UAW160 using converted SF1 files

[Jel 37]

The 500x500 Solomons terrain, with the tile and height maps converted to "eaw32.tm" and "eaw6.hm". I was able to use their pilot map too

I was using a hastily converted EAW ETO target map for what has been a successful test of my conversion software 

[Wrench 9,425]

that's quite interesting!

which version of SF1 version of the Solomons did you use? (also, why are the Japanese bases blue?)

[Jel 37]

The Solomons one I used had tiles with EAW names like "BNRiver5.bmp". It was from an installation I downloaded shortly after getting Strike Fighters Gold years ago , and adding a number of WW2 planes and a few theatres.

As our versions of EAW can read BMP files, and use flexible sized tile-maps I worked out the structure of the "TFD" and "HFD" files and wrote software to extract the values from them in order to create the "eaw32.tm" and "eaw16.hm" files.
So I made the tile map, the height map, the tilename list and the pilotmap/target and home-base selection map all from the SF1 files.

The targets and bases are not from SF1. They were added as a test from the EAW ETO theatre, and moved using the EAW target editor just to get them on land.
Hence the colours on the map that you see are the EAW ones, not SF1 ones.

It would be better to use the EAW South Pacific Air War targets and objects, and I may do that and make a much better job of it. However, the whole thing was to test if it could be done

Edited August 8, 2019 by Jel

[Stratos 3,167]

Pretty interesting. The first PAcific Tide mod gave me the best WW2 Pacific action I ever had!

[RIBob 39]

Is there an over-riding reason to use SF 1 as a point of departure, as opposed to SF 2?  I understand there are considerable differences between the two versions of SF,  and that the same difference pertains to First Eagles 1 and 2, the WW I flight sim.

It being a fact that "TK", a designer of EAW, also played a major part in the designing of FE1 and SF1, perhaps explains the compatibility of the games, at least to some extent.

The number of recent submissions for both SF1 and FE 1 has declined over time, with most modding work being done with the very different "2" versions of both games.  In that instance, the number of submissions for both "2" versions of the game has been considerable, and is ongoing.

It is worth mentioning that some FE1/SF1 mods may work in FE2/SF2, but the converse is seldom possible.  It is likely that the mods for FE1/SF1 when installed into the "2" versions of the game will require some tweaking, but perhaps not.  Perhaps the Mods which work with little or no issues are relatively simple ones. 

It is presumed that FE1/SF1 version of the game is much more like EAW than is the second "2" versions, and that is why you chose the "1" version with which to experiment.  That is understandable.  That said, is EAW inherently incompatible with the "2" versions of FE2/SF2?

If so, then that explains your choice.

If not, then may I suggest considering the "2" versions of FE/SF games as a better departure point?

FWIW, I consider both FE 2 (Modded), and SF 2 (modded) as exemplary flight sims.  The Modder community has gone a long way in modifying, and improving  both sims to a remarkable degree, despite the somewhat outdated graphics.  Even though less than (modern) top-tier, the graphics on both "2" versions of the games can be much improved with a modern computer and Gfx card, allowing both games to run at "full-option", as pertains to graphics.

I have run some rather old games at "full option" settings on my new "Gaming computer" and the ability to run the graphics wide-open, with nothing downgraded, makes a surprising difference in many games.  Depends on the game, of course, and perhaps some mods as well.  Surprisingly, the semi-arcade game  "Crimson Skies" seems to have benefited the most from having all Gfx options run at full capability.  Admittedly, this was subsequent to applying the "Widescreen" patch/mod, which added the essential "csfix" patch (runs game on newer OpSys),and the "Widescreen" patch, which allows running at native monitor resolution.  It is now a "NoCD" game, a distinct side benefit. 

Almost "Night vs. Day" difference in the graphics.   

It is also worth mentioning that the FE2/SF2 games are TrackIR-friendly, as is EAW, with some minor tweaks.  I have not yet tried the latest version of V1.60 with TrackIR, but other versions of the game required only simple set-up of the TrackIR program itself, and inversion of the mouse "Y" axis within the game graphics preferences.  I fully expect V1.60 to be TIR-friendly as well.  Will report back on this.   MarkEAW has recorded the major contributions of SkyHigh, and my minor contributions on this topic on his Help Site.

So, with apologies for rambling a bit, and perhaps some ignorance, submitted for discussion.

 

 

Edited August 10, 2019 by RIBob

[+gerwin 449]

There is not such a clear difference in SF1 vs SF2.

Strike Fighters games, addons and updates were released in the timeframe 2002 to 2013. The features came gradually over that time. The SF1 to SF2 redefinition was a big step, where the developer implemented all the Windows Vista/7 game design recommendations that came out from Microsoft at the time. First SF2 'rehash' was out in 2009, It was not available as an update. One big difference was that the SF2 games were easily mergeable into one install, sharing all the assets like planes and ground-objects mostly without issues.***

There was also the SF1 Wings over Isreal addon, released in 2010, for which many SF2 features were backported into the last official SF1 release. It was a bit like a SF1.5 game.

