[Gluk-v48]: Alex: What do you think about this? I added in the Whiteboard. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ares/+spec/ways-to-capture-rubble
AlexB__: i'm thinking about other things at the moment
AlexB__: neutral rubble could be helpful, but occupiable rubble would cause some problems
[Gluk-v48]: What?
[Gluk-v48]: The only problem is the cursor.
AlexB__: rubble is removed from map, and occupiers in them could leak that way
[Gluk-v48]: This cursor repair rather than penetration.
[Gluk-v48]: MaxNumberOccupants=0 By default
[Gluk-v48]: Not who can not enter into it. Only the engineer can repair it.
[Gluk-v48]: It is important that the owner only Neutral,
[Gluk-v48]: In this case, there should be no leak
AlexB__: it isn't a good solution. it's too easy to set number of occupants to something above 0 accidentally
[Gluk-v48]: Can borrow the logic that allows engineers to enter buildings with CanBeOccupied=yes. To do this will already require additional hooks.
[Gluk-v48]: Errors authors mods, not your concern. I think so....
[Gluk-v48]: Incidentally, when the structure CanBeOccupied=yes, Strength less than 25%(IIRC), it automatically switches to the building Neutral, all passengers out of the building.
AlexB__: that doesn't apply if an occupied rubble building is converted to the intact version
[Gluk-v48]: Sure...
[Gluk-v48]: aslo
[Gluk-v48]: The engineer still can not enter if 100% health.
[Gluk-v48]: I like my idea due to the fact that it is quite simple to implement.
[Gluk-v48]: Albeit with a few restrictions.
AlexB__: you should put it up on ppm and see if the others like it. but i can't promise to code it for 0.6
And also:
I want to ask two additional tags for logic Advanced Rubble.
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Remove= (boolean)
[BuildingType]►Rubble.RemoveAnim= (animation)
If the engineer repair Rubble, then the building will be just remotely, and in its place will be played animation. QUICK_EDIT
And also:
I want to ask two additional tags for logic Advanced Rubble.
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Remove= (boolean)
[BuildingType]►Rubble.RemoveAnim= (animation)
If the engineer repair Rubble, then the building will be just remotely, and in its place will be played animation.
So you want an alternate outcome to rubble where it instead clears it instead of repairing it back into a building? _________________ ~ Excelsior ~ QUICK_EDIT
[Gluk-v48]: Alex: What do you think about this? I added in the Whiteboard. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ares/+spec/ways-to-capture-rubble
AlexB__: i'm thinking about other things at the moment
AlexB__: neutral rubble could be helpful, but occupiable rubble would cause some problems
[Gluk-v48]: What?
[Gluk-v48]: The only problem is the cursor.
AlexB__: rubble is removed from map, and occupiers in them could leak that way
[Gluk-v48]: This cursor repair rather than penetration.
[Gluk-v48]: MaxNumberOccupants=0 By default
[Gluk-v48]: Not who can not enter into it. Only the engineer can repair it.
[Gluk-v48]: It is important that the owner only Neutral,
[Gluk-v48]: In this case, there should be no leak
AlexB__: it isn't a good solution. it's too easy to set number of occupants to something above 0 accidentally
[Gluk-v48]: Can borrow the logic that allows engineers to enter buildings with CanBeOccupied=yes. To do this will already require additional hooks.
[Gluk-v48]: Errors authors mods, not your concern. I think so....
[Gluk-v48]: Incidentally, when the structure CanBeOccupied=yes, Strength less than 25%(IIRC), it automatically switches to the building Neutral, all passengers out of the building.
AlexB__: that doesn't apply if an occupied rubble building is converted to the intact version
[Gluk-v48]: Sure...
[Gluk-v48]: aslo
[Gluk-v48]: The engineer still can not enter if 100% health.
[Gluk-v48]: I like my idea due to the fact that it is quite simple to implement.
[Gluk-v48]: Albeit with a few restrictions.
AlexB__: you should put it up on ppm and see if the others like it. but i can't promise to code it for 0.6
And also:
I want to ask two additional tags for logic Advanced Rubble.
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Remove= (boolean)
[BuildingType]►Rubble.RemoveAnim= (animation)
If the engineer repair Rubble, then the building will be just remotely, and in its place will be played animation.
you want it so that if a building is destroyed..... nothing but rubble.......... you can put an engineer in it and rebuild? If I am correct in what you are requesting, does this apply to civilian structures or military? _________________ I am authorized to send out the TMP Studio, PM ME IF YOU WANT IT And check this out, these were sent to me for help with terrain and zdata help along with TMP Studio/Builder
1. I want the was solved problem when the engineer can not penetrate the Rubble if the player is not the owner of the Rubble. To encode it in ares (for my proposed method), requires not a lot of code, but my proposed method has some minor limitations.
