Auto Fire?

[Virus-X]

Anyone knows how to make a auto fire, like gatling bot?

 

[pOke]

What is auto fire? What is a gatling bot?
Can you explain a little bit more? It's hard to know what you're wanting to accomplish.

 

[Pyrogasm]

Phoenix fire ability is what Battleships uses for everything. It will constantly shoot at any valid nearby target.

 

[Virus-X]

What is auto fire? What is a gatling bot?
Can you explain a little bit more? It's hard to know what you're wanting to accomplish.

that mean they will auto fire while walk(dosen't need to order unit stopping and attack.
Galiting bot?:ah, i found in spells, has a machine robot, auto move and auto fire.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Not possible in WC3. Can only be simulated by having dummy units attack targets which are moved periodically with SetUnitX/Y to match the main units position. When the main unit attacks then the dummies are disabled from attacking, or possibly the main unit has a dummy attack which relays orders to the dummies.

In StarCraft II one can allow units to attack while moving. Tracer from HotS and the Diamondbacks from campaign use this. Interceptors use strafe weapons which works similarly but forces movement when attacking.

 

[Tal'Rarity]

Not possible in WC3. Can only be simulated by having dummy units attack targets which are moved periodically with SetUnitX/Y to match the main units position. When the main unit attacks then the dummies are disabled from attacking, or possibly the main unit has a dummy attack which relays orders to the dummies.

In StarCraft II one can allow units to attack while moving. Tracer from HotS and the Diamondbacks from campaign use this. Interceptors use strafe weapons which works similarly but forces movement when attacking.

More of just lacking the animations for it... It is definitely possible in WC3, just have to look at it from a different angle. You can use a constantly moving dummy unit or different methods of a moving dummy unit combined with basic abilities like carrion swarm or forked lightning.

 

[doom_sheep]

well, it is sort of possible to just trigger the movement instead.

 

[Dr Super Good]

More of just lacking the animations for it... It is definitely possible in WC3, just have to look at it from a different angle. You can use a constantly moving dummy unit or different methods of a moving dummy unit combined with basic abilities like carrion swarm or forked lightning.

Results in wrong kill credits (dummy gets kill), and also does not fire events correctly. Not a 1:1 replacement for Tracer/Diamondback like shoot while moving attacks.

 

[Tal'Rarity]

Results in wrong kill credits (dummy gets kill), and also does not fire events correctly. Not a 1:1 replacement for Tracer/Diamondback like shoot while moving attacks.

Use a damage detection system to fix that.

 

[Virus-X]

well, it is sort of possible to just trigger the movement instead.

Best Idea Ever

 

[Virus-X]

well, it is sort of possible to just trigger the movement instead.

Ugh,how to use?

 

[Virus-X]

Phoenix fire ability is what Battleships uses for everything. It will constantly shoot at any valid nearby target.

Yes,but unit dosen't attack animation,that weird.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Ugh,how to use?

With a complex path finding system, or maybe a dummy unit which does all the path finding and the main unit gets set to its x/y periodically. Attacks and abilities will not be interrupted if a unit is moved by SetUnitX/Y natives. Of course no walking animation will play, and the animation will not sync with actual movement speed, and the dummy unit might not get slowed correctly by debuffs or speeded by buffs, but once again this is not StarCraft II.

 

[Virus-X]

With a complex path finding system, or maybe a dummy unit which does all the path finding and the main unit gets set to its x/y periodically. Attacks and abilities will not be interrupted if a unit is moved by SetUnitX/Y natives. Of course no walking animation will play, and the animation will not sync with actual movement speed, and the dummy unit might not get slowed correctly by debuffs or speeded by buffs, but once again this is not StarCraft II.

Well,it is not a StarCraft II,why trigger galiting bots can make this,the robot moving around and fire nearby enemy.

 

[Kyrbi0]

I wonder if giving the model Bone_Turret will let it rotate to attack while moving?...

 

[Dr Super Good]

Well,it is not a StarCraft II,why trigger galiting bots can make this,the robot moving around and fire nearby enemy.

If someone has already done it why ask? You can just look at what that guy did. Chances are it does some hacky work around that can result in events failing to fire or wrong credits being awarded for kills.

I wonder if giving the model Bone_Turret will let it rotate to attack while moving?...

The problem in WC3 is making the unit attack while moving, not animating it so. If it is playing its walk animation due to walking it cannot be attacking as WC3 does not support attack while move. If it is attacking it cannot be moving because of the same reason. If one attaches the turret as a head or torso one can trigger rotate it while the walk animation moves the unit.

Achieving what Tracer and the Diamondback from SC2 do is not easy in WC3. Even when done, it likely has faults unlike in SC2 where it is quite literally an attack while moving.

 

[Virus-X]

Like this!

 

[The_Silent]

Use the spell pack?
Gatling Bot v3.7

 

[Virus-X]

Use the spell pack?
Gatling Bot v3.7

Not really,but i want make a auto fire,auto moving i don't need.
And too hard copying this spell,has many error.

 

[Tal'Rarity]

If someone has already done it why ask? You can just look at what that guy did. Chances are it does some hacky work around that can result in events failing to fire or wrong credits being awarded for kills.


The problem in WC3 is making the unit attack while moving, not animating it so. If it is playing its walk animation due to walking it cannot be attacking as WC3 does not support attack while move. If it is attacking it cannot be moving because of the same reason. If one attaches the turret as a head or torso one can trigger rotate it while the walk animation moves the unit.

Achieving what Tracer and the Diamondback from SC2 do is not easy in WC3. Even when done, it likely has faults unlike in SC2 where it is quite literally an attack while moving.

It is supported in WC3 because all it is, is animation which most models lack. Just need an attack walk animation if you want the visual's otherwise fake it with dummy units, SC2 likely does the same thing as most games where you see its animation and then it creates an object to fire towards its target. I wouldn't know 100% because I don't play SC2 however from video's, that is what it looks otherwise it might be a model for the projectile like a carrion swarm or acid bomb like feature. It's pretty basic, people just overcomplicate it.

 

[Kyrbi0]

It is supported in WC3 because all it is, is animation which most models lack. Just need an attack walk animation if you want the visual's otherwise fake it with dummy units, SC2 likely does the same thing as most games where you see its animation and then it creates an object to fire towards its target. I wouldn't know 100% because I don't play SC2 however from video's, that is what it looks otherwise it might be a model for the projectile like a carrion swarm or acid bomb like feature. It's pretty basic, people just overcomplicate it.

That might make it visually "attack while moving", but in terms of "what the game code/mechanics will allow" it cannot actually move and attack simultaneously, which is the goal.

 

[The_Silent]

I often considered this for tanks, which is technically possible through triggering if you use a custom missile system and makes sure the "turret" has a helper "head" bone. Since you can change the facing of head and torso bones via triggers.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Just need an attack walk animation if you want the visual's otherwise fake it with dummy units, SC2 likely does the same thing as most games where you see its animation and then it creates an object to fire towards its target.

SC2 supports turrets. Turrets can turn while a unit moves. Weapons can be made to fire while a unit moves and use a turret. Hence if a unit has a turret no magic or hackery is needed to make it shoot and move.

The problem in WC3 is making it actually an attack, and not a spell or an attack from the wrong unit. The damage has to be known as an attack and the attack has to originate from the intractable unit while it plays the correct animations. The attack also needs to be modified by buffs and debuffs.

And too hard copying this spell,has many error.

Sounds like the spell needs a third party editor you do not have. I recommend using it instead of writing your own as the creator may have spent extensive research to get it to function as well as it does.

 

[Kyrbi0]

SC2 supports turrets. Turrets can turn while a unit moves. Weapons can be made to fire while a unit moves and use a turret. Hence if a unit has a turret no magic or hackery is needed to make it shoot and move.

The problem in WC3 is making it actually an attack, and not a spell or an attack from the wrong unit. The damage has to be known as an attack and the attack has to originate from the intractable unit while it plays the correct animations. The attack also needs to be modified by buffs and debuffs.


Sounds like the spell needs a third party editor you do not have. I recommend using it instead of writing your own as the creator may have spent extensive research to get it to function as well as it does.

I feel like, with a perfect blend of good model-creation & good triggering, you could engineer a seamless "move & attack" thing. But the work required to do so... Bleh.

 

[Pyrogasm]

The problem in WC3 is making it actually an attack, and not a spell or an attack from the wrong unit. The damage has to be known as an attack and the attack has to originate from the intractable unit while it plays the correct animations. The attack also needs to be modified by buffs and debuffs.

Why there aren't GetUnitAttackMin/Max() I will never understand. Clearly the engine knows what they are... so why not allow JASS to know too?

 

[Virus-X]

so many comment this question

 

[Kyrbi0]

It's a contentious point.