It seems that there was little development time spent on the terrain engine throughout all these years. Only in 2012 a new non-tile terrain setup was added, but it was left in a premature state. The Tile-based terrains of SF1 and SF2 are technically pretty much the same. Just minor differences.

( *** SF2 currently handles different planes, ground-objects, terrains etc. in an almost perfect way. They can be added as desired and they are distributed according to UserLists with Dates and Nationalities. If done right, there is no need to remove or deactivate objects, since objects only appear when it is appropriate. )

Edited August 10, 2019 by gerwin

[Jel 37]

 

Now this one is tricky

I am making a utility to match SF1 tiles with EAW tiles and change the references in the "eaw32.tm" file generated from the SF1 files from the SF1 tile number to the EAW tile number.
This morning I added the save and load the temporary file routines, which allows me to save what I have done.
The cyan colors indicate things that have been done already
It takes patience, as there are 104 tiles in the SF1 set

[Jel 37]

Cracked it- this is the Darwin tile and height map with the converted files made by the new editor

Still using ETO targets to test, and the Autumn terrain

For some reason the Darwin BMPs caused problems, otherwise I would not have needed to make this editor

[Jel 37]

I needed a break from working on Darwin, so I went back to further develop the SF1 Solomons theatre for 160 multiplayer fun

With a bit more work I will have a beta out in a couple of days

Jel

[RIBob 39]

On 8/10/2019 at 5:31 PM, gerwin said:

  the only thing I knowThere is not such a clear difference in SF1 vs SF2.

Strike Fighters games, addons and updates were released in the timeframe 2002 to 2013. The features came gradually over that time. The SF1 to SF2 redefinition was a big step, where the developer implemented all the Windows Vista/7 game design recommendations that came out from Microsoft at the time. First SF2 'rehash' was out in 2009, It was not available as an update. One big difference was that the SF2 games were easily mergeable into one install, sharing all the assets like planes and ground-objects mostly without issues.***

There was also the SF1 Wings over Isreal addon, released in 2010, for which many SF2 features were backported into the last official SF1 release. It was a bit like a SF1.5 game.

It seems that there was little development time spent on the terrain engine throughout all these years. Only in 2012 a new non-tile terrain setup was added, but it was left in a premature state. The Tile-based terrains of SF1 and SF2 are technically pretty much the same. Just minor differences.

( *** SF2 currently handles different planes, ground-objects, terrains etc. in an almost perfect way. They can be added as desired and they are distributed according to UserLists with Dates and Nationalities. If done right, there is no need to remove or deactivate objects, since objects only appear when it is appropriate. )

I presume your last paragraph, enclosed in parentheses, pertains to FE 2, as well?  The only thing of which I am certain is that many complex mods for FE1 are problematic when trying to install them into FE2.

As I am a fan for both SF2 and FE2, your comments are valuable, and informative.  I have some small experience in adding Mods to both games, and having done so, the (carefully selected) Mods add a great deal to both games.  

Comparing a fully modded version of either FE2 or SF2 to the original game is like comparing a Volkswagen Beetle to a Porsche of the same model year.  With a modern computer/GFX card, all the Gfx features can be enabled, and both games are considerably enhanced by doing so.  

Thanks for your comments.   

That said, and back to the original Topic, lest we drift too far, OP has not responded, as far as I know, to my original question.  Why the choice of using these files?  No doubt there is a simple reason for doing so, and I am too ignorant to see it.  My presumption is that these files are relatively easily obtained/Modded, offer some advantage over existing/non-existing original EAW files, and are also legitimately used.

So, this question is asked out of ignorance, plain and simple. 

As a fan of all the games involved in this discussion, I hope that this is but the first example of such adaptations.

Edited August 24, 2019 by RIBob

[Jel 37]

Quote

That said, and back to the original Topic, lest we drift too far, OP has not responded

I was not sure if the Old Person was me

However, this whole thing was a simple experiment to see if I could extract the data from SF files, to produce a tile map, a target map, a height map, and a list of target names and create a theatre for UAW160.
It entailed the writing of new software, but it was successful.
That's all

[RIBob 39]

On 8/25/2019 at 12:03 PM, Jel said:

I was not sure if the Old Person was me

However, this whole thing was a simple experiment to see if I could extract the data from SF files, to produce a tile map, a target map, a height map, and a list of target names and create a theatre for UAW160.
It entailed the writing of new software, but it was successful.
That's all

It was you, but in this context, "OP" was intended to mean "Original Poster", lol.  I am of an age where I no longer make light of older people.  I hope that the success of your experiment will allow improvements to EAW, in general, and V1.60 as well.

As always, I appreciate all your hard work.