2. I do not want to repair the Rubble, I want to destroy them. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 8:11 am Post subject:
You can destroy the rubble already. You can make Rubble.Intact a building which destroys itself somehow without a rubble. There is no restriction that the advanced rubble tags should refer to each other, only their foundation.
I do not see the benefits of your first part. The original issue was even more easier than what you are trying to sell here. I don't even understand what would Rubble.Strength be used for. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
Also Known As: ZivDero Joined: 23 Jul 2013 Location: Russia
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:48 pm Post subject:
Ares needs to unhardcode a lot of stuff to make modding a lot easier. For example: the tiberium images are hardcoded which makes it completely impossible to remove udeless entries without screwing the game up. _________________
DarkVen9109 wrote:
What in the name of insanity is this? I FRICKING LOVE THIS LOGICCCC!!!!!!!!!!!!OOOOOOOOHEEAWWWWWWWWWWWYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWW PEW PEW PEW PEW BOOM BOOM BOOM!! Nice I love this!!!! Ferriswheel bomb, Dive bomb. New Logic discovered thanks to Kenosis
Game doesn't care shit about the order of lists in your rulesmd.ini. It's what is in the list after parsing.
Also, why do you want to clean the lists so badly? You can always add new stuff at the end. That might be difficult for overlay, but you can always replace dummy entries like PALETXX _________________
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:41 pm Post subject:
Overlays list is all about that and considering that list has stuff which can't be rendered into INI tags nicely, it's better to leave it that way. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
Also Known As: ZivDero Joined: 23 Jul 2013 Location: Russia
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:00 pm Post subject:
I care about junk there so much because it annyys me while modding.
I know that the game makes its own enumeration of entries in lists, it's all about how nice it looks. Editing clean rules is much nicer that seeing tons of junk there and trying to understand, what is used and what is not, what can be added. For example: GACSPH_A _________________
DarkVen9109 wrote:
What in the name of insanity is this? I FRICKING LOVE THIS LOGICCCC!!!!!!!!!!!!OOOOOOOOHEEAWWWWWWWWWWWYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWW PEW PEW PEW PEW BOOM BOOM BOOM!! Nice I love this!!!! Ferriswheel bomb, Dive bomb. New Logic discovered thanks to Kenosis
You can destroy the rubble already. You can make Rubble.Intact a building which destroys itself somehow without a rubble. There is no restriction that the advanced rubble tags should refer to each other, only their foundation.
I tested it. I can not get rid of craters of destruction of buildings.
Graion Dilach wrote:
I do not see the benefits of your first part. The original issue was even more easier than what you are trying to sell here. I don't even understand what would Rubble.Strength be used for.
Rubble.Strength - This strength of the building during construction.
"original issue was even more easier"
If it's so simple. Why it has not yet who did not code? QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:57 pm Post subject:
Tiiiiiiime. I have no time to even live, goddamnit! _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
So to recap...you requested whole engineer remove rubble feature for the limitation of getting crater when you blow it up...
Surely its better idea to request LeaveCrater=no or something as I surely do not recall if this was hard coded in, else just use explosion animations without Crater=yes ...
Plus lets think about the engineer use, who in their right mind wants to use 500$ worth in engineer to remove a rubble and get nothing from it except it gone!??? QUICK_EDIT
LeaveCrater=no That would be good. But it's harder to do.
ApolloTD wrote:
Plus lets think about the engineer use, who in their right mind wants to use 500$ worth in engineer to remove a rubble and get nothing from it except it gone!???
Edited. I found a way that my building do not leave craters. I replaced all the Crater=yes in the rules on the Burn=yes. However, this method is bad.... QUICK_EDIT
This is my ini code. Connect these files via [#include] in the rules and art. Last edited by Glukv48 on Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:07 pm; edited 2 times in total QUICK_EDIT
Ares needs to unhardcode a lot of stuff to make modding a lot easier. For example: the tiberium images are hardcoded which makes it completely impossible to remove udeless entries without screwing the game up.
really? you want ARES to unhardcode stuff? you think its that easy?
ApolloTD wrote:
So to recap...you requested whole engineer remove rubble feature for the limitation of getting crater when you blow it up...
