|
Oh the irony. I will try it out tonight on my WoL account but you might have to use the starter edition unfortunately..
Thanks a lot because right now im playing the starter edition and it wont allow me to change AI difficulty to make it more challenging. I really like this mode because i always wanted to play brood war with starcraft 2 graphics.
Also do you know if these things could be changed:
Using mind control on allies
in starcraft brood war once you mind control a unit of a different race you get the population for that race too but in this mod you get all three races with one race population.
|
can someone make a vid of the hydralisk attack animation for demonstation purposes please??
|
so bad there is no more news and update about this game anymore.
|
On April 22 2014 20:53 Foxxan wrote:
I found the micro on this mod really bad, or else i would happily have played it.
Anyone else feel the same?
I agree. Unfortunately i think this is the best you can get because the sc2 engine is so limited and crappy.
|
On June 26 2014 23:13 TaShadan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2014 20:53 Foxxan wrote:
I found the micro on this mod really bad, or else i would happily have played it.
Anyone else feel the same? I agree. Unfortunately i think this is the best you can get because the sc2 engine is so limited and crappy.
This is not the case. The SC2 engine is EXTREMELY strong and seemingly boundless compared to the Broodwar engine. Starcraft 2 probably inherits some warcraft 3 basic coding structure, but otherwise it was designed FOR implementation rather than being cobbled together DURING implementation.
Contrast this to Broodwar's engine: map gets divided into 16x16 squares, but art assets are ambiguous, Two Dimensional, and quite frankly designed for a different engine. Broodwar is built directly on top of the Warcraft 2 source code, hence the initial "Orcs Vs Humans but in Space"-style screenshots from extremely early development. The engine was being written as units were being implemented, and every single time small changes to basic unit pathing/ai were made, the Carrier code had to be revised and either rewritten or left with unexpected behavior. This resulted in the unintended Interceptor Leashing mechanic in the final code.
The subdivision of each square of the map into passable, impassable, or "partially-passable" caused a nice organized group of zealots to clump up and get confused on narrow bridges if you aren't carefully shepherding them. Is this the behavior you want? Do you simply want a source-port of Broodwar with 3D graphics? Then start a thread on blizzard's forums asking for the release of the SC1/Broodwar source code.
I know you actually want Vulture moving-shot micro that's perfect emulation of Broodwar, I know you want siege tanks whose turrets rotate to fire even while unsieged (this is entirely possible in the SC2 engine btw), I know you want goliaths with rotating mid-sections (I want this too; bring back 2-piece goliaths blizzard~!), I know you want units to have bounding-box issues to the point of making rogue dragoons think the fastest path to the ordered destination for their group is not a straight line with stops or a press against allied units but instead a long arc across your opponent's siege line.
This is a reconstruction of Broodwar in a superior engine. THEORETICALLY, Broodwar could be perfectly emulated in the SC2 engine, but since nobody here has access to Broodwar's commented source code nor do they posses the time to completely re-implement basic functions like unit movement, terrain passability flags, individual exceptions for individual units, processing 3-Dimensional objects on a 2-axis plane with a 3rd boolean flag (flying?: true/false), and other such non-trivial tasks. It's amazing that SC2BW resembles the original as much as it does as is; reverse-engineering sub-optimal movement and behavior of controllable objects in an engine that was designed to optimize movement and behavior of said objects is worthy of appreciation, even if it isn't a direct port of the Broodwar Engine code with 3D units and terrain tacked on.
The problem here is not with the Engine; SC2 is powerful enough to recreate Broodwar perfectly given the source code of BW is accessible. The problem is that creating deliberately wonky code in order to emulate behavior whose exact cause is not known is an extraordinarily complex problem.
|
This is not the case. The SC2 engine is EXTREMELY strong and seemingly boundless compared to the Broodwar engine. Starcraft 2 probably inherits some warcraft 3 basic coding structure, but otherwise it was designed FOR implementation rather than being cobbled together DURING implementation.
Contrast this to Broodwar's engine: map gets divided into 16x16 squares, but art assets are ambiguous, Two Dimensional, and quite frankly designed for a different engine. Broodwar is built directly on top of the Warcraft 2 source code, hence the initial "Orcs Vs Humans but in Space"-style screenshots from extremely early development. The engine was being written as units were being implemented, and every single time small changes to basic unit pathing/ai were made, the Carrier code had to be revised and either rewritten or left with unexpected behavior. This resulted in the unintended Interceptor Leashing mechanic in the final code.
