Hey , I am having trouble recreating what you have done. I want to use my MannequinCharacter for movement/crafting/interaction etc. while out of combat instead of the BP_ThirdPersonCharacter. It seems easiest to leave the BP_ThirdPersonCharacter in place for the turn-based combat. I think the trouble I am having is pinpointing all the spots that reference the BP_ThirdPersonCharacter outside of the turn-based mode that need to be switched to my MannequinCharacter. Thanks again for your help.
Good news, everyone! I managed to get the update done a lot quicker than expected. I did an intense bug fixing session and got everything done in a day. Iâve sent it to Epic, so it should hopefully be up in a few days. This version does not add any new features, but fixes several bugs, including workarounds for engine issues with UE4.24. Se [my Trello]( for details.
@Zennisin I think I finally managed to figure out the touch issue as well. At the end of the TouchInput chain of events in the player controller, set Touch to true. Also, disconnect the EventTick of the player controller. Sorry for the terribly long delay on this. I can partially blame technical issues with my phone, but I should still have gotten this done earlier. Especially when it turned out to be so minor a thing.
Ok, I see. Any reason you canât just scale the meshes down? Are you planning to be able to zoom down extremely close to the tiles?
Hard to know what you are missing without seeing your code. Are you using a similar child actor setup? In my hybrid example the player unit has the third person character as a child actor. It uses this child actor as the visual skeletal mesh for both the turn based unit and the third person character. For looking through my code, the relevant blueprints are just the ones in the Hybrid folder. Primarily the unit, character and turn manager blueprints.
Probably not, but I like to keep things to real scale where possible. Itâs habit for me coming from Unity where too much scaling makes the physics weird. Donât know how well Unreal handles it.
Sorry. I knew my edit was confusing. I meant that I had everything connected up right(I think) It wasnât working like I said. Then I was fooling around with stuff before I took that screenshot where that event is disconnected and that is when I took the screenshot. That gave me a compile error. Reconnecting it just leaves me back where I was of the animations not working. I just added the disclaimer so you didnât look at it and say âahh here is the problem.â I meant âpretend like it is connected and tell me what else is wrong.â
Now in your reply you mention 4.23 being an issue and I think I was using 4.23 so maybe that is why it is not worked ng. Thank you
Hello ,
Through some recent testing since last time, this line of code for some reason (First picture) doesnât make sure that it makes the unit stop after attacking the same target twice if the hit was super effective. I was thinking of putting a bool into this section of the blueprint (Second picture) to make it so that if it gained a set number of AP to much it could stop the unit. Would that be possible, asking for a second opinion here and maybe another mind to figure this out.
Thank you so much, EagleEyeGamma.
Fair enough. I donât know whether that is true of Unreal Engine as well. While youâre still early in the project it is probably a good idea to look into this stuff and choose whatever is likely to cause the least headache down the road.
Oh, terribly sorry. I completely misread your last comment. Your language was clear, so my bad. I believe the problem youâre having is also not something youâve done. I think one of my later updates might have changed stuff so that the approach used in my tutorial video does not work anymore. I will look into it, but it might take me a bit of time. My apologies for the confusion.
Yeah, that should probably work. However, Iâm afraid Iâm not able to keep straight in my head exactly what you want to achieve, which makes helping you more difficult. Could you describe what you want in more detail? You want a game where you get extra attacks if you make a super effective attack, which is repeatable if you keep attacking new units? So every time you attack you gain a new attack until A) you land an attack that is not super effective or B) you attack the same target twice. Is that a correct description of what you want? How does movement factor into this?
Yes I want to make sure its only repeatable if you attack new units that are super effective, and should you attack the same unit twice it ends your turn. The movement factors into re-positioning onto panels Iâve made that change the element type of a character. However it should stop if its not effective or does normal damage to a target that isnât super effective.
Since your abilities seem to work a bit differently to the default abilities I would recommend replacing some of the unneeded stuff instead of working around it. No need to reduce the AP of the unit and then increase it again if the attack is super effective. That makes things a bit messy. Rather, remove the default functions where you pay an AP cost. Rather, reduce AP only in the situations where you want to; namely when you make a normal attack or attack a unit that has already been attacked. That should be cleaner and should make it easier to work with.
