After all that time and work what was the real downfall of the 1.3 patch? Why have most folks elected to stay with 1.2? It can't be just the flying issue that seemed at the root of all the animosity.
here are my thoughts:
the whole flying issue gave the patch a bad rep. so other players heard all the talk about how it was bad and how more people were playuing 1.2 anyway. so they didnt get it.
now most people are on 1.2. so, when newer people get in to mplayer, they see 1.2 is the mainstream patch, so they get it.
In a small community like this the players 'on the field' are those that have been playing for a long time. Well, 'long time' as games go...
They've developed their entire skill set in 1.2, and 1.3 brings just enough changes to balance and tactics that it upsets their play style. Toss in some controversy, some board bashing, and take away one of their main enjoyments and they find very little reason to move to 1.3...
-Av-
Quote from: AvatarIn a small community like this the players 'on the field' are those that have been playing for a long time. Well, 'long time' as games go...
They've developed their entire skill set in 1.2, and 1.3 brings just enough changes to balance and tactics that it upsets their play style. Toss in some controversy, some board bashing, and take away one of their main enjoyments and they find very little reason to move to 1.3...
-Av-
Very vell put, Av
Avatar you make it sound sooo bad, but your forgetting preaty much few other main problems....
we couldnt play 1.3, it was never finished and still isnt, when we did tried to play it was unplayable, the horriable warp and the targted stuff that jerk around, also - that game style seemed slower, and people do like their speed very much, I'm sure that quite alot of player would've played 1.3 if they could (yes, im not one of them i did try helping in some bug hunting at one point though)
so, if your having fun in something, and preaty much suffer in the other
and you got a choice, which one will you pick?
and come on, its in humans nature to
1. stick with whats famailer and known
2. when its not importent to think of the short-run and not the longrun and the "easy way"
besides that, your getting trashed at, spitted, bashed, unheard etc' - with that atitude you'll even find it harder to appericate a patch, or one's work(even before checking)
I believe it was purely due to the devs attitude to the established and regular players. The whole concept of 'I know, I just don't care' is an almost gauranteed way to design a failed patch.
Blizzard entertainment, arguably the masters of balance and patch releases, listen more to the advanced players than they do to the new ones. Their primary concern is making the game balanced at high levels. That way, if there is a strategy that a new or intermediatte player cannot beat, he always has an answer - get better. If the game is balanced for vets then every player has a way of working around a strategy, even if it is just 'improve your skills'. Balancing for the beginners makes the vet game flawed.
Furthermore, deciding that the devs should have more of a say than the players is a clear sign of bad after-sale support. If I produce something I generally try to tailor for their neds, since they're the ones that are paying me. It's understandable that if they had already payed me years ago then I don't need to listen to their views, but it will ascertain players not using my new code if they have the option.
In short, 1.3 adds some incredible new features, but it also slows the game down too much. I'll say hands-down that the reason the vets don't like 1.3 has nothing to do with their fixed playstyles. In fact I'll gaurantee that any vet will defeat the 1.3-lovers on their own turf (in a 1.3 game). The reason the vets don't like it is nothing to do with established tactics, it is because it is slow, and a lot of the fun is removed with the sluggish ship handling. Shame really.
I'm still hoping that when/if 1.3 is finally released it will fix many of these issues. Normally if I didn't like a beta patch I'd remind myself that 'it's only in beta' and reserve judgement, but due to the 'I know I just don't care' attitude in 1.3 I don't expect the final release to resolve the issues people have with it.
Um...
As usual language fails me...
The 'just enough changes' part was meant to cover the broad range of changes 1.3 brings, including game pace and overall balance. I was trying to paint a broad picture of a patch that changed many things rather than just the bugs. 1.3 is a very different game than 1.2 to long time players and those differences make 1.2 more attractive to many of them.
I guess I need to be more lawyer-like...
"The 1.3 patch brought changes including but not limited to overall game pace, unit speeds, weapons strengths, ammo usage, shot duration, ship maneuvering, building strengths, building usage, multiplayer options, exploits availability, moddability, etc..."
