CMP to SUR Conversion Tests
-
Thank you both, whatever you can do is very much appreciated.
It is so disheartening that each time this sur generator/exporter/builder/whatever name it is given, is taken on, the author has to restart from the beginning each time.
This particular one is so close it’s almost surreal that it should be abandoned and collapse in this way.
Good luck, I’ll give whatever help I can in testing, modelling, whatever I can manage just let me know, I’ll do my best.
-
So - is this thread finally dead?
Nobody volunteered to let me have access to the code or tell me where to get it.
LS you are playing blind and deaf, which is a surprise as I know you have read these posts.
And I think you have a good idea you are the cause of all of this, so I expected you to “play the white man” especially as you are only a tad younger than me.
I like closure, just tell me it’s dead and I’ll go away.
-
one question (or issue post?):
i have created a sur for a capital ship, divided it into root, bow, stern, pylons and “nacelles”. the sur worked fine only on the root part. on the other parts collisions with ships and missiles were not detected but only shots. also both npc’s and missiles aimed to hit the starboard nacelle (probably hardpoint HpBayDoor01) rather than the shiparch shield link or the root or HpShield01 or anything else. ofc they hit other parts if they faced them but always aimed for the starboard nacelle. why? or better: how to fix? -
Take a close look at the sur by importing it back into MilkShape with the ship model, and be sure each cmp group has a sur part covering it?
If not then increase the face count of each group by dividing into more so that the sur builder has more chance to generate sur parts for every cmp group.
You must also ensure the sur part name is exactly the same as the cmp group name plus _lod1, e.g. for cmp group “Nacelles” the sur part name must be Nacelles_lod1
-
StarTrader wrote:
So - is this thread finally dead?Nobody volunteered to let me have access to the code or tell me where to get it.
LS you are playing blind and deaf, which is a surprise as I know you have read these posts.
And I think you have a good idea you are the cause of all of this, so I expected you to “play the white man” especially as you are only a tad younger than me.
I like closure, just tell me it’s dead and I’ll go away.
Honestly, ST, relax. The fact that you keep on hounding this thread and criticize all of those individuals that have contributed to this tool in some form or another really isn’t helping the cause. I’d suggest you take a step back from this thread for a week or two and think about what you’re trying to do.
I realize this is a very important program for many modders but being a troll isn’t helping anything.
That’s my 2 cents.
-
I had to read 3 pages of posts, this thread has been very active.
Anyways, I need to speak to each who wants to work on the code on MSN, drop me a msg here and I will send you my name on it. I need real time chat to make sure you can set it up, without help you will be messing around for days trying to set it up.
-
The SUR Builder is now on the Forge at: http://forge.the-starport.net/projects/lancer/files
Project membership requires Lancer’s approval and at least one interactive orientation session. Current project members are:
Lancer Solurus
Bullwinkle
Adoxa
SchmackbolzenThere has been a lot of discussion about the SUR Builder’s ability to deal with parts that do not have a sufficient number of vertices to create a convex shape (sometimes called a “convex hull” in this thread). Let us be clear: The SUR Builder requires a sufficient number of vertices. The precise limit depends on the shape, and the limits cannot be lowered without re-writing the SUR Builder’s algorithms.
Furthermore, Freelancer itself has difficulty with shapes with an insufficient number of vertices. There is no such thing as a “correct” SUR for a CMP part that does not function correctly in-game. We have reports that some overly-simple shapes, such as knife-edges and single-points, may “slice” into other shapes, regardless of the SUR. Other shapes, such as trapezoidal prisms (boxes) that create concave shapes when positioned next to other parts, may simply be insufficient for the SUR Builder to generate a tightly-wrapped convex shape.
In other words, if you have a CMP part that the SUR Builder cannot build around, then add more vertices. Sometimes all you need to do is to split up the faces (tesselation).
The bottom line is that there is no current plan to enhance the SUR Builder’s ability to wrap tightly around shapes that do not have sufficient vertices.
The SUR Builder makes the best guesses that it can, given our current understanding of SURs, and it works quite well for most models. However, a human designer with a 3-D program can easily create shapes that the SUR Builder cannot anticipate.
If you feel that your CMP deserves a hand-crafted SUR, then make a hand-crafted SUR.
For those who find the SUR Builder useful as it is, we are glad that we have been able to make a contribution to the Freelancer community.
