Right now, Starcraft scripts operate in 1/16 game-second ticks. Halving this time to 1/32 would be a tremendous boost for scripters.
I've written about this in general (and have confirmed it's in 1/16th chunks, even when using the Zero Wait), but I think it's time we petition to have this changed.
Humans can very easily discern he difference between 1/16th and 1/32 ticks, but not so much 1/32 and 1/64th ticks; specially since Game Speed Fastest would actually be ticking about 1/48th per real-second when converted from game-seconds.
I just don't understand why they choose such an abysmally slow game-tick when they first designed the game. If I'm not mistaken, Warcraft 3 operates even faster than SC2.
Starcraft II already runs poorly on many people's computers. This would only make it even worse, and I doubt they'd make such deep engine changes, as they would probably require a lot of work.
Starcraft II already runs poorly on many people's computers. This would only make it even worse, and I doubt they'd make such deep engine changes, as they would probably require a lot of work.
This. By upping the tick rate, you would force the game (unless they specifically decided to code otherwise) to update EVERYTHING twice as often. Everything from thinks for AI/Actors, to path finding calculations, to checking for periodic effects/events/triggers/while loops. The added CPU load would be frustrating and a waste to most players.
Well if SC2´s performance wouldnt be so abysmal to begin with, the extra fast tick rate wouldnt be a problem I imagine.
From what I can tell, the engine is fine, but people either A) Try to run SC2 on very low end hardware or B) Poor coding.
Blizzard campaign maps are rather intricate, yet run with no lag/performance issues of any kind to my knowledge. I've done some pretty intricate stuff and still no performance issues.
The usual problem is people either trying to A) Do WAY too much at the same time or B) Shoehorn data stuff into triggers. Triggers will always be slower then data in the end, simply due to the interpretation of the script adding overhead. For really simple stuff, they are probably about the same, but go beyond that and it becomes really evident.
I'm also not certain what we gain by operating at faster tick rates, other then maybe some smoother periodic effects, but it would be interesting to see what people think is possible with the faster tick rate. I imagine it would be useful, but the tradeoff has to accommodate that it doubles the CPU load by definition, since as I mentioned above, everything would double and there is quite a few things going on all the time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Right now, Starcraft scripts operate in 1/16 game-second ticks. Halving this time to 1/32 would be a tremendous boost for scripters.
I've written about this in general (and have confirmed it's in 1/16th chunks, even when using the Zero Wait), but I think it's time we petition to have this changed.
Humans can very easily discern he difference between 1/16th and 1/32 ticks, but not so much 1/32 and 1/64th ticks; specially since Game Speed Fastest would actually be ticking about 1/48th per real-second when converted from game-seconds.
I just don't understand why they choose such an abysmally slow game-tick when they first designed the game. If I'm not mistaken, Warcraft 3 operates even faster than SC2.
Starcraft II already runs poorly on many people's computers. This would only make it even worse, and I doubt they'd make such deep engine changes, as they would probably require a lot of work.
This. By upping the tick rate, you would force the game (unless they specifically decided to code otherwise) to update EVERYTHING twice as often. Everything from thinks for AI/Actors, to path finding calculations, to checking for periodic effects/events/triggers/while loops. The added CPU load would be frustrating and a waste to most players.
Well if SC2´s performance wouldnt be so abysmal to begin with, the extra fast tick rate wouldnt be a problem I imagine.
From what I can tell, the engine is fine, but people either A) Try to run SC2 on very low end hardware or B) Poor coding.
Blizzard campaign maps are rather intricate, yet run with no lag/performance issues of any kind to my knowledge. I've done some pretty intricate stuff and still no performance issues.
The usual problem is people either trying to A) Do WAY too much at the same time or B) Shoehorn data stuff into triggers. Triggers will always be slower then data in the end, simply due to the interpretation of the script adding overhead. For really simple stuff, they are probably about the same, but go beyond that and it becomes really evident.
I'm also not certain what we gain by operating at faster tick rates, other then maybe some smoother periodic effects, but it would be interesting to see what people think is possible with the faster tick rate. I imagine it would be useful, but the tradeoff has to accommodate that it doubles the CPU load by definition, since as I mentioned above, everything would double and there is quite a few things going on all the time.