Now, bringing up Blizzard as an example is a good choice, as they've been very devoted and attentive to their audience. The fact that they're HUGE and commercially motivated to supporting their still active games while 1.3 is entirely the work of two volunteers working on what is certainly a commercially DEAD game should be mentioned... I know that doesn't carry any weight with a lot of people but to me it's a major point.
Then there's the idea of balancing a game for the vets. This is fine for a legacy game that's been out for a while. One that isn't expected to generate huge numbers of new players that will become extremely discouraged when they can't last two seconds against a vet. To me that's what happened with Tribes. It got to the point where a newbie going in alone wasn't able to even get a shot in before being toasted by someone who'd mastered the game. Of course, Tribes was about Teams, and Teams should take care to nurture and train their own players, but still... a game shouldn't be patched to the point where there's an overwhelming advantage to having been playing the game for years.
(Lawyer-talk here:) by 'overwhelming' I mean just that. Total dominance. Newbs don't have even a glimmer of a chance to progress. They're shut down before they can learn even the basics. That sort of thing.
-Av-
Inbteresting points avatar, and well thought out.
One of your points, however, about balancing the game towards high-end players, doesn't seem to make much sense. As you stated battlezone2 is a 'dead game' sales-wise. Hardly anyone is buying it nowadays, it's very old, and thus the influx of new players is tiny, which if anything should be *more* of a reason to balance the game for the experienced crowd.
Furthermore, I disagree with the idea that new players should be given a big chance against vets. When I want my friends to have a chance of beating me at a computer game, I play more luck-based games like wario inc. or dead or alive on the consoles. When I want to compete seriously at a game in a competitive environment, I'm more inclined to play street fighter alpha 3, tekken 4, or other more skill-based games.
PC games, as a whole, especially those played competatively online, tend to be less luck-based and more skill-based, in order to reward good players and allow players to match their skills against one another, rather than just have a bit of a laugh with friends.
I do recognise the need for new players to have a chance in a game, but I don't think making reducing the skill=success formula is the way to go about it. I'd much sooner see games for new players, or training for new players, which does go on in the BZ2 community.
Finally, as you mentioned BZ2 is a team game, and the nature of the game means that even if a player is completely new, in at the deep end in a vet 1.2 game with hovering allowed, the new player will still have a chance of winning due to team balancing, and will still find ares of the game where she destroys enemy scavengers, extractors, turrets, or even a few vet players who are retreating low on health. I think it already caters for the new players just fine, and there is no need to adjust the game to balance it at the low-end. Most games you'll join online are pretty high in general skill level, which steels my resolve in stating BZ2 should be balanced at this level. New or uncompetative players can have their fun regardless of game balance, the issue is only there if a new player joins a vet game, and then, no matter what you do to BZ2, the vets will stomp on the new players like it's going out of fashion.
Still, I completely agree with you on one thing - the fact that the devs are working on after-sales support after all this time is commendable. It's just a shame they have to 'spit' on their players, or flat-out tell them that they don't care what they think, because it's produced a lot of members of the community who dislike the devs despite what they're doing for the game.
How is 1.3 slower?
I tried BZ2 the other day and I was surprised that even on 7MB DSL it still warped like the original version.
I didn't say such balancing would be wrong for BZ2, I only outlined when such balancing is appropriate. BZ2 is a good example of a 'legacy game that's been out for awhile and is not expected to draw in tons of new players." If that's not BZ2 I don't know what is...
I also tried hard to define 'overwhelming'. There may be a fine line between 'skill' and 'experience'. I may not be overly skillful, but if I've been around long enough to learn every last exploit/trick/weapon stat I'm going to dominate someone just walking into the game. I agree that skill should win out, but not such that a newbie might as well not even try...
All I'm saying there is imagine a newbie Stratting against a vet in 1.2 BZ2 right now. How long would he last? 2 minutes? There's got to be a decent play experience even in losing, so that the loser learns something. Many games patch themselves to where this doesn't happen.
If 1.3 took the game down a notch and provides the newbie with a chance to actually watch how a vet takes him down it's not a bad thing and the vets should realize this. If it failed in this and all it does is slow down the vet game then the Devs should realize this. Best of all would be to enable the options necessary to set gameplay at various levels, so that all are happy. This last is what I always fight for, the options necessary to tailor gameplay to the player's personal taste.
