101
General discussion /
« on: 29 May 2008, 10:19:16 »
you can look at the xml for errorseeking. look at the vertexnumbers and stuff. If you cannot find something you can upload it then i will have a look.
News:
Check out the latest MegaGlest news on our e-mail newsletter (subscribe), Twitter, Facebook and Google+.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
102
Announcements /
« on: 29 May 2008, 10:13:07 »
Great Job!
Theres so much potential in this. I looked in the xmls and the scriptsettings are easy to understand like it was with the xml-units before.
However, is there a way to get special maps with different event-locations? I got that with startlocation of the players, maybe i can put special trees on the map so i get its positions by call and then can cast an army there
.
Ok, i theres lots of possibilities to build nice missions of that. I will try making one soon.
Theres so much potential in this. I looked in the xmls and the scriptsettings are easy to understand like it was with the xml-units before.
However, is there a way to get special maps with different event-locations? I got that with startlocation of the players, maybe i can put special trees on the map so i get its positions by call and then can cast an army there
.Ok, i theres lots of possibilities to build nice missions of that. I will try making one soon.
103
Mods /
« on: 25 May 2008, 09:06:47 »
Hi again,
i found a new trick which other might find usefull:
Its possible to edit normals within blender so that they are solid/smoothed even in the export:
As explanation whats this is about:
Imagine the cube i posted. The normals decide if the edges are visible hard shaded or smooth so you cannot notice them in best case.
For this cube smoothing looks weird because its not possible that the edges cannot be seen; its a corner of 90° and so the attempt to make it invisible leads to bad shading on the planes...
In blender you can easily adjust to which corner angle it shell try to smooth the edges: You must use the modifier "edge split" on the mesh. Adjust the angle-value till the modell looks good to you (use viewingmode "solid"). You will notice that normaldata is really changed: If you display the normels you will see how they move when you change the angle-value.
Ok, if its not clear what i whanted to tell, just ask again.
i found a new trick which other might find usefull:
Its possible to edit normals within blender so that they are solid/smoothed even in the export:
As explanation whats this is about:
Imagine the cube i posted. The normals decide if the edges are visible hard shaded or smooth so you cannot notice them in best case.
For this cube smoothing looks weird because its not possible that the edges cannot be seen; its a corner of 90° and so the attempt to make it invisible leads to bad shading on the planes...
In blender you can easily adjust to which corner angle it shell try to smooth the edges: You must use the modifier "edge split" on the mesh. Adjust the angle-value till the modell looks good to you (use viewingmode "solid"). You will notice that normaldata is really changed: If you display the normels you will see how they move when you change the angle-value.
Ok, if its not clear what i whanted to tell, just ask again.
104
General discussion / -
« on: 24 May 2008, 12:54:49 »
amazing truk wciow !
does it drive like a tank(one side faster) cause i dont see if wheels can turn left/right? Perhaps you can add a oven(?) where wood is burned to create the stem but i dont really have ideas for details; perhaps some seats and forks and axes for the workers.
I got some further with the tower; perhaps i can cover it in trees, so it is more likely like duke suggested.
does it drive like a tank(one side faster) cause i dont see if wheels can turn left/right? Perhaps you can add a oven(?) where wood is burned to create the stem but i dont really have ideas for details; perhaps some seats and forks and axes for the workers.
I got some further with the tower; perhaps i can cover it in trees, so it is more likely like duke suggested.
105
General discussion / -
« on: 24 May 2008, 06:29:09 »
So possibly still free are: (am i right?)
-entwined tower
-ranger
-lookout
im not quite sure... as you probably noticed on my persianmod i still struggle with textures and so no progress. So perhaps i try a building first because it needs less time. Prob is only that i have to fit to your style... difficult because yours are greatly done . OK i dont mind if you throw it away in end; i made a lot of modells just for fun so thats still possibly.
As i not exactly understand entwined tower i will try lookout, ok?
//EDIT:
first progress; most shall be wooden, only main tower part of stone.
