CMP to SUR Conversion Tests

nah, working on one thing commonly is often ending up with failure. just remember your elementary school days, when you wrote short stories. if you wrote them with a mate together, even if you decided on what to write, anyway it ended up not nearly as good as if you write alone. guess it is similar with editing single files commonly especially with so much people.
also, if i remember right, Lance will mind, as the code, changed slightly can be abused badly and this is likelier the more people have their hands on it. we don’t suspect anyone but its not worth the risk, is it?

lol try abousing sur on ower server you end up in the brig
thats what the anticheats for
only fixes that benfit the program are applyed
not everyone is excepted lol

the way i look at it i built my anti cheat and it wasent just my input i maby built it but motah cannon and crazy
swaped ideas around and bits of code i put it toghere
and built it as they did with theres so it dose work
maby have a private code board for projects like these

This project does not need much work, just the changes I have suggested and for me it is finished.

With this functionality I can then make the type of surs that I need without much difficulty by doing some trickery in MilkShape - but it is not possible with the present state of Sur Builder.

If anyone wants more in it they have not said so, and I do not want to keep moving the goalpost, so I would be against more additions/changes. We need to get it finished.

Well, I took a break as advised.

Now I’m back and there’s not been any new post.

Is nobody with C knowledge able / willing to help out with this?

Is it really dead?

I am still willing to have a go but will need a lot of hints and advice to start - if LS will even consider letting me have access.

Lancer? Are you willing to help me fix it as a total C novice (hint - I used to be fairly capable at tracing old sods’ Basic and REXX and others using simple 1-letter variables and uncommented code)!!

Or do you prefer to let it die?

Well there is still my tool in development, but atm i am concentrating on university stuff. So even if this project is “dead”, I will try to finish mine.

Thank you Schmackbolzen, much appreciated as always.

I hope we can achieve both.

I’ll work on the exporter after JFLP. I should also have access to the builder (if it ever gets added to the Forge), so I may be able to fix it, too.

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.

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
Schmackbolzen

There 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.

trully we have some work in milkshape

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 ect

it’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 opinion

i 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 tool

anyone 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 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 ect

it’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 opinion

i 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 tool

anyone 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 univers

so …

i don’t think that the project is dead and no matter what is said, if someone wants to continue it will continue