In this 1.3 succeeds, giving MP play more options than anyone could ask for. There's no reason there can't be Recys\units available for MP play to make everyone from the newest newb to the grittiest vet happy.
-Av-
Trinity, if you are refering to v1.3, the warping is indeed not significantly better than it was in v1.2 , but it has nothing to do with your connection speed (obviously, I guess). The warping that you are seeing is more related to how the game tries to integrate the so-called visual world with the game world. (And, I probably shouldn't try to explain it any better than that, because I'll probably get it wrong.) This may be something that can be improved upon, if the programmers ever can get back to it. I say this, because I've seen wide variations in how much things seemed to warp and do other odd things over the course of various v1.3 builds. Hopefully, this means that things might be tweakable to a degree that would be an improvement over v1.2. Maybe.
Avatar wrote
Quote
In this 1.3 succeeds, giving MP play more options than anyone could ask for. There's no reason there can't be Recys\units available for MP play to make everyone from the newest newb to the grittiest vet happy.
Very True Avatar couldn't agree more with option of Recy lists surely a recyler varaint to bring back the style of play vet's want could be created just needs someone to do the work.
I just can't play 1.2 FE it just crashes all the time I have to use 1.3 ( I think its all the errors in the FE weapons )
Cheers
QuoteAll I'm saying there is imagine a newbie Stratting against a vet in 1.2 BZ2 right now. How long would he last? 2 minutes? There's got to be a decent play experience even in losing, so that the loser learns something. Many games patch themselves to where this doesn't happen.
ok then, lets try and divide bz2...
1 - stratergy...
take for example any game you can think of, i know starcraft personaly, so ill take that as example, i started playing with my school friends, we all sucked exept 1... and he was a gosu (elite in bz2 terms)
so at first all of us , the newbs played alone... then we played with him once...
we did like a 4v2 or a 5v2... he slaughtered all of us like we're *nothing* for him... in like 5 mins...
sooo, on every startergy only game you'll get bashed horriably (if the game allows 'rushs')
2 - FPS / action
lets take CS for example... one of the older versions... i used to play CS - and one game i joined in and it was like hmmm 7 v 2... me and another one... all i remember is that he picked a sniper and all he did was jump and shoot them in the head, he barly missed and he slaughtered ALL of em preaty much alone...
so there combine those 2 and you get bz2...
QuoteVery True Avatar couldn't agree more with option of Recy lists surely a recyler varaint to bring back the style of play vet's want could be created just needs someone to do the work.
after the vet rec was made there were talking and attemps to kill flying for good, we made our own flying scouts and what did we get?
and again, its making no sense to work on it, it got some / more bugs that 1.2 has, warp is preaty bad and why work so hard to try and get our 1.2 style of we can just play 1.2?
what ur saying is that we should make our rec to be like a 1.2 one...
why not just play 1.2 then?
Quotewhat ur saying is that we should make our rec to be like a 1.2 one...
why not just play 1.2 then?
ehehe yes that was the only flaw in my argument
Cheers
...another big factor is that FE is not compatiable with 1.3 yet....and if the editor isnt improved then it could become very difficult to get the FE '1.3ised' properly....
also, 'slower ships' are not more fun, even for a newer player.
The only thing why i didn't give 1.3 more of a chance was the units jerking around... It was horrible... how are you supposed to play a game like that if you cant even hit ai units?
There are some settings in the GamePrefs.ini file that can be played around with, if someone wanted to take the time to see if they could tweak how the visual and multiworld currently are brought together.
// Maximum percentage of a craft's normal forward velocity it may be
// smoothed by in MP. This applies only to units that are piloted by a
// remote user; AI units don't count. This value should be between 0.1
// and 5.0, where 1.0 means that the craft is allowed to travel up to
// 100% of its forward velocity per frame. BZ2 1.0-1.2 used 0.25,
// though that was based on an arbitrary max velocity of 45, not the
// craft's physics parameters. Setting this number higher will be
// slightly more jumpy, while lower numbers will tend to induce warp if
// remote players maneuver really quickly.
MaxMWSmoothPercentage = 0.4
// Flag to use the newest timeskew code. If false, the code from 1.2
// will be used instead. This option may go away at some point.
