527 replies to this topic

[quico]

I had an old 3DSimEd version when learning at the very beggining, but when I started the Jarama I bought the program. It's not perfect, but very useful and is the one I use for 3do files and tools like that for missing textures or 3dos are necesary.

When hsv file is shorter than track, aren't final sections in black?

[quico]

I got to a point where I had 3 complicated problems to solve, and I was saturated after 3 years working on the track. I've rested for almost a year and I'm back with it, and the first job I'm doing is the ads on the fences along the track.


 099.jpg   28.89K   48 downloads

The ads have to match the inclination of the track, and for that is the 8th value of the lines of the TSO file, but it only works for me in 10-15% of cases. Is it my fault or is it not working well?
I'm doing diferent 3dos for places with diferent inclination, but would be better not to duplicate them...

[ginetto]

If you use objl or objf  as first value, it usually doesn't work.
if you use obj, it should work all the time.
PS: if you don't do it already, use 3dsimed to check your result and fine tune it.

[quico]

Thanks for answer so quicky.

Unfortunately, I need  the "objl". The difference can be seen here:


 delante0.jpg   25.24K   31 downloads  delante1.jpg   25.1K   34 downloads

The good thing is that there are only a little amount of ads in slopes that must be inclined.



Despite the use of "objl", backwards is almost impossible to get a no corrupted view.

 atras1.jpg   23.8K   25 downloads

Is there any trick to avoid the intrusion of the fences? Am I missing something?

[ginetto]

Depends on how you built your track
That usually happens if the 3do crosses  or even only touches a vertical wall.

If you are trying to apply a 3do in a curved section, you can divide the single object into smaller ones that together make the whole object.
Every single smaller object must fit into one single subsection that you can see very well in 3dsimed.
I usually then use scaled down 3dos in the build folder so they are easier to place inside a subsection when compiling; then in GPL folder I use 3dos that can touch or even cross the subsection and that does not matter since the track.3DO has been compiled with 3dos that fit in their own single subsection.
Is this in some ways understandable to you?

Sometimes is just easier to draw a texture to be used in the GTK that covers the whole section (unk4= 8) with the ads you want painted on top of the fence.

[quico]

Thanks Ginetto,

I began to think about divide an ads but it was an inclined one, wich makes the job little more difficult. I keep the ads without crossing any wall, but transversal lines are another question.

It has no sense to make anything now, as there must be all the ads in place and in final size and then see what is needed as now are continuously moving.... I'll keep in mind all what you say. Thanks again!

Edited by quico, Jun 29 2019 - 04:12 PM.

[quico]

ginetto, on Jun 29 2019 - 03:13 PM, said:

I usually then use scaled down 3dos in the build folder so they are easier to place inside a subsection when compiling; then in GPL folder I use 3dos that can touch or even cross the subsection and that does not matter since the track.3DO has been compiled with 3dos that fit in their own single subsection.
Is this in some ways understandable to you?

I understand that you have a scaled 3do to build the track.3do, and a big one in the gpl track folder??? Yesterday I didn't realize what you mean (if I'm right, as my english is so unsafe). Cheating GPL!!!

[ginetto]

Yes; you have a 3do that fits or is a little bigger than the section in the track folder.
Then another one that is shorter so it fits safely in the section (or subsection for the curved sections) to cheat the compiling program in the folder that you use to compile the track.3DO

In this way I did for example the Les Combes barrier; made of many little 3do objects with collision (everyone sitting in their subsection) instead of a single one that would have clip everywhere. You can check that.

[quico]

First attempts to do the AI, mainly to see frames with full grid, but always this report from RpytoLp:

 errorRpy2Lp.jpg   12.71K   11 downloads


and... MERRY CHISTMAS!



Edit: Revised version of the program, I have seen that did not have the most up-to-date, which is that of the corresponding thread.:   http://srmz.net/inde...?showtopic=2990

Now it works perfectly.

Edited by quico, Dec 27 2019 - 04:35 PM.

[quico]

I'm not sure what mytrack.set file does. I've read that it's only for 3do file resolution, but when 4th value in the file, the scale B row changes, I get different amount of polygons in the trk23dow

 polys01.jpg   80K   8 downloads

changing scale B from 10 to 34, the amount of polys decreases dramatically (8000), but in the report of the 3doEdit 3DSimEd all remains the same, also in the track image -displaying wireframe-.

 polys03.jpg   49.7K   7 downloads


Also changing 7th value, section resolution in turns, works badly as I can only get turns with 2, 4 or 8 subsections, although this is a quick evaluation. Perhaps only 2 multipliers?

Really lost with things I thought was simpler, but coulld be so interesting to reduce the load of polys. Any help?



Have checked the size of the mytrack.3do, and it changes in accordance with the changes in the set file.

Edited by quico, Dec 31 2019 - 10:44 AM.

[ginetto]

you need to change / experiment changing the 7th value for the curved sections (the lower the number the more polys)

The 1st and 2nd values go together and determine the limits of how long the subsections will be.

