Terrain Editor

[Greebo]

I have added some flak bases to CraterMA and uploaded the latest files to the FTP server. There are now pairs of flak bases about 3 miles to either side of each HQ and more pairs about 4 miles to either side of each city (centre to centre). There are also three flak bases, one for each country, in the central tank town area.

I could get better coverage for the HQs if I moved the flak bases in from 3 miles apart to about 2 miles. So long as I made sure they were not in the same 4 mile square would there be any problem about doing this? As neither the HQ or flak bases are capturable there can't be any spawn conflict from AA with them being that close. I was wondering though if there might be some other issue about setting bases and strats close together, perhaps some sort of resupply conflict.

[hitech]

2 miles should work.

HiTech

[Easyscor]

   Related.

Do you see any issues with rail paths? IIRC, I was once told there needed to be 3 miles clear distance for them because of the flak guns?

[Greebo]

To my eyes the big rectangular blocks of 100 clouds I have placed in my map look too obviously artificial from a distance. So I was thinking of splitting each of these up into say five closely spaced groups each of 20 clouds, or ten of 10. My question is if a player sees 100 clouds nearby grouped into five or ten fronts will this have any impact on his frame rates compared to seeing the same number of clouds but grouped into just one front?

[hitech]

To my eyes the big rectangular blocks of 100 clouds I have placed in my map look too obviously artificial from a distance. So I was thinking of splitting each of these up into say five closely spaced groups each of 20 clouds, or ten of 10. My question is if a player sees 100 clouds nearby grouped into five or ten fronts will this have any impact on his frame rates compared to seeing the same number of clouds but grouped into just one front?

I the FPS will be the same in each case. FPS will depend on how many are in view and how many close.


HiTech

[captain1ma]

To my eyes the big rectangular blocks of 100 clouds I have placed in my map look too obviously artificial from a distance. So I was thinking of splitting each of these up into say five closely spaced groups each of 20 clouds, or ten of 10. My question is if a player sees 100 clouds nearby grouped into five or ten fronts will this have any impact on his frame rates compared to seeing the same number of clouds but grouped into just one front?

I was running them in the AVA a big line of them. they worked once, and then didn't. I didn't notice an hits on my framerates because of them. ive been spending time in the alpha ava trying to get missions and clouds to work. its always something though!

I had build a simple mission and then all of a sudden it stopped working. same with the clouds. but it could be i'm in the wrong place before they come out.

[Greebo]

A tip HT gave me when using the cloud editor is to use minus numbers in the "First Create HR:" box. This sets the time that cloud bank is first created to a point before you enter the terrain. That way you do not have to wait for your cloud systems to generate.

I've had no problem with frame rates and clouds either, but then I have a decent PC which runs the alpha at over 80 fps. It is hard for me to know how many clouds to include. I want them to look good but I don't know how much they will affect those players running on marginal systems.

A few things I have found out that may help other terrain builders:

For MA terrains I try to set all the cloud systems to have the same lifetime, exactly one hour in my case. That way the maximum cloud count stays the same however long the terrain runs.

If you put a number of cloud fronts together and you want them to stay together for more than one front life time they will all need to have the same number of rows and clouds per row. This is because even if they are all set to the same speed a front with more clouds takes a little longer to generate on each cycle and so will be a little further away from a smaller front than last time. Over subsequent cycles the group will gradually break up. Again this is mainly an issue for MA terrains.

The density of cloud types in the editor from lightest to heaviest goes something like: 0,1,3,7,6,5,2,9,8,4. So using 0 and 1 in a cloud bank will give lightly scattered puffs of cloud while 8 and 4 will give a heavy overcast. There is about twice as much of the max type of cloud in a bank as the min type.

[Easyscor]

The OE Edit Tree Utility


Admittedly, I always have a lot of programs running at the same time so if anything can go wrong, it will.

