YesNoOk
avatar

NotHitBy vs ReversalDef (Read 2501 times)

Started by O Ilusionista, June 27, 2011, 07:11:27 pm
Email this topic
View printable version
Share this topic:
« previous next »
Page 1 of 11   Go Down

O Ilusionista

NotHitBy vs ReversalDef
#1  June 27, 2011, 07:11:27 pm
  • ******
  • A living Mugen dinossaur :)
  • 23 years of Mugen O_o
    • Brazil
    • www.brazilmugenteam.com
While I was coding my last char, I've found a weird bug:

Chars which are on a NotHitBy state STILL can be hit by ReversalDef, something just absurd (Come on, Elecbyte...).
A NotHitBy should mean, you know, NOT HIT BY, instead of ALMOST NOT HIT BY :)

This render some bugs, like Super Armor chars (using or not an helper for the armor) will be on p2 states besides their own states.

I've tried to make this:

Quote
[State 0, SelfState]
type = SelfState
triggerAll = RoundState =2
trigger1 = MoveType = H
value =0
ctrl = 1
ignorehitpause=1
persistent=1

[State -2, ChangeState]
type = ChangeState
triggerAll = RoundState =2
trigger1 = MoveType = H
value =0
ctrl = 1
ignorehitpause=1
persistent=1

But, no good.

There is any other solution?

Rajaa Retired

Re: NotHitBy vs ReversalDef
#2  June 27, 2011, 07:24:56 pm
  • avatar
  • ******
    • Thailand
It makes sense because reversaldefs are triggered when touched by attack clsn. There's nothing wrong with this logic and nothitby shouldn't stop characters from getting their moves reversed.

Try to use a changestate that utilizes the movereversed trigger and then send your character to a state that sends it back to state number of the move that was reversed. Of course you'll need to make global modifications to your states just like you would have to do for super armor.

I'm sure you can think of something.

O Ilusionista

Re: NotHitBy vs ReversalDef
#3  June 27, 2011, 07:36:04 pm
  • ******
  • A living Mugen dinossaur :)
  • 23 years of Mugen O_o
    • Brazil
    • www.brazilmugenteam.com
Quote
It makes sense because reversaldefs are triggered when touched by attack clsn. There's nothing wrong with this logic and nothitby shouldn't stop characters from getting their moves reversed.

I do not agree on this. Its makes more sense, to me, that NotHitBy should stop characters from getting their moves reversed, because we want the char, you know, Not Be Hit by the conditions we set.

Movereversed ? Gosh, I work with this for years and I never heard about this trigger :(

I'll try this when I get home. Seams that it will be easy and I could make something like trigger = MoveReversed && MoveType = A

Thank you, Rajaa.

Cyanide

Re: NotHitBy vs ReversalDef
#4  June 27, 2011, 10:54:28 pm
  • ******
  • Legendary XIII
  • I am the eye of the storm to come!
    • New Zealand
    • network.mugenguild.com/cyanide/
But, a reversaldef isn't the same as a hitdef. They don't hit you. They do something as a result of you hitting them that allows for a custom state. This makes perfect sense and although a bypass would be useful it's not actually a fault with nothitby.


In M.U.G.E.N there is no magic button

They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance.

O Ilusionista

Re: NotHitBy vs ReversalDef
#5  June 27, 2011, 11:01:27 pm
  • ******
  • A living Mugen dinossaur :)
  • 23 years of Mugen O_o
    • Brazil
    • www.brazilmugenteam.com
I know that isn't the same, but they, at the end, will have the same final result.

Think outside the box. I'm talking about another thing, about Semiotic.

I just think the logic behind this is wrong: when you choose NotHitBy, you mean that you want the char Not Be Hit by everything.
There is nothing on the docs which says that char on a NotHitBy still can be hit.

So, they need or to include this info or even make a flag like "allowReversal = true".

Anyway, I will test the code later.

Rajaa Retired

Re: NotHitBy vs ReversalDef
#6  June 28, 2011, 07:44:12 am
  • avatar
  • ******
    • Thailand
Nothitby means you can't be hit by attacks. That means your blue clsn are unaffected by red clsn boxes. Making it work for reversals is silly, even when one thinks outside of the box. Reversaldefs are not hitting. In fact, they don't even send your character to a hit state unless you use a p2stateno to send the character to a hit state.

Archimonde

Re: NotHitBy vs ReversalDef
#7  April 08, 2021, 08:12:45 am
  • avatar
  • **
    • Vietnam
O Ilusionista said, June 27, 2011, 07:11:27 pm
While I was coding my last char, I've found a weird bug:

Chars which are on a NotHitBy state STILL can be hit by ReversalDef, something just absurd (Come on, Elecbyte...).
A NotHitBy should mean, you know, NOT HIT BY, instead of ALMOST NOT HIT BY :)

This render some bugs, like Super Armor chars (using or not an helper for the armor) will be on p2 states besides their own states.

I've tried to make this:

Quote
[State 0, SelfState]
type = SelfState
triggerAll = RoundState =2
trigger1 = MoveType = H
value =0
ctrl = 1
ignorehitpause=1
persistent=1

[State -2, ChangeState]
type = ChangeState
triggerAll = RoundState =2
trigger1 = MoveType = H
value =0
ctrl = 1
ignorehitpause=1
persistent=1

But, no good.

There is any other solution?



Nothitby only use the 'attr' parameters to check. Since reversaldef using the same address with hitdef in character memory, so you can think is that reversaldef is the same with hitdef but different in the attr. Without attr parameters, that reversaldef is still reversaldef and its only contact with the clsn1 box while nothitby is using clsn 2 box.
------Tremble Mortal and Despair. Doom has come to this world------
Page 1 of 11   Go Up
« previous next »