This part of a post by Ken begs a question:
Quote from: Ultraken on November 30, 2009, 12:43:45 AM
On the other hand, it's all just ODF files. If people are willing to come up with values that the community can agree on, I could include it in the package. Getting the community to agree is the hard part. :)
Now, I think anyone who's been around the various boards, both here and elsewhere, or been part of the 1.3 beta, or stood between Dx and Spock for any length of time, or or or...
sorry, getting a bit off target... hopefully you get the idea...
anyway, I think most will agree that the most controversy generated with the highest volume of BS thrown between attending monkeys has been...
(drum roll please)
when FIXING issues with the game bumped heads with CHANGING parts of the game.
C'mon, you have to admit that 99.999% of the controversy about the BZ2 1.3 patch has been the reaction of MP players
coughVETScough to patch changes that affected unit performance and weapons balance. Most of the complaints about BZE (Dx's BZ1) have been about similar changes to balance.
Every time things come to a head we see the same statement: "Why can't you just FIX what's wrong and NOT change anything else?".
So, the question is, and it's all up to Ken, should 'extra' changes be made or should he take his own advice when it comes to anything other than bug fixes:
Quote from: Ultraken on November 30, 2009, 12:43:45 AM
"Run away! Run awaaaaaayy!" :-D
-Av-
Oh you've started trouble now!
In my opinion, BZ1 may be able to learn a lot from BZ2. BZ2 is probably the best balanced game ever when it comes to two races having separate technology.
Quote from: TheJamsh on November 30, 2009, 05:18:01 PM
Oh you've started trouble now!
In my opinion, BZ1 may be able to learn a lot from BZ2. BZ2 is probably the best balanced game ever when it comes to two races having separate technology.
But that balance wasn't achieved by bug fixes alone. Creating balance requires change, there's no way around it. Folks are all for change as long as it doesn't affect their own gameplay. Some would be thrilled if splinters were nerfed, except those love to spam bases with splinters. There are bugs, exploitable bugs and balance. Each one will invoke different reactions from the gamer population.
At the end of the day, we all have to make choices to have progress. There is simply no way to please everyone.
Eddy
The last thing we want to do right now is bog Ken down in a debate over what needs "fixing" and what doesn't. That can come later... much later. There are a few non-controversial things we could include - Dx has fixed the offset Golem shooting problem, for example, and if he wants to contribute those files from BZE I'm sure this would be one welcome change.
Ken, I have a couple of "non-controversial" things I can contribute myself as regards terrain files. I have a fixed TRN and MAT file for the mysterious "inst01" mission, which is like an IA mission but starts with camera shots. In 1.4 this is a completely black terrain mission. Also I have a fixed TRN file for Titan which can go in the edit folder - the current TRN file is missing road textures and doesn't autopaint right. If you want to include these in a 1.5 patch I will gladly send them in.
I think it'll all depend on what Ken intends to do... that is, what Ken figures a 'bug' is. Obviously running under Windows 7 and on modern hardware needs code changes...
Code changes can create balance changes, though, especially if they're making something work for the first time ever. For a BZ1 example the flash cannon performance over the network is a bug, but if it's fixed will people use it more in MP? Will it imbalance MP if it finally works? Personally, in my MP playing days, I never got a GT using either the BC or FC to actually HIT anyone. This was in the day of dial-up, though, and P2-233's... where 'lag armor' was the ultimate weapon.
This makes me wonder if the netcode using UDP packets could be considered a bug, or if it's even an issue in these days of cable modems and Gigabyte CPUs?
Now, just fixing something simple that worked, but not totally correctly, can cause trouble. Fixing Service Trucks in BZ2 meant they actually worked rather than just facing away and waving their arm around, but it caused balance issues to the point where further enhancements were needed to allow them to be tweaked back to not so perfect...
The last thing I'd like to point out is that, like BZ2, BZ1 is technically dead. Without being able to buy it anywhere there's little chance of attracting new players (unless you embrace and then ignore the fact that it's widely pirated now). So, if this is going to be done and be worth anything it will have to be accepted by the VERY small community that's already divided.
The bottom line is maybe Stage 1 could be just making it run under modern hardware, and then see if the Community can find any issues.
Stage 2 could then be fix the glaring issues like making the Flash Cannon work over the network, and see what people do with that.
