Map Maker Beta ...

[Mraah]

Stridor,

Version 9a impressions ... Much better overall operation of everything. It seems faster and cleaner.

Now, I wanted to clarify something ... If I'm happy with what MM pumped out and I start moving objects around in SE and save the sceneXML from within SE, then is it understood that I can no longer "load" this scenery thru MM without causing errors ... correct?

Also ... a comment on the AutoGen ... for buildings. I found the autogen feature for adding buildings to be much faster than simply plopping them down one by one. Since I have specific loaction for buildings (say 25 locations) I simply create 5 entries with 5 different building types and set the autogen to display ~ 6 per type. Now, I know this would create ~ 30 buildings but I found the ~ to round down instead of up ... so, it's easier to delete 5 buildings than it is to add 25 buildings [:)].

Anyway ... I have another suggestion (as always) regarding your LOCK tool ... perhaps for future use. Now, you know how MS3D has a feature where you can 2x or 4x the number of vertixes for fine tuning the mesh ... so, I'm wondering if you have the ability (or if it's usefull) to be able to LOCK in an area of pixels and double or quadruple the number of pixels for fine tuning of the height map. Just an idea ... no heartaches if you're unable [;)].

Rob

[Mraah]

Stridor,

A note about the Bridges ...

As you know there are several bridges that I gave you that are duplicates but they were included so we have a complete set.

One bridge called "MML4A_terrainBRIDGE" didn't have any texture with it. It's a small flat span of a bridge that I have no idea what it's used for other than providing a platform for some other part of the bridge.

Now, if you want, I can texture this short span but we'll have to define the texture with a resource XML (I know you know this[;)]).

Let me know if want me to do this ... otherwise you may want to get rid of it and possibly look at the other bridge dupes for exclusion in the final version.

Rob

[DasTactic]

Is there a help file or post on the steps required to start using Map Maker?

[Stridor]

ORIGINAL: Das123

Is there a help file or post on the steps required to start using Map Maker?

Not yet, there will be. At the moment read the ReadmeMM.doc in the main PCK directory to get some tips.

I am also planning to do an online tutorial soon

[DasTactic]

I can't get beyond the initial screen so I'll just wait for the tutorial.

[benpark]

I'm finding it tough to get some of my older maps looking like the previous versions in terms of the blending of textures. For example, the main road concrete texture is being overtaken by other textures and I have it cranked up to 1.0 on the scale.

If the order the textures are one in contributes to the first textures done still being stronger than any below it, this is something I would hope can be changed in the map maker (rather than deleting all previous). Something like simply selecting the texture and moving it up or down in the order if this is the case would be good.

[Stridor]

ORIGINAL: benpark

I'm finding it tough to get some of my older maps looking like the previous versions in terms of the blending of textures. For example, the main road concrete texture is being overtaken by other textures and I have it cranked up to 1.0 on the scale.

If the order the textures are one in contributes to the first textures done still being stronger than any below it, this is something I would hope can be changed in the map maker (rather than deleting all previous). Something like simply selecting the texture and moving it up or down in the order if this is the case would be good.

Ben,

Yes this is a S/E of the new mask generation system.

The old system always left a large "dirty" ouline around masks. This new system is better in that it doesn't do that, but the problem is that the blur and transparency are now linked. So if you take a layer and blur it a lot the transparency will fall, so you need to crank the trans up.

However I have fixed your problem in the latest build by allowing trans multipliers mucher than 1.0, so you can make a layer as dense as you want now.

I much prefer the look of the new mask system than the old, it does allow more flexibility but at the cost of slightly more complexity.

Regards

S.

[benpark]

Ah, great.

As long as something like a road can be kept the width drawn, and have a good blending still with the adjacent terrain things will be good.

[Stridor]

Rick,

I couldn't replicate your smooth error, no matter what I tried.

Can anyone else?

[Mraah]

ORIGINAL: Stridor

Rick,

I couldn't replicate your smooth error, no matter what I tried.

Can anyone else?

I haven't seen it ...

[Stridor]

Actually I think I have found and fixed the fault.

I have also added a few nice things as well.

Like being able to "tilt" the battlefield in a particular direction which is something which is hard to do with the base sculpting tools. In RL terrain is *mostly* planar but mostly *not* level. These new tools will really help with historicall slopeing battlefields (eg running up or down hill)

I have also added the ability to move the textures up and down the list box so you can set which overlay which in the render order. Not to mention a whole bunch of other goodies [;)]

[rickier65]

Sounds good on your additions - I'm surpised neither you nor Rob could duplicate it - it is very consistent in my setup, both my laptop using ie7 and my desktop. But no worries, just clicking noise seems to fix whatever the issue was.

I did go through very basics of building a map and showing in ScenEdit - thats a very nice featrue. Lets me see how things look pretty quickly, then I can go back into MM and tweak some things.

I'm going back through the forum thread to pull out all the notes - I look at my efforts at the maps, and then at Robs - and mine look pretty poor by comparison. But with the new features in MM - I can keep trying some different things to see how they go.

Thanks and I'll post if any more quirks pop up. I may also try to put together a compendium of operational notes in this thread.

Thanks
Rick

[Mraah]

Stridor,

A long time ago it was suggested that MM be a full screen editor. I like how the scenario editor (v1.7a) is full screen and I was wondering if you reconsidered MM as a full screen application?

Rob

[Stridor]

ORIGINAL: Mraah


Stridor,

A long time ago it was suggested that MM be a full screen editor. I like how the scenario editor (v1.7a) is full screen and I was wondering if you reconsidered MM as a full screen application?

Rob

For performance reasons I can't go full screen. It would only help with the Zoomed in view anyway.

HM at 129x129 pretty much chug my system and that can be easily seen in the default view.

Anyway I will see what I can do.