The subdivision of each square of the map into passable, impassable, or "partially-passable" caused a nice organized group of zealots to clump up and get confused on narrow bridges if you aren't carefully shepherding them. Is this the behavior you want? Do you simply want a source-port of Broodwar with 3D graphics? Then start a thread on blizzard's forums asking for the release of the SC1/Broodwar source code.
I know you actually want Vulture moving-shot micro that's perfect emulation of Broodwar, I know you want siege tanks whose turrets rotate to fire even while unsieged (this is entirely possible in the SC2 engine btw), I know you want goliaths with rotating mid-sections (I want this too; bring back 2-piece goliaths blizzard~!), I know you want units to have bounding-box issues to the point of making rogue dragoons think the fastest path to the ordered destination for their group is not a straight line with stops or a press against allied units but instead a long arc across your opponent's siege line.
This is a reconstruction of Broodwar in a superior engine. THEORETICALLY, Broodwar could be perfectly emulated in the SC2 engine, but since nobody here has access to Broodwar's commented source code nor do they posses the time to completely re-implement basic functions like unit movement, terrain passability flags, individual exceptions for individual units, processing 3-Dimensional objects on a 2-axis plane with a 3rd boolean flag (flying?: true/false), and other such non-trivial tasks. It's amazing that SC2BW resembles the original as much as it does as is; reverse-engineering sub-optimal movement and behavior of controllable objects in an engine that was designed to optimize movement and behavior of said objects is worthy of appreciation, even if it isn't a direct port of the Broodwar Engine code with 3D units and terrain tacked on.
The problem here is not with the Engine; SC2 is powerful enough to recreate Broodwar perfectly given the source code of BW is accessible. The problem is that creating deliberately wonky code in order to emulate behavior whose exact cause is not known is an extraordinarily complex problem.
Well said, friend. I couldn't agree more, nor could I have worded it this perfectly.
That said, I wonder what MavercK has been up to these days. I hope he's doing alright.
|
On June 26 2014 23:13 TaShadan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2014 20:53 Foxxan wrote:
I found the micro on this mod really bad, or else i would happily have played it.
Anyone else feel the same? I agree. Unfortunately i think this is the best you can get because the sc2 engine is so limited and crappy.
I hope you're joking.
|
On June 29 2014 06:24 hvylobster wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 23:13 TaShadan wrote:On April 22 2014 20:53 Foxxan wrote:
I found the micro on this mod really bad, or else i would happily have played it.
Anyone else feel the same? I agree. Unfortunately i think this is the best you can get because the sc2 engine is so limited and crappy. This is not the case. The SC2 engine is EXTREMELY strong and seemingly boundless compared to the Broodwar engine. Starcraft 2 probably inherits some warcraft 3 basic coding structure, but otherwise it was designed FOR implementation rather than being cobbled together DURING implementation. Contrast this to Broodwar's engine: map gets divided into 16x16 squares, but art assets are ambiguous, Two Dimensional, and quite frankly designed for a different engine. Broodwar is built directly on top of the Warcraft 2 source code, hence the initial "Orcs Vs Humans but in Space"-style screenshots from extremely early development. The engine was being written as units were being implemented, and every single time small changes to basic unit pathing/ai were made, the Carrier code had to be revised and either rewritten or left with unexpected behavior. This resulted in the unintended Interceptor Leashing mechanic in the final code. The subdivision of each square of the map into passable, impassable, or "partially-passable" caused a nice organized group of zealots to clump up and get confused on narrow bridges if you aren't carefully shepherding them. Is this the behavior you want? Do you simply want a source-port of Broodwar with 3D graphics? Then start a thread on blizzard's forums asking for the release of the SC1/Broodwar source code. I know you actually want Vulture moving-shot micro that's perfect emulation of Broodwar, I know you want siege tanks whose turrets rotate to fire even while unsieged (this is entirely possible in the SC2 engine btw), I know you want goliaths with rotating mid-sections (I want this too; bring back 2-piece goliaths blizzard~!), I know you want units to have bounding-box issues to the point of making rogue dragoons think the fastest path to the ordered destination for their group is not a straight line with stops or a press against allied units but instead a long arc across your opponent's siege line. This is a reconstruction of Broodwar in a superior engine. THEORETICALLY, Broodwar could be perfectly emulated in the SC2 engine, but since nobody here has access to Broodwar's commented source code nor do they posses the time to completely re-implement basic functions like unit movement, terrain passability flags, individual exceptions for individual units, processing 3-Dimensional objects on a 2-axis plane with a 3rd boolean flag (flying?: true/false), and other such non-trivial tasks. It's amazing that SC2BW resembles the original as much as it does as is; reverse-engineering sub-optimal movement and behavior of controllable objects in an engine that was designed to optimize movement and behavior of said objects is worthy of appreciation, even if it isn't a direct port of the Broodwar Engine code with 3D units and terrain tacked on. The problem here is not with the Engine; SC2 is powerful enough to recreate Broodwar perfectly given the source code of BW is accessible. The problem is that creating deliberately wonky code in order to emulate behavior whose exact cause is not known is an extraordinarily complex problem.
