Negative. That is frame-rate dependend. If you're running the game on 16fps then it'll be updated every 0.0625. Mostly you're running on much higher speeds though.
If it was only 16fps then the game would look crappy. Animations were chunky, etc.
Are you sure? Most games I've heard of have a fixed-length physics step for stability. And there's no way that SC2's update step is frame-rate dependent in multiplayer, since it's entirely deterministic. For a game that runs in lockstep, I think a 62.5ms physics update step is entirely reasonable, especially without a gameplay-related physics simulation.
But what I need to know is what sorts of boolean, mathematical, and comparative expressions can I perform with it?
There are none. The only way to interact with a player group are the associated functions. Equality comparison might exist for player groups, I'm not sure.
For example, if I have a Player Group that contains players 1, 2 and 3, and I ask it: Does Player Group == Player 3? What is the response? The two values are clearly not equivalent so I'm guessing it should say "false." What if I ask it to subtract 1 from the Player Group? What does it do?
Both of those are illegal and won't compile. It's meaningless to compare a player group to a player, as well as to subtract an integer from a player group.
Only the SC1 units that are in the campaign are in the editor. None of the cancelled/removed units are there, nor are SC1 units that don't show in the campaign.
Blizzard is working on it; Dustin Browder said as much during a fairly recent interview. It's just a hard problem.
The problem is, I believe, that there's a delay between a trigger-issued order and the order taking effect. So when someone presses a button, that information is sent out over the network. As soon as that information reaches all the clients (one network trip total so far), the triggers can know about it. The event couldn't be sent before because it has to be synchronously sent on all clients. The trigger issues an order, but the order doesn't take effect until the next network tick (two total network trips). So the apparent lag is twice as bad as if the order was simply issued normally.
Additional attack speed/damage for marines. If I'm using marines, I better outnumber them, so I better be hitting them more than they're hitting me. Thus, damage. I wonder if I'll regret that on non-base-building missions, though.
Instant supply depots all the way.
Obscenely fast SCV production or three total food saved per geyser? Let's go with fast SCVs.
Probably Ravens for Point Defense Drone, but it depends on what the Science Vessel does.
Might go with drop pods for awesomeness, but double Marauder production? Awesome.
Turrets for bunkers, combined with…
The ability to make flame turrets.
Pfft, transports, I'll go with the Predator—especially if I stick with drop pods.
I have no idea about the last two, I'll wait and see.
This wasn't data-mined, this was publicly distributed information. Also, you don't choose between Protoss and Zerg, every stage unlocks two options in each list, of which you can only pick one. So five total Protoss techs and five total Zerg techs.
You should definitely be able to create a requirement in the Data Editor. You might have to duplicate the Mothership's requirement, but it should definitely be possible.
You should probably do it the same way that Blizzard makes their units fire twice at the same time. Make one weapon, but make its effect launch two missiles. Look at the Phoenix for an example.
I believe no unit will ever fire multiple weapons at once. For example, the Thor has two different weapons it can use against Colossi, since they can be targeted as both ground and air; but it always just picks one (ground close enough, air otherwise).
@Mille25: Go
To Sublimity: Good to know. Both work... it also demonstrates using Pick each unit, which a lot of people could use some familiarity with.
You'd have to use Pick Unit anyway, to hide the items.
0
Are you sure? Most games I've heard of have a fixed-length physics step for stability. And there's no way that SC2's update step is frame-rate dependent in multiplayer, since it's entirely deterministic. For a game that runs in lockstep, I think a 62.5ms physics update step is entirely reasonable, especially without a gameplay-related physics simulation.
0
@LazyCoder: Go
There's one for all three dimensions of world coordinates:
0
There are none. The only way to interact with a player group are the associated functions. Equality comparison might exist for player groups, I'm not sure.
Both of those are illegal and won't compile. It's meaningless to compare a player group to a player, as well as to subtract an integer from a player group.
0
The Text module shows all the text in your map. There's no way to search it that I can see, but at least it'll all be in one place.
0
Be warned, that will reset all the mineral patches to full, and make everything mining from them at the time stop (I believe).
0
Text tags are secretly just integers, but as far as I know you need to use a custom script to get the GUI to convert back and forth. Use these:
You need to use a custom script value to insert "lp_textTag" and "lp_integer".
0
Only the SC1 units that are in the campaign are in the editor. None of the cancelled/removed units are there, nor are SC1 units that don't show in the campaign.
0
Wait, what? Really?
0
Blizzard is working on it; Dustin Browder said as much during a fairly recent interview. It's just a hard problem.
The problem is, I believe, that there's a delay between a trigger-issued order and the order taking effect. So when someone presses a button, that information is sent out over the network. As soon as that information reaches all the clients (one network trip total so far), the triggers can know about it. The event couldn't be sent before because it has to be synchronously sent on all clients. The trigger issues an order, but the order doesn't take effect until the next network tick (two total network trips). So the apparent lag is twice as bad as if the order was simply issued normally.
That's my understanding, anyway.
0
@tigerija: Go
Battle.net: will evolve to gain three of the four remaining features.
Rock: will remain in 40,000 BC forever.
0
At least for my first play-through:
Additional attack speed/damage for marines. If I'm using marines, I better outnumber them, so I better be hitting them more than they're hitting me. Thus, damage. I wonder if I'll regret that on non-base-building missions, though.
Instant supply depots all the way.
Obscenely fast SCV production or three total food saved per geyser? Let's go with fast SCVs.
Probably Ravens for Point Defense Drone, but it depends on what the Science Vessel does.
Might go with drop pods for awesomeness, but double Marauder production? Awesome.
Turrets for bunkers, combined with…
The ability to make flame turrets.
Pfft, transports, I'll go with the Predator—especially if I stick with drop pods.
I have no idea about the last two, I'll wait and see.
@progammer: Go
This wasn't data-mined, this was publicly distributed information. Also, you don't choose between Protoss and Zerg, every stage unlocks two options in each list, of which you can only pick one. So five total Protoss techs and five total Zerg techs.
0
@DarkShape80: Go
You should definitely be able to create a requirement in the Data Editor. You might have to duplicate the Mothership's requirement, but it should definitely be possible.
0
You should probably do it the same way that Blizzard makes their units fire twice at the same time. Make one weapon, but make its effect launch two missiles. Look at the Phoenix for an example.
I believe no unit will ever fire multiple weapons at once. For example, the Thor has two different weapons it can use against Colossi, since they can be targeted as both ground and air; but it always just picks one (ground close enough, air otherwise).
0
@progammer: Go
"Heroic or grand in scale or character" this is not.
It does, however, blow my mind.
0
You'd have to use Pick Unit anyway, to hide the items.