1. Post #1
    "Sounds like something Stiffy would say."
    Stiffy360's Avatar
    May 2011
    3,336 Posts
    As in vvis wise. It would be fine as a func_detail

    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Disagree Disagree x 2Optimistic Optimistic x 1 (list)

  2. Post #2
    Gold Member
    Drumdevil's Avatar
    March 2008
    1,720 Posts
    Model
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows XP Netherlands Show Events Disagree Disagree x 4Dumb Dumb x 3 (list)

  3. Post #3
    "Sounds like something Stiffy would say."
    Stiffy360's Avatar
    May 2011
    3,336 Posts
    what? its a brush/ brushes. Im just wondering if I should func_detail it because of areaportals.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Artistic Artistic x 1 (list)

  4. Post #4
    Grenade Man's Avatar
    October 2009
    505 Posts
    There are way better and cleaner ways to make this out of brushes.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Croatia Show Events Agree Agree x 3 (list)

  5. Post #5
    Ask me about my 'female train' fetish.
    ViralHatred's Avatar
    January 2006
    5,423 Posts
    There are way better and cleaner ways to make this out of brushes.
    Such as this:



    (Drew correct shapes in blue)
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows XP United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 4 (list)

  6. Post #6
    Gold Member
    Drumdevil's Avatar
    March 2008
    1,720 Posts
    what? its a brush/ brushes. Im just wondering if I should func_detail it because of areaportals.
    Sorry, I mean that it would be better if it's a model.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows XP Netherlands Show Events Disagree Disagree x 1Dumb Dumb x 1Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  7. Post #7
    Ask me about my 'female train' fetish.
    ViralHatred's Avatar
    January 2006
    5,423 Posts
    Sorry, I mean that it would be better if it's a model.
    Models are lit per vertex. Models should be used sparingly when replacing brushwork and only in suitible locations.

    Since he has provided no information regarding the location of this curve, and is obviously somewhat new to mapping, such advice would be better withheld until a later date.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows XP United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 4 (list)

  8. Post #8
    "Sounds like something Stiffy would say."
    Stiffy360's Avatar
    May 2011
    3,336 Posts
    Such as this:



    (Drew correct shapes in blue)
    I was mostly asking about vvis issues such as area portals. This way is better for what im doing cause I can make curves on nearly any ratio of brush size. and besides, its still rendering the same faces.

  9. Post #9
    ShadowDeath's Avatar
    August 2008
    173 Posts
    I was mostly asking about vvis issues such as area portals. This way is better for what im doing cause I can make curves on nearly any ratio of brush size. and besides, its still rendering the same faces.
    Well personally I don't see it as much more than personal preference. I find the method ViralHatred posted to be editable more easily and would prefer to do it that way. I am not sure if vvis will care too much, though.

  10. Post #10
    "Sounds like something Stiffy would say."
    Stiffy360's Avatar
    May 2011
    3,336 Posts
    Well personally I don't see it as much more than personal preference. I find the method ViralHatred posted to be editable more easily and would prefer to do it that way. I am not sure if vvis will care too much, though.
    okay cool. (I still don't see why there would be any hatred for this curve though.

  11. Post #11
    Gold Member
    eichhornch's Avatar
    May 2005
    406 Posts
    okay cool. (I still don't see why there would be any hatred for this curve though.
    There is only one face touching the ground instead of 8 which means less t-junctions. And you should turn it into a func_detail.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Luxembourg Show Events Agree Agree x 1Informative Informative x 1 (list)

  12. Post #12
    "Sounds like something Stiffy would say."
    Stiffy360's Avatar
    May 2011
    3,336 Posts
    There is only one face touching the ground instead of 8 which means less t-junctions. And you should turn it into a func_detail.
    Makes sense.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  13. Post #13
    Ask me about my 'female train' fetish.
    ViralHatred's Avatar
    January 2006
    5,423 Posts
    Well personally I don't see it as much more than personal preference. I find the method ViralHatred posted to be editable more easily and would prefer to do it that way. I am not sure if vvis will care too much, though.
    There is only one face touching the ground instead of 8 which means less t-junctions. And you should turn it into a func_detail.
    ^ Correct.

    Vvis will render triangular shapes far more efficiently than tetragonal or more vertex shapes. If you make it have more than 3 vertexes vvis will break it down into two separate triangular shapes, creating more work for the compiler.

    It's quicker and more efficient.

    I'm going to guess and assume you made that curve using a carve?

    Really if you're func_detailing it, it doesn't matter since it will be ignored by vvis during compile. However if it isn't sealed behind it or is meant to block a players LOS (Line of Sight) it'll create leaks and/or performance issues.

    Also considering I don't make maps often I sure do know a hell of a lot about performance issues

    Beta tester for life.

  14. Post #14
    "Sounds like something Stiffy would say."
    Stiffy360's Avatar
    May 2011
    3,336 Posts
    ^ Correct.

    Vvis will render triangular shapes far more efficiently than tetragonal or more vertex shapes. If you make it have more than 3 vertexes vvis will break it down into two separate triangular shapes, creating more work for the compiler.

    It's quicker and more efficient.

    I'm going to guess and assume you made that curve using a carve?

    Really if you're func_detailing it, it doesn't matter since it will be ignored by vvis during compile. However if it isn't sealed behind it or is meant to block a players LOS (Line of Sight) it'll create leaks and/or performance issues.

    Also considering I don't make maps often I sure do know a hell of a lot about performance issues

    Beta tester for life.
    No carving actually. I made it using good ol' clipping tool. Also one last thing. Will I still have that T-Junction issue if I func_detail?

  15. Post #15
    Ask me about my 'female train' fetish.
    ViralHatred's Avatar
    January 2006
    5,423 Posts
    No because func_detail is ignored by vvis.

    It'll still increase compile times for vbsp and vrad though.

  16. Post #16
    I make awesome maps that never see the light of day
    oskutin's Avatar
    January 2007
    7,174 Posts
    That curve doesn't need to be func detailed.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Finland Show Events Disagree Disagree x 2Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  17. Post #17
    ShadowDeath's Avatar
    August 2008
    173 Posts
    ^ Correct.

    Vvis will render triangular shapes far more efficiently than tetragonal or more vertex shapes. If you make it have more than 3 vertexes vvis will break it down into two separate triangular shapes, creating more work for the compiler.

    It's quicker and more efficient.

    I'm going to guess and assume you made that curve using a carve?

    Really if you're func_detailing it, it doesn't matter since it will be ignored by vvis during compile. However if it isn't sealed behind it or is meant to block a players LOS (Line of Sight) it'll create leaks and/or performance issues.

    Also considering I don't make maps often I sure do know a hell of a lot about performance issues

    Beta tester for life.
    Ah that's very neat and good to know. I will probably never need it though, since I func_detail almost anything round and not box shaped. That's why I only see it as a matter of personal preference.

  18. Post #18
    "Sounds like something Stiffy would say."
    Stiffy360's Avatar
    May 2011
    3,336 Posts
    Ah that's very neat and good to know. I will probably never need it though, since I func_detail almost anything round and not box shaped. That's why I only see it as a matter of personal preference.
    Concave surfaces are fine when making area portals. Convex objects screw them up.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  19. Post #19
    [yournamehere]'s Avatar
    March 2009
    564 Posts
    Is the original design on grid?