- Lancer Solurus and Bullwinkle
-
You lot do realise that even if you do get a SUR Builder that does what you want, that you will still have a #$%%-load of work to do in Milkshape to get the mesh in the CMP into the right state, otherwise you’ll never get the SUR Builder to make a SUR that works.
Here’s a swift knee in the nuts for you, when I’m making a “skintight” SUR 60-70% of the work I do is getting the mesh that goes into the CMP & the CMP itself done right.
So if you can’t figure out how to make a SUR using my methods with the exporter or Dev’s methods with the SUR Splicer, then you are still going to be in the dark with the SUR Builder.
Time to learn how to use Milkshape properly, rather than as an import/export tool.
-
Not quite sure what youre trying to prove… O master of Milkshape. Over the last seven years I’ve seen a lot of waffle belittleing other peoples work and egos getting in the way of this (freelancer) being a good community. Yes, Bejay, you can get sur_splice to work for you, youre obviously better than everybody else. Personally I’d rather encourage people to make what is in essence a free tool for the rest of us mere mortals, one that works. One with a shield bubble would be nice too. Carry on guys, some people actually appreciate your work, which youre giving us for free.
-
Thaddeus i don’t think that irony is a good choice
we don’t say that we are god of milkshape or anything like that
but it’s a fact if you want to use the sur builder with a multi part cmp then you need to modify your cmp
enough vertices, enough groups, you maybe also need to know how to modify the structure of the cmp ect ectit’s not a problem, now we know that we have to do these modifications
the sur builder is a good tool, not yet totally finished, it’s my opinioni respect the work of LS and Bullwinkle and all the testers, including startrader
so it’s not necessary to specify that there are people who like this toolanyone who has already tried one day to make a hitbox like this tool
-
Mirkha wrote:
Thaddeus i don’t think that irony is a good choicewe don’t say that we are god of milkshape or anything like that
but it’s a fact if you want to use the sur builder with a multi part cmp then you need to modify your cmp
enough vertices, enough groups, you maybe also need to know how to modify the structure of the cmp ect ectit’s not a problem, now we know that we have to do these modifications
the sur builder is a good tool, not yet totally finished, it’s my opinioni respect the work of LS and Bullwinkle and all the testers, including startrader
so it’s not necessary to specify that there are people who like this toolanyone who has already tried one day to make a hitbox like this tool
Wasnt a criticism of you Mirkha.
I agree, I would love a sur tool that built a sur for a multipart cmp with a shield bubble and had expansion for animated parts (partiularly inherently concave docks and animated dock doors) all parts centered at origin with correct offsets applied so that parts can be targeted correctly. Doesnt have to be perfect, the sur for the dagger isnt exactly “tight” afterall. I know it is a big ask, I wouldnt want to code that lot. I just dont want to see this tool abandoned just because someone says that his way of doing something is better, yes the sur exporter and sur_splicer method can produce a sur sometimes after a lot of fiddling, its not the best, the best has yet to be written. If we dont give these guys a chance to write it then it never will.
I’m going to shut up now. -
bah you don’t have to shut up
the fact is that each method can be good
it depends on what you need
if you are in a vanilia univers this tool is allready the best for you
personaly i use the sur splicer, great tool, great tutorial from Devastat8r and Sushi and the best for a SW universso …
i don’t think that the project is dead and no matter what is said, if someone wants to continue it will continue
-
the problem i see with the multipart sur generation is as follows.
(note, this is from my experience of making surs for trains)basically a train is made of the root and 2 additional groups, engine01 and engine02. the root consists of 8 subgroups, each engine consists of 3 subgroups. (you can see that after importing to milkshape)
first of all min-max sort has to be set to “no sort”, both type 1 + 2 skipped one of the engine groups, not really a problem.now for problem #1:
the builder works through all the subgroups which gives a really bad sur. to fix it i had regroup them into just the 3 groups, eliminating subgroups.
so the solution here would be to actually recognize the group span and consider the subgroups as one object.next problem #2:
the group offsets in the fix node are calculated into the sur generation but they shouldnt.
the result is that the sur groups have double the offsets of the cmp when viewed in hardcmp.
so the solution would be to subtract fix offsets.hope you understand as my english sometimes gives me a headache and its already in the morning as well.
i think this is a great tool and if the 2 problems get fixed i consider it perfect as it will then generate good surs for multipart vanilla ships.
so heres my thumbs up and i hope this report helps whoever takes over the project.edit: forgot to say an option for shield bubble and hardpoints would be needed as well, but i consider that less difficult from my point of view.