You do not need the BW sourcecode. You need the SC2 sourcecode because some of the BW stuff is just not possible to recreate with the editor. You need to edit the engine. Which will never happen. Thats why the sc2 engine is not suited to emulate BW in its current state, therefore its crappy and limited. It could be changed but it will most likely never happen.
|
You do not need the BW sourcecode. You need the SC2 sourcecode because some of the BW stuff is just not possible to recreate with the editor. You need to edit the engine. Which will never happen. Thats why the sc2 engine is not suited to emulate BW in its current state, therefore its crappy and limited. It could be changed but it will most likely never happen.
This is only half true. There are certain things about ANY game that are best replicated (or downright made BETTER) with direct access to the game's "source code". That, and you can simply reverse-engineer a LOT more efficiently and accurately when you have access to that raw, unprocessed data.
A perfect example would be how Gearbox has Blackbird Interactive hard at work creating the "Remastered Homeworld 1 and 2", then you suddenly realize "Wait a second! Where's Homeworld: Cataclysm Remastered??". The answer to that is simple; Gearbox, and by extension, Blackbird Interactive, have working copies of the source code for Homeworld 1 and 2; this is largely because Relic Entertainment released the source code in 2003 (originally, you had to sign a "license agreement" and become part of the Relic Developer Network to "legally" access and/or use this code).
In the case of Homeworld: Cataclysm, Relic did not develop this; that origin belongs to the then-named Barking Dog Studios (which become Rockstar Vancouver in 2002, and then merged with Rockstar Toronto in 2012), and they never released the source code before the conversion, then merger. The full source code itself is thought to have been "lost to the sands of time", but a handful of firms apparently have backups of the original "source audio". At the very least, if Cataclysm MUST be remade from the ground up, the voice overs will remain true to their original form, perhaps even released in higher sample quality, thanks to the tech jump between the original, and possible remake.
As for Blizzard and Brood War, in all likeliness, they probably have the source code, but they simply haven't chosen to release it to the general public, currently. Whether that will change or not, remains to be seen.
On a side note, Gearbox acquired the Homeworld IP rights about 2 years ago, but that's the only thing they had going for them; I doubt they actually knew if they were up to the task of "Remastering a LEGEND". Then they happened upon Blackbird Interactive, which is largely composed of several former members of the Homeworld development team, and I think that was their big "Remaster Team JACKPOT". What better way to remaster a legendary franchise than to have the very creators of the franchise THEMSELVES take part in this MASSIVE undertaking?
|
On July 02 2014 06:02 Talthos wrote:Show nested quote +
You do not need the BW sourcecode. You need the SC2 sourcecode because some of the BW stuff is just not possible to recreate with the editor. You need to edit the engine. Which will never happen. Thats why the sc2 engine is not suited to emulate BW in its current state, therefore its crappy and limited. It could be changed but it will most likely never happen.