Okay also I got this as an error when i try to build any idea why this is happening?
PackagingResults: Error: Expected an include at the top of the header: â#include âDamageModifiers.generated.hââ
Thatâs weird. You shouldnât get any issues with a header file if youâre working in blueprints. DamageModifiers is your custom variable, right? Are you using C++ for anything or are you attempting to nativize or somethine like that?
Heya , I have been working on switching out the ThirdPersonCharacter with my own MannequinCharacter in the Hybrid folder. I have tried it several different ways and canât get it to work. Any chance you could help me out with the steps necessary? It could be helpful to others in the future. I really appreciate your time and expertise.
Thanks,
Hey McNuggets. Iâd be happy , but I need some more info. What have you tried and have you gotten any of it working or nothing at all?
hi
I havenât been here for a few months, and I hope all is well with you.
I fire up the new build And I noticed that the hybird example is missing from the experimental folder, did you move it to another place? or did you have some issues and just delete it?
thanks in advance
glade to be back
leo
I downloaded the newest version from the launcher now and it has the hybrid example. It is in Maps/Experimental/Hybrid. Try redownloading the toolkit. You should have it.
Hi Mono,
Not sure if I am in the correct Thread.
What a beautiful written engine, well done.
Just a quick question: I am trying to find somewhere in these threads, I am sorry if it has already been discussed, being able to stack units on top of each other.
would I need to add a array for the add and also use mouse right to be able to select the tile or am I still able to use mouse left.
Thanks for the kind words, Matt! For your question it depends on what you mean. The toolkit allows for multi-level grids, so you can have multiple units on overlapping tiles. For multiple units in the same tile it can be more or less tricky depending on what you want. If you want something like Civ, where each unit has multiple skeletal meshes but still constitute one unit as far as game logic is concerned, that is not terribly difficult. If you want multiple separate units on the same tile that can be selected separately and split you will need to do some significant tinkering. You would want to replace the GridUnits TMap with a new map that contains nested arrays or sets of units and would need to rewrite major parts of all abilities, AI and tile selection nodes to recognize this appropriately. Which of these is it?
hi
i saw on trello that you made some fix for the nativization, is that mean that we can nativize the grid manager blueprint?
Good Morning , thank you for replying to my question. without drawing a detail which I can if it makes to easier to understand, unit 1 for example moves to tile index 1, end turn, unit 2 moves to tile index 1 which creates a overlap event and opens a widget for the player to add both units if need be or leave them as single units only showing one unit, if they are both added it would create a static mesh of showing a platoon style for example but as only one unit, there value would be added together, eventually I am aiming to add cinematic battle sequences for battles, but for the interim and ease battles will take place using you implemented system.
Hopefully this makes sense, I guess civilization, well the old one I use to play, you use to be able to stack units on top of each other and they use to fight as a single unit from the same tile per turn from memory, I am more chasing 2 units at the same time from the same tile to fight as a whole but without the use of single units from the one tile, but damage and hits will be taken from each unit.
Hey leo! If all goes well then yes. On my internal build inclusive nativization of the toolkit seems to mostly work. A remaining hurdle is that native blueprints do not seem to allow custom trace channels defined in the config files, which makes some of the toolkit features less flexible. Hope I can find some workaround for this. The performance improvement is quite good, though.
Good evening, Matt. From what youâre describing I think you can avoid having to change the structure of the GridUnits TMap. In the case where youâre just seeing one unit (but the other unit is still there, hidden), perhaps you can add the hidden unit to an array in the visible unit and store it in this way. For the platoon you could do something similar. Perhaps have a platoon type unit, which also holds an array of unit references. When adding or removing a unit from the platoon you could call a function to add or remove that unitâs stats from the platoonâs stats.
hi
this is great news!! this and the Convert expensive functions to cpp that you are working on will make a Significant addition to this allready awesome toolkit.I am impressed 
cheers
leo