Stage 3 could then be enhancements... although I absolutely shudder to think of what a Code Elf ™ considers an enhancement when left on his own... :)
Anyway, as I said, it's all up to Ken as to just what he intends to do. I'd just like to see the lessons learned during the 1.3 patch AND what Dx's run into with BZE to do some good...
-Av-
To be kind, this a most dated debate.
Anyone that's played BZE ...knows... the release has the full BZ embedded. Every map...and specific ship ALONG with that map.
The argument against BZE "changing" the game is absolute nonsense.
uh. . .oh wait. . . Unless you argue that BZE added too much content and fixed too many issues.
Now, for lack of a better mindset, the spock sensibility says, "way too much has changed in the strat balance". Let's assume for a second there is some changes that fundamentally upsets some player's hardwiring to what he's learned.
Wasn't both BZ1 and BZ2 new once?
The argument to bash a version of BZ that basically fixes the majority of the crippling aspects of BZ, then criticize the game for some perceived . . .or real "re-balance", is the epitome being stuck in time.
99% of balance is ODF tweaks, which comes after Ken makes the engine happy.
What else is really cool is that there's a lot of good players with 10+ years of experience who know what works and what doesn't, plus know every bug.
It can't help but become better now. :-)
Quote from: Red Devil on November 30, 2009, 07:31:49 PM
It can't help but become better now. :-)
Famous last words. :D
Quote from: Blunt Force Trauma on November 30, 2009, 07:14:07 PM
The argument to bash a version of BZ that basically fixes the majority of the crippling aspects of BZ, then criticize the game for some perceived . . .or real "re-balance", is the epitome being stuck in time.
Having been through (and responsible for) much of the early firestorm around BZ2 1.3 changes, I'm much less inclined to make fundamental changes this time around. The argument about flying was probably the most acrimonious and longest-lived, though the AI changes that made Turret Tanks spectacularly effective definitely ranks up there. (There were plenty of others over the years.)
So that means spinning walkers, flipping turrets, flipping gun towers, scrap cheats, hacking, /kick not working, FC not working, anet cheat, etc.. etc... will be considered fundamental and remain?
Quote from: Dx on December 01, 2009, 01:22:49 PM
So that means spinning walkers, flipping turrets, flipping gun towers, scrap cheats, hacking, /kick not working, FC not working, anet cheat, etc.. etc... will be considered fundamental and remain?
I assume they would go the way of certain bugs in BZ2 1.3, and thus gain a cult following.
I wouldn't be surprised. :D
While the dividing line may be notoriously ill-defined, the listed issues are far enough over to the "bug" side that they'd be reasonable candidates.
Be warned, those are part of the exploits many want left alone. But then, that is what mods are for... :D
That doesn't mean I won't fix them. Flying Mortar Bikes and Scouts were very popular, but exploits nonetheless. :)
(Players kept finding ways around our changes, so Nathan kept adding more and more interesting remedies.)
Theoretically, what was done in BZ2 1.3 with new ODF lines to toggle certain glitches back on (like effects getting stuck on anchor rounds) would help certain 'mods' re-add things.
Really BZ2's asset system would be great for BZ1 in how it does asset checking and manages additional items, instead of using predefined in the engine object lists.
This is stuff for Ken to figure out though.
Quote from: Nielk1 on December 01, 2009, 01:47:02 PM
Really BZ2's asset system would be great for BZ1 in how it does asset checking and manages additional items, instead of using predefined in the engine object lists.
I hope you're not refering to the lock step resyncing stuff, i'll run away. :)
Quote from: Dx on December 01, 2009, 01:53:29 PM
I hope you're not refering to the lock step resyncing stuff, i'll run away. :)
No, just the asset checking and the file loading.
Lockstep is a different animal without relation to the asset system.
If I were to start over again, I'd go with a data-driven component database system similar to what I used at Pandemic and for my VideoVenture project. Neither BZ1 nor BZ2 will be going that direction in the foreseeable future, though.
You big tease... typical Code Elf™...
"If I could, I'd add the gold plated muffler bearings we used in 'Revenge of the Lemmings IV'..."
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Get ready to flame me...
:-P
Spinning Golems, while spectacularly bizarre, are to me a part of the quirky, screwy game I love. So are Scavenger Trap inclines, and Pilots that bounce forward faster than a Scout can fly.
I'd LOVE to have a BZ1, exactly as it is, that simply ran perfectly under Windows 7 in both SP and MP mode. I could finally scrap this Win98SE P3-500/Riva I've kept around just to keep BZ1 running.