UseNewTimeskew = false
I'm not sure how much can be done with these parameters in the current v1.3 public beta. Basically, I'm just repeating what I mentioned earlier; this is something that appears can be (or could be) adjusted in various ways. Up to now, it has never been very extensively tested, since most of the v1.3 work has been on finding bugs and rewriting code that seemed prone to instability (e.g., the old Aureal based sound code). Although I have no real knowledge of whether v1.3 multiplayer can be made to "look" the same or better than v1.2, I wouldn't take the current public beta as the best that could be done in this area, as not that much time was put into working with it.
This is an after thought that I had to what you were saying, Victorius. Were you using a low MWF setting like 1 or 2 when you noticed a lot of AI jumping about or mini-warping? I play a lot of MPI games with v1.3 and use a MWF of 5 typically. The AI units don't seem to jump around much with this setting. I'll have to try some lower MWF to see if this makes a difference. Paradoxically, it may be that while a lower MWF makes human players less warpy, it may cause problems with how the AI craft appear. As I said, this is an area that still needs a lot of testing and further work.
Argh.
The 1.3 patch was *Public Beta*. Beta, as in, "not final". Beta, as in, "for testing and debugging purposes". But, due to some (unwise and ill-advised) personal affronts visited upon the developer(s) of the patch due to a lack of understanding of the meaning of the word "Beta" and an increasingly heavy workload at work, work on the BZ2 1.3 public beta patch was not worked on, but was continued for a bit in private, which produced some interesting effects and introduced more enhancements and bug fixes.
Hopefully, after their workload at their income-producing jobs abates somewhat and they take a well-deserved break, they will find it in their hearts to revisit the beta patch.
What a colossal effort to go to such a waste.
As much as Nathan is an unmitigated ass I feel bad for what happened for him as well as the community. I think if the game could have worked better for me while playing MP I would have given it more of a chance. But it sure was hard to like a game that warpy and prone to "net' issues. I would have thought that would have been a central focus of the 1.3 patch as opposed to whether units should fly or not.
Oh well. Still a pretty game.
What if 1.3's lag handling code would be replaced with 1.2's ?
in all previous versions (1.0, 1.1...) there appears this crazy warp when somebody takes highest possible speed by putting nose down (with automatic leveling turned off and absolute pitch enabled) and pressing w+e. In 1.3 this causes apocalyptic insane warp...
(1.3 strat is really unplayable, no change to hit nothing really. as if the game was played with 2000 ms pings)
otherwise 1.3 is really good when not talked about laggin and clumsy physics.. Im sure that it would have hc players using it if these things were fixed..
Elite players had fought so many years against the horrible warping of 1.2 that how in the **** could have they accept more among with a new patch......
But anywas 1.3 really has some positive features aswell that would really bring lotta new features to bz2. Sad to c it so distracted atm...
EDIT: forgot to mention that i was talking about 1.3beta..
beta
adj 1: second in order of importance; "the candidate, considered a beta male, was perceived to be unable to lead his party to victory" 2: preliminary or testing stage of a software or hardware product; "a beta version"; "beta software" n 1: the 2nd letter of the Greek alphabet 2: beets
1.3 is really annoying to play strat in, there are a lot of balance changes, and while the physics does matter, the warp is a real pain in the ass, i couldnt kill someone running in a straight line, they jumped 7m to a side every second or so. I did kill them, but it took 5 times (in my gameworld, before sync). The new g66 is good tho, and with the 1.3 better mpi stuff, its a bit harder. not much work has been done for awhile, cause the devs are working on starwars battlefront, but once that is dont 1.3 might get some work done, and i have heard that there have been improvments in many of these problems in the last few betas, but i wouldnt know. I still like 1.3, but nobody is there so i go to other versions.
Last time i've heard GSH & Ken Miller were busy working on the Star Wars Battlefront Game which is set to be released September 21st & they most likly don't have anytime to work on the 1.3 patch until sometime after Battlefront is Released.
Quotepersonal affronts visited upon the developer(s) of the patch due to a lack of understanding of the meaning of the word "Beta"
I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall/neanderthal, but I'll repeat just once more...