These are both for laf1x1m. I'd been working awhile documenting the hierarchy in GIMP when things got weird.
In the first jpg, an Object Ob switched over to become a group.
In the second, I was getting different and unexpected dialog boxes. I hope the lines showing which buttons resulted in which dialog are the actual paths I took and make sense. One time I clicked Edit Face flags iirc and got one, a dialog similar to a Group dialog, then again later, I got the second which I take as the correct one. This may not be exactly how it happened, but it's close.

[Easyscor]

TE - Beta p00

I was looking for a new bridge in the full objects list    but playing around as I went.

Anyway, I selected the italianstonepine and as soon as I clicked Apply or OK, the TE crashed. At first, I thought that made sense since I had Euro Summer set so I changed to Mediterranean but the same thing happened.

[bustr]

I tested the cloud block again with my GTX 760 that floats over TT on NDilses online. With my old AMD6770 128bit bus 1G GDDR5. In the center of the block my FPS was 20-27. With my new 760 256bit 2G GDDR5 40-52. Cloud density is going to have an effect on players with PC that meet the minimum to medium requirements to play the game.

Also I suspect terrains that have a density of highlands above 2k with trees and especially rock faces combined with clouds will be another FPS hit for the same group of players. I paired back the tall oak density on the 2k and higher on my offline terrain which gave me back some FPS to my 760. The complex rock structures are what they are and why I repainted about 30% with a grey rock and vegetation tile to create a wider transition to bare rock. Offshore in one of the CV looking at the island from the officers club catwalk. My FPS improved from locked at 20 to fluctuating 22-32 depending on the visual focus point at the island.

Offline on NDisles if I sit in a 37mm at A1 and pan my view at the rock wall of the nearest visible mountain. While the view is pointing at highland with vegetation 52. The moment it pans into the edge of the rack wall, 40-45 FPS until I pan the view off the rock formation. I tested sitting in a gun on a destroyer NDisles CV20. The nearest mountain is about 12-15 miles away and very low on the horizon. FPS looking at it 55-60. On my terrain the CVs are about 8 miles from the 2000ft shore cliffs with exposed rock.

[Greebo]

Thanks for the feedback regarding clouds and FPS, I've been wondering about this since my system rarely drops below 100 fps.

Recently I have been considering whether to get rid of the cloud system I have done for CraterMA, maybe just leave an overcast layer. Apart from the FPS issue I am not too keen on how they look anyway, the square blocks of cloud look too obviously artificial and the individual clouds judder in a disconcerting way in the middle distance. The AH II clouds looked much more realistic IMO.

[bustr]

Is there a secret to painting terrain around the HQ object that does not end up with trees sprouting out of the water, roads and other none tree places on that object tile?

[Greebo]

That sounds more like an issue with the HQ object. Do you still get the trees in the wrong places even with the treeless sand texture below the object?

[hitech]

Is there a secret to painting terrain around the HQ object that does not end up with trees sprouting out of the water, roads and other none tree places on that object tile?

I assume you know if trees are on they will not refresh when you place or move an object?

HiTech

[bustr]

I deleted the HQ, laid down sand to remove all trees. Turned off, then turn on trees and all gone. I use that to help correct tree mistakes. Else where I will switch between tree\clutter type tiles to remove trees while on\off the show trees to check results.

When I lay down tree terrain around the HQ there seems to be a tolerance zone. As long as I keep sand showing around the HQ tile, no tree problems. As soon as I try to edge some clutter into the HQ object zone, trees sprout up in the strangest places. And it's the same sprout pattern each time, even if I'm using the mixed sand and sparse tree tile.

I doubt anyone I give my gunnery terrain to will bother to drive around the HQ. It was something I noticed and spent some time trying to paint clutter without causing trees to sprout in the water and on the roads. I guess knowing my HQ has trees where they shouldn't be bothers me....

I have not tried painting the tree\clutter into the square first I want to place the HQ in to see if this still happens. I'm finding terrain building is like having the same dream every night that you think you forgot something that you can't remember but it still bugs you the next day.