Fire Wall 1.01

Moderator · Aug 29, 2009

20:18, 29th Aug 2009
hvo-busterkomo:

The spell is decent (approved), but should try to avoid useless conversions. You can easilly avoid all of the R2I calls by modifying a few of the functions. You also use local variables in the Actions function when you can just use the values directly into the create method. Isn't their a script at WC3C that is used to easily create wall spells?

Deuterium · Aug 29, 2009

Huge code for such a simple spell.. great job!

Just_Spectating · Aug 29, 2009

yeah, i think it could be done in GUI too

Yixx · Aug 29, 2009

Now that is some bitch-ass piece of code!
The first thing that caught my attention is the list. Anyone else would have used a 'Flame array' if you know what i mean. The code seems really good and certainly like a maskedpoptart-code. But the thing that i was amazed by is how you managed to NOT use any angle/sine/cosine calculation!
Well besides that i saw no flaws in the code. And i looked through it quite thoroughly.

Though my upper fella's are kinda right, the spell is easy and could have been done in GUI (though that lacks efficiency and i more like to look through (v)Jass than GUI), this spell could NEVER have been done more maskpoptart-ish! =D

Great job! ^^

EDIT:

Could you try to teach me how to not use angles but your calculations instead? Because it looks Way more efficient to me this way!

Yes of course i can copy your equotations but that doesnt teach me the fine things of the logic behind it, which is what really intrigued me about it!

Element of Water · Aug 31, 2009

Could you try to teach me how to not use angles but your calculations instead? Because it looks Way more efficient to me this way!

It's not much more efficient. It requires a SquareRoot calculation plus quite a bit of multiplication/division.

Deuterium · Aug 31, 2009

Cosine and sine and all that aren't... well how can I explain that in a simple way... well they're like BJs in Jass

They've got certain calculations behind them, so they are avoidable

As EoW says, bit of math

maskedpoptart · Sep 1, 2009

EoW, in this case, using vectors makes more sense and is a little more efficient than using polar. If you used polar, you would have to use Atan2 to get the angle between the caster and target. You convert rectangular coordinates to polar. After adding pi/2 to make it perpendicular, you would have to convert the polar coordinates back into rectangular by doing Cos(angle) and Sin(angle). Each individual trig operation is slower than SquareRoot. When combined, the trig operations are at least three times slower than finding the SquareRoot. Considering we only have to call these functions once, using vectors won't make any noticable difference in speed. It just makes more sense to use.

Element of Water · Sep 1, 2009

Cosine and sine and all that aren't... well how can I explain that in a simple way... well they're like BJs in Jass
They've got certain calculations behind them, so they are avoidable

What maskedpoptart did wasn't to write his own way of finding the sine/cosine. He just used a different way of finding a perpendicular line.

EoW, in this case, using vectors makes more sense and is a little more efficient than using polar. If you used polar, you would have to use Atan2 to get the angle between the caster and target. You convert rectangular coordinates to polar. After adding pi/2 to make it perpendicular, you would have to convert the polar coordinates back into rectangular by doing Cos(angle) and Sin(angle). Each individual trig operation is slower than SquareRoot. When combined, the trig operations are at least three times slower than finding the SquareRoot. Considering we only have to call these functions once, using vectors won't make any noticable difference in speed. It just makes more sense to use.

Yeah, I guess it makes sense, but in most situations where it'd give you any efficiency gain, it'd be useless using vectors anyway as you probably have to recalculate the angle every 0.035 seconds.

maskedpoptart · Sep 1, 2009

Element of Water said:
Yeah, I guess it makes sense, but in most situations where it'd give you any efficiency gain, it'd be useless using vectors anyway as you probably have to recalculate the angle every 0.035 seconds.

You are right to a certain extent. There are situations where you have to use polar and it is useless to convert it to vectors, such as making something move in a circular path. There are other situations where you could use polar, but it would be quite a bit less efficient than using vectors, such as collisions.

Element of Water · Sep 1, 2009

Well yeah, calculating collision is something that's always done with vectors, but again, usually collisions happen barely once per second, which doesn't make much difference when the polar coordinates are used 60 times per second.

maskedpoptart · Sep 3, 2009

Update! See the OP for what I added. Oh I also added a bunch of crap to the terrain in the test map because I was bored...

G00dG4m3 · Jul 16, 2010

Well, I made a Wall of Fire spell in my map in GUI...

Andser · Mar 31, 2011

Good

This is a good map :goblin_boom:

//TESH.scrollpos=0
//TESH.alwaysfold=0
function Trig_Melee_Initialization_Actions takes nothing returns nothing
- call FogEnable(false)
- call FogMaskEnable(false)
endfunction
//===========================================================================
function InitTrig_Melee_Initialization takes nothing returns nothing
- set gg_trg_Melee_Initialization = CreateTrigger( )
- call TriggerAddAction( gg_trg_Melee_Initialization, function Trig_Melee_Initialization_Actions )
endfunction

Fire Wall 1.01

Just another Warcraft III map (Map)

Moderator

Moderator

Similar threads