ZEELLO'S PROFILE

Aladdin
Defeat the vermin of the underworld with the help of a fire djinn.

Search

Filter

[RMVX ACE] How to make event run every turn of battle?

Sorry. This seems really simple, but I just can't get it to work. A glitch maybe. I'm at a loss.

The event will run on the first turn, but not on subsequent turns.

https://forums.rpgmakerweb.com/index.php?threads/battle-event-turn-0-1-x.26428/
"turn 0 + 1*X should be once every turn"
I have the same problem as the the person in that thread. The event will run on the first turn, but not on subsequent turns. It's not triggering at all.

My idea was to manipulate party AGI to change who goes first every turn. Setting it up was really confusing. :p But because of how confusing it is, at first I thought I must have set it up incorrectly or something. But even if I add text boxes to the event, they don't show up after the first turn, which means the event is not being triggered in the first place. It's not that my event isn't working as intended, but that it won't even start.

One of the users in that thread suggests that scripts are somehow causing it. Please tell me that isn't the case!
edit:

Somewhere along the line I began to try and be specific when naming the scripts, so I always remember what they're for. So hopefully that image is at least somewhat informative.

edit:
On second thought maybe I don't need to know how to solve this.
I try to avoid asking the forum for help unless absolutely necessary. Because otherwise I'd be doing it constantly and would probably end up spamming the forum. If I don't know something I'd rather just find another way. Plus it's more rewarding to do things yourself.
So why did I make this thread? Because I sort of assumed my game absolutely needs to have this mechanic. So I hit the panic button. (aka "create new thread") But maybe I can just have enemies go first and give the player skills/items that temporarily increase their AGI. This might actually suit the game better than an event that switches who goes first.
But if I do that then I have no idea what I'll do about a turn system in future games. But I guess for now I shouldn't be worrying about that and just focus on finishing this one.
I guess I should still want to know how to fix this, though, just so I'm armed with that knowledge. Not like I can delete this thread. (nor would I really want to)

[Poll] Dragnfly = a total hypocrite. Long names vs short names

I say you're lucky to have thought of a name you're happy with (especially if you already thought about how it looks when displayed on the title screen) so I say just stick with it. Also it's not the creator's job to think of how the title will fit in databases. Though maybe it's worth considering what people will call the game if it were to become popular. (Would people start calling it "My Heart" for short? Would they use an acronym? etc.)

edit: relevant
http://magiccards.info/uh/en/107.html

"Fan games can still ruin your life. Please stop believing otherwise."

I was wondering something along those lines. If something is popular enough then a company having absolute control over it may prevent that property from being continually refined and tailored. (Think free marketplace of ideas, but limited to a single property). I used to defer to the notion of a company knowing what's best for their property ("their" being used loosely in some cases- many companies had no part in the creation of a property they own) but I think I was more afraid of fans having ideas that I don't agree with. It's part of evolution, the best ideas are the ones that catch on. One company shouldn't have a monopoly on guiding a property's vision, because then it's just a vision, not necessarily the objectively definitive one as guided by collective human taste. This is still just kind of a theory though and I still think people who create a property deserve to have control over it, although once they sign off on that property to the company they work for and then later leave the company then it becomes kind of moot.

jRPG Essentials

"You're beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube. You even think like the tube. This is mass madness. You maniacs. In God's name, you people are the real thing. We are the illusion."

- Howard Beale (Network)

jRPG Essentials

You make a good argument. Alright, you've persuaded me. Playing games is stupid and we should all just watch Lets Plays in order to be more factual.

But uhh... who will make the Lets Plays?

"Fan games can still ruin your life. Please stop believing otherwise."

author=zeello
That sounds like a pretty basic thing to patent.


ugh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrWqz1IcetE

jRPG Essentials

author=NeverSilent
Telling people they can't watch Let's Plays or read additional material on a game is a rather simplistic and one-sided approach. That's like telling people they're having fun the wrong way.
I think perhaps where I differ from others is after a certain point I've placed the expectation on the game to be fun. Trying to sidestep the game means that either the game is not fun or you do not find games fun.

It's a simple fact that different people have different tastes and different skills. So watching someone else play a certain game you want to see in action but wouldn't enjoy tackling yourself is an absolutely legitimate way of experiencing it, too.
Personally if a dev excluded you out of their game, I say do not consume their game, because why would you wish to encourage that.
We have different subcultures as a consequence of differing tastes and standards, and the like. I say let people stick to their own camps. Outsiders who digest a game without playing it is a form of deception in a way, like wearing a disguise.

Plus, the added "cultural context" can also be a good thing for some games, as it can be a lot of fun to see games through other people's eyes.
For critical purposes, people who've played the same game should discuss their experiences with each other, yes.

Not to mention that sometimes, Let's Players can share observations and insights on the workings of a game that you normally wouldn't have noticed yourself even when playing the game on your own.
If before playing a game you do something that alters your experience then the integrity of your playthrough has been compromised. You're just piggybacking on someone else's playthrough and made yourself meaningless. Actually you're worse than meaningless, because now you've become a meme carrier, one in a horde of potentially thousands of "youtuber x's playthrough" players that elevate one youtuber's experience with a game to be disproportionately more normative.
It's the same reason why if you do a survey, you're not supposed to tell the participant the results before hearing their answers.

If you really care about learning more about games as a medium, I think the most important part is to find a reasonable balance between personal, subjective experience and external, more or less factual knowledge.
Except... the game IS the external. That's kind of what makes media compelling, it empirically exists, but the subjective experience is unlocked by consuming it in a vacuum. This rule fails however when you defer to cultural concoctions representing the game in place of the actual game. At that point you've basically made up your mind before you even started, so you might as well not even bother.

Anything other than the game that you could possibly appeal to as external or objective is someone ELSE'S playthrough of said game. But if your playthrough is imaginary and arbitrary, then technically, so is his or hers... >_>

What CPU and RAM capacity do you have?

Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit

Intel Core i5 2400 CPU @ 3.10 GHz

4GB RAM

"Fan games can still ruin your life. Please stop believing otherwise."

author=turkeyDawg
I think there was another patent regarding button configuration that affected fighting games. Can't remember exactly what, I think it was something about configuration during loading screens or on the character select screen, or smth, I can't find it atm. Ultra David (fighting game commentator) used to like to bring it up during button checks.


That sounds like a pretty basic thing to patent. Anyone know more about this?

Game difficulty mechanics - brain storming

I'd first have to know whether AI units will intentionally try to kill the unconscious unit. But then again why would they bother? After all it's not like you would intentionally go after their unconscious units since if you win then they all die anyway.

Actually what about this version: The unconscious unit can't be attacked at all. So really the only way to die is to be hit by an attack so powerful that your HP goes from non-unconscious range to 0.

I thought of that after I was about to suggest a mechanic where units can play dead. This is a weird idea though because in any game where such a mechanic existed, there'd be no reason not to go after lying-down units with extreme prejudice, thereby defeating the point of playing dead. The only way for such a mechanic to remotely make sense is in a game without visible HP, because at least then there's no way to tell if a lying down unit is dead or not.