Not because I'm crippled playing it if I don't have the exploits, (because after decades of online play in dozens of games I'm tired of attitude to the point where I only play MP with a very small circle of close friends who 'get' me), but because I love it just the way it is, spinning buildings, lag armor and all... it's part of the magic that makes me still mess with the game and spend years recreating every part of it even after a decade of playing it.
Believe me, I've agonized over every little bug in BZ1 and whether I should fix them for my own BZC mod for BZ2. In the end I'd love to replicate every screwy part of it because all of those flaws have been part of the game for as long as I've played it. You know, it turns out it's amazingly hard if not impossible to recreate some of those bugs... and I have a rabid quality control guy to deal with to boot... :)
OTOH... :evil:
I fully understand the desire to perfect the game, squash the bugs, and put a beautiful shine on the old girl. It's maddening... impossible, even... NOT to expand and fix and enhance things when you're messing with their very essence. For BZC I've added units, updated weapons, put the proper texture in place, and even added sections of things that didn't exist because they were under the ground in the original, or were never gotten back to in the rush out the door. It's thrilling to make things work that never did before.
These new and fixed things I'm including in an expansion to the original, or as part of a Recycler Variant, or the almost Total Conversion that the Ancients campaign is turning into. And don't get me started on TRO, the Chinese units have tons of issues... :)
So I not only can see both sides, I've lived through the flames when it came up for BZ2 1.3 AND I've experienced it myself while working on my own BZ2 mod.
You see...
I'm greedy when it comes to things I love.
I've said it time and time again during the 1.3 patch, to the point where I was seriously getting a little ashamed. I want it all. I want my cake and to eat it too... I want my original, beloved game exactly as it is, just because I love it. I want it fixed up, too, all shiny and perfect and ready to take my breath away again...
So I can understand both sides of the issue, and in the end I'd love to see it both ways... but I realize this might not be possible, or the best thing for an already tiny and divided community. One version that heals all wounds would be the best thing for everyone.
So, if it can only be one way then it simply must be fixed as much as possible. The past is done and can't ever be taken away from me (not while my P3-500 hangs in there), and the future deserves a running BZ1. Maybe if it's fixed up nice and shiny AND runs great on modern hardware someone will pick it up again and publish it for the next generation.
-Av-
Me, I say get rid of/fix anything that takes away from the immersion.
That's certainly a different perspective Avatar.
I suppose stuff like poly clipping, frame rate drops into the teens from bad coding of explosions and some weapons, Lockstep freezing, fast unsynced PCs playing >30% faster, easily hacked, easy avoidance of host wishes, etc., etc., could be seen as affectionately quaint or quirky.
And if you love that, I'll have to respect your view.
But the other 95% of the 20 hardcore and 20 casual who play the various versions of this game, just want it fixed.
You all are aware of that little thing called www.udk.com?
:-D
I love my extreme pilot speed! It is pretty much the only way to survive on foot.
Golems, guntowers, and turrets (although less frequently) spinning underground just kills immersion. Why would a building flip around? The golem is a heavy bipedal beast; while knocking it over should be possible, spinning uncontrollably into the air seems unlikely. Thumper would most likely throw it into the air and destabalize it, but not turn it into a gyroscope.
But it's so much fun to watch... Also funny is when a Golem runs out of ammo in the middle of terrorizing your scavengers and just stands there stupidly wondering what to do next - "What's the matter, big boy, outta ammo?" WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! :-D
Games always have unrealistic aspects to them. Why, for example, should you hear any sounds on the Moon or the Galilean moons since all the action takes place in a high vacuum?
Quote from: bb1 on December 02, 2009, 08:42:44 AM
Why would a building flip around?
They don't but another bug occures with structures and omega shake that leaves a lasting effect on buildings and is really bad if a vehicle comes in contact with the building.
Quote from: ssuser on December 02, 2009, 08:02:55 PM
Games always have unrealistic aspects to them. Why, for example, should you hear any sounds on the Moon or the Galilean moons since all the action takes place in a high vacuum?
Actually, in theory, the vibrations of the sounds would pass into the ship, and thus resinate off the hull and through to the air inside the cockpit, thus becoming sound.
In a vacuum, there are no molecules to pass along those vibrations. Since you are in a hover tank, the ground will not pass any vibrations to you either. At most, I think you might hear some muted thumps if you are close enough to an exploding vehicle as the outrush of gases might impinge on your vehicle. Maybe Blunt Force Trauma can give us some more technical details as to what you might actually hear in a vacuum in a battle situation - he's good at that stuff. You would hear your own weapons firing of course.
