@DerVVulfman
About the "problem 1" of Blazblue Fan, i don't know how the animated battlers handles the action animations.
On ACBS 2.0 i had some methods to time battle animation and pose animation. first i had two VX methods:
update_basic and wait(n).
the update basic updated only the graphics and spriteset., and the wait looped the update basic for X frames.
so all i needed to do is get the animation lenght ($data_animations[@animation_id].frame_max * 2)and use the wait, and only after the wait, i rested the pose animation.
Also you should check the Combination Add-On of ACBS. I created methods so i could set "who do what".
I basically made the actors in combination use different skills.
so, in combination skill 100, actor 1 use skill 101, and actor 2 uses skill 102.
I'll look into that when I get some time. As long as what needs to be done does not require actual rewrites to any default code and allows me to attach/alias existing methods, it would suit me just fine. Everything I do with Animated Battlers is geared towards compatibility with virtually existing systems.
@DerVVulfman
In the case of an "combination add-on", you can make it run on an "alternative" update_phase4.
That way the original methods would stay unchanged.
Hey VVulfman, I was wondering if you came across this issue. I used the characterset battlers pre-configured script into the game w/ RTAB set to fully active, and when Im in a battle everything is fine until the battle ends. For some reason, the actor who gets the last kill isnt given enough time to retreat back to the starting place to do the "pose" victory (in this case, just turning down). What happens is that the last actor just gets frozen in the middle of the animation retreating back to the base position and the end battle windows comes up and ends the battle. Do you know why it may be doing that?
It is a result of increasing or decreasing the amount of time after the battle. It is configurable with the RTAB system as you will see from the translated instructions here:
Code:
# @after_wait : The delay (in frames) after the battle is finished before
# moving to the 'game over' screen or showing the 'battle
# result' window.
# [a, b] a) delay for party loss, b) delay for enemy loss.
Right now, it is set up like this:
Code:
@after_wait = [80, 0] # Delay for party/troop after battle loss
Here, you change the delay for victory and/or defeat.
I have another question, hopefully pertaning more to this script than my other. Is there a way to set separate actor positions on the battlefield according to how many actors you have? Would this be more with the formation script?
Example: You have one character, so instead of having him in a default spot on the battle field; id rather have him centered and as more actors join, accomodate the centering for the extra characters.
Im not sure if Im making sense but hopefully you understand kind of what Im asking about.
EDIT: Well it looks like with configuring the formation script, creating separate formations for x amount of battlers actually will do the trick. =/ yay for actually looking.
Hi. A guy asked me for a way to make a character that is using a skill disappear during the execution of the skill. In this way he can use an animation with the character in it and make as complex animations as he pleases.
The problem is, while a blank skill casting pose is good to make the character disappear while the user animation is playing, it looks like nothing can be done to make the character disappear when the user animation has finished and the target animation is playing. At least I don't know Anim Battlers that well to figure out how to make the character hold the casting position until the whole skill has been executed...
Is there a way to do that? Maybe with some little edit? Even a few pointers would be useful, thanks.
EDIT: I am taking a look at version 13.2. Reading the guide actually. There's one thing that I have always found a little bit confusing in the configuration and it's the names MNK_POSE1, MNK_POSE2, etc. I never remember if 7 is attack, skill, item or whatever, so, especially when looking at the code, maybe in order to make some changes, or to figure out how some specific parts work, I would find very much more "explicative" names like MNK_POSE_READY, MNK_POSE_STRUCK and so on. I think a user may be initially puzzled also by the fact that the MNK_APOSE and MNK_EPOSE sections do not have comments, even if the MNK_POSE section, with the comments, is just above. Names like MNK_APOSE_READY and MNK_EPOSE_READY would help here as well. Sorry if this sounds pedant, but the system is so well refined that little things like these get noticed. :)