Surely its better idea to request LeaveCrater=no or something as I surely do not recall if this was hard coded in, else just use explosion animations without Crater=yes ...
Plus lets think about the engineer use, who in their right mind wants to use 500$ worth in engineer to remove a rubble and get nothing from it except it gone!???
im not interested in this, but since you mention cost of the engineer, what about making an engineer say $250 that only has this purpose, make his weapon affect only this _________________ I am authorized to send out the TMP Studio, PM ME IF YOU WANT IT And check this out, these were sent to me for help with terrain and zdata help along with TMP Studio/Builder
The entire point of the rubble is that it remains.
If you don't want there to be remains, don't use rubble.
Also, can't you just destroy the rubble the normal way?
I don't recall adding handling to prevent rubble destruction, and I didn't see anything like that in the code just now.
I asked Alex just now, and he also says it can be destroyed.
Seriously, though: It boils down to the first line of the post: The entire point of the rubble is that it remains. (At least until repaired.)
If the building is supposed to be destroyed without ruins, don't use rubble features.
If you want to destroy rubble...destroy it.
There is no reason for weird special case concoctions to turn Engineers into part-time SEALs under very specific circumstances.
Also, I can't help but notice that the army of merciless requesters still fails to have the necessary strategic view and four-dimensional thinking to create good feature requests.
If you must have this, if you must complicate your entire game by crafting a pointless edge case to achieve the opposite of the intended effect, why not at least make it reusable?
Why insist on making the request as stupidly narrow and pointlessly specific as the feature?
What you actually want is the ability to change a special infantry unit into a different special infantry unit based on a certain condition.
What you actually want to request is the ability to control which of Assaulter, Agent, Engineer, C4, IvanBomb or Thief/VehicleThief is active for a particular Armor.
...and the whole thing would be solved and you could do shitloads of other stuff with it:
Like code it to be a spy only for power plants, so Engineers can sabotage hostile power stations, but not steal money or technology.
Or creating building-specific clearers: e.g. a unit which is an Assaulter solely for trench buildings, or Battle Bunkers.
Or all-purpose capturers: Engineers which can not only take over buildings, but tanks as well.
Or master spies: Spies which can not only use their disguise to steal enemy technology, but also to commandeer enemy vehicles.
And so on, and so on.
But noooooooooooo, as usual, you seek out the narrowest possible case and riddle the codebase with silly one-off edge case handlings. _________________ #renproj:renegadeprojects.com via Matrix - direct link QUICK_EDIT
This is my ini code. Connect these files via [#include] in the rules and art.
Obviously many do not understand what I want to do.
So why instead of writing at the beginning of assumptions that do not test code that I gave you? QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 5:55 am Post subject:
You did... what? _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
Can be tested.
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Anim= (animation)
Animation that plays during create Rubble.Intact or Rubble.Destroyed
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Neutral= (bool)
Will the next Rubble.Intact or Rubble.Destroyed owned owner Neutral. Defaults to no
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Strength= (float - multiplier)
Strength percentage which will be created by the following Rubble.Intact or Rubble.Destroyed. Defaults to 100% for Rubble.Destroyed, 1% for Rubble.Intact.
Attachment deleted, out of date. Last edited by Glukv48 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 1:13 am; edited 2 times in total QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:40 am Post subject:
Hm. I don't approve what you did with the product name, but regardless, cool. So you did found out that it was an easy thing to do.
Sorry, but I still remember that time, when you started assinging random bugs to yourself... and I thought this was also a case of such. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
Rubble.Strength and Rubble.Neutral work as intended. I felt it sad that one cannot specify a country, such as (Rubble.Special=yes), that way people could repair an allies rubble. "Special is allied to all players so making rubble special would have allowed you to repair it without requiring you to capture it before you can use the rubble intact logic to restore to Rubble.Intact=.
Before I ever even tried your new code Gluk, I found a way to achieve some of this already. Since I had been working with making unclear-able rubble etc that could be repaired.
Using attached animations, with a play once function using a negative duration, I was able to Set strength and provide animations before you ever created this code. But good job on the code and I'm glad you were able to contribute.
That said Using Rubble.Strength is a whole lot simpler and gets around a bug I may have found with attached animations as a strength setter.
During my tests I captured a CAOILD, destroyed it with my own units then repaired it back. I had set my Rubble.Destroyed as XCAOILD on my CAOILD. When CAOILD was destroyed it's Rubble.Destroyed was placed and took the 950 damage from the attached animation, thus putting it at 50 strength of 1000.
