Sponsored Links - Login to hide this ad! |
|
![]() |
#32 |
User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
![]() |
![]() hmm...no No Store updated version? I just replaced the requires UnitIndexingUtils to AutoIndex, does work fine?
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 |
User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
![]() |
![]() BUMP
__________________Why not update the No Store version of Last Order? because it really cause bugs with AutoIndex, the No Store Version works better than LastOrder system with AutoIndex combined Last edited by Sinnergy : 08-10-2009 at 12:07 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
Obscurity, the Art
|
![]() I really need to figure out why it doesn't work with AutoIndex, because AutoIndex should function nigh-on identically to UIU.
__________________EDIT: I have decided that if this library has some problem with AutoIndex, then it is AutoIndex's fault. Can you possibly elaborate upon the type of bugs you see? I am almost certain that it means that AutoIndex is not giving correct indexes where it should. Last edited by Rising_Dusk : 08-10-2009 at 08:13 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 |
User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
![]() |
![]() any method to do such thing like this?:
__________________![]() call IssueOrderIdEx(GetLastOrderId(GetTriggerUnit()), thisUnit) Lets say a hero (GetTriggerUnit()) issues an order to attack a certain target, then if I want to make a unit (thisUnit) follow the issued order of that hero (so that they would be identical), then I would use the function above, now, there's no need to check what type of order did the hero used, no matter what type of order did the hero is issued, the unit will always try to issue the hero's order Last edited by Sinnergy : 08-13-2009 at 04:33 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 | |
Laughs Derisively
Project Member: PoC
|
![]() Quote:
Try using Demo Spell Error. Last edited by Archmage Owenalacaster : 08-13-2009 at 01:08 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 |
extends net.wc3c.Jasser
|
![]() It seems that defend ability messes up with AbortOrder and LastOrder combination.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 | ||
Obscurity, the Art
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 |
User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
![]() |
![]() I really can't take the bug anymore, it makes me want to use UIU for last order instead of AutoIndex, I just don't know if two indexing system works in 1 map?
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 |
Obscurity, the Art
|
![]() They won't. It's one or the other; if you have both your map won't even compile. I really don't know what to tell you about the whole bug, since it is because of the defend orders your units get when using AutoIndex. You could add an exception to LastOrder to ignore 'defend' orders, but that shouldn't be in the submitted library, rather in your copy of it.
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#41 |
User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
![]() |
![]() ok2x, let me just think a way to exclude 'defend' in last order, I even don't know what part of last order should I implement that.
__________________edit: wait, you already excluded an order id used by autoindex which is the 'undefend' order id (852056) in here: (id >= 852055 and id <= 852762) Last edited by Sinnergy : 08-18-2009 at 12:44 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 |
Obscurity, the Art
|
![]() The function is called OrderExclusions, but if it returns true then an order is not excluded. 'defend' is 852055 and 'undefend' is 852056. You would need to change that last segment to: (id >= 852057 and id <= 852762)
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 |
User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
![]() |
![]() ok. I thought the returned order id's are the ones that are not included, so that means I must not create abilities based on defend right?
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#44 |
Obscurity, the Art
|
![]() Well, it means that LastOrder will ignore any defend or undefend orders as if they do not exist. So if for some reason you do want IssueLastOrder() to issue your last defend order (Doubt you ever would), then it would pretend as though the original defend order were never issued in the first place.
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#45 |
User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
![]() |
![]() I can't think of any usage for defend ability, I even don't base my spells with the defend ability, so I'm 100% sure that I won't use defend ability (except for a requirement like AutoIndex)
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|