-
Scratches Head
Could someone point me to the part of my post where I belittled BullWinkle & LS’s work, cause I sure as hell can’t find it. It’s the exact opposite, I’m all for the SUR Builder and any other tool that makes it easier to get models into FL.
The problem is that even with a SUR Builder working as ST wants it, the CMP has to have been done right otherwise the SUR wont work, and in my experience that’s the part most fail on, either because they hate using Milkshape (too basic for them), or because they have little or no modelling experience (not knowing how to use the CMP exporter properly doesn’t help either), that is what my post was about.Eh! the only SURs I’ve ever done with the splicer are the ones I did for Gibbon’s Galactica 2.0 mod, and a couple of starlancer ones I was working on before my last visit to the loony house, haven’t built a SUR since I got out, you never know I might just finish them one day. It’s the Exporter for me, 5 years of practise means that only “shrinkwrapped” SURs fail for me, and only because that part of the exporter is F***ed.
-
Bejay, Thaddeus…
You are both on the same side.
Bejay is quite right, a lot sometimes needs to be done in Milkshape to regroup the model - but he has had experience with too many single-group models as have I, these are a pain and that is what he is explaining.
Someone else suddenly threw in animation and hardpoints - forget it. That is moving the goalpost and I am against that.
The only things we need fixing is what I have already put in because they are simple to produce and there is clearly NO INTENTION HERE to improve Sur Builder.
I am not being insulting now, I passed that and BW copped the lot.
I will not apologise, because he not only refused to even listen to my input, but decided to deride me three times, and refused on several occasions to consider to complete this project, without explanation.
I am now merely very bloody sad about all this sh&t!
I am hoping that LS will have enough maturity being close to my own age to spend the 3-4 hours that are needed as only he can do it to complete this to the spec that I and others have accepted for the sake of compromise to make it achievable.
So to stand any chance of him rethinking this, let sleeping dogs lie.
LANCER: - my last appeal to you is this one. Think about it and reason, please. Minimum 8 vertices, if less then issue a message that the cmp group SUR will not be generated, and an optional shield bubble 1m around the ship shape. With your knowledge I could do this in the same time I have suggested. I am not boasting, I do have knowledge in other languages and can compare the task indirectly.
Anyone want to throw another punch at me watch out, I advise you don’t do it, I do not care who you are, this is not spam, not trolling, and I am extremely vitreolic right now. Don’t bring my wrath on yourself.
My reason and cause of my anger: This project is the third bloody time it was started from scratch, and the third bloody time it is killled inches away from being good.
So some of you need to grow up - a lot. This is NOT only for me.
-
Time to learn how to use Milkshape properly, rather than as an import/export tool.
Bugger… you mean i have to actually do some work?? lolz :lol:
-
Xarian, heaven forbid that you should have to work
I must once again agree with ST, its frustrating being so close to having it done and then it dieing off.
Thanks as always though to those that put in their all.
-
It’s only work when you don’t enjoy it
& I’ve never once not enjoyed it.
Playing with ms3d is fun…Just wish there were more hours per solar rotation… or i clone myself… then I at least wouldn’t have a problem with sur’s… it’s all about time for me… If a ship is chewing up precious modding time, it get’s put aside or worked on in parts (over a few days/weeks)… a working sur clicky thing would go along way to speed up the last stages of conversion & be one less thing to worry about.
It’s just such a blastedly mind-bending format to grasp… when its not your only worry, Here’s to some agreement and further advancement in this area
:pint: -
The project is available to be worked on in 2 places, here at the Forge and also on my site. Here is the one BW was working on 0.003 and on my site is the one I gave him to work on 0.002…
Feel free to take on the project, I’m not going to stop you. As far as the 3-4 hour fix, umm, not. I spent 2 months trying to get it to properly wrap a model to no avail.
The program needs to be rebuilt anyways, for one the heavy memory footprint needs to be reduced. This means the file io class needs revamping to remove the preset arrays. The UTF handler needs to be rewritten to use growable arrays as well. And also it needs the insert node problem fixed (why the mesh remapper sometimes works, it inserts new nodes).
The code to build this type of progam is already available here and on the web. The UTF editor can be used for the utf code, the sur format was posted earlier in this thread and on my website in tutorials. The convex hull creation can be had from a program called qhull (my code is built from scratch but qhull is actually in part of FL, there are others such as the 3DFlame stuff)…