But then there was a problem during a test. I discovered one of my units was also using an attached animation warhead which reduced strength by a percentage, and was able to apply it to both CAOILD and XCAOILD "my Rubble.Destroyed rubble", causing the attached animation which applied 950 damage on XCAOILD to take more then 950 damage and die instead of being at 5% health.
The bug I encountered is that attached animations carry over to the new rubble buildings despite being a new building. Of course Graion may have designed it this way, so I'm not sure it's fair to call this a bug or not.
I'm sure Graion can answer that question easily enough, at his convenience though. Thanks. _________________ Grab my Map Logic Expansion Pack 5.2 here!
Adds random weather patterns into maps.
More disabled navalyards.
Preplaced Neutral buildings.
Additional new features.
Special is allied to all players so making rubble special would have allowed you to repair it without requiring you to capture it before you can use the rubble intact logic to restore to Rubble.Intact=. .
I tested it, it did not work as you said. the effect was the same as at Neutral. Alex said that FindSpecial function does not work properly in 0.5, and that he corrected this in 0.6. I will return to this topic after it is released ares0.6
I use another method, so anyone can recover Rubble
Code:
[CAAIRP]
LeaveRubble=no
Rubble.Destroyed=CAAIRP_R
Rubble.Neutral=yes
Rubble.Strength=1% ;You can set any value except 100%. Example 101% or 99%.
[CAAIRP_R]
UIName=Name:Shattere
Name=Shattered Ruins
Strength=100
Rubble.Strength=0%
Rubble.Intact=CAAIRP_R
CanBeOccupied=yes ;Most important
MaxNumberOccupants=0 ;The default is 0, but may cause problems if it is accidentally set to a positive value. Know this.
EricAnimeFreak wrote:
But then there was a problem during a test. I discovered one of my units was also using an attached animation warhead which reduced strength by a percentage, and was able to apply it to both CAOILD and XCAOILD "my Rubble.Destroyed rubble", causing the attached animation which applied 950 damage on XCAOILD to take more then 950 damage and die instead of being at 5% health.
You used AttachEffect.Animation ?
You added AttachEffect.Duration=1 ?
Damage from animations applied each frame that plays the animation. If the duration of the animation 3 frames, Damage=10, then the total damage is 30.
EDIT:
EricAnimeFreak wrote:
Rubble.Special
Glukv48 wrote:
I tested it, it did not work as you said.
I managed to do it and it works. Thanks for a good idea. QUICK_EDIT
You used AttachEffect.Animation ?
You added AttachEffect.Duration=1 ?
Damage from animations applied each frame that plays the animation. If the duration of the animation 3 frames, Damage=10, then the total damage is 30.
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 9:12 am Post subject:
I don't remember if the Transfer codes are called during transition of rubble. If they are, well, then that's what causes Eric's AE issue. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
No the code is correct. Attach Effect is applied for each full play through of the entire animation.
The duration for playing my animations is 5 frames.
The animation itself has a rate of 900 frames per game minute. The animation itself has 3 frames in it so it takes 3 frames to complete. Since it can only play the animation completely once, since the attached effect lasts 5 frames, only 950 damage is ever dealt. A second animation never finishes.
Duration controls how many frames can be played. Rate controls how many frames are displayed in these frames. My animation is played in 900 frames per game minute "with game minute equaling 60(15)=900."
For your math to be correct either
LoopStart=0
LoopEnd=0
or
AttachEffect.Duration=15
Would have to have been used.
Also my code worked fine, it was only when I used a tank with an AE warhead which reduced the targets strength when the rubble was actually destroyed. note the tankd attacked CAOILD not the rubble. I beleive the AE carried over to the rubble, so the strength of the rubble was reduced, thus allowing the AE to destroy it instead of damaging it to 5% of it's health.
EDIT:
I just realized a fix/workaround for my issue. Simply have the animation last longer then any of my AE warheads which reduce strength... Problem is, then it looks weird in game... Guess I'm going to have to wait for Rubble.Strength codes before I can get it working like I want it in my mod. _________________ Grab my Map Logic Expansion Pack 5.2 here!
Adds random weather patterns into maps.
More disabled navalyards.
Preplaced Neutral buildings.
Additional new features.
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:47 pm Post subject:
Eric... animation damages are dealt every frame they're played. Also, LoopCount for AE anims are hardcoded to -1 for sanity reasons. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
I redid tags, think it will be more flexible and properly.
