Issue Information
-
#005237
-
2 - Fair
-
Fixed
Issue Confirmations
-
Yes (5)No (0)
1
Originally posted by Ghost
Tested on pRO Valkyrie server.
Land Protector's border should be ineffective againts AoE spells.
Scenario:
A player is on the edge of the 11x11 Land Protector cell. Storm Gust is casted on the edge, player must be hit.
Tested on pRO Valkyrie server.
Land Protector's border should be ineffective againts AoE spells.
Scenario:
A player is on the edge of the 11x11 Land Protector cell. Storm Gust is casted on the edge, player must be hit.
LP removes the units completely so it won't deal damage even if you remove LP. You can see that clearly with skills that have single units visible like Sanctuary and Crimson Fire Formation. You can see that it's "cut off".
And since "NE" SG knockback is official no reason to implement complicated algorithm for it.
And since "NE" SG knockback is official no reason to implement complicated algorithm for it.
Read through the commit.
Shouldn't the check be in skill_unitsetting and not initilize the unit on LP cell at all? Thats how I personally did it when meddling around. If its done in skill_unit_onplace / sub_onplace like that its only checking if the unit is on LP and making it not deal damage but the unit was still initialized on LP, its only triggered when something is in units splash range. Would also be better performance wise if those units dont get initialized at all, like you said?
Yeh, didn't see you posted that the NE is official. Was based on that illustration of yours. Ill prolly try to do something for myself though, I prefer that way.
Shouldn't the check be in skill_unitsetting and not initilize the unit on LP cell at all? Thats how I personally did it when meddling around. If its done in skill_unit_onplace / sub_onplace like that its only checking if the unit is on LP and making it not deal damage but the unit was still initialized on LP, its only triggered when something is in units splash range. Would also be better performance wise if those units dont get initialized at all, like you said?
Yeh, didn't see you posted that the NE is official. Was based on that illustration of yours. Ill prolly try to do something for myself though, I prefer that way.
It is done in skill_unitsetting, it goes via the skill_cell_overlap check (as it should be).
The damage checks could be completely removed, but I just wanted to be on the safe side in case something doesn't get removed properly or fast enough.
map_foreachincell(skill_cell_overlap,src->m,ux,uy,BL_SKILL,skill_id, &alive, src);There are a lot of unnecessary checks now, but I decided to keep them in as they improve the performance a little.
The damage checks could be completely removed, but I just wanted to be on the safe side in case something doesn't get removed properly or fast enough.
Edited by Playtester, 15 November 2014 - 10:15 PM.
ah, those extra checks got me confused and I missed that. but yeah I agree its a good idea to keep them just to be secure.