With 3rd 4th and 5th you determine how long the subsections will be (in the graphic part, the 3DO) so if the track is flat, you use high numbers while for elevations that changes a lot you will need to use lower numbers to avoid cars fly or sink above below the asphalt surface.


example for flat track (Monza ):

43.0
125.0
43
84
125
15.0
0.03125
1000
1000
100

example for wavy track (Road America ):

60.0
120.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
0.03
1000
1000
100

[quico]

Thanks for your quick reply.

7th value have an easy behaviour, except for that lack of elasticity that makes changes only of 2, 4, 8... and that changes can be seen both in trk23dow and 3DOedit 3DSimEd (in amount of polys reported and visually).

But when 4th value is changed, in trk23dow I get a decrease of polys, and the 3do file also changes the same direction. But when edited in 3DOedit, 3DSimEd, the polys reported are exactly the same than before the changes and visually you cannot see any difference.

I use to control the elevation changes with unk4, so it could be that there are no variations in the track, but 8000 polys are so much polys not to see nothing at all. I want to know if there is a real improvement in that drop of polys that will became a better frame rate although they are invisible.

From where  have been removed those polygons?

Edited by quico, Dec 31 2019 - 10:43 AM.

[mcmirande]

Hi guys,
are these parameters related with the angles in the inside of the track?

I noted that the inside line of the corners are seen as straights connected by angles, which is more noticeable in some tracks than in others. In Alta Gracia I left those parameters as received from Juha and I noted the inside of the track has somewhat long "sections", instead of a smooth curved line.

I'm wondering if I could have solved it tweaking these parameters...

Cheers and thanks; Marcos

[quico]

You can change the number of subsections on corners with the 7th value in the set file. The definition in the GPLEA Track Creation Guide, "Corner Error is a value that controls how many times each corner is split. It is a value in metres, so 0.10 is 10 centimetres - this is the maximum deivation from the true circle that the polygons will be. This error value is calculated at the centre of the track ! In other words, there will be greater error on the outside of corners to the inside".

As I was talking above, that number seems to be limited to 2, 4, 8... As Gineto said, the lower the value in set file, the more subsections.

Of course you can change the number of subsections also with unk4, that works the same in corners than in straight sections.



But you will never get a curved line, only many straight lines connected.

Edited by quico, Dec 30 2019 - 03:14 PM.

[mcmirande]

Gracias Quico

[quico]

Feliz año!

Felice Anno Nuovo!

Happy new year!

[Michkov]

Taking this back to the gtk creation stage, I've got two questions in that regard

First what is the best way to go about connected areas as seen in figure 1. My initial idea was to have an invisible wall somewhere along the midway point, maybe some high grass texture.
Ideally I'd want cars to be able to cross between unconnected section, I know that is possible as I've seen it at Vallelunga. I doubt it's all that easy and stable to do though.
 fig1.png   510.93K   15 downloads

As for the second question, what are the best practices when trying to get the walls to be aligned with the yellow line as seen in figure 2. All I can think up is cutting the bend section into small enough pieces that it isn't too obvious.
 fig2.png   50.29K   13 downloads

[ginetto]

High grass is always a must in those cases
Remember that where you place the lateral TRK file border, the car will hit a wall even if you don't draw anything in the 3DO.
Adjusting the FB file you can then make the part of the track adjacent to the one you are on visible so you can also see other cars pass though; or you can make a 3DO that copy the part of track that is adjacent (actually 2 3DO, one for each side) so you don't have to put big numbers into the FB file and save memory for the frame rate sake; this is done at Monza 10k on the main straight.

At Vallelunga I used the GAPPY function also used for example at Mexico hairpin (you can cut and turn before the actual hairpin crossing the banking).

For your second question, the best way is to use straight track side objects (3DO, placed using the TSO file); these can be built with a collision so the car can hit them and just stop there. In this case, you just leave the last wall on the GTK with a height of 10 GPL units so it is basically invisible and will not clip through.

If the surrounding is complex (non flat), you can have massive clipping of the 3do placed in a curved section.
I find that sometimes the best way to avoid this is to make the 3do so small that just stays within a subsection of the curved section and repeat its  placement for every sub section. This way you have several smaller 3DOs aligned together so they look like one single big 3DO.

[Michkov]

Thanks Ginetto.

I'm reading this as focus on the road sections and figure out the extreme borders towards the end, especially since there is a lot more splitting of sections to come. Good to know that I can have collidable TSO that makes life easier.

About the FB settings whats the maximum value you'd recommend. It would be quite neat having the cars visible traveling in the opposite directions. The track is not too long so I'd guess it wont go over 1k in either direction of viewing distance.

[ginetto]

1000 meters is not too long in the FB; just remember to increase in slower steps though otherwise you could get a CTD.
like (consider the following as they are in the FB file in a vertical column instead of a horizontal line as I write here) 500 600 700 800 900 1000 instead of 500 1000.