Upgrade Centers
Nov 24 2008, 10:22 am
By: liver  

Nov 24 2008, 10:22 am liver Post #1



Okay, I'm making a hero arena style game, with 2 forces and a third for the 2 computers. We'll my question is, I can make a trigger to where the heros upgrade by moving their units onto the upgrade beacon, but problem is, when they get off the beacon, they still own the building, how can I fix this? my trigger looks like this:
Trigger("Force 1"){
Conditions:
Bring("Current Player", "Men", "upgrade protoss 1", At least, 1);
Switch("Upgrade", not set);

Actions:
Give Units to Player("All players", "Current Player", "Buildings", All, "upgrade protoss center 1");
Preserve Trigger();
Comment("Upgrade Begin");
Set Switch("Upgrade", set);
}



None.

Nov 24 2008, 10:50 am rockz Post #2

ᴄʜᴇᴇsᴇ ɪᴛ!

Trigger("Force 1"){
Conditions:
Bring("Current Player", "Men", "upgrade protoss 1", Exactly, 0);
Switch("Upgrade", set);

Actions:
Give Units to Player("Current Player", "Whatever player you want to have owning it", "Buildings", All, "upgrade protoss center 1");
Preserve Trigger();
Comment("Upgrade Begin");
Set Switch("Upgrade", not set);
}
You need a trigger to give the building back. The switches are pointless, unless you are using them in some other trigger. In fact they'll make it so if two people go onto the beacon, one of them can't use it until the other one leaves and that person leaves then gets back on. I'd highly recommend you also change it from "all players" to "whatever player you want to have owning it" when it's not in use. That way, you won't have people walking up on it and then interrupting the player's upgrades.



"Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman - do we have to call the Gentleman a gentleman if he's not one?"

Nov 24 2008, 12:18 pm liver Post #3



such as giving it to a neutral player when the current player is done upgrading? ie. give back to computer 7?



None.

Nov 24 2008, 12:31 pm Vi3t-X Post #4



When the player gets off the beacon, you give the buildings back to whatever player who originally owned it. In this case, Player 7.



None.

Nov 24 2008, 1:08 pm Falkoner Post #5



In the conditions you may want to add that the computer player owns a building there, so they can't steal the upgrade buildings from eachother.



None.

Nov 24 2008, 1:49 pm NudeRaider Post #6

We can't explain the universe, just describe it; and we don't know whether our theories are true, we just know they're not wrong. >Harald Lesch

To summarize, this is the most simple and usable way to do it:

Preplace all the upgrade buildings for neutral, P9-11 or to a spare computer player. Depends on what other uses you have for those players. Any will work. I will use Neutral in my example.
Trigger 1: Grab the buildings
Player Force
Conditions:

Current Player brings at least 1 [men] to 'upgrade protoss'
Actions:
Give all [buildings] owned by Neutral at 'upgrade protoss center' to Current Player
preserve trigger

This will automatically prevent stealing the buildings as only Buildings owned by Neutral will be given.

Trigger 2: Give the buildings back (using Neutral)
Player Force
Conditions:

Current Player brings at most 0 [men] to 'upgrade protoss'
Actions:
Give all [buildings] owned by Current Player at 'upgrade protoss center' to Neutral
preserve trigger

If you don't use Neutral (but lets say P8) you need to rewrite this trigger a little to deal with leavers while upgrading:
Trigger 2: Give the buildings back (using P8)
P8
Conditions:

Player Force brings at most 0 [men] to 'upgrade protoss'
Actions:
Give all [buildings] owned by All players at 'upgrade protoss center' to P8
preserve trigger

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Nov 24 2008, 1:54 pm by NudeRaider.




Options
  Back to forum
Please log in to reply to this topic or to report it.
Members in this topic: None.
[02:27 am]
Symmetry -- https://staredit.net/topic/18903/ THE REVIEWS ARE HERE! "ok these are pretty good memes" - ssj9Kevin
[2026-7-17. : 2:58 pm]
Ultraviolet -- Symmetry
Symmetry shouted: Man I wish we had this tech back in the day when people played ums lmao
fr fr
[2026-7-17. : 2:39 am]
Symmetry -- Man I wish we had this tech back in the day when people played ums lmao
[2026-7-16. : 6:28 am]
NudeRaider -- EUD actions, specifically. The conditions remained. Today we can even have actions again, but they're all virtualized/whitelisted (not sure on the actual technical implementation) so you can only use them for specific intended purposed, not arbitrary code injections.
[2026-7-16. : 6:26 am]
NudeRaider -- I mean yes, maps - through EUDs - were theoretically able to do that as well, but that was patched quickly.
[2026-7-16. : 6:25 am]
NudeRaider -- Symmetry
Symmetry shouted: Ohhh imagine a SC map that could delete itself
not the map, the editor
[2026-7-16. : 2:28 am]
Symmetry -- I vaguely remember Voy doing some ACE back in the day, but I had no idea EUDs could do that kind of shit. I am very much catching up on the technology
[2026-7-16. : 2:28 am]
Symmetry -- Ohhh imagine a SC map that could delete itself
[2026-7-15. : 8:51 pm]
NudeRaider -- Symmetry
Symmetry shouted: NudeRaider Is EUD editor capable of writing shit onto the player's harddrive? That seems like it would be dangerous
yeah an editor that isn't allowed to write files sounds rather pointless, so I'd assume it can. Like most other programs too btw. and yes, obviously that's dangerous, but also kinda necessary. MS introduced that virtualization for exactly that reason.
[2026-7-15. : 4:10 am]
Ultraviolet -- I don't think so. I think they shut that shit down after 1.16, maybe even earlier
Please log in to shout.


Members Online: Moose