Regards

S.

[Stridor]

Request for help ...

1. How much of a pain is it after the MM has placed a structure, to have to go into the SE and draw red (structure terrain) under it? Would it be good if the MM could do this for you?

I could potentially do this but it would be a bit of work. It would also mean that a bounding (4 coords) box would need to be defined in the resources.xml for each model you wanted the MM to auto draw on the AI map for you. Is this something which would be worth the effort! Along with this we should define some standards for structure modelling like which vector the front of the structure should face (I am thinking 1,1 is best). This way the little direction arrows in the MM will line up with the final model. Your models should always have the center of mass of the model at 0,0 and not be "offset". The actual game models don't really obey any of these rules which is a shame, but I think eventually the modder models will eventually displace these as the work I have seen you guys do is much better than the ingame art (and the volume is now really starting to crank [&o])

2. Could ? Rob or someone do some real world tests on the map WRT to the exact properties of each of the terrain colors?

The new MM has the ability to remap your terrain map colors to the AI map colors. This means that you can use your own color palette and remap it at build time to something that PCK understands. This will be really helpful for autogen stuff. It would be good to know stuff like:

Does each AI color actually work in PCK as advertised? Run infantry and drive tanks over it, does it slow them down, are they real obstactles? Does there need to be "red" under each house (especially given that the building type now defines a structure), what about ruins? etc etc

It would be possible to just whip up a demo map with long strips of each terrain color on the map and put some units down and see what happens (also would be good to see what the PCK engine reports the terrain type as).

I would do this myself but am really tied down with developing the MM and RL, so I have very limited time and think that it is probably better spent working on the MM.

Regards

S.

[Mraah]

ORIGINAL: Stridor

Request for help ...

1. How much of a pain is it after the MM has placed a structure, to have to go into the SE and draw red (structure terrain) under it? Would it be good if the MM could do this for you?

I think it would be a nice feature ... but left for a random map generator in the future. Also, AutoGen occassionally clumps the buildings together so if you had mixed building size's (factory + house) then you'd end up having to remap the AI yourself if it dropped the smaller houses into the factory. You'd need to apply a rule for the randomizer so it can space the buildings out properly so we wouldn't have to chase our tail making changes.

2. Could ? Rob or someone do some real world tests on the map WRT to the exact properties of each of the terrain colors?

Does each AI color actually work in PCK as advertised? Run infantry and drive tanks over it, does it slow them down, are they real obstactles? Does there need to be "red" under each house (especially given that the building type now defines a structure), what about ruins? etc etc

I've done some tests earlier with the legal terrain colors like tank obstacle, impassible, obstacle, wall and fence. I did them with my obstacle course thread.
The underlying terrain for building can be anything ... it all depends if you want a vehicle to be able to enter the building or not.

It would be possible to just whip up a demo map with long strips of each terrain color on the map and put some units down and see what happens (also would be good to see what the PCK engine reports the terrain type as).

I can do this test over the next few days. How many colors ... 256?

Rob

[madorosh]

Ok, first question - I've tried adding the program to my list of McAfee trusted programs - even despite the fact it is not an .exe. I've typed in the name of the program, and it resides in the trusted list, but the firewall still does not identify the publisher. Any way around this problem? All the images in the map editor show up as red 'x's and the buttons are disabled. The scenario editor seems to work fine though, once I add it to the trusted program list.

[madorosh]

Wait, it is worse than I thought. It is WINDOWS screwing with me, not McAfee - "What should you do when Windows blocks the installation of an ActiveX control?"

Now what?

[Stridor]

Michael,

It is ok, all that disabled stuff is normal until it gets activated.

All my utils have been tested on stock windows releases

In particlular

XP SP2 SP3
Vista SP1

and all run with no problems.

Try this:

Press the browse button for the H/map and load the LORES_HM.bmp which is in the PCK root dir.

This will activate the AI/MAP button

Press this and load Media/Kharkov_L1b/map.bmp

This will load the AI map and activate the rest of the controls.

The controls change activation status on a context basis.

I will provide more help in the form of a tutorial later tonight (AEST).

Regards

S.

P.S. Orginally I got rid of those red Xs but in the end I liked them so I left them in [:)] . Perhaps it was a bit confusing. All will become clear with better documentation.

[madorosh]

ORIGINAL: Stridor

Michael,

It is ok, all that disabled stuff is normal until it gets activated.

All my utils have been tested on stock windows releases

In particlular

XP SP2 SP3
Vista SP1

and all run with no problems.

Try this:

Press the browse button for the H/map and load the LORES_HM.bmp which is in the PCK root dir.

This will activate the AI/MAP button

Yeah, I tried fooling around by loading a map. I just tried again, and it tells me I need to install activeX controls. I saw a reference to this by Mad Russian earlier in the thread (I was reading while I was waiting for the downloads of the zip) but was too lazy to go back and reread...anyway, long story short, no joy yet. I'll go back through this thread and see if there is a fix - I should have the most up to date activeX stuff though if PCK is working, shouldn't I?

Press this and load Media/Kharkov_L1b/map.bmp

This will load the AI map and activate the rest of the controls.

The controls change activation status on a context basis.

I will provide more help in the form of a tutorial later tonight (AEST).

Regards

S.

P.S. Orginally I got rid of those red Xs but in the end I liked them so I left them in [:)] . Perhaps it was a bit confusing. All will become clear with better documentation.

No worries on documentation, I know that the best programmers are seldom the guys with the time to write the best manuals - trying to get Molek to tell us WTH he was talking about with the old CMMODS software, for example, was like trying to pull teeth, but the program was a thing of beauty once you got into your melon and got it to work on your computer.

EDIT - to be specific, I get Error (024) - ActiveX Plugin not installed, no matter which of the four default maps I try and load from the root directory.