This is only half true. There are certain things about ANY game that are best replicated (or downright made BETTER) with direct access to the game's "source code". That, and you can simply reverse-engineer a LOT more efficiently and accurately when you have access to that raw, unprocessed data. A perfect example would be how Gearbox has Blackbird Interactive hard at work creating the "Remastered Homeworld 1 and 2", then you suddenly realize "Wait a second! Where's Homeworld: Cataclysm Remastered??". The answer to that is simple; Gearbox, and by extension, Blackbird Interactive, have working copies of the source code for Homeworld 1 and 2; this is largely because Relic Entertainment released the source code in 2003 (originally, you had to sign a "license agreement" and become part of the Relic Developer Network to "legally" access and/or use this code). In the case of Homeworld: Cataclysm, Relic did not develop this; that origin belongs to the then-named Barking Dog Studios (which become Rockstar Vancouver in 2002, and then merged with Rockstar Toronto in 2012), and they never released the source code before the conversion, then merger. The full source code itself is thought to have been "lost to the sands of time", but a handful of firms apparently have backups of the original "source audio". At the very least, if Cataclysm MUST be remade from the ground up, the voice overs will remain true to their original form, perhaps even released in higher sample quality, thanks to the tech jump between the original, and possible remake. As for Blizzard and Brood War, in all likeliness, they probably have the source code, but they simply haven't chosen to release it to the general public, currently. Whether that will change or not, remains to be seen.On a side note, Gearbox acquired the Homeworld IP rights about 2 years ago, but that's the only thing they had going for them; I doubt they actually knew if they were up to the task of "Remastering a LEGEND". Then they happened upon Blackbird Interactive, which is largely composed of several former members of the Homeworld development team, and I think that was their big "Remaster Team JACKPOT". What better way to remaster a legendary franchise than to have the very creators of the franchise THEMSELVES take part in this MASSIVE undertaking?
Your wall of text is nice but you do not understand the real problem here... and please stop using BOLD and CAPITAL LETTERS. It does not improve your text.
|
The engine is not that frickin great, you can't even accurately recreate Defensive Matrix with it, after all this time.
|
M is best unit, he will return
scbw forever
|
Your wall of text is nice but you do not understand the real problem here... and please stop using BOLD and CAPITAL LETTERS. It does not improve your text.
I see that the concept of "emphasis" on points I figured were important is something you either didn't understand by how I wrote my post, or you chose to overlook it.
Either way, I've said what I think needed to be said, and whether or not you see the validity in what I said is irrelevant to the issue at hand; MavercK has been doing this largely solo so far, and that isn't always a favourable position to have for a mod of this scale. We'd probably be doing him a kindness by perhaps seeking out even more people who might be interested in lending a hand in their spare time, with his consent, of course. More insight and Editor know-how would probably only help the project at this point.
|
On June 29 2014 06:24 hvylobster wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 23:13 TaShadan wrote:On April 22 2014 20:53 Foxxan wrote:
I found the micro on this mod really bad, or else i would happily have played it.
Anyone else feel the same? I agree. Unfortunately i think this is the best you can get because the sc2 engine is so limited and crappy. This is not the case. The SC2 engine is EXTREMELY strong and seemingly boundless compared to the Broodwar engine. Starcraft 2 probably inherits some warcraft 3 basic coding structure, but otherwise it was designed FOR implementation rather than being cobbled together DURING implementation. Contrast this to Broodwar's engine: map gets divided into 16x16 squares, but art assets are ambiguous, Two Dimensional, and quite frankly designed for a different engine. Broodwar is built directly on top of the Warcraft 2 source code, hence the initial "Orcs Vs Humans but in Space"-style screenshots from extremely early development. The engine was being written as units were being implemented, and every single time small changes to basic unit pathing/ai were made, the Carrier code had to be revised and either rewritten or left with unexpected behavior. This resulted in the unintended Interceptor Leashing mechanic in the final code. The subdivision of each square of the map into passable, impassable, or "partially-passable" caused a nice organized group of zealots to clump up and get confused on narrow bridges if you aren't carefully shepherding them. Is this the behavior you want? Do you simply want a source-port of Broodwar with 3D graphics? Then start a thread on blizzard's forums asking for the release of the SC1/Broodwar source code. I know you actually want Vulture moving-shot micro that's perfect emulation of Broodwar, I know you want siege tanks whose turrets rotate to fire even while unsieged (this is entirely possible in the SC2 engine btw), I know you want goliaths with rotating mid-sections (I want this too; bring back 2-piece goliaths blizzard~!), I know you want units to have bounding-box issues to the point of making rogue dragoons think the fastest path to the ordered destination for their group is not a straight line with stops or a press against allied units but instead a long arc across your opponent's siege line. This is a reconstruction of Broodwar in a superior engine. THEORETICALLY, Broodwar could be perfectly emulated in the SC2 engine, but since nobody here has access to Broodwar's commented source code nor do they posses the time to completely re-implement basic functions like unit movement, terrain passability flags, individual exceptions for individual units, processing 3-Dimensional objects on a 2-axis plane with a 3rd boolean flag (flying?: true/false), and other such non-trivial tasks. It's amazing that SC2BW resembles the original as much as it does as is; reverse-engineering sub-optimal movement and behavior of controllable objects in an engine that was designed to optimize movement and behavior of said objects is worthy of appreciation, even if it isn't a direct port of the Broodwar Engine code with 3D units and terrain tacked on. The problem here is not with the Engine; SC2 is powerful enough to recreate Broodwar perfectly given the source code of BW is accessible. The problem is that creating deliberately wonky code in order to emulate behavior whose exact cause is not known is an extraordinarily complex problem.
