
I'm not sure if I'm your guy because I don't have much time to dedicate to it, but I enjoy dabbling in the editor, and, if it's not too much work, I'd be willing to do it. I've had some thoughts about your descriptions, but I'm not sure if I understand correctly. (It might have something to do with me being a Bronze league scrub.)
My take on it: The first practice mode would be very clinical, on both the macro and micro side. There is no intention to mimic a real base layout, so the different tasks, like making supply depots and starting upgrades, would be arranged next to each other, compactly, and there would be no ambiguity about what to do or in which order to do it. It might be like, "start this upgrade, then build a supply depot, then build this missile turret", from left to right. Then you go back to the micro, and when you go back to the macro you get a new set of tasks.
Is that roughly what you had in mind? Does what I wrote even make sense as a practice format?
What would be great is if you could name some existing maps/mods that are similar to what you're after, even if outdated, so I could check them out. I only know about the SALT mod, and some pure micro challenge maps (like Knalle Micro Map).
I'd start with a new preset with all the different states you want, like
Diplomatic Relationship
In Alliance
In Non-Aggression Pact
Surrendered
At War
And another one for proposals.
Then make a new record (call it Diplomatic Status) with two variables: Relationship, Proposal
Then have a 2-dimensional array of Diplomatic Status type, so that for each player they have a Diplomatic Status for each other player. Though you might want to structure it a bit differently if, for example, a diplomatic relationship is always mutual, to avoid redundant storage in that case.
Then make some helper functions to make it easier to check any of several states, e.g. In Alliance and Non-Aggression Pact would both disable auto-attack, so you could make a function named "Is Hostile" that takes two player parameters and returns true if the relationship is either one of those two.
With those pieces in place, you should be able to make all the triggers necessary to show/hide dialog items (buttons to propose/accept relationships) and such.
The modifier is off by default. Use the trigger action, UISetCommandAllowed, to turn it on and off.
When this modifier is on: When you hold Ctrl while issuing an order, the order will only be sent to units in the currently highlighted subgroup instead of all selected units. For example, say a player selects a Marine and a Zealot, making sure only the Marine is highlighted. If he then issues a right click move order while holding down Ctrl key, only the Marine would be ordered to move.
I am unable to make it work (see attachment). What am I missing? Has anyone successfully used this feature? (I assume there must have been some demand for it.)
0
It's called ArtilleryMengskAttack.
0
The OP is a fake account. The text is copied from a 2018 reddit post.
0
It's a spam bot. The text is copied from a reddit post 7 months ago.
In a few hours or days, the bot will edit the post to insert a link to a spam/malware website.
0
Hm, okay. I'm trying to understand the key difference between the two modes in your description. You wrote that newly trained units would explode, but what practical difference would that make? You wouldn't actually get to use the produced units in either mode (offensively anyway) since the micro challenges are a separate thing, otherwise we're talking about just a plain old melee match (with the ability to iterate quickly, which is what SALT is for). That's why I inferred that the macro in the first mode would be very simplified.
It does seem to me like only one mode is needed. But positioning your units defensively should be part of the exercises, as well as rallying IMO. Why leave those tasks out?
Sorry, I'm just confused as to where or why to draw the line between regular melee rules and simplification. If I understand correctly, the main goal is to accelerate practice compared to just playing actual games, and to focus on specific scenarios. But doesn't SALT cover both?
As I said, maybe I'm just not your guy. Good luck finding someone!
0
Huh 🤔 even though there are still a lot of SC2 players? You'd think there'd be more demand & supply for this sort of thing. Did you actually ask in the Discord server? This forum has become a ghost town as I've just gathered.
I'm not sure if I'm your guy because I don't have much time to dedicate to it, but I enjoy dabbling in the editor, and, if it's not too much work, I'd be willing to do it. I've had some thoughts about your descriptions, but I'm not sure if I understand correctly. (It might have something to do with me being a Bronze league scrub.)
My take on it: The first practice mode would be very clinical, on both the macro and micro side. There is no intention to mimic a real base layout, so the different tasks, like making supply depots and starting upgrades, would be arranged next to each other, compactly, and there would be no ambiguity about what to do or in which order to do it. It might be like, "start this upgrade, then build a supply depot, then build this missile turret", from left to right. Then you go back to the micro, and when you go back to the macro you get a new set of tasks.
Is that roughly what you had in mind? Does what I wrote even make sense as a practice format?
What would be great is if you could name some existing maps/mods that are similar to what you're after, even if outdated, so I could check them out. I only know about the SALT mod, and some pure micro challenge maps (like Knalle Micro Map).
0
Are you still looking or have you found someone already (on Discord perhaps)?
0
I'd start with a new preset with all the different states you want, like
Diplomatic Relationship
And another one for proposals.
Then make a new record (call it Diplomatic Status) with two variables: Relationship, Proposal
Then have a 2-dimensional array of Diplomatic Status type, so that for each player they have a Diplomatic Status for each other player. Though you might want to structure it a bit differently if, for example, a diplomatic relationship is always mutual, to avoid redundant storage in that case.
Then make some helper functions to make it easier to check any of several states, e.g. In Alliance and Non-Aggression Pact would both disable auto-attack, so you could make a function named "Is Hostile" that takes two player parameters and returns true if the relationship is either one of those two.
With those pieces in place, you should be able to make all the triggers necessary to show/hide dialog items (buttons to propose/accept relationships) and such.
0
Is "Automatically Add Multiplayer Data" unchecked in Map -> Map Options?
0
Patch 4.13 PTR / 5.0.0 listed this as a new feature:
https://news.blizzard.com/en-us/starcraft2/23482838/starcraft-ii-5-0-patch-notes (item 48 in the list)
I am unable to make it work (see attachment). What am I missing? Has anyone successfully used this feature? (I assume there must have been some demand for it.)