But you would hear when stuff hits your ship.
Edit: Whaaaa?
That is one of the reasons I liked the new BSG. The space battles sounded like they had mics in all the ships, but no air.
I would also like nothing in battlezone 1 to change...
But perhaps Completing something that wasn't finished.. Like those Shield Walls that you see on the 5th training map. as a novelty
Some anti-hacking measures would be nice.
Shield Towers is a odf change and they work now.
A directors cut of BZ would be good, but so far the closest we're getting is BZC.
I read about 1/2 the posts so please excuse.....
so...where does changing thunderbolt bomber...by adding normal hull strength fit in?.....
I don't know how anyone perceived the ISDF thunderbolt (w/ armour so thin it was like flying around a gasoline tanker)...could ever be seen as "balanced' with a Grendel..
Just a question...as the only player who ever had the T-Bolt license plate "I drive a T-Bolt....Am I f&*Kin' NUTS??!!"....I think its a worthwhile question to ask...
"Sir...may I actually GET a Tbolt WITH Armour?"
Actually, thats a technical bug.
There are separate files used for MP.
The t bolt isnt supposed to have more, the grendel is supposed to have less.
look in the ZFS pack at the following files: avhrmp.odf, svhrmp.odf, svhraz.odf.
avhrmp is the MP version of the thunderbolt, and is used in mp. - 2500 health
svhrmp is the MP version of the Grendel, and is NOT used in mp. - 2500 health
svhraz is the normal Grendel, and is used in mp. - 3000 health
I think the game was originally meant to use the svhrmp.odf in the vehicle list, but for some reason it wasn't?
Thanks for the compliment ssuser!
You're explanation of sound transmission in a hard vacuum is right on.
There might be some added high frequency chatter from high EMP/EMF hysteresis resulting in some Schmitt triggering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmitt_trigger#Applications) of some of the onboard systems. :roll:
Ok, ok. . . I know. . .come down to earth space cadet. It basically means the electro-mechanical systems on board reacting to the field sweeping past from an energy weapon going off in close proximity to the tank. And since it's the 1960's and 70's, there would be much more of that than there would be 'today'.
The only 'twist' I would add, is the added variable of what keeps the tanks levitated. If you buy my conjecture of how the ships stay "hovered", (http://www.battlezoneclub.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2288&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=44) then there may be some additional "sound" transmission through the field or the field's fluctuation.
I forgot about rounds hitting your ship - of course you would hear that. :lol: Although I think it would sound different than it does in the game.
Another funny thing in BZ is that you can hear the pilots groan in pain when hit - even on a world with atmosphere they are sealed up in their suits, but you can hear them yowl plain as day when you nail them...
Since bombers are big heavy vehicles I think it would be appropriate if both the Grendel and Thunderbolt had 3000 health - however, for multiplayer tank vs bomber games there is something else that comes into play - since the Grendel has that big, long wing it is very easy to knock it about with SP-Stabbers by firing at the tip of the wing - not so with the Thunderbolt. Maybe when they were playtesting and figuring that most games would be multi-unit melees they felt the Grendel was too weak at 2500 because of this and included the regular Grendel for MP instead.
The thing is, most especially about BZ1, after release the community had DAYS upon DAYS into WEEKS into MONTHS into YEARS of 2-4-8 hours A DAY of actual gameplay. . . so while the devs knew the code, the players know the 'game'.
So, regarding that, I don't regard the devs as doing any big 'mistake' back in '97. But now that we have players that have 4000. . . 6000+ HOURS of gameplay. . . they certainly should be listened to, or walk into another arguably BZ2 type mistake.
Speaking of which, since they wear pressurized suits, shouldn't they shoot off haphazardly like a balloon?
Quote from: ssuser on December 03, 2009, 08:30:07 PM
Another funny thing in BZ is that you can hear the pilots groan in pain when hit - even on a world with atmosphere they are sealed up in their suits, but you can hear them yowl plain as day when you nail them...
Or expand in their suit until blood flows.
QuoteRed Devil
Speaking of which, since they wear pressurized suits, shouldn't they shoot off haphazardly like a balloon?