-entwined tower
-ranger
-lookout
im not quite sure... as you probably noticed on my persianmod i still struggle with textures and so no progress. So perhaps i try a building first because it needs less time. Prob is only that i have to fit to your style... difficult because yours are greatly done
. OK i dont mind if you throw it away in end; i made a lot of modells just for fun so thats still possibly.As i not exactly understand entwined tower i will try lookout, ok?
//EDIT:
first progress; most shall be wooden, only main tower part of stone.
106
Mods /
« on: 22 May 2008, 13:44:44 »
i think we talk of different xml files here :roll: : if i separate the planes i get it shaded wich hard edges, so no wonder that it looked bad. Only problem: it would be easier if the exporter would create such normals if you change modelparts to solid in blender. But thats not easy since normals in blender are always stored smooth and not solid, its only a displaying option.
107
Mods /
« on: 21 May 2008, 20:20:54 »
good idea titi 
that sounds like the best solution
one question: does the doublesidedbutton in blender work for you? for me it changes transparenzy/teamcolor but not doublerender. I can only achieve it by editing the xml but i must change the "customcolor"boolean for doublesided; the twosided affects teamcolor/not=transparenz...
I just wonder if that is due of my bad glexempel copy or something.
that sounds like the best solutionone question: does the doublesidedbutton in blender work for you? for me it changes transparenzy/teamcolor but not doublerender. I can only achieve it by editing the xml but i must change the "customcolor"boolean for doublesided; the twosided affects teamcolor/not=transparenz...
I just wonder if that is due of my bad glexempel copy or something.
108
He good news, kindof:
The error was because of blownup Blenderfilestructure; titi, you used a script right? So something was wrong with the blend so the exportscript went mad. OK, this can often happen, perhaps if you use undo and redo often or copy your model and delet old one... If you have it, export your geometry as obj and import it again (perhaps append works too)... then even our script is capable of writing the right normals
.
Ok perhaps we can improve our script based on the obj exporter as it seems to work better but thats another topic.
On the other had the tree still looks funny (in g3d viewer); I think we have only one point light in the g3d-viewer; so even a box can look odd, perhaps GAE can have a look on this or answer my question how the lightning works.
Ok, this is not really a good idea, just follow it if the tree still doesnt look good in glest.
The error was because of blownup Blenderfilestructure; titi, you used a script right? So something was wrong with the blend so the exportscript went mad. OK, this can often happen, perhaps if you use undo and redo often or copy your model and delet old one... If you have it, export your geometry as obj and import it again (perhaps append works too)... then even our script is capable of writing the right normals
.Ok perhaps we can improve our script based on the obj exporter as it seems to work better but thats another topic.
On the other had the tree still looks funny (in g3d viewer); I think we have only one point light in the g3d-viewer; so even a box can look odd, perhaps GAE can have a look on this or answer my question how the lightning works.
Ok, this is not really a good idea, just follow it if the tree still doesnt look good in glest.
109
Hi back
unfortunately there still seems something wrong with blender exporter/glexempel.
The problem titi recognised was because the g3d has wrong normals in it. Some normals are right as they originally were in blender but especially the planes that intersect have wrong normals:
I dont know if glexempel recalculates normals and makes errors here, or if blenders exportscript writes wrong normals/ writes in wrong order...
I will need further testings to be sure about it. I even had problems with glexempel converting a glest_treeg3d into xml because he only gave a empty file, so perhaps i made a mistake in usage of it cause i use glexempel on wine.
unfortunately there still seems something wrong with blender exporter/glexempel.
The problem titi recognised was because the g3d has wrong normals in it. Some normals are right as they originally were in blender but especially the planes that intersect have wrong normals:
I dont know if glexempel recalculates normals and makes errors here, or if blenders exportscript writes wrong normals/ writes in wrong order...
I will need further testings to be sure about it. I even had problems with glexempel converting a glest_treeg3d into xml because he only gave a empty file, so perhaps i made a mistake in usage of it cause i use glexempel on wine.
110
General discussion /
« on: 20 May 2008, 13:50:44 »
Because Blender and OpenGL/Glest have different orientated coordinate systems 
Means that xyz isnt xyz in the other one but maybe x,-z,y...
something like that
Means that xyz isnt xyz in the other one but maybe x,-z,y...
something like that
111
Mods /
« on: 20 May 2008, 13:41:40 »
I dont know much about glest tileset-stuff...
