Navigation

    Fuze Arena Logo
    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Help
    • Discord

    getMapLocationNames() usage hard crash

    Bug Reporting (FUZE 4 Nintendo Switch)
    4
    4
    285
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • Z-Mann
      Z-Mann last edited by

      I was indenting to iterate over all map locations with pattern matching to spawn enemies/moving objects from them. However, that plan was shattered quickly:

      Demo Project:
      https://fuzearena.com/catalogs/view/2338

      All it does is load maps in a loop, iterate over the names returned by getMapLocationNames(), then call update() once. For me, it crashes FUZE hard when run twice. A code comment claims there is a workaround, sadly, that broke down after I added another map location :( So no direct workaround.

      I haven't tested it thoroughly, but it seems getMapAreaNames has the same problem.

      I'm solving my original problem now by using tiny collision areas to mark the spawn points, then scanning the map with a collision probe sprite to find them all. There's a finite number of collision area names to check, so that works.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
      • PickleCatStars
        PickleCatStars F last edited by

        Thanks for the info. GetMapLocationNames() is the way I have suggested/would have used it myself in the past. Good to know what to avoid.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • waldron
          waldron F last edited by

          Since the last update this broke it's been reported and hope for a fix,in the mean time I'v been using detectmap not the best alternative but works.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
          • Willpowered
            Willpowered Fuze Team last edited by

            Hi @Z-Mann, I can confirm that this is an existing issue in version 3.0.0 and has already been addressed on our end. You'll be able to run this program multiple times successfully in the next patch!

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
            • First post
              Last post