Not a bad idea for getting past the server-side bank issue, but the 1mb bank limit size would limit it. Although 1mb can store quite a bit of info if it's condensed well.
For a multiplayer aspect, it could have an AI player as an ally for each player.
It could also learn by mimicking what a human player does, so as it plays against someone it could compile what he/she does and remember it.
I've done a lot of thinking about an AI that learns the more that people play against it. Server side banks would definitely be nice, but if that never gets implemented it could also be accomplished by having people upload their bank files to a website and releasing a smarter version every so often. A fully fledged AI that learns as it fights against people would be very cool. For now this is just a basic proof of concept and a demo of a genetic algorithm.
My map does have the option to output detailed results to a bank file, but it's output only. I might make a windows app to view them in a friendly way.
I do want to add attack behavior to it (attack priorities, focus fire, etc...) and evolve that along with the unit selection, instead of leaving it to the default unit AI.
Hey everyone, I recently put up an arcade map that uses an evolutionary algorithm (or genetic algorithm) to evolve the best combination of units to use against any army you specify. Basically, you create an army and it will find the best army to use against it, that does the most damage while losing as few units as possible.
It works by creating some random armies to fight in the first generation of battles. They get assigned a score and the highest scoring armies go on to fight in the next generation, along with some mutated versions with slightly different units. After a few generations of this, it evolves armies with the highest possible score. The results are displayed on a bar graph so you can see the improvement over time.
It's not so much of a playable game, because you can't control any of the units. It's more of a demonstration of a simple genetic algorithm.
That's actually a pretty cool idea... introducing gambling into it. Get all the gambling addicts hooked on it :) The problem with tic-tac-toe is that the person who goes first always has the advantage.
But the whole gambling idea opens up possibilities for other game types... like doing your whole tournament/gambling system with people fighting mini-battles instead of nuke-tac-toe. Then the minerals that each player wins become their starting resources for the next round of play, and the mini-battles can get bigger and bigger until someone has enough of an advantage to win the whole thing. Very cool stuff.
I like the tournament idea. I wonder if it would be better to implement it across multiple games using banks, instead of all on the same map. Not much incentive for someone to stick around after they get eliminated, other than to be a spectator.
Nuke takes too long to Fall down, the game take soo long to finish with sometime a tie...
Well for me, part of the enjoyment is watching the carnage of the nukes destroying the units. Obviously you can play it on paper but you can't drop nukes on paper. But if people agree that it takes too long, I can speed it up.
Quote:
Like making it 3 stage high, with the possibility to make tictactoe at the vertical and horzontal
Is it even possible to have 3-dimensional stackable terrain like that in Starcraft? It's a cool idea but I don't think there's any way to do it with the Starcraft engine, unless I'm wrong.
Quote:
You should try making funny and interesting boost to the game.
In my original post I talked about adding a scoring system with bounties on who you nuke, to add another element of strategy other than just trying to make your 3 X's or 3 O's. If anyone has other ideas for adding to the gameplay, keep em coming.
First off, happy anniversary to the WTE! I think it's a great way to encourage map-makers and share ideas. I've been really impressed with the responses I've seen to previous exercises. You guys can do better designs in a week than I could do in a year.
I have a custom map that I think would be a good candidate for it. I just launched my first map called Nuke Tac Toe, which is basically a tic-tac-toe game using nukes. You can see a video of it here: http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwNngVEnqe4
Thing is, since map design and terraining isn't my strong suit I mainly focused on the coding of the gameplay for this first version. You can see that the terrain design is basically non-existant, other than the 9 squares that make up the 3x3 grid.
The reasons I think this would make a good weekly exercise are:
- The maps would be really small, with only the 3x3 grid of small "squares" (they don't have to be square), each of which has a size of 11 in my version. They need to be small so the overhead camera view can fit the whole grid.
- The squares don't need a lot of detail, since there needs to be a relatively open space in each one for the units to fight in, and the X or O to display on.
- There are a lot of possible concepts for a 3x3 grid of squares: space station (like my lame design), jungle islands, lava pits, cityscapes, etc.... The possibilities are endless.
I just published my custom map called Nuke Tac Toe. You play tic-tac-toe against your opponent by dropping nukes on the square where you want to place your X or O. Each square has neutral units engaged in battle so the nukes have something to destroy, and the camera zooms in and pans around while the nukes are dropped, so you can see the destruction up close.
You can play against a human opponent or against a computer opponent by adding an AI player, and you can play multiple games in the same session.
The current terrain design is pretty basic, since I was focused more on the gameplay for the first version. I want to add more map designs in the future.
Any and all feedback or suggestions are appreciated. I have a few ideas for future upgrades to the gameplay, such as:
- Keeping score of wins/losses.
- An additional scoring system where there are bounties on units or races that you nuke. That would add another element of strategy for choosing the square to nuke, instead of just trying to win the tic-tac-toe game.
- Right now the player on Team 1 always plays first as X. I might change it so the player who plays first alternates each game, to keep it fair. Or maybe the player who lost the previous game gets to start first on the next game.
