Staredit Network

Okay, I will try and redo the loading routine to cope with this

Simply displaying a higher ID is a no-brainer coding-wise, however I want to stay true to the purpose DatEd was made for - staying as faithful to the format as possible. I see two options here: (both would have a disclaimer in red that will state that the shown IDs are 1 off)
1)Implement the change into-the-core.
2)Make this an option in the Options box.

Hmm?

Hokay, I'll try to do it for v1.4b.


That's what I have in mind to do.There is enough space for it on the UI, and both options should be available.


...and still kicking

Will look into this.

This will go into the appropriate hint. DatEd does not include a SC-mod debugger as of now
PS:1000th reply is mine

What's the difference between whether they start at 0 or start at 1 in the sfxdata.dat editor? Unless those IDs are actually stored in sfxdata.dat, showing them as one higher number wouldn't be falsifying the format. If they are not stored in there, then the starting index is only determined by the program using it, which is Starcraft; and it apparently uses 0 for no sound and then starts the sfxdata.dat entries at 1.

I won't argue (the IDs are not DAT-stored), but if it is done like that then the entry #1 from sfxdata.dat would not be pareil to entry #1 from, say, units.dat, format location-wise. The IDs are provided as the order by which entries are stored in the format, and the program acts accordingly. If I do it this way, I would have to redo e.g. the ID-jump routine, because when the user will input XXX, in fact it will want entry #XXX-1, and the routine I use is versatile for all the editors. Doing this is of little problem technically, but the thing is whether such a 'problem' should occur at all?

ADDITION:
I don't like the idea of faking the display, besides everything else.

Haha, the overall idea of making them match was more just TheNomad's idea.

Let him fight for it, then

ah you betrayed me

Well, maybe add a "None" in front or something, which I think would fit everything just fine (since iscript and the taunts in the units sound subtab agree that 0 is "None").

P.S. WB Broody
And nice one with #1000

You'd be surprised how envious this thread makes me...

TheNomad>For technical reasons (as SF mentioned) there cannot be a "no sound" entry, so this option goes down the drain.

LJ>May I know why?

Understood
Weird that blizz did it with x+1 for taunts but not in the sound tbl...

OK, no prob, I'll just do X-1 in Iscript then

But I wanted that too!!!

No, "it" is a hack to make the sound indexes match the ones used by SC and the ones in the TBL. Apparently, the TBL starts with a WAV as Index 0, while SC starts with NULL as Index 0. Which means IScript and the Taunt page (Sounds subtab of the Units tab) will have the ID of "X + 1" than the one showed in the Sound tab (using sfxdata.tbl).

Something tells me it was 2 coders that did this and had a misunderstanding when they implemented it in SC

Sfxdata.tbl has nothing to do here. It's just the matter of having a different base for indexing, and that's all. The sound-pointing properties need to have a "no sound" pointer and the developper decided to implement it this way. Some properties use a similar 'mechanism' to mark the "No something" entries, but some use for this purpose an index value higher than the total amount of entries (e.g. portraits). What I think to be the case here is that this implementation was done earlier than the complete sfxdata was composed and hence they could not use a number higher than the total count of entries (because they didn't know it yet), but still they needed it so they decided to use 0.

that's what I kinda meant

I wanted the sounds index to be changed



If you look at the post ID# I actually got the 1000th post he got the 1001st post its just its on the first of the page, first being the keyword. Im not trying to burst a buble im just technical.


so are you gonna change it then? Please!

Quote from myself: (emphasis mine)



Well, I can do something like this as a non-default option, but nothing more.Satisfied?

Upon testing some weapon stuff, I found a weird thingie... I changed the effect (which you weirdly call "explosion" ) to "Splash (Air)" and I noticed that is just "Splash (Enemy)" in behavior. I copy-pasted the halo rockets entries and modified the targeting to ground instead of air and gave it to the wraith and it attacked ground units as normally as the valk does. I even tried to fool around with "Splash (Enemy)" and I didn't notice any changes.