The reason players were distressed was not because everything that needed fixing wasn't already done in the beta, it was that the devs had demonstrated very clearly that they didn't care about people's opinions on these issues.
It's not about people not knowing what 'beta' means, it's about devs rudely stating 'I know, I just don't care' in reply to balance and/or detrimental physics changes.
In short, how were people supposed to say 'It's only beta, it'll be ok in the final release', when they'd already been informed that the devs knew what was wrong, but were not going to do anything about it because they didn't care?
I think the entire argument would be moot if the version we all got on the cd was 1.3 (which btw, is what the remaining devs are trying to give us). The fact of the matter is, that had it not been for Activision accountants, things may have very well been much different than they are now (code and community wise). Now everybody, please stop this senseless discussion as it appears to me that the thread starter brought this up to provide just this sort of entertainment for themself.
Simply not true on all accounts BZZERKER (execpt for maybe the Activision accountants point).
You could fly in the BZ2 demo for crying out loud. It was left in. It wasn't until some jerks made pests of themselves by overusing it, and subsequently a bunch of babies crying about it that it got any attention at all. There are an infinite number of better methods of correcting the problem than what was implemented, but as DF has pointed out, the programmers developing the patch simply didn't want to listen to reason.
Ruining the craft dynamics was definitly not a good fix.
I know what you mean... once again, that response was meant for the hovering whiners and was not intended for those who had valid concerns about balance and physics, but people chose to expand its scope and used it as ammunition for their own weak arguments. In my experience, relying on injury to fragile and overinflated egos instead of valid and logical points to buttress a case will not win many cases. Try pulling that off with your boss at work and see where it gets you. Yep, nowhere...fast.
Mower, you may very well be right but we'll never really know for sure. If Pandi had more time, someone may very well might have said something about it during "polishing". It's all the accountants fault :x
And yes, that was primarily aimed the bruised ego club.
Quote from: BZZERKER... it appears to me that the thread starter brought this up to provide just this sort of entertainment for themself.
Actually no. I knew there was a lot of anger over 1.3 and I saw a bit of Nathan's tirades but I just couldn't imagine all this angst over flying vehicles. I guess I would need to play 1.2 and 1.3 to compare but I just can't get past the god damn warping. I was surprised to find that the thing that bugged me the most about BZ2 (other than the crippled DM) was the warping lag was even worse after all that work. I would have thought it was a priority to fix. I was wrong.
If only BZ2 got the time and money that Halo got...
And Halo is a good....but relativly rubbish game incomparision to BZII (except graphics wise...the graphics in halo are top notch, let alone halo 2).
QuoteI know what you mean... once again, that response was meant for the hovering whiners and was not intended for those who had valid concerns about balance and physics,
Then say so in your orginal post. Also acknowladge what dark fox is saying. I dont mean 'agree or disagree'. I mean register and think about what he and others like him say.
Also...has anyone seen GSH say sorry for all the spiting? Is there any word from Lizard?
Quote from: MowerManIf only BZ2 got the time and money that Halo got...
add to that a slightly decent advertising campaign by acit...
i dont think ghs really needs to applogise, seeing of reactions to 1.3. Yes, he was wrong, but it did have some reason (note how i say he was wrong and some reason).
I guess fleshstorm will never be...
The MP lag (including the targeting reticle warpage) is being worked on, but test activity reporting on it has gone down to nil in the past few months, due to the devs focusing on something else (i.e. SW:BF). Plus this problem in the netcode has been elusive to pinpoint, releasing other bugs in the process. Typical beta process. :)
Is this the same MP lag we saw in the original? Or was it induced by changes incorporated into 1.3?
Quote from: †Trinity †Is this the same MP lag we saw in the original? Or was it induced by changes incorporated into 1.3?
A little of both I imagine. By trying to fix 1.2's netcode stuff here and there, new types of problems/lag appeared, heh. You might be able to find some data in the 1.3pb log. That's what you get for fixing code from 4-5 different games built on top of each other. :D
1.3 Beta isn't really all that bad for me except with some aspects of the editor.
People keep saying it's more stable, but I haven't seen any improvement with stability than with FE BZ 1.2. Then again, I have noticed a few improvements that I love, such as the ability of creating a huge dome explosion that covers the entire map, and detonating it from far away without the effect going away. Also, saving the map multiple times is a big improvement. However, I was hoping to get into DLL scripting (Finally), but with 1.3 that's alot more difficult to do. I think that when 1.3 final is released, they should put the editor and the main executable back together. Who is going to care about a multiplayer exploit? I'm sure there are better ways to fix it.