Absolutely there could be some of Newton's second law going on. But there's really not enough air mass in a suit, compared to the soldier, his suit and equipment to move him much, unless he was in zero g (off planet), and even then, very little.
Now if his pressurized, or possibly liquefied breathing gases, were hit, that might indeed send him spinning :-D
If the suits are layered with some kind of biometal mesh, they probably will not swell or burst. The pilot inside probably gets smushed up pretty good when a round hits him, though.
BFT is very right when he says that it is the vet players who "know the game". It is pretty certain that even with extensive playtesting back in 97 that the devs didn't catch on to every little wrinkle, thus if "fixes" are to be implemented input from the players is vital. If a BZ 1.5 patch had been done say back in 2000 or 2001 and the players had input I think we would have seen a better game that would have stayed popular for a longer time.
If a change is controversial, a setting to disable or enable said change may be the best way to go. An example to this was the removal of flying in bz2. Some vets still refuse to move over due to that change alone. Sadly, a simple setting may, or may not, be enough to get them to upgrade.
In the case of the Flash Cannon, I would try to preserve that "heat ray" effect as much as possible regardless of the underlying implementation. No one uses that weapon in multiplayer anyway, so it's not like it would draw a lot of controversy. :)
Well. . . it's been broken since 1.4, so everyone playing BZ has pretty much forgotten it.
In BZE it's a VERY effective weapon and it does. . .sort of. . .act like the original.
Most importantly, I appreciate Dx trying his best at emulating the original.
Quote from: Blunt Force Trauma on December 03, 2009, 09:05:07 PM
The thing is, most especially about BZ1, after release the community had DAYS upon DAYS into WEEKS into MONTHS into YEARS of 2-4-8 hours A DAY of actual gameplay. . . so while the devs knew the code, the players know the 'game'.
So, regarding that, I don't regard the devs as doing any big 'mistake' back in '97. But now that we have players that have 4000. . . 6000+ HOURS of gameplay. . . they certainly should be listened to, or walk into another arguably BZ2 type mistake.
Well, the size of either the BZ1 or BZ2 Communities are SO small that it really doesn't matter what is done from a practical point of view. Considering that it's not being sold anymore it would be crazy not to listen to the few dozens of people actually playing it. That is, not if you actually want the work put into it to mean anything.
Still...
In a new game, or one that was still being sold and actually had a future, balancing by 'Vets' is a very bad idea. Yes, they know the game the way they play it, but doing so may make the game much more inaccessible for newb players as well as narrowing the gameplay into only the way they play it. Many games evolve over the years as new players push the gameplay into new directions, and this helps keep such games alive.
BZ1 was primarily DM when it first came out, and then we started seeing more ST as the whole concept caught on. Even so, after years of play we still had our Fuzzy Pink Armadillos, that had no idea what to do with wingmen if you gave him some... or our Scrappy's, who had no idea that Armory thing actually had other weapons in it. :)
-Av-
Quote from: Ultraken on December 04, 2009, 03:42:59 PM
In the case of the Flash Cannon, I would try to preserve that "heat ray" effect as much as possible regardless of the underlying implementation. No one uses that weapon in multiplayer anyway, so it's not like it would draw a lot of controversy. :)
If it worked, people might. One of the benefits of a weapon like flash cannons is the "red-out" effect, which can blind a player. It's hard to shoot back a something when you can't see anything but a red screen...
Eddy
Quote from: Avatar on December 04, 2009, 05:22:13 PM
. . . In a new game, or one that was still being sold and actually had a future, balancing by 'Vets' is a very bad idea. Yes, they know the game the way they play it, but doing so may make the game much more inaccessible for newb players as well as narrowing the gameplay into only the way they play it. Many games evolve over the years as new players push the gameplay into new directions, and this helps keep such games alive.
-Av-
Balancing to me, NOW, only means certain ships are forgotten in DM.
In a vague way, one other aspect I was suggesting was the CHOICES a vet makes over a noob.
IMHO, it's easy to balance ships in DM playing BZ. Just imagine you're playing in a
monetary situation. . .a league for points for a sizable pot of cash split amongst 5 players. And winning was all that mattered.
You're given a map to play in. . . You're then given a set of constraints ("rules") set by the host.
What ship do you then choose?
If the rank is painfully obvious in its disparity. . . you have balancing issues.
The ships never chosen would be forgotten.
Quote from: Blunt Force Trauma on December 04, 2009, 06:11:59 PM
Balancing to me, NOW, only means certain ships are forgotten in DM.