I am pretty sure there ARE differences since I don't think Blizz is crazy enough to make the same thing twice just for air... I didn't fully fully fully test (even on buildings) so there might be a difference or two (maybe concussive splash or something), but what I did see is that it is mislabeled since it works on ground too. I'll test versus different type of units and buildings to be sure.

Cheers!

P.S. just a question, will you ever add CL params to DatEd ? I don't really want one since you'd also have to add dat-to-text exporting and text-to-dat compiling, which I doubt you're in the mood for, but I was wondering if you wanted to add this in the long term (maybe DatEd 2.0).

Please do some testing and then elaborate on the explosion effects. This is another property that needs to be re-researched (along with ascertaining the property that I called "Follow" in v1.4). Damn KA

Command-line...hmm....I thought about it at some point. Implementing this would require me to export the entire DAT format data and property descriptions to an external text file, which is A LOT of work, although it's not a difficult task by itself. I can't see any use for it though, other than AZero-files compatibility, which is another issue since even AZ have some properties mislabeled and I don't think there many AZ users left around anymore (on Windows at least).

After a moment of reflection, I can actually think of a use to such a feature, one that was proposed already some time ago, namely - DAT comparison.Would someone still want something like this being done?

I may rather work on a Mac port of the program, which I know to be doable with Qt, but this would be a very serious project, one that I don't know if I'll have time to do.

ADDITION:

It's possible, but I can't believe that Blizz would copy an already existing property option for BW.

Heh
Well, I can give you one... apart from compatibility with Max (say a Mac user gives me a dat spreadsheet so that I can compile it for him with DatEd), I'll tell you how I do it with Ice-ing: I have my "Units.dat.txt" and "Images.dat.txt" in my IceCC folder, just to have the defaults there (although I mostly use Images.dat since it contains Units.dat entries - yes I know they aren't dat files, but I was too lazy to think of a diff name ) and a file called Input.txt. Input.txt is basically all my experimentation or change. And then I made a little batch file on the desktop + a shortcut to the Input.txt file. The batch file, once double-clicked will compile Input.txt to IScript.bin on my desktop so I can easily drag&drop it on my already open WinMPQ

This way I don't have to keep my IceCC folder open and too many files or even both to open IceCC (since I only use the CL) to do anything. It would be nice to have a batch file that compiled the dat file so I can easily add it. The objective in this case would be that if I change, say a flag to True, it'd just basically be a 1<->0 conversion. Obviously for complete changes like graphics or say more than 2 changes I'd use the UI of DatEd.

Well just an example, since as I said, it doesn't stay as a priority. But I thought maybe others wanted it and that is the way I'd use it if it'd be implemented.

P.S. I added a little application someone sent me today. It is a little xmas tree and if you click on it, it shows how many days are left 'till the BIG day I thought I'd share it with you guys (and girls) just for fun It's made by the "Drive SW" company. click me for the xmas tree. Enjoy!

Yes, I for one would indeed very much like *.dat comparison! If it was graphical it would be even more awesome, but it's of course up to you how you'd like to implement it....


I was planning on going over basically everything in DatEdit this weekend, but I didn't get time, I'm afraid... Hopefully I'll be able to do this before christmas or at least before the new year, but no promises. School's put me on papers of gigantic proportions when summed up, and I ain't spending Christmas day working on this.

To be honest, I think the best option would be to create a brand new program for this purpose, but I don't want to maintain two apps if I can do it in a single one I shall think of it, and who knows....who knows....

This is one of those things I tested years ago. Last time I tested it, I think I found that the difference between the two was that "Splash (Enemy)" can hit both ground and air with the splash at the same time, while "Splash (Air)" can hit only either ground or air with the splash with each attack, depending on whether the target is ground or air. This may need to be tested again just to be sure.

Tested that on the night in question and both the Dark Archon and the Mutalisk from above took damage with both Splashes (unless I missed something).

... strangez0r !!

Dear BroodKiller:
DatEdit is fantastic. I especially love the fact that I will no longer need the buggy Unit Resizer program. However, one thing that always made it difficult to work with was the fact that you could only see the box, not the GRP to get a sense of where that box is in relation to the actual graphic. Just as DatEdit can display button icons, it'd be awesome if it could also show the unit or building graphic in relation to the unit size box.