Ok, thanks. Is there any way to test a map using the lobby without publishing it? When you test from the editor it skips the lobby and brings you into the game automatically. I don't want to have to publish a new version of my map every time I make a change to test the lobby.
I have a map with 2 players (slots 1 and 2) that are user controlled, but when I create a game in the lobby, the second player is always a computer player and the "Add AI" and "Add player" buttons are deactivated. How do I make it possible to add a player? I'm sure there's something simple that I'm missing.
EDIT: I solved it by changing the player controller to "Open" in the Game Variants for both players, but I'm still not able to change who gets to be player 1 and who is player 2. When I create a game I'm always player 1, even if I move myself to the Team 2 slot. Is the player who creates the game ALWAYS player 1?
I have a map where I use a custom galaxy script that I wrote in a text editor and imported using the Import Manager. In this script I call some "libNtve_" functions like libNtve_gf_HideGameUI() and libNtve_gf_CreateDialogItemButton(). In the trigger editor I create a custom script to include the galaxy file, and use the Initialization Function feature of the custom script to call an init function from my galaxy file.
This all works fine as long as there is at least one other trigger that exists in the trigger editor. If I delete the other triggers, leaving only the custom include script, then suddenly it doesn't recognize any of the "libNtve_" function calls in the galaxy script and gives a syntax error on those lines.
If I add an empty trigger in the trigger editor and disable it, then it works again. So it appears that there has to be at least one trigger that exists (even if it's disabled) in order for a custom galaxy script to have access to the "libNtve_" functions.
Can anyone explain why this happens? I can give more detailed instructions on how to duplicate the problem, if you want.
I'm not sure if this is useful for this example, but every region that you create gets assigned an integer ID by the editor, and there's a function that returns the region for the ID that you pass in:
region RegionFromId(int id)
This function doesn't show up in the trigger editor for some reason, but it is one of the native galaxy functions. A lot of the campaign scripts use it. I haven't found an easy way to determine the ID of a region, though. I believe they get indexed starting at 1 in the order that you create them, so if you don't rename the regions, the ID should be the same as the number in the region name "Region 001".
0
@Amaroq64: Go
Not a bad idea for getting past the server-side bank issue, but the 1mb bank limit size would limit it. Although 1mb can store quite a bit of info if it's condensed well.
For a multiplayer aspect, it could have an AI player as an ally for each player.
It could also learn by mimicking what a human player does, so as it plays against someone it could compile what he/she does and remember it.
0
I've done a lot of thinking about an AI that learns the more that people play against it. Server side banks would definitely be nice, but if that never gets implemented it could also be accomplished by having people upload their bank files to a website and releasing a smarter version every so often. A fully fledged AI that learns as it fights against people would be very cool. For now this is just a basic proof of concept and a demo of a genetic algorithm.
My map does have the option to output detailed results to a bank file, but it's output only. I might make a windows app to view them in a friendly way.
I do want to add attack behavior to it (attack priorities, focus fire, etc...) and evolve that along with the unit selection, instead of leaving it to the default unit AI.
0
Hey everyone, I recently put up an arcade map that uses an evolutionary algorithm (or genetic algorithm) to evolve the best combination of units to use against any army you specify. Basically, you create an army and it will find the best army to use against it, that does the most damage while losing as few units as possible.
It works by creating some random armies to fight in the first generation of battles. They get assigned a score and the highest scoring armies go on to fight in the next generation, along with some mutated versions with slightly different units. After a few generations of this, it evolves armies with the highest possible score. The results are displayed on a bar graph so you can see the improvement over time.
It's not so much of a playable game, because you can't control any of the units. It's more of a demonstration of a simple genetic algorithm.
Screenshots:
Screenshot 1: creating the army
Screenshot 2: units allowed for the evolving army
Screenshot 3: summary and algorithm settings
Screenshot 4: battle
Screenshot 5: results graph
0
That's actually a pretty cool idea... introducing gambling into it. Get all the gambling addicts hooked on it :) The problem with tic-tac-toe is that the person who goes first always has the advantage.
But the whole gambling idea opens up possibilities for other game types... like doing your whole tournament/gambling system with people fighting mini-battles instead of nuke-tac-toe. Then the minerals that each player wins become their starting resources for the next round of play, and the mini-battles can get bigger and bigger until someone has enough of an advantage to win the whole thing. Very cool stuff.
0
@Pshyched: Go
I like the tournament idea. I wonder if it would be better to implement it across multiple games using banks, instead of all on the same map. Not much incentive for someone to stick around after they get eliminated, other than to be a spectator.
0
Well for me, part of the enjoyment is watching the carnage of the nukes destroying the units. Obviously you can play it on paper but you can't drop nukes on paper. But if people agree that it takes too long, I can speed it up.
Is it even possible to have 3-dimensional stackable terrain like that in Starcraft? It's a cool idea but I don't think there's any way to do it with the Starcraft engine, unless I'm wrong.
In my original post I talked about adding a scoring system with bounties on who you nuke, to add another element of strategy other than just trying to make your 3 X's or 3 O's. If anyone has other ideas for adding to the gameplay, keep em coming.
