Messages are moved here (should anyone ever want to see them again) once they are no longer applicable to the current version (e.g. suggestions that have been implemented or bugs that have been fixed).
Moderator: George Gilbert
Forum rules
Please read the Forum rules and policies before posting. You may
to help finance the hosting costs of this forum.
Suule
On Master
Posts: 656 Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Post
by Suule » Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:28 am
I'm still waiting on those 'invisible ranged attacks' thing
beowuuf
Archmastiff
Posts: 20686 Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:00 pm
Location: Basingstoke, UK
Post
by beowuuf » Thu Apr 13, 2006 9:07 am
You can already do invisible ranged attacks, you want an instantaneous ranged attacks : )
Actually, really what you want is a projectile speed able to achieve the games' natural 1/6 second turn when it appears to be on about 1/3
Suule
On Master
Posts: 656 Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Post
by Suule » Thu Apr 13, 2006 9:48 pm
Hmrrr. Is it possible for the projectives to be invisible?
beowuuf
Archmastiff
Posts: 20686 Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:00 pm
Location: Basingstoke, UK
Post
by beowuuf » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:01 pm
Lol, yes, sophia and george and I maye have mentioned this already : ) Just assign a null graphic for it. This works for anythign actually - you could create invisible walls or monsters liek that. I have an invisible pillar in my dungeon right now. And when i say dungeon i mean 'small area filled with junk'
Suule
On Master
Posts: 656 Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Post
by Suule » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:34 pm
Oh, Last time I heard assigning null images to objects crashed RTC. I guess that is fixed.
beowuuf
Archmastiff
Posts: 20686 Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:00 pm
Location: Basingstoke, UK
Post
by beowuuf » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:54 pm
If so you could just assign a graphic of 1x1 pixel size for the projectile : )
Suule
On Master
Posts: 656 Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Post
by Suule » Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:20 pm
or just an image with 255 alpha channel
beowuuf
Archmastiff
Posts: 20686 Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:00 pm
Location: Basingstoke, UK
Post
by beowuuf » Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:30 pm
Lol, exactly
mikko
Craftsman
Posts: 102 Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Post
by mikko » Mon Apr 17, 2006 11:48 pm
How about 0? 255 would be fully opaque..
beowuuf
Archmastiff
Posts: 20686 Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:00 pm
Location: Basingstoke, UK
Post
by beowuuf » Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:24 am
255 is ignored by the engine so is fully transparent : )
mikko
Craftsman
Posts: 102 Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Post
by mikko » Tue Apr 18, 2006 9:15 pm
That's just weird.. Hmm.. Why is it like that since every (?) common image format has 0 as fully transparent and 255 fully opaque?
beowuuf
Archmastiff
Posts: 20686 Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:00 pm
Location: Basingstoke, UK
Post
by beowuuf » Tue Apr 18, 2006 10:13 pm
Oops, nm, I was meaning the colour and completely missed you'd shifted to palette position : (
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13773 Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:
Post
by Gambit37 » Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:49 pm
Jeez, Beowuuf, you're missing complete words out now!
255,0,255 as a RGB triplet is power pink -- this is rendered transparent in RTC.
In an image with an alpha mask, the scale of 0-255 within the channel is exactly as mikko states: 0 = fully transparent, 255 is fully opaque.
Suule
On Master
Posts: 656 Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Post
by Suule » Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:51 pm
Oh my bad. Was thinking in reverse. Damn Thermodynamics messing my point of view thingies.
beowuuf
Archmastiff
Posts: 20686 Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 2:00 pm
Location: Basingstoke, UK
Post
by beowuuf » Wed Apr 19, 2006 12:29 am
Words are overated, especially the spelling of them. Yeah, sorry, I started missing out the 0,255 as everyone started talking about 255 / 0. I just suck : )