IWTE - World editing - (General Discussion)

[makanyane]

odd...

are you sure it's A). the exact same co-ordinates?
B). the same map.. if you're playing the campaign on the provincial campaign map it'll be from the files in that folder and not the /base folder which is what the custom battle uses.

[wilddog]

I finally got around to sorting out the worldpathfinding in IWTE as it was quite a slow process.
In the next version it will be a simple paint process in IWTE. Left click will block out the pathfinding and right click will open it. The button options to edit it will just be reduced down to setting the brush size (max is 25x25 squares).
It is distinctly faster than the current process to load and edit but the same remains roughly the same as it has to recalculate the values of the blocked squares.

The maximum of 25x25 is set at that level because when I tried a 50x50 I did get a bit too much lag.

[wilddog]

IWTE v14_04_B Released :

with version 14_04_B
1) Rewrite of worldpathfinding functionality. Now very simplified and quick. You just paint open of closed items in the 2d window by using left or right click mouse buttons.
2) Removed writing of model comment bounding info in the ms3d structure files and ignore any model comment that is in the read files.

second item should stop crashes in loading ms3d structures created by merging two ms3d files and not checking the model comment has been correctly set up or deleted. New process doesn't create them any more and simply ignores anything in the comment field.

Mak suggested I should set up the worldvegetation update process to work similar to the pathfinding process (ie be updateable in the 2D window) as you can then also view the world objects at the same time.

[Mr.Jox]

A. Yes, same tile;
B. I don't have any other campaign, only imperial and afaik the only map files in base folder. In the battle map both terrains look same, the only difference between'em is water height.

TY, WD for new IWTE version!

[makanyane]

@Jox25 - only other "user error" I can think of is if you're doing the campaign battle from an old saved game, and the custom battle is working off a new map.rwm (and someone altered the map in between)

bit confused otherwise... if it was near a river I'd say maybe the campaign used the river height and the CB used 'sea level' if the river was out of the battlemap area - but I assume this is your settlement by the 'lake' ?

which way around is the difference?

[gosho]

Hi,
I'm the guy that annoying you with terrain issues.
Sorry if i bother you another time but i was modify the terrain with MS.
1-I resized the terrain 171x171 with IWTE

2-I Loaded it in MS and i merged the terrain with the original gate object which i brought from IWTE.

3-I shaped the terrain and deleted the gate in the group tab.

4-I want to replace the MS3d file with the terrain but i got this error:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Please can you explain me whats the error?Is there a way to fix it?

[Mr.Jox]

Hi, mak.
I deleted map.rwm before tested, coz I did some changes to map_regions and map_heights(very minor changes: I just expanded the lake.)
I'll try to test it again and then I'll post the results with screenshots.

[wilddog]

Please can you explain me whats the error?Is there a way to fix it?

171*171 verts is 29241 verts..... which is what it is expecting. You seem to be trying to load an MS3d terrain which has 29254 verts. I guess after you merged with the gate object you didn't correctly remove all the verts associated with the gate and so have ended up with too many.

[gosho]

Thank you very much for your patience and your help!!
I deleted all gate model vertices, but i added a few with the DIVIDE EDGE command for shape reasons.
Becouse the were few vertices i merged some triangles with TURN EDGE command and delete vertices in a flat part of the terrain which will be under water plane.
Doesn't it make problems with texuture and other things right?

[wilddog]

@gosho - I think you are assuming somethings that don't apply to the world terrain. Let me try and explain.

The world terrain data is just a series of points (think of them like vertices) which are arranged in a grid sequence similar to a TGA. It does not contain any information about triangles. Every point is a set distance away from each other one and the sequence of the grid is always the same.

The only thing you should be changing in milkshape is their height. Not the base position. Nothing you do to a triangle is relevant as the triangle information is not present in the world terrain file. You also cannot assign a texture to any specific triangle on a terrain map.

When the world terrain file is loaded in the game to generate the battlemap the triangles are assigned to the specific points in sequence. They do not all have the same setup as say the map_heights in the stratmap setup (where each set of 4 points splits into two triangles which are identical for each square) . If you look at the 2dview with the triangles shown you will see the way triangles WILL be assigned by the game i.e. sometimes the split of each square swaps between a bottom left to top right versus top left to bottom right).

Hope that helps you understand it and why the positions of the points must be left the same other than the heights.

[Arkay]

Thanks wilddog, the new pathfinding function is great.

And about the vegetation process mak suggested, how would it work? Will you be able to edit it in IWTE directly?

[wilddog]

@Arkay - Thanks for the feedback.

Regarding the vegetation process yes I'd set it up similar. Currently it generates a TGA which you have to edit outside of IWTE and uses a double column and row grid v the pathfinding. I would probably set up 3 'layers' in IWTE.
1) which handles the grass which you just paint on similar to the pathfinding. I would then convert the entries to values for the specific point where the grass is. These seem to be uniform settings so should be easier to do and I would use a half size grid to do that.
2) For trees it would be similar but only allow the one point setting as you place individual trees via that route.
3) For the other TGA which sets based on a grey scale density and the underlying rock/tree type that would be set up as a third layer.

I'm just putting together a little tool to help me with some strat mapping which will be using a layering approach also.

[Arkay]

Oh that would be nice, good work. I should try it first though.

