- (230.36 KiB) Downloaded 29 times
- T3D File Format Specification.pdf
- (22.79 KiB) Downloaded 33 times
Personal file database: http://ut99files.gamezoo.org | Personal map database: http://ut99maps.gamezoo.org
"These are the days that we will return to one day in the future only in memories." (The Midnight)
Haha, tell this UnrealED. It only uses the texture name only what causes trouble, if you have different packages that contain textures with the same name.T3D File Format Specification.pdf wrote:<Texture>
The texture of the polygon. Must be specified in Package.Texture format.
I meant on a stripped map, even Menu>File>Export won't export the brushes except for the active one.Barbie wrote:Do not use Menu>Brush>Export but Menu>File>Export to export the complete map.PrinceOfFunky wrote:Surely exporting to T3D won't export any brush except for the active one.
Because the Red Builder Brush is the only brush in it?PrinceOfFunky wrote:I meant on a stripped map, even Menu>File>Export won't export the brushes except for the active one.
It is indeed.Barbie wrote:Because the Red Builder Brush is the only brush in it?PrinceOfFunky wrote:I meant on a stripped map, even Menu>File>Export won't export the brushes except for the active one.
Void is not ignored with additive system maps.FraGnBraG wrote:Basically the compiler/algorithm only cares about the faces in the space side of normals, ignoring the void. So really, additive csg brushes that exist in or extend into the void is basically IGNORED by the complier. Of course the exposed part is used in calculations.
- (159.8 KiB) Downloaded 21 times
Reading again first post and doing the reversal, setting up bDeleteMe True using this way (like you can do with editing ammo inside map) :
ConsoleCommand <set brush bDeleteMe True> or <set Brush bDeleteMe 1> - in a normal map. Do you now wanna know my results (I cannot check yours after all) ? All brushes did not even blink at this command. And then I draw a conclusion <set Brush bDeleteMe 0> or <set Brush bDeleteMe False> probably even if are there (excuse me but UTPT I think has found only red builder) will not help at this point. If Editor is rejecting such a command I think there are reasons to do that - reasons which I don't have knowledge about at this moment, maybe another time.
Paranoia around: Perhaps some of those Egyptica versions ( stripped ) it's crashing at a moment for a roaming problem because I think a PathNode or something like that has been removed being selected at once with brushes DELETED using Delete command from Editor and nothing like a script.
Wandering stage: Is AllActors iterator able to take in account bDeleteMe Actors ? If yes, flag can be reverted but I have doubts that you can find such a "Model" Brush with this flag in such a map. Advanced actor Editing using an actor selected and actor-name - for Brush - it's not even opening AdvancedProperties in a stripped map - maybe your Editor does that, mine doesn't. If I'm trying manually to handle such a "Brush20" or whatever call, nothing can be edited as I can do with a normal actor which is not "pending deletion".
Code: Select all
class Actor extends Object abstract native nativereplication; ... var const bool bDeleteMe; // About to be deleted.
- Posts: 5142
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:24 pm
- Personal rank: Work In Progress
- Location: Liandri
So yeah... /topic
Having that said though, something that crossed my mind in my way home, was that an approximation to the original brushes could be potentially achieved with simple algorithms (check for cubic shapes, tessellated shapes, etc), or even with AI, by training it with intersected brushes from stripped maps as its input, and make it compare to the same but original brushes in the output.
Could be an interesting experiment, but it's not worth the trouble, there are just way too many maps anyway, and most of the best ones are not stripped at all, so there's really no practical point to this, it would only be for the challenge.
I had that thought about AI too and the difference between mine and yours is that you wrote it down even knowing it's not worth the trouble lol.Feralidragon wrote:but it's not worth the trouble
A supervised ANN could easily be trained to make approximations of objects having the image(or vertices) of a piece of the map and the label as an object's vertices.
A unsupervised ANN could instead fit better for simple shapes or by having as input just pieces of the shapes, but I'm not sure
Also an AI could output just the vertices that are hidden and their chained visible vertices so that the time spent to be trained could be less (we are not talking about big data so the difference would be impercettible).
- Posts: 858
- Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:13 pm
- Personal rank: Good news everyone!
- Location: Canada
Your sample map is empty ?... Void is not ignored with additive system maps.
Perhaps I didn't express the concept very well... i'll try again:
Additive brush is overlapping a subtract. part of the additive brush is in the void.
As you see, the bsp-tree (built map) ignored the area that is out in the void.
This is another way of looking at it. What did the compiler do?
Created necessary vertices from the "exposed" area of the additive brush to create polygons as required.
So restated - additive surfaces that are in the void are ignored by the compile process...
Have a look at the "Groups"...FraGnBraG wrote:Your sample map is empty ?
Wait, wth? That wasn't intended XD I didn't even know there was a map I made a lot of time ago in there.Barbie wrote:Have a look at the "Groups"...FraGnBraG wrote:Your sample map is empty ?
What I meant is that you can add brushes in the void in an additive system world, like the ADDITIVE_MAP example, we usually build maps in a subtractive system world because UnrealEd for UT99 only allows us to create a subtractive system world when clicking on File>New.PrinceOfFunky wrote:Void is not ignored with additive system maps.
This one is a clean additive system world map (try adding a cube and a light):
- (1007 Bytes) Downloaded 21 times
Failing to do this could lead to your ripped work being deleted from various servers, mapping sites etc. back then, however.
It's been my experience that I've asked at least a hundred times for permission on using some various item someone has made. Never once been fully denied. In fact it's almost always been super positive. This just happened on my unreal coop server. I asked about a private server controller that I knew of and the maker not only allowed me to use it, he updated it for my use and is giving me advice on extending it how I want.
The point is that instead of invoking EULA why not ask? Guys who make stuff get a chubby when someone shows interest. I know it makes my day.