0
First off, happy anniversary to the WTE! I think it's a great way to encourage map-makers and share ideas. I've been really impressed with the responses I've seen to previous exercises. You guys can do better designs in a week than I could do in a year.
I have a custom map that I think would be a good candidate for it. I just launched my first map called Nuke Tac Toe, which is basically a tic-tac-toe game using nukes. You can see a video of it here: http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwNngVEnqe4
Thing is, since map design and terraining isn't my strong suit I mainly focused on the coding of the gameplay for this first version. You can see that the terrain design is basically non-existant, other than the 9 squares that make up the 3x3 grid.
The reasons I think this would make a good weekly exercise are:
- The maps would be really small, with only the 3x3 grid of small "squares" (they don't have to be square), each of which has a size of 11 in my version. They need to be small so the overhead camera view can fit the whole grid.
- The squares don't need a lot of detail, since there needs to be a relatively open space in each one for the units to fight in, and the X or O to display on.
- There are a lot of possible concepts for a 3x3 grid of squares: space station (like my lame design), jungle islands, lava pits, cityscapes, etc.... The possibilities are endless.
0
I didn't realize about the region thing, so I added it to my post (North America). Is there any way to get a map playable everywhere?
Video added: http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwNngVEnqe4
0
Nuke Tac Toe
(Region: North America)
I just published my custom map called Nuke Tac Toe. You play tic-tac-toe against your opponent by dropping nukes on the square where you want to place your X or O. Each square has neutral units engaged in battle so the nukes have something to destroy, and the camera zooms in and pans around while the nukes are dropped, so you can see the destruction up close.
You can play against a human opponent or against a computer opponent by adding an AI player, and you can play multiple games in the same session.
Screenshot 1: http:img221.imageshack.us/img221/585/nuketactoescreen1an.jpg
Screenshot 2: http:img232.imageshack.us/img232/4264/nuketactoescreen2.jpg
Screenshot 3: http:img580.imageshack.us/img580/7374/nuketactoescreen3.jpg
Video: http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwNngVEnqe4
The current terrain design is pretty basic, since I was focused more on the gameplay for the first version. I want to add more map designs in the future.
Any and all feedback or suggestions are appreciated. I have a few ideas for future upgrades to the gameplay, such as:
- Keeping score of wins/losses.
- An additional scoring system where there are bounties on units or races that you nuke. That would add another element of strategy for choosing the square to nuke, instead of just trying to win the tic-tac-toe game.
- Right now the player on Team 1 always plays first as X. I might change it so the player who plays first alternates each game, to keep it fair. Or maybe the player who lost the previous game gets to start first on the next game.
0
Ok, thanks. Is there any way to test a map using the lobby without publishing it? When you test from the editor it skips the lobby and brings you into the game automatically. I don't want to have to publish a new version of my map every time I make a change to test the lobby.
0
I have a map with 2 players (slots 1 and 2) that are user controlled, but when I create a game in the lobby, the second player is always a computer player and the "Add AI" and "Add player" buttons are deactivated. How do I make it possible to add a player? I'm sure there's something simple that I'm missing.
EDIT: I solved it by changing the player controller to "Open" in the Game Variants for both players, but I'm still not able to change who gets to be player 1 and who is player 2. When I create a game I'm always player 1, even if I move myself to the Team 2 slot. Is the player who creates the game ALWAYS player 1?
0
Ok, thanks. I did compare the generated scripts when there was a trigger and when there wasn't a trigger, but I didn't notice that
gets changed to
when a trigger doesn't exist. Durr.
0
I have a map where I use a custom galaxy script that I wrote in a text editor and imported using the Import Manager. In this script I call some "libNtve_" functions like libNtve_gf_HideGameUI() and libNtve_gf_CreateDialogItemButton(). In the trigger editor I create a custom script to include the galaxy file, and use the Initialization Function feature of the custom script to call an init function from my galaxy file.
This all works fine as long as there is at least one other trigger that exists in the trigger editor. If I delete the other triggers, leaving only the custom include script, then suddenly it doesn't recognize any of the "libNtve_" function calls in the galaxy script and gives a syntax error on those lines.
If I add an empty trigger in the trigger editor and disable it, then it works again. So it appears that there has to be at least one trigger that exists (even if it's disabled) in order for a custom galaxy script to have access to the "libNtve_" functions.
Can anyone explain why this happens? I can give more detailed instructions on how to duplicate the problem, if you want.
0
I'm not sure if this is useful for this example, but every region that you create gets assigned an integer ID by the editor, and there's a function that returns the region for the ID that you pass in:
region RegionFromId(int id)
This function doesn't show up in the trigger editor for some reason, but it is one of the native galaxy functions. A lot of the campaign scripts use it. I haven't found an easy way to determine the ID of a region, though. I believe they get indexed starting at 1 in the order that you create them, so if you don't rename the regions, the ID should be the same as the number in the region name "Region 001".
0
Can't you just use the Import Manager to import the galaxy files into the map, then add a custom script in the trigger editor with:
Why do you need to add something to the InitLibs() function? Unless I'm not understanding what libraries are?