If that's not going to happen, then they oughta fix the editor executable so I can easily incorporate FE, and other mods, into my creations.
Another thing I would like to see them do, and I really want them to take this into consideration, is to make it possible for two solid objects to merge, but both can stay solid.
If they do that, I'll be able to create some of the most wild maps imaginable.
In fact, solid objects should only affect the area they take up, not the 2D space. If that's possible, I can create an instant action single player mission where you must destroy an important enemy installation inside an ice cavern. You must set up a base, build a force, and navigate them across subterranean terrain, bridges across chasms, all the way to the enemy base and what they are defending.
Right now, it'd be impossible to set up the base because the ice, which is about a hundred meters higher than the buildings, is blocking the construction of all the buildings. The bridges can be placed with some trickery, but they won't be solid. The units will probably fall through them.
I would use, for the ceiling of the ice cave, the bane ice sheet objects. I could use the icebergs for icy stalagtites and stalagmites.
QuoteI'm sure there are better ways to fix it.
Sure there are. But they usually require ones brain to function in a way other than 'yes/no' or 'on/off'.
For example, if you were to make multiplayer editing tell any player that joined that the game had been edited, then everything would be fine.
Also, if the editor actually worked ingame as it is supposed it (e.g., going into instant action, console, game.cheat bzeditor,
hearing the a voice go 'enable edit : on ' since it is ment to be a game function , then droping the objects you wanted to test)...
then that would be the indication of a sublty made patch.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, have a fully functional version of BZ2 with the editor and without netcode(SP,IA.Editor) Then have another without the editor and with the netcode(SP,IA,MP).
I must of missed that idea, cause its a damned good one. I was thinking of something on those lines as well, but i had not worded it properly.
Nice one.
Nathan has stated that the Editor was simply waaaay down on the list but that it would be addressed later in the process...
that is, if there's still a process to address it. My hope is that things pick up again once winter sets in...
He needs something to do in those cold, 70 degree California winter nights... :p
-Av-
(who's way up north and surrounded by water)
Very true. I really hope that 1.3 doesnt break the abilty to mod, otherwise it would do more harm than good sadly.
Quote from: AvatarNathan has stated that the Editor was simply waaaay down on the list but that it would be addressed later in the process...
that is, if there's still a process to address it. My hope is that things pick up again once winter sets in...
He needs something to do in those cold, 70 degree California winter nights... :p
-Av-
(who's way up north and surrounded by water)
Cold? Hey where I live 70 degrees in a nice spring day. Hehe. Well back on to topic I mod BZ2 as most of you probably(hopefully) know. And after trying 1.3 I haven't been able to take my self back to 1.2. Yup thats right I haven't touched 1.2 since 1.3 came out.
I still dont see the problems with the editor. and let me tell you, I have built 5 missions in 1.3 up to now.
It didnt take longer then building missions for 1.2
What exactly do you need the editor to run dlls for? test it ingame! since you CAN program the dll, you can give yourself the best unit. or whatever you want 'on the fly'
1.3 even has enhanced AIP logging so you always KNOW immediatly what the ai is doing and do not have to leave the game to check the log file.
This constant bickering about the Editor just shows me one thing: it is like always: there is a right way to do things and there is shortcuts. Often shortcuts take longer.
The only problem I have with 1.3pb is the warp in MP and the tracked unit physics.
I am not refering to those things. I am refering to the increadbly useful action of being able to just start up an instant action (i like to use FE Lizards World), type console game.cheat bzeditor. Add some stuff and test in-game.
No hassle, no fuss.
It also becomes easy to in lets say a single mission, skip 50minutes of making a base and just editing it in so that you can get to the bit you want to test.
