-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 661
Fixed Escort Ability 1-Hex Move Logic #2793
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
@Matt-Foo-SL Heya! The leftover graphics issue is a known one and should already be fixed in master (see closed issues or PRs). Regarding the game mechanic, Scavenger can only pull units, meaning they need to be behind (it will grab them using its tail), unable to push units (there are other ones that do just that). |
Ah I see, okay. What about this point: If the target is behind scavenger and it has flew some distance forward, it is unable to escort backwards. (see screenshot below)? |
As Busta Rhymes sang: "There's no going back now!". Scavenger can only pull using the tail while flying. You have to think of unit animations and what's possible irl 🐻 If you want to move unit back, you'll have to fly over it first. Eventually there might be an undo move button, there's an open issue for that. This will rewind things animation wise at some point. |
Gotcha. Another thing is an update to the ability description is probably needed as well? Currently it says "Carries over a frontal or..." Maybe just remove the frontal part? |
That stuff means that the ability works inline. If Scavenger has a frontal unit, Scavenger will turn around and be able to carry it in that direction. Hence ability description is accurate and no need for an update. |
I see. I will make some adjustments to the code and make a PR |
This is a followup fix for branch #2684 by @emna9
However I have found more underlying issues namely
Also in this branch and in production, I have noticed 2 potential issues
Are both of this intentional? @DreadKnight