No Item Sharing v1.11

[pusha1999]

omg...this is smth strange...i did make antishare system with 10 lines in code ;D

 

[Flux]

omg...this is smth strange...i did make antishare system with 10 lines in code ;D

I highly doubt it has the same functionality as mine. 10 lines? Maybe what you did was dropped the item if it is picked up by another player. Mine is very different from that, you should have seen it for yourself.

 

[pusha1999]

I highly doubt it has the same functionality as mine. 10 lines? Maybe what you did was dropped the item if it is picked up by another player. Mine is very different from that, you should have seen it for yourself.

smth like that, but not exactly. im still dont see the point for usin lot of useless code(libs) and create lot of dummy objects for that wich discrease a map size and loading speed. code should be a maximum simple everytime, i know u understand what i mean. if you wanna make simular dota codes, then i wanna tell u epic true: lot of things in dota released very bad and this is a last instance where u should look how smth is released or copy ideas. sor for my english, im not english speaker . yes, dota map got alot of good and unique ideas, but how they are released, its another question (im still wondering, how this map still didnt get desync problem with that) anyway you did a good code. GL HF

 

[Flux]

In my opinion, this is not useless. I made this system for my map and I just shared it here in hive if ever anyone else would need it.
The point is, to allow allies to pick your items but not allowing them to sell it. If you just did a simple: "If item is not yours, then drop it", then your ally wouldn't be able to pick your items. Plus, it has additional feature which you can configure if they can use the shared item or not.
You don't have proof to what you claim the 'epic truth'.

 

[pusha1999]

In my opinion, this is not useless. I made this system for my map and I just shared it here in hive if ever anyone else would need it.
The point is, to allow allies to pick your items but not allowing them to sell it. If you just did a simple: "If item is not yours, then drop it", then your ally wouldn't be able to pick your items. Plus, it has additional feature which you can configure if they can use the shared item or not.
You don't have proof to what you claim the 'epic truth'.

first - i can make for alli heroes share items but not for enemies, anyway its + 1-2 lines in code for that but not tons of code and tons of libs. and second about epic true, i have proof, but ofc i will not share this. if u need this for ur map, ok use it, but really some ppls who dont know something they will use ur system in maps and same copy tons of objects, code and weird libs wich really unuseless...

 

[Flux]

Can you show that 1-2 lines you speak of?

 

[pusha1999]

Can you show that 1-2 lines you speak of?

simple condition if IsPlayerAlly(GetOwningPlayer(heromanipulating item),Player(...)) then
code
else
code
endif

+ 3 lines
dude, i have nothing against ur system, but for make it works in other maps, need to do alot of work in map with copy+past objects and adding in tables...and now imagine, if map got over 200 items or more wich should be in this system...and imagine if player wanna ruin the game and dont wanna give item back to owner...or he will destroy the item. owner will lost gold and will have no item in result.


function IsIventoryFull takes unit u returns boolean
local item it
local integer slot = 0
local integer count = 0
loop
exitwhen slot > 6
set it = UnitItemInSlot(u,slot)
if it != null then
set count = count + 1
endif
set slot = slot + 1
endloop
set it = null
if count == 6 then
return true
else
return false
endif
endfunction

function ChangeDummyItem takes unit u, player p, integer newitemid returns nothing
local item it
local real x = GetUnitX(u)
local real y = GetUnitY(u)
set it = CreateItem(newitemid, x,y )
if not IsIventoryFull(u) then
call UnitAddItem(u, it)
endif
call SetItemInvulnerable( it, true )
call SetItemPlayer( it, p, true )
set it = null
endfunction


function BuyItem takes nothing returns boolean
local item it = GetSoldItem()
local integer i = 1
//all fake items i did as ITEM_TYPE_CHARGED for avoid unuselles trigger actions.
if GetItemType(it) == ITEM_TYPE_CHARGED then
loop
//this is not a fake item, this is for be possible buy item anyway if inventory is full (items in shops released as books)
exitwhen GetItemTypeId(it) == udg_ItemShopDummy or i > FakeItemsTotal
set i = i + 1
endloop
call RemoveItem(it)
call ChangeDummyItem(GetBuyingUnit(),GetOwningPlayer(GetBuyingUnit()),udg_ItemShopOriginal)
endif
set it = null
return false
endfunction

//===========================================================================
function InitTrig_BuyItem takes nothing returns nothing
local trigger t = CreateTrigger( )
call TriggerRegisterPlayerUnitEvent(t, Player(10), EVENT_PLAYER_UNIT_SELL_ITEM, null)
call TriggerRegisterPlayerUnitEvent(t, Player(11), EVENT_PLAYER_UNIT_SELL_ITEM, null)
call TriggerAddCondition( t, Condition(function BuyItem) )
set t = null
endfunction