Ok, I'm gonna answer some of those topics because you were flat out wrong.
First: StarCraft was at its alpha, basically a WarCraft mod, yes. But then everything changed when the fire nation attacked when they realized they must use the best they possibly could to compete with eighty (80) RTS that were in development. A whole new engine was created. So, StarCraft became a thing on its own, rather than a WarCraft "mod".
Secondly: The game uses A* pathfinding algorithm. And this algorithm is probably the worst pathfinding algorithm, but it's also the best, because it's so simple to create. Since the units didn't count other units as obstacles, we had that behavior of clustering in chokes and all. It's not "fault of the engine" so much as "that algorithm kinda sucks". It wouldn't matter the granularity of the map representation for pathfinding, they would always get stuck. That's the nature of the beast. Unless, they would recognize other units as obstacles, then it's a different story.
Third: Theoretically, no, BW can't be emulated perfectly in SC2. There are things that the engine won't let you change. You can think of small gimmicks and all, but in the end they're just that: gimmicks. Look at muta micro, or vulture patrol... Those things rely on engine exploitation, and for that we need to recreate the entire engine... It's just not possible to do everything in SC2.
That said, I believe that, even though BW can't be emulated perfectly, it can get so close that people can't distinguish the two without serious examination. It just needs gimmicks, lots of gimmicks.
|
I think that maybe, just maybe, SC:BW remake will be done with Lotv... Since they said it would be so cool to do that etc(blizzard)
|
i wish someone with experience can make a better AI for this mode, since this mode is so great but the AI especially the terran AI is so awful.
|
On July 16 2014 05:25 weitao9292 wrote:
i wish someone with experience can make a better AI for this mode, since this mode is so great but the AI especially the terran AI is so awful.
I'm trying to make an AI for SCBW, and man it's hard to make one... Even for top researchers. 
I wouldn't count on it getting done anytime soon (without cheating).
|
On July 12 2014 04:27 Foxxan wrote:
I think that maybe, just maybe, SC:BW remake will be done with Lotv... Since they said it would be so cool to do that etc(blizzard)
I wish that Blizzard would recognize M's work..
sounds ridiculous to even think that it has not been featured.. very very disappointing indeed
Poll: Should Blizzard feature SC2BWyes, it is long overdue (24) 92% what's sc2bw? (1) 4% yes blizzard is afraid of the competition (1) 4% no, they decide, more power to them (0) 0% what's "featured"? (0) 0% 26 total votes Your vote: Should Blizzard feature SC2BW (Vote): yes, it is long overdue
(Vote): no, they decide, more power to them
(Vote): what's sc2bw?
(Vote): what's "featured"?
(Vote): yes blizzard is afraid of the competition
|
hydralisk is too strong in PvZ. i think those zealot's ai has problem. it needs attention
and ingame mvspeed are something wierd. in SC1 though mvspped are slow ,not so easy to die in this game
i think it needs attention too
|
Hello guys. First of all I gotta say "Great Work". Seriously, what you are doing is extremely good. I hoped too see those units playable, and you did it. This is the first time I have seen this project, so, I have some questions:
1 ¿are the screenshoots from the lastest version or are they "recycled" from previous versions?
2 if they aren't from the lastest, ¿the 3D model from the Devourer have been changed to his real one? (I remember that there are 3D models of the Devourer in the secret area of wings of liberty, in the first areas of heart of the swarm, and in the mission of HotS where you have to destroy the science facility where Hybrids are created. Exactly, in the floor -yes, "in the floor", like in a cavity in the floor.)
3 ¿the 3D model of the Dragoon are going to stay that size? I mean... Supossedly they where a little bigger.
To finish this post, thank you for all the good work. Keep doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
