Different application of filler brushes?
KungFuSquirrel
Basher of Muttons Join Date: 2002-01-26 Member: 103Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
Basher of Muttons Join Date: 2002-01-26 Member: 103Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
<div class="IPBDescription">A thought i had earlier today...</div>Maybe someone else has done this or thought of it (slap me if this is the case), but I had a thought today regarding the application of filler brushes. So far, they give a nice black surface to the top of maps so that the walls don't appear wafer-thin (there's one I haven't used in a while) -- but what about the massive numbers of bulkheads that you see in corridors in maps? Left untouched, you get the paper-thin look again, but given a filler brush, you might cause problems for the commander to see what's going on underneath... (Depending on the thickness, of course). So why not make filler brush versions of the bulkheads using the func_illusionary's rendermode and fx amount? You could theoretically get a nice shaded effect across these bulkheads for depth and yet still avoid any hassles for the commander.
I wouldn't think this would affect too many limits, as using Merl's tools, the clipnodes for the illusionaries would be removed, and if you did it right, you'd (I think, at least) add few to no planes. If anything, the entity limit might cause a problem, but you can always tie multiple bulkheads to the same illusionary.
I'm no expert on the functioning of such things in NS, and I haven't managed to test the idea myself, but I thought I'd share it here and see what you think. Feasible? Practical? Useful? Any other synonym? <!--emo&:D--><img src="http://www.natural-selection.org/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'><!--endemo-->
Again, just a random thought from that crazy squirrely guy in the corner. <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://www.natural-selection.org/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo-->
I wouldn't think this would affect too many limits, as using Merl's tools, the clipnodes for the illusionaries would be removed, and if you did it right, you'd (I think, at least) add few to no planes. If anything, the entity limit might cause a problem, but you can always tie multiple bulkheads to the same illusionary.
I'm no expert on the functioning of such things in NS, and I haven't managed to test the idea myself, but I thought I'd share it here and see what you think. Feasible? Practical? Useful? Any other synonym? <!--emo&:D--><img src="http://www.natural-selection.org/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'><!--endemo-->
Again, just a random thought from that crazy squirrely guy in the corner. <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://www.natural-selection.org/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo-->
Comments
Here's a simple example corridor I put together:
<img src="http://planethalflife.com/awmaps/filler_ex1.jpg" border="0">
Note how the first support appears to have no thickness. This is, of course, the reason for commander fillers in the first place:
<img src="http://planethalflife.com/awmaps/filler_ex2.jpg" border="0">
I placed a regular filler brush on the second support, and as you can see, it gives a strong sense of depth, but could possible inhibit viewing what's going on below, especially if the supports are wider:
<img src="http://planethalflife.com/awmaps/filler_ex3.jpg" border="0">
Finally, back to the original idea, I gave this a rendermode of 'texture' and an fx amount of '100.' While that may have been a little dim, it gives the sense of depth while also giving the commander a clear view to whatever may be below:
<img src="http://planethalflife.com/awmaps/filler_ex4.jpg" border="0">
Seen that i'm not mapping <!--emo&:(--><img src="http://www.natural-selection.org/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':('><!--endemo--> i want to try to contribute with my version of KungFu's demonstration:
-<b>the system can be improved giving more/less transparency basing on the (vertical)depth of the brush.</b>
---the KungFu' sample is right,think of making a heavy concrete bridge...you'll make it darker,so it's harder to see under it,and arrive to make object under commander can't see...also make a darker brush depending on the height the commander camera is in a room: less height>>more transparency;great height>>less transparency
Naturally this go a little in contrast with what Flayra has written in the mapping guide,but i think that sometimes this rule can be broke...naturally it depends on every single case,cos a large bridge don't allow to the commander to give commands,but some smaller(i'm talking of orizontal dimension,not about the depth!)can be also not seethrough.
-<b>a FADE TEXTURE can be used, so in the centre the bulkhead is semitrasparent while at the borders no...</b> i think this thing is very important cos...look at the KungFu' sample,is not very cool the critical jump from the side texture to the trasparent! it look like there are 2 tiiiiiny bulkheads,not one!
Its also worth noting grouping entites that span large areas is bad (if you intend to do this to reduce the number of brush ents and save time by doing mass "to entity" rather than individual beams) since VIS will see the grouped brushes covering multiple portals and thus drawing them from multiple places. Hence r_speeds may be affected in some areas.
Good point about the patches, though, I wasn't even thinking of that.
At any rate, it's only a little aesthetic improvement; no sense using it if it's going to put you beyond the limits. However, I think it might be worth it for anyone who manages to stay underneath with just a little room to spare (though I haven't seen anyone manage this yet, heh...).
Making beams visable should be left to the discresion of the mapper. I'd be concerned that having the wrong items totally invisable could be very frustrating to the commander. Vertacle columns have a footprint, and he may keep trying to build under a column he can not see.
So this is where KFS has the idea on how to keep the geometry visable and attractive to the commander, while not hindering gameplay.