If its a problem with vertex and normals, you can try viewing the modell(g3d) in the g3d-viewer but without texture; then you should see if there are hard edges or wrong shaded planes.
Or give me the blend and i will have a look; but i think martino's suggestion is the only problem i can think up here too.
But i hered something stange about alphamaps blending iin glest sometimes ago; was there something that dark textures dont work good with it? Maye we should try this too.
The biggest problems seems to accure with the thin bush. That can be antialasingproblem; because you have turned antialasing off it dosnt smooth the bright pixel next to dark ones... I think this can only occure if geometry is lower than one pixel, but i have no real knowledge about that...
If its a problem with vertex and normals, you can try viewing the modell(g3d) in the g3d-viewer but without texture; then you should see if there are hard edges or wrong shaded planes.
Or give me the blend and i will have a look; but i think martino's suggestion is the only problem i can think up here too.
But i hered something stange about alphamaps blending iin glest sometimes ago; was there something that dark textures dont work good with it? Maye we should try this too.
The biggest problems seems to accure with the thin bush. That can be antialasingproblem; because you have turned antialasing off it dosnt smooth the bright pixel next to dark ones... I think this can only occure if geometry is lower than one pixel, but i have no real knowledge about that...
112
General discussion /
« on: 15 May 2008, 14:06:57 »
I think they use armatures/skeletons in blender, i dont know any other way to do this comfortable so...
I think glest you wont need a skeleton-base animationthing unless you want something like ragdoll or stuff. Morphing and else can be done by the point-interpolation which you nicely extended for useability (thanks again ).
Also i think a ragdollsytem will need much more artistic skills, too, as the modell is much more likely to act "weird", means sometimes if i try to make an animation i must give up an idea (like let the man taking a bag over his shoulder from ground) because the model wont look good at some skeleton-situations. Thats why i had to turn the thrall for northmenmod in order to let him pick up the bag.
Same goes for raising weapons over head. Sometimes it looks good sometimes doesnt...
I think glest you wont need a skeleton-base animationthing unless you want something like ragdoll or stuff. Morphing and else can be done by the point-interpolation which you nicely extended for useability (thanks again
).Also i think a ragdollsytem will need much more artistic skills, too, as the modell is much more likely to act "weird", means sometimes if i try to make an animation i must give up an idea (like let the man taking a bag over his shoulder from ground) because the model wont look good at some skeleton-situations. Thats why i had to turn the thrall for northmenmod in order to let him pick up the bag.
Same goes for raising weapons over head. Sometimes it looks good sometimes doesnt...
113
Mods /
« on: 5 May 2008, 18:28:30 »
well, if you preserv me with the models animated in blender ther are only less steps to go till it is insinde glest. Only thing: Balancing is not that easy to find out. But its just changing values in notepad, so i think its easy for you to learn, if you can already handle the 3d-stuff.
So i think modding glest is relly possible for you.
So i think modding glest is relly possible for you.
114
General discussion /
« on: 5 May 2008, 18:25:15 »
Zaggy, perhaps you can improve the leg without further uv-editing:
Cut the triangles/Faces with knife, shift+k, then perhaps "exactline" or "midpoints". Then scale that around or make mor of that cuttet-rings.
@daniel.santos
hehe, you mustnt go back that much for cruel handpainting jobs. If you ever have hered of a game named "clonk". I made some objects for it some time ago but really cruel was making a new unit because you have to draw a set of maybe 40-pictures which show the unit walking, punshing, throwing... I think these pictures had around 9 pixels for the head so not the same but still something that could have lead to similar feelings
//edit
you can join tris to quads with alt+j and split by strg+t, but you may know
Cut the triangles/Faces with knife, shift+k, then perhaps "exactline" or "midpoints". Then scale that around or make mor of that cuttet-rings.