AND ANITHSARE
function try_share takes nothing returns boolean
if IsItemInvulnerable(GetManipulatedItem()) and GetItemPlayer(GetManipulatedItem()) != GetOwningPlayer(GetManipulatingUnit()) then
call UnitRemoveItem(GetManipulatingUnit(), GetManipulatedItem())
endif
return false
endfunction

//===========================================================================
function InitTrig_player_try_share takes nothing returns nothing
local trigger t = CreateTrigger( )
call AddEventPlayer(t, EVENT_PLAYER_UNIT_PICKUP_ITEM)
call TriggerAddCondition( t, Condition( function try_share ) )
set t = null
endfunction

 

[Flux]

Lol those were not three lines.
I know adding the item to the list and creating the 'shared version' is a BIG con, but if your OCD strikes and really want it to be like in Dota ItemSharingSystem (like my case), then this is the system for you.

That was the point, you can destroy (or hide) enemy items but not steal its effect. Or any user could just set the item hp to very high if he/she didn't want items to get destroyed.

 

[pusha1999]

Lol those were not three lines.
I know adding the item to the list and creating the 'shared version' is a BIG con, but if your OCD strikes and really want it to be like in Dota ItemSharingSystem (like my case), then this is the system for you.

That was the point, you can destroy (or hide) enemy items but not steal its effect. Or any user could just set the item hp to very high if he/she didn't want items to get destroyed.

antishare code 5 lines ok. not 3 )

why lot of ppl copying from dota things, while icefrog didnt make nothing himself and only steal systems, heroes, ideas without donate autors??? i still didnt get it, really. and afterall ppl thinks that its "from dota"...sad, really. ok. i see no point to continue this. GL HF

 

[Flux]

BloodDrunk requested additional feature:

Hey Flux!
I am using your system no item share, and it's working all good and everything EXCEPT!
I need the item to become shareable once the player left the game. Could you please take a look at that?

It can now be done using ItemShare.setOwner(yourItem, null).

 

[Flux]

Fuck, I failed to think of storing the unit holding the item in Table/Hashtable instead of Picking all Units in the Map.

Don't review this yet reviewers/mods until the next update.

EDUT: Actually, nevermind. Go review this so I can fix it all in the next update. Another error in the code is it should be tb.item.remove instead of tb.remove..

 

[KILLCIDE]

All though the concept is not anything new, this will be an extremely useful system to many map makers and a great addition to the Hive! The API is extremely easy, and the code looks good to me (the optional Table is a plus). There are just a few minor things I questioned:

• The local integer and loop on init to register the unit event makes it look soo convoluted. Some red text is nice!
• In static method convert, what is the reason for disabling and enabling pickTrg and dropTrg? My only conclusion is that you wanted to avoid an infinite loop, but I can not see the possibility of it ever happening with this system
• The addition of "(Shared)" into the names of items is a bit misleading

Of course they are extremely minor things, so the status is set to Approved with a 4/5 rating from me.

 

[Flux]

The local integer and loop on init to register the unit event makes it look soo convoluted. Some red text is nice!

It is to avoid looping twice. I know it's a minor thing, but it was already there before this update so there's no point in changing it back to use the BJ function.

In static method convert, what is the reason for disabling and enabling pickTrg and dropTrg? My only conclusion is that you wanted to avoid an infinite loop, but I can not see the possibility of it ever happening with this system

Yes, good find. It was indeed unnecessary to disable/enable it.

The addition of "(Shared)" into the names of items is a bit misleading

Why?

Anyway, I was not expecting this would not be approved yet because of the rushed submission with O(n) operation. Anyway, it is fixed now (I just updated it).

 

[KILLCIDE]

It is to avoid looping twice. I know it's a minor thing, but it was already there before this update so there's no point in changing it back to use the BJ function.

Yeah excuse my suggestion on that. It is indeed better to not have to loop twice through the player slots. It's only good to use the bj when you have one event.

Why?

People can mistaken it for an item that can actually be shared (as in being able to use it + gain stats).

Anyway, I was not expecting this would not be approved yet because of the rushed submission with O(n) operation. Anyway, it is fixed now (I just updated it).

I trusted that you would fix it considering the one you used in your DummyRecycler works flawwlessly. The overall system worked without any obvious issues on my tests as well, so I didn't see an issue not approving it.

 

[Mechanic]

Hello. I like this. But, I prefer automatically drops the item that doesn't belongs to player. How do I change the "Then Action" to be automatically drop from the triggering unit that doesn't belongs to the item instead of having a worthless item called "Shared"?

 

[HerlySQR]

hi