I don't use Hammer so I can't answer your question directly - but I do know that hammer rounds the coords to the nearest whole unit when it exports to .map to compile it. So whether you place it or not things will still be on a unit by unit base. Placing things off-grid in general isn't a very good idea because it can cause problems compiling, but if you want to Quark can easily and will export 5 decimal places to the .map file.
The command you want is Map -> Snap to grid. You may also be interested in Map -> Show grid. As Shadowics notes, vertices are rounded to integers during map export, so this is a common cause of hard-to-find leaks.
<!--QuoteBegin-Shadowics+Feb 23 2004, 04:03 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Shadowics @ Feb 23 2004, 04:03 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> It sounded like he was asking how <u>not</u> to have things on the grid, not snap them to the grid.
If you had the vertex (18.95, 13.5, 21.3333333333) Hammer would export (18, 13, 21) Quark would export (18.95000, 13.50000, 21.33333)
It's best to stay on the grid, but if you use hammer that's particularly important since off-grid ploys with get shrunk to grid. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Uh, yes. Snap to grid toggles it on or off...
Comments
If you had the vertex (18.95, 13.5, 21.3333333333)
Hammer would export (18, 13, 21)
Quark would export (18.95000, 13.50000, 21.33333)
It's best to stay on the grid, but if you use hammer that's particularly important since off-grid ploys with get shrunk to grid.
If you had the vertex (18.95, 13.5, 21.3333333333)
Hammer would export (18, 13, 21)
Quark would export (18.95000, 13.50000, 21.33333)
It's best to stay on the grid, but if you use hammer that's particularly important since off-grid ploys with get shrunk to grid. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Uh, yes. Snap to grid toggles it on or off...