@daniel.santos
hehe, you mustnt go back that much for cruel handpainting jobs. If you ever have hered of a game named "clonk". I made some objects for it some time ago but really cruel was making a new unit because you have to draw a set of maybe 40-pictures which show the unit walking, punshing, throwing... I think these pictures had around 9 pixels for the head so not the same but still something that could have lead to similar feelings
//edit
you can join tris to quads with alt+j and split by strg+t, but you may know
115
General discussion /
« on: 5 May 2008, 13:13:05 »
*you may get bored by it but.*
Awesome
I just think about it.. you use blender right? Have you ever tried baking shadows and AO(ambient occlusion(?)) to the texture? perhaps that can improve the look once again. It may even work of you bake for a subsurfed model and then put that on the original one..
Ok, is just a idea, basically its looking so good, its really fun seeing it.
Awesome
I just think about it.. you use blender right? Have you ever tried baking shadows and AO(ambient occlusion(?)) to the texture? perhaps that can improve the look once again. It may even work of you bake for a subsurfed model and then put that on the original one..
Ok, is just a idea, basically its looking so good, its really fun seeing it.
116
General discussion /
« on: 4 May 2008, 07:16:03 »
Basically the idea is not bad.
But i think it will make game to complex with too less benefits. The norsemenmod was sometimes considered as confusing as there are so much units to produce (and it wasnt clear enough what they were good for).
So i already think units should be kept at minimum count but highest details we can provide (ok, i couldnt so we got these number of units in norsemen
).
Btw, what if you have a couple of these swordmen? wouldnt it be confusing if the number cannot really be considered as its strength as they are not easy to identify which is strong or weak?
But i think it will make game to complex with too less benefits. The norsemenmod was sometimes considered as confusing as there are so much units to produce (and it wasnt clear enough what they were good for).
So i already think units should be kept at minimum count but highest details we can provide (ok, i couldnt so we got these number of units in norsemen
).Btw, what if you have a couple of these swordmen? wouldnt it be confusing if the number cannot really be considered as its strength as they are not easy to identify which is strong or weak?
117
General discussion /
« on: 2 May 2008, 17:58:39 »
Hi, question is not really websiterelated but to the SVN.
I tried to get the sourcecode with kdesvn and i chose "head" as config...
Unfortunalely it loaded about 500 mb and it didnt seem to stop soon so i broke it. Have you a hit what configuration to use? or did i only take the wrong folder (i think it took from "repos").
I tried to get the sourcecode with kdesvn and i chose "head" as config...
Unfortunalely it loaded about 500 mb and it didnt seem to stop soon so i broke it. Have you a hit what configuration to use? or did i only take the wrong folder (i think it took from "repos").
118
General discussion /
« on: 2 May 2008, 09:52:51 »
Great as ever
Perhaps there can be gras or small bushes at the "teethstone" to make them look more individual.
Btw, can you tell how you made the texture? Photos and composed in Gimp or such, and what about the darkening at the wood, is this handmade?
Perhaps there can be gras or small bushes at the "teethstone" to make them look more individual.
Btw, can you tell how you made the texture? Photos and composed in Gimp or such, and what about the darkening at the wood, is this handmade?
119
Mods /
« on: 2 May 2008, 09:46:04 »
does anim8bor work due tpo performance?
it could be possible to make a script for it. (although i am afraid i cant programm writing the binary g3d)
//EDIT: that can be workaround by glexemlel, so we only make ~ascii xml
can you even model with it? i found it realy hard to use.
I dont really know, theres wings3d, k3d but i dont know if they need less performance than blender(?!)
Perhaps you can try compiling blender for your machine if it is "library"lagdown...
it could be possible to make a script for it. (although i am afraid i cant programm writing the binary g3d)
//EDIT: that can be workaround by glexemlel, so we only make ~ascii xml
can you even model with it? i found it realy hard to use.
I dont really know, theres wings3d, k3d but i dont know if they need less performance than blender(?!)
Perhaps you can try compiling blender for your machine if it is "library"lagdown...
120
General discussion /
« on: 1 May 2008, 08:16:40 »
heh, thanks for including me
now i must give some results to "act" like a member
now i must give some results to "act" like a member
121
General discussion /
« on: 1 May 2008, 08:13:18 »
I finished the splitting for 8 units each tech/magic 4.