Rubble.Anim remained unchanged. Rubble.Neutral Been removed, was replaced by Rubble.Owner. Rubble.Strength now takes integer values. No float.
What we have now:
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Owner= (enumeration Current|Special|Neutral|)
Which owner will owned next Rubble.Intact or Rubble.Destroyed. Defaults to Current
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Strength= (integer)
Strength which will be created by the following Rubble.Intact or Rubble.Destroyed. Defaults to 100% for Rubble.Destroyed, 1% (But not less than 1 integer) for Rubble.Intact.
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Anim= (animation)
Animation that plays during create Rubble.Intact or Rubble.Destroyed
Attachment deleted, out of date. Last edited by Glukv48 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 1:12 am; edited 3 times in total QUICK_EDIT
I daresay this could be expanded to act similar to the GLA in generals.
Have a "time until rebuild" tag, and "time to build" tag, a "rebuilding" image tag, and you'd be set.
Just thinking aloud, I wouldn't use it, but someone else might.
That is what I think this is though without the rebuilding thing. What I expected was this to be basically transforming the building to another entity the Rubble Building.
Was thinking could use this where destroyed buildings turn into impromptu Defensive Structures (Troops "garrisoned" inside) until the Engineer builds it back to the original structure. _________________ ~ Excelsior ~ QUICK_EDIT
Eric... animation damages are dealt every frame they're played. Also, LoopCount for AE anims are hardcoded to -1 for sanity reasons.
I just tested several times. Animation damage is dealt only after the animation goes through an entire loop, the amount of loops is irrelevant, and the hardcode to -1 makes sense.
In this case my animations LoopStart=0 and LoopEnd=3 says that my animation has 3 frames. In game those frames are played at a certain rate, determined by the Rate= tag. In this case Rate=900 would mean my animation plays its frames at 900 frames per 900 game frames. If my Rate was set at 450, then it would play a frame at an interval of 450 frames per 900 game frames, or 1 frame every 2 game frames. My tests show this as accurate.
Since my Attached animation's effects duration is set at 5 frames. And my animation has 3 frames, in order to do a complete cycle, based on the fact it plays 1 frame per 1 game frame second, it will take 3 game frames to play. Then the animation only ever complete its 3 frame cycle once. Therefore applying the damage only once, not per every frame they are played. Unless of course you meant every time they were fully played, "as in all of their frames."
Code:
Try this code.
If you set AttachEffect.Duration= to anything less then 200 it will never damage the technotype it's attached too.
_________________ Grab my Map Logic Expansion Pack 5.2 here!
Adds random weather patterns into maps.
More disabled navalyards.
Preplaced Neutral buildings.
Additional new features.
Your wrong based on all my years of experience on this, fact is, it runs so fast so more likely your mistaken by how fast it runs and think damage is caused by entire run when it is not. I've had damage on large explosion animations that gradually damage as long as animation runs and it has been even 70 frames or so and building keeps flashing on the entire run, not only after it.
Plus don't ever EVER put higher rate than 900, besides 900 is default btw...
Higher than that is not valid and will freeze the animation, AE may be exception to allow it to run...
Do yourself favor and try a actual explo or something longer on some target and you will see damage happen gradually unless you put absurd instantly killing values. QUICK_EDIT
I need to run more tests your right. And yeah assigning more frames then their are frames also makes sense.
I want to understand animations more than I do now. _________________ Grab my Map Logic Expansion Pack 5.2 here!
Adds random weather patterns into maps.
More disabled navalyards.
Preplaced Neutral buildings.
Additional new features.
Small update. Old binary files removed from this topic. Now is based on the 0.6. Aslo fixed a few minor bugs. All three tags were separated for individual control Destroyed and Intact.
What we have now:
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Destroyed.Owner= (enumeration Current|Special|Neutral|Random)
Which owner will owned next Rubble.Destroyed. Defaults to Current
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Intact.Owner= (enumeration Current|Special|Neutral|Random)
Which owner will owned next Rubble.Intact. Defaults to Current
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Destroyed.Strength= (integer)
Strength which will be created by the following Rubble.Destroyed. Defaults to 100%.
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Intact.Strength= (integer)
Strength which will be created by the following Rubble.Intact. Defaults to 1% (But not less than 1 integer)
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Destroyed.Anim= (animation)
Animation that plays during create Rubble.Destroyed
[BuildingType]►Rubble.Intact.Anim= (animation)
Animation that plays during create Rubble.Intact
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum