BTNLigtntingShockWave

[Moderator]

14:18, 8th Nov 2012
I3lackDeath:
[x] Original Blizzard Icon with too less freehand work to be approved separately.
[x] Approved due to usefulness, (alternative) authors changed.

 

[InfernalTater]

It looks good. Hopefully people will be able to deal with it having the same axe -- I think it having the same axe is a good thing, but I'm sure people will moan about it being a recolor.

Still, even if this is just a recolor with lightning added to it, it looks good, and can be useful. The fact that it is similar to the fire shockwave only makes it yet more useful.

Hopefully an exception will be made to allow this particular recolor. I'm giving it a 4/5.

People probably misunderstood my objective long ago when I had been "campaigning" against most of the recolors and CnP's long ago. My objective was not to have all recolors banned forever; I just didn't like how people would make poor recolors, simply dragging the hue bar across and then re-saving their poor icons. This particular recolor, however, has had enough work on it, and is done well enough, that I think it is approvable.

 

[kola]

Looking good and useful

 

[doomhammer99]

Very Useful

 

[zbc]

Charge effect can be more intresting released with some spiral effect around axe edge. Currently looks dramatic poor (in a case of recolor concept). But as inferno noticed - really useful as a recolor icon.

 

[sonofjay]

This way way better than the original shockwave, though its more useful for lightning sfx spells. Goodjob,

 

[SpasMaster]

Vote for approval.

Looks really nice!

 

[LaMorte]

OMFG ITS NEED A MODEL TOO!!!

 

[JesusHipster]

gj

 

[Chaosy]

this looks really good. 5/5 from me just awesome

 

[Deleted member 212788]

Kawaii. . . . 5/5

 

[JollyD]

nicee) should be approved

 

[Arrr]

good recolor, useful

 

[Sunchips]

It will probably be rejected because of lack of "free hand" but I think it's well done and useful so I vote for approval

 

[Claw]

At first I thought it was too simple change, but then i liked it.

 

[I3lackDeath]

Recolours of original Blizzard Entertainment icons have to follow certain conditions in order to be approvable: Set "Blizzard Entertainment" as the alternate author in the submission panel (Click "This resource is not mine" under "Other Fields") Recolours still have to feature at least 50% freehand content, which does not apply here. You recoloured the whole image to a blue-ish hue (probably by setting it to "black and white" with a blue taint) and added some white lightning

 

[InfernalTater]

Normally I'd agree with that, but since at least 2/3 of the icon is the axe, and part of what makes this useful is having the same axe, then freehanding that part would inhibit it from being able to match it, ruining the entire usefulness of the icon.

 

[Praytic]

Maybe 30% - recolor and lightnings are 20%?

 

[I3lackDeath]

No, about 10%.
Hue-changes don't count as freehand work.

 

[InfernalTater]

If he were to entirely remove the fire part of the shockwave, rather than recoloring it, and make the entire lightning shockwave part himself, while having the same axe, would that be approvable to you?

 

[I3lackDeath]

The problem with this particular icon of Blizzard is that there is not much to play around with.
Your best bet would be to change the axe aswell as slightly alter the effect to fit the needs, as that would surely cover enough freehand content.

If one chose to stick to editing the effect, one wouldn't reach 50% freehand content. The axe itself poses around 60% of content for this icon.

 

[Adiktuz]

well, yeah recolor and few edits... but hmmm... useful... maybe you could modify the axe a bit...

 

[Praytic]

If i edit the axe, i will fail the whole icon for sure.

 

[InfernalTater]

If i edit the axe, i will fail the whole icon for sure.

Draw some lightning on the edge of the axe, just to add more freehand.

 

[Praytic]

Maybe moderators allow to save this icon and rename the author to Blizzard?

 

[SpasMaster]

Maybe moderators allow to save this icon and rename the author to Blizzard?

I surely hope so. This is way too good/useful to get removed...

 

[InfernalTater]

If icons like [thread=202171]this[/thread] and [thread=202333]this[/thread] are fine, then certainly exceptions can be made for icons such as this, considering how it is extremely useful, and if the axe were freehanded, it would no longer be useful, since the usefulness is due to it having the same axe, and being able to match with the other icon.

Of course, I'm just some random member who doesn't have any authority or reputation, and anything I say has no significance, but due to this situation, I do have a bit of a suggestion:

What if the rules are amended, so that resources that do not meet freehand requirements can be voted on by all moderators in the corresponding resource section, to determine whether or not they are useful enough to be worth making an exception to the rules, requiring a 99% consensus (at least all but one vote yes), in order to ensure that such exceptions are not often made?

Of course, this is not the appropriate place to actually make that decision, so I'll be repeating the above suggestion in Site Discussion.

 

[I3lackDeath]

Alrighty, we could do this as follows:

We may approve this, but set the original author (which means, the uplaoder) to "Blizzard", while you will be noted as the alternative author.

Any objections/other suggestions?

 

[JollyD]

Alrighty, we could do this as follows:

We may approve this, but set the original author (which means, the uplaoder) to "Blizzard", while you will be noted as the alternative author.

Any objections/other suggestions?

I think this can be approved that way. Minimum freehand here, but icon can be useful. So I suggest to approve it if will be matched your criterias.

 

[Praytic]

Alrighty, we could do this as follows:

We may approve this, but set the original author (which means, the uplaoder) to "Blizzard", while you will be noted as the alternative author.

Any objections/other suggestions?

I agree with this.

 

[I3lackDeath]

Alrighty, approved.

 

[twistedfate08]

very useful!
5/5

 

[Siryan]

Before someone goes all-out for hours trying to make an awesome REAL Shockwave (because Blizzard's makes no sense being fire), all you have to do in the World Editor/NewGen is navigate to the spell 'Shockwave' and look for where it says 'Art - Missile,' and replace THAT with the 'Thunderclap' animation. Normally the lightning effect would stay in the area of the POSITION of the unit casting it BUT when used as Missile Art, for some reason it sends out the lightning effect in the direction casted. Not only that, doing it this way literally lives up to the proper description of this spell; the ground ripples and it causes a lightning shock effect.

Sometimes you have to play around with things in the Editor that seem like it won't make sense, but somehow makes sense, especially when it comes to animations. You'd be surprised with what you can do without using people's custom animations here on Hive and unnecessarily making your map bigger than it has to be.

Anyway, hope that helps!

 

[Siryan]

I know this is an old post but, I took a look at the commentaries here, saw yours, and the solution to making an awesome/feasible Shockwave spell look like an actual shock (not fire) is to replace the Shockwave's missile art with 'Thunderclap.' This makes the lightning effect of thunderclap go outward and doesn't stay in the position of where the unit is standing. It also causes a literal ripple effect as said in Blizzard's tooltip of 'Shockwave' with the ground cracking, etc.