Spring RTS Engine

but it didn't af, thread was recovered and now I am derailed discussing it when both paul and I dropped it.

smoth wrote:but it didn't af, thread was recovered and now I am derailed discussing it when both paul and I dropped it.

LOL! Aint forums fun

AF - I see your point but what is the harm in raising it as a general request?

If the people making maps can read, digest and understand all sides of the issue then hopefully the end result will be maps that do not cause people to be PMing behind the scenes.

Devon, you can do what I said earlier using springsp.


Shot at 2007-07-29

Forboding Angel wrote:Devon, you can do what I said earlier using springsp.

Yes you can but why have to do that every time you play a map? What is wrong with wanting it to work 'out of the box'?

Don't get me wrong - I can cope with this. As previously explained, I have already extracted every .smd file and can easily mod them as I see fit.

This all started because I was curious as to why some of the maps were not already set up for skirmish. That has now been explained. While i do not fully agree, I can see the point of view of someone who makes maps and only plays multi-player.

At the time of posting I did not understand the difference in the modes of play as I have never played anything other than SP. I guess that is why I ruffled a few feathers. Is that a bad thing though? While we may be a minority, SP players do exist. Is it too far out of line to request SPs be pre-set?

Unfortunetely, as previousl said;

Saktoth wrote:Most bad maps aint going to read this forum or take suggestions like that before putting stuff up.

Seeing that the majority of the responses so far have been negative or workaround solutions I guess it isn't going to happen. Never mind, it was worth a shot.

forb your copy of spring SP is borked, and out of date.

I estimate that 15% of all Spring players only play Spring SP, for network reasons, mainly, as there is virtually no other logical reason. This is a significant number of people, but you must understand that maps have only one set of start positions. If 85% of play is conducted in multiplayer, the maps shall have multiplayer optimized start positions - if they are optimized for any sort of play.

Id argue that 15% of all english games are singleplayer through the lobby and 20% singleplayer via spring.exe or springSP.

Then ontop of that theres the chinese contribution, for which the vast majority play singleplayer due to lobby issues.

neddiedrow wrote:If 85% of play is conducted in multiplayer, the maps shall have multiplayer optimized start positions - if they are optimized for any sort of play.

Excuse my ignorance but what is the difference?

Surely the optimum is to maximise the distance between starts? That applies to both Multi and Single play equally. I admit that I have no design experience but if I did have a bash I would have worked by designing an environment, from the size determine the maximum player density, allocate appropriate SPs, balance resources around the SPs. If that is not too far off the mark then the SPs are valid for SP or MP aren't they?

Or am I missing something?

Not always.


Sometimes maps are made for different purposes. For Example edola prime was made with quick fast action in mind, the map is 30x30, but the start positions are very close to one another Which is what I intended from the get go.

In EE conquerors isle, the enemy AI starts at the bottom right corner of the map in the water and is stuck as a result

Forboding Angel wrote:Not always.


Sometimes maps are made for different purposes. For Example edola prime was made with quick fast action in mind, the map is 30x30, but the start positions are very close to one another Which is what I intended from the get go.

OK, but that is a feature of the map to make it play the way you designed it. The question still remains - are these start points suitable for both SP & MP?

If you use kai... Yes.

Forboding Angel wrote:If you use kai... Yes.

kai?

Man I feel like such a NooB LOL!

KAI is the name of an AI.

j5mello wrote:if i may offer just a bit more to this discussion...

many mappers probably ignore start points for the sheer reason that their maps are going to be played using the choose-start-pos setting.

I think it's that, indeed. But still, placing start point doesn't take long, and suddenly render the map playable in other mode, so it's no excuse.

Also, when making maps, don't forget to make it suitable for any number of player, and not just "made 4v4, unplayable in 2v2 because all first four start on same side". That is done by placing 1 in one corner, 2 in the opposite, 3 in the same side of 1 but other corner of the side, 4 opposite of 3, etc.. with each even position opposite of the corresponding odd start pos. Like that.

neddiedrow wrote:I estimate that 15% of all Spring players only play Spring SP, for network reasons, mainly, as there is virtually no other logical reason.

I estimate that the number of player that never play online is like the black mass of the universe, 90% of players, but you never see them because, duh, they're not online! And Spring single player experience is so raw they probably were disappointed and vowed never to re-attempt it again.

An easy way to estimate the number of single player would be to ask a YankSpanker how many time Spring 74b3 has been downloaded (75 is too new and people who stay offline won't check for update often), and compare that with the number of player, minus smurf, on the lobby.

Well, Z, want to make a campaign for BA with me then? Or one for KP? Honestly, we should at least give them some experience offline.

Z - What a breath of fresh air

So we SP's are NOT the minority after all. The MP's are

MAKE ALL MAPS SINGLE PLAYER COMPATIBLE!

But seriously (if I can stop laughing), what you said makes a lot of sense both about placing start points and the numbers of player types. My argument/request/gripe/whatever has always been that it takes a lot of time and effort to make a map. Surely taking a few minutes to drop in some decent start points is worth the effort? Those numbers add a bit of weight to the argument.

I checked and I am currently playing against KAI-0.12 which is more aggressive (fun) than AAI. All the acronyms used here loose me some times. I thought it was something else.

so i think it can be agreed that some mention of start points in a mapping tut would make this a less likely occurrence in the future, ya?

I do wonder why peopel dont put in good ones... after all theres a friggin program that will even type it all out for you (which is probable in the mapps tool pack on UF or FU).

aGorm