In a vague way, one other aspect I was suggesting was the CHOICES a vet makes over a noob.
IMHO, it's easy to balance ships in DM playing BZ.
I'd have to agree with this other than sometimes the 'forgotten' ships can be fun. Turrets vs Walkers was always fun, depending on the map, but nobody in their right mind would pick a turret for a normal DM.
As to choices, that's a good point. I've found that the experienced player has a plan... the newb is just joyriding. The experienced player is thinking several steps ahead when he chooses terrain, ship, weapon, damage and ammo states, where the newb just charges in and enjoys the skyride.
Balance in DM should be as simple as numbers, adding up ammo usage, damage/sec, etc.. Weapon linking made this a lot more complex, though, and things like nav blocking and lag armor tossed in unknowns that made each game a little random. You can balance it by the numbers and still not be balanced when humans grab the controls.
Toss in Strategy play being heavily dependant on the AI and balancing for Strategy becomes very difficult.
I've always felt the best thing is to balance everything by the numbers and then let the players hash it out. If some combo or weapon proves too effective it's patch time. Of course, this means someone has to be around still supporting the game and making the patches...
-Av-
You're absolutely right about some of the weaker vehicles like Turrets being fun in some very controlled situations.
Some of my fondest memories in BZ1.4 was 'Turrets vs Bombers' in the Crossroads map. Back when there was >50 in the community, we would get 6-8 man games most anytime we wanted.
I loved grabbing a couple of raves in my Turret and finding a place to sit and "bottom fish" while casually drinking a beer and whispering info and maneuvering placement to other Turrets.
Going from sitting and chatting to either a desperate attempt to escape or pounding an unsuspecting patrolling Bomber in a matter of a few seconds was awesome.
I think coming up with 'Bombers vs Turrets' was a serendipitously positive, unconscious attempt to bring the weak Turret into the fray.
Stepping away from the unit balance issue for a moment, I would like to bring up the names issue for BZ1. Ken, is there any way to redo the engine so you can use any name you like for vehicles and such using the BZ font map? Since you can obviously implement it for player names in multi, I was wondering how hard it would be to have the game dynamically substitute a custom name for a unit based on what it reads out of an odf. It this proves to be a lot of work, I would suggest at least we have some new sprite tables and MAP files containing more names for units and buildings. Dx has already done this for BZE, so it should be an easy update. There have been alot of new models done for BZ, and adding in such names as "Heavy Tank", "Sniper" and other generic monikers would be a good idea. A good names list could be made up via a poll.
Quote from: Dx on December 03, 2009, 02:34:19 PM
Shield Towers is a odf change and they work now.
That's semi-vague
They "work now" as in at one point they didnt work odf edit or not?
and what is the odf change?
and is this just some hack up of a mcurtain or do they do what they SAY they do when you show info on them?
I'm sure that if you stuck an M-curtain on it's side and flattened it's effective radius, you'd get the same effect they were going for.
In abshld.odf change the i76building to:
[GameObjectClass]
classLabel = "shieldtower"
The shield works next to a powerplant, it's a one way shield.
<3
You need to set up the effects of it too like the M-Curtain properties. IMO the shield tower class kind of sucks as it is, the beam types Avatar set up for BZC are much better. You can build such Shields in BZ1 too with Dummy's VDF Viewer, these have to be set up right so they are only good for preplacing on IA maps.
Noticed a small discrepancy in the storyline. When Mission 9 is won, the following is displayed. (file name misn09w1.des) No biggy, but more for the purists.
.
.
.
Conflict arose between the two governing bodies. As each side developed more sophisticated weaponry, the other would top them. But it was Nexus who managed to construct the ultimate weapon. One that would end the war. The information that he gathered during his experiments began going into production in a secret weapons facility called Lerna on Jupiter's moon Io.
We must get to Io and capture the fruits of Paternus's Nexus V's weapons program. We have not found any war records that postdate the work at Lerna.
Quote from: ssuser on December 06, 2009, 01:55:54 PM
You can build such Shields in BZ1 too with Dummy's VDF Viewer
You mean sdf viewer, shieldtower is a structure.
Nope, I meant VDF Viewer. To make the beam shield for BZ1, you make the Shield into a Gun Tower. Add 2 HP for the beams, and set it into the game with a power supply, then have it attack a custom shield that is team 3 with health set to zero so it is invincible. Works quite well, the beams can be used to block a path thru a canyon - if the power supply is well hidden and both Shields are invincible the player has to find a way to take out the power supply thru alternate means.