[Falconwatch]

Hey just another question following the previous step, I've set the size of terrain to 251, and heights to 0,
how the the border areas adapt to the terrain?

Thanks for the help!

[wilddog]

Hey just another question following the previous step, I've set the size of terrain to 251, and heights to 0,
how the the border areas adapt to the terrain?

I take it from that description you've set up a level surface of 251*251 points all set to height zero.
There are two merge processes that are used in the world terrain. They are described in this tutorial and the link to Makanyane's diagrams which are within that tutorial:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...les-%28IWTE%29

If you don't understand then I'd suggest setting the two different merge files separately so you can see their effect. Also don't forget to resize the other terrain size related files.

[leo.civil.uefs]

Im sorry wilddog but you are not free from me yet... Im still here...

But this time, not to ask redudant stupid questions... lol (not beeing ironic, I know I did it some times).


Im trying to add a real bridge of kazad dum in moria, KK never got to do it so he used terrain instead and then some tricks with black objects to mimic the shape of a bridge.

Anyway, everything works fine, the point is that the bridge is really tight so I made it editing the bridge path values, blocking it all except a thin line on the center, making it as tight as possible.

The problem is that... if I block it like this, on both sides of the path, no matter what, after clicking ok, IWTE will not consider all the blocked points I added but just the "border" ones. This should actually work well as the only passable path would be the unblocked pat on the center of the bridge path, but a strange bug happens, units gets jammed trying to enter the small tight pass, and they do it, but some of them break the blockage and enter the brigde in the parts where they should not have acess. so as my brige is reall small, they end up flying on its sides.

I did some tests and I noticed IWTE likes to erase some of my blockage dots.

If you wan to, just do a easy test, try making a bridge like I said, very tight, with only a small passage on the center, beeing it as large as one single blockage dot. click ok, go to views and hit click view breaches, you will see iwte deletes the inner dots, keeping only the border ones. you cant have lots of blocked dots forming comlumns in a row, they will be deleted by iwte.

Point is that I really need all it to be blocked except the tight line on the center, otherwise the units will breake the line of blocking and fly arround the bridge.

resumig, a single comlumn of blockage dots can be break by units, it seems to be a engine bug. IWTE does not allow me to block consecutive collumns in the bridge path, always giving me a empty part circled by a blockage border, wich can be broken by units and then they reach this empty part.

so it is a iwte bug or a engine limitation?

ps: sorry for the big text but Im not home and I cant post pictures now.

[wilddog]

@Leo - Thanks for pointing that out. I'll try and check it and see what the problem is. If IWTE is deleting pathblocks it will be a bug. Edit : it wasn't so no bug however the view of the breaches uses different colours to the change so you can't easily spot some blocked from some non blocked as the greens are almost the same

Sort of in the middle of something, having problems creating an extract of map data for a large enough size with just the features I want from the open street map.

Edit : and now giving up on that - it was taking too long to extract a map of sufficient size for the details. Easier to simply use an overlay of a map with a bit too much info getting in the way and doing the 'effected bits' manually.

[wilddog]

Anyway, everything works fine, the point is that the bridge is really tight so I made it editing the bridge path values, blocking it all except a thin line on the center, making it as tight as possible.

The problem is that... if I block it like this, on both sides of the path, no matter what, after clicking ok, IWTE will not consider all the blocked points I added but just the "border" ones. This should actually work well as the only passable path would be the unblocked pat on the center of the bridge path, but a strange bug happens, units gets jammed trying to enter the small tight pass, and they do it, but some of them break the blockage and enter the bridge in the parts where they should not have access. so as my brige is reall small, they end up flying on its sides.

Just tried to recreate the issue you described but failed. I created a new bridge 10x10 hanged it to 10x50 blocked off about half and saved. reloaded it was OK. I then edited down to a single path. Saved reloaded all OK. I then moved it . all OK. Only issue I came across was when I tried to change door positions and reduced the size to below the original size and that caused a crash so I need to fix that but its a pretty straight forward crash issue. So so far not been able to create a bridge which isn't retaining the edited blocked bits unless its crashed.

I will though likely change the setting process to use the paint process similar to the pathfinding as thats a lot quicker.

I think I need two sets of files. One with a bridge added and the other with an amendment to that bridge that hasn't kept everything. Not sure how to recreate it otherwise.

[leo.civil.uefs]

if you edit it and save/load it, and just check it by trying to edit it again you will not be able to see the bug.

you must edit it, save and then check it in VIEWS tab, there you will se what Im tlking about.

take a look on the picture:



1 is the way I edited it.

2 is the way it shows up in the view tab button, and also the way it seems to be ingame.

notice some of my blocked dots are gone, and as I said, with this vanilla bug, the units can 'jump' this single blocked dock on the side borders and run into the empty area, where my blocked dots should be, but were deleted.

anyway, if you still cant recreate it by checking on the 'views" tab, it means it is a bug on my settlement files, wich worth it a invesigation anyway as it can be something related with IWTE.

so please check it again the way I said now, and then if you still cant recreate it, I will send the files, sorry Im just without internet connection at home so I acessing it from another house.

[wilddog]

leo - just to be clear does the number 2 items show the 'squares' as you have shown them or does it show no squares? ie where you are showing white with the pink square outline. It is significant so I need to be sure.