If that kind of functionality was there, then it would be great. I barely know what an AIP is. I care about it because other modders and future testers care. If you say that there is some stuff 1.3 does that is better with AIP than 1.2, then i take your word for it fishbone. But thats not what i use the editor for.
again, you can start up any map in the same time via bz2edit.exe
and you can have your dll preplace any base for you, when you are testing the mission. (since you are testing mission dll anyways!) or have the dll start right where you want anyways.
honestly, I dont miss anything in the current editor and tend to believe that you simply have not ever created a mission (I dont know that but indications tell me) and therefore do not really know what you are talking about. or are you? if so, can I download one of your missions?
Fishbone, now now. your giving the impression your not reading my posts thoughly.
I understand the editor doesnt stop you making missions. I am saying that the editor's fuction was not just to make missions. It was also to tests elements of the game.
E.g. lets say i want to in the space of 5 minutes test the exact details of how a Wasp Lancer (me) attacking an AI Gt, turret, something else etc, is like....
currently i go in an instant action, (fe lizard cause there are no enemy AI) stick the enemy units wher ei want them, give myself a lancer,...then TEST.
I could name a 101 different 'testing' scenarios where a 1.2 style useabilty of an editor is increadbly time /effort saving and efficent. Hell, today i went in and out of it about 20 times to test a set of weapons i have made against the AI.
well, thats exactly it. why cant you do your TEST in 1.3?
just load up any map, stick your units in there and test it. am I missing something?
I have never been able to do that in 1.3.
I go to console....game.cheat bzeditor doesnt work :S.
Also, what if i want to test some stuff with someone in a multiplayer game?
Me and PF had to play a *4 hour session* if there was not the abilty to edit in stuff...and we could only do once race vs 2nd race.
Last time I checked, I could drop OUT of the editor in bz2edit.exe to appear in my tank and be able to do what I wanted to, just like in 1.2, but without DLLs running.
And that was all of 20 seconds ago.
Jwk, use bz2edit.exe and not bzone.exe. the editor is a seperate program.
For multi testing, you should first try to balance things out 'on paper' and then you have to do full scale online testing. there is no way around it.
perhaps to avoid confusion a sticky thread detailing the exact way to use the 1.3 editor for mission building and the slightly seperate issue of tactical testing should be typed out. Would of saved a fair amount of problems dont you think?
Well, once you understand that you need to use bz2edit.exe to edit maps, everything is the same as in 1.2
so I am not sure why you would need a tutorial?
Well, personally, I just read the changelog and found everything very clear. Now, if one doesnt want to read, then why would he read a sticky thread?
However, since you know all the secrets now, why dont you start a new thread and I will make it sticky. how does that sound?
I dont really know all the secrets, and I did read the change log. I just seemed to of not understand that section. (took a hell of a lot of effort to read that document with my dyslexia and all).
elected to stay with 1.2? no way! 1.2 no longer resides on my disk. though the patch still has issues. the overall gameplay experienced has enhanced. effects are more defined. i hang around the maulers just to see them spit; the effects on that are not like 1.2 bz2.
It does have some improvments, but it also has some mistakes. I do hope other areas of the modding are not broken.
Quote from: Saborelected to stay with 1.2? no way! 1.2 no longer resides on my disk. though the patch still has issues. the overall gameplay experienced has enhanced. effects are more defined. i hang around the maulers just to see them spit; the effects on that are not like 1.2 bz2.
Ahh so I'm not the only one. I haven't tutched 1.2 since 1.3 beta came out. Sure hope we can have a beta2 sometime. (GSH?)
@the hemp guy...Uh....Well lets see. To the best of my knowledge ODF modding is not broken. I don't possiably see how 3d Modeling could be broken. Fishbone seems to have the Mission/map making down just fine. I can also attest to the fact the the 1.3bz2edit works just fine(actually better) to edit/make maps. So what else is there?
ask someone like space :P, not me obv. I just balence and test and play. I do some modding, but only a medlium level of sophistication.
All removal of the editor did for me was double the number of shortcuts in my Mod directory. I set up an Editor and an Engine shortcut for each race, pointing to the test map I use. Same BZN etc. only different EXE.
I don't do DLL's and if anything the Editor is MORE touchy than the engine so there's no issue with something working in the Editor but not in the Engine.
-Av-