Red Devil, there are lots of little errors like that in the game. On one mission end screen IIRC "court martial" is spelled "court marshall", lol.
Quote from: ssuser on December 09, 2009, 03:27:08 PM
Nope, I meant VDF Viewer. To make the beam shield for BZ1, you make the Shield into a Gun Tower. Add 2 HP for the beams, and set it into the game with a power supply, then have it attack a custom shield that is team 3 with health set to zero so it is invincible. Works quite well, the beams can be used to block a path thru a canyon - if the power supply is well hidden and both Shields are invincible the player has to find a way to take out the power supply thru alternate means.
Red Devil, there are lots of little errors like that in the game. On one mission end screen IIRC "court martial" is spelled "court marshall", lol.
What if you're in a 3 if 4 player game? I would think using teams 7 or 8 might be a better idea, since there's no map I know of that's 7 or 8 player strat. I wonder if that is even feasible?
You wouldn't be, since IA is always one player.
Yeah, this only works for single-player, and it has to be set up by the map author at that. Cool effect, though.
Setting up a working shield complex in either SP or multi regardless of whether its a beam type or M-Curtain style shield would be problematic - there is the question of orientation. You'd have to set it up so the shields would orient themselves properly - the constructor does not do this. Also, for IA missions, the AI would have to be programmed to attack the shields to bring them down, and know not to cross the beam line beforehand. Insofar as an M-Curtain type shield goes, the AI will not attack any building class on purpose, it just hits stuff that happens to be in the way of vehicle - GT targets.
Ya i made tools for positioning the shieldtowers on a premade map. The shields work well enough for me although it would be nice to have lighting and alphas to work with...
It would also be nice to see a wireframe of the object in the build reticle and be able to rotate it like what was added in Bz2 1.3 patch.
I could make beams accross the shieldtowers as they are but with no lighting or alpha, it would look cheesy.
You can rotate buildings around in SHIFT-F10 mode while editing - best to do on perfectly flat terrain tho - otherwise you can end up with tilted buildings... :-D
You mean by rotating the camera?
No, if you are in SHIFT-F10 view (satellite style view) while editing, you can rotate buildings by right clicking on them, holding down the mouse and then moving the mouse to spin them around to where you want them.
Wow i learned something new in bz after only 12 years. :D
Quote from: Dx on December 12, 2009, 02:02:18 PM
Wow i learned something new in bz after only 12 years. :D
I worked on the game and I didn't know that. :-D
(In my defense, I never used the BZ1 editors.)
Quote from: Ultraken on December 12, 2009, 06:24:52 PM
I worked on the game and I didn't know that. :-D
(In my defense, I never used the BZ1 editors.)
That officially makes ssuser THE bz god!
That little tidbit has been in my IA tutorial for a long time... didn't you read the editor section? :-o
Another undocumented feature is that CONTROL-Z will undo changes in wireframe mode - very handy if you are glooping a big cliff or hill section in and make a boo-boo. How many changes you can undo seems to vary with the system and the size of the terrain you are undoing - maybe linked to available memory (?) usually it seems to undo 1 or 2, maybe 3 on my older win9x system.
I'm much more familiar with the BZ2 editor since I wrote that one. :-D
It was George Sutty that wrote the BZ1 editor code, according to the mapeditor doc. They must have cranked out the documentation in a hurry and missed listing some of the editor features.
Speaking of the editor, if you get around to general improvements later, I would REALLY like to see that ramp making tool become functional. :wink: Boy, that would save a lot of time.
You'll also notice that rotating and moving buildings leaves their shadow behind as the light file isn't updated when editing...
Seems like there's also a way to get into a 'psuedo' view, where you have textured terrain instead of the wireframe view for terrain scultping. I can't remember the keystrokes, though, cause I'm old...
I thought the BZ1 editor to be the most amazing thing I'd ever seen. It's still head over heels better than most editors out there if only for the instant in/out of FPS/Edit mode. Nothing beats sitting right there in front of whatever you're trying to edit...
-Av-
Yeah, I remember doing that - I THINK that if you are in wireframe mode, and hit CTRL-E to back out to normal mode, then hit CTRL-E again, you will be editing the HGT file in texture mode, though I can't remember for sure - I've only done it by accident.
You can turn on wireframe and add the color to it.