I think the other units can only be splitted with too much effort and no good results (for example the hut of battle_mage could be seperated but that would nearly require new animating that head... so technical problem).
I made these files for each unit:
- the blend from which you can easily recreate the g3ds
- unit_body.g3d thats the animated part that wont move
- unit_stuff.g3d here i have the weapons animated so you con merge with body and have the original ani
- unit_stuff2.g3d the weapons static in original position
- unit_ weapon.g3d the weapons centered at origin
GlestSplit.zip
dont fiddle around with position and rotation for the weapons for the xml, i can do this much easier in blender than in the g3d viewer i think (just moving it right and reading the values from panel).
I think the other units can only be splitted with too much effort and no good results (for example the hut of battle_mage could be seperated but that would nearly require new animating that head... so technical problem).
I made these files for each unit:
- the blend from which you can easily recreate the g3ds
- unit_body.g3d thats the animated part that wont move
- unit_stuff.g3d here i have the weapons animated so you con merge with body and have the original ani
- unit_stuff2.g3d the weapons static in original position
- unit_ weapon.g3d the weapons centered at origin
GlestSplit.zip
dont fiddle around with position and rotation for the weapons for the xml, i can do this much easier in blender than in the g3d viewer i think (just moving it right and reading the values from panel).
122
Mods /
« on: 28 April 2008, 13:02:41 »
hm i dont really understand. The only way i see is if the that part with
<attack-range value="200"/>
is used. Have you added it yourself, or do other buildskill-definitions have this too ?
<attack-range value="200"/>
is used. Have you added it yourself, or do other buildskill-definitions have this too ?
123
Mods / Persian Mod (part of megapack v4)
« on: 27 April 2008, 16:09:31 »
Here is the persian mod
For downloads see http://www.titusgames.de
current screens:
Click on the image to see more!
----------
original post by weedkilller:
Hello, as Zaggy Dad adviced i will start making persian modells now. I dont know if it will get a full faction but at least i will collect modells until i can group them to one.
I chose persian because then we can use Zaggy's elephant and i like the orientalic(?) lookings; Greeks would have been nice too but my creativity was not so good at them.
Please give me feedback and hint for improvements of the modell.
the image is a link to the hostservice as i dont know if they like direct linking...
For downloads see http://www.titusgames.de
current screens:
Click on the image to see more!
----------
original post by weedkilller:
Hello, as Zaggy Dad adviced i will start making persian modells now. I dont know if it will get a full faction but at least i will collect modells until i can group them to one.
I chose persian because then we can use Zaggy's elephant and i like the orientalic(?) lookings; Greeks would have been nice too but my creativity was not so good at them.
Please give me feedback and hint for improvements of the modell.
the image is a link to the hostservice as i dont know if they like direct linking...
124
Mods /
« on: 27 April 2008, 07:28:46 »
He botjer,
i think you can choose between teamcolor or transparenzy for each modell-mesh: If the "two-sided" flag is on in blender it should use teamcolor where is transparenzy on the texture. Else it is transparent...
Transparenzy in the tga-textures is via the Alphachannel.
I use GIMP for that.
To model-unwrapping: Thats one of blenders easiest functions (compared to gmax for example). If i shell help you just ask.
i think you can choose between teamcolor or transparenzy for each modell-mesh: If the "two-sided" flag is on in blender it should use teamcolor where is transparenzy on the texture. Else it is transparent...
Transparenzy in the tga-textures is via the Alphachannel.
I use GIMP for that.
To model-unwrapping: Thats one of blenders easiest functions (compared to gmax for example). If i shell help you just ask.
125
General discussion /
« on: 26 April 2008, 09:43:49 »
WOOT wciow stop beeing so good or i loose any mood to try it myself 
No just joking(i wont give up), but i must say theese are are so cool.. nothing to add.
I like the deer most! Can you try making a fox too?
No just joking(i wont give up), but i must say theese are are so cool.. nothing to add.
I like the deer most! Can you try making a fox too?