Sharing texturemap globally with all features...?

[Peet]

http://springrts.com/svn/spring/trunk/r ... dels/s3o.h

[TradeMark]

Code: Select all

	float radius;		///< radius of collision sphere

can this be zero?

and what units these are using, for example

Code: Select all

	float height;		///< height of whole object

is it 1 texture pixel size on the map = 1 height unit?

[Argh]

1 height == 1 elmo, IIRC. 8 elmos == 1 heightmap square, so yes, it's 1:1 with texturemap squares.

[TradeMark]

why dont you call them pixels instead of elmos? since the texture aspect ratio is constant... makes more sense xd

also the unit weapon ranges etc are measured in pixels...

[Argh]

"Pixels" would be very confusing, because then people would get confused about whether we're talking rasterized pixels (i.e., a non-constant in terms of what distance they represent in OpenGL) or an absolute measurement of length.

Hence "elmos". They are equivalent to the distance x1 --> x2 of a diffusemap pixel as displayed in Spring, assuming that the heightmap is precisely flat. I don't know how many OpenGL units they represent.

[TradeMark]

why its confusing? look at your map texture, you see pixels... look in spring, you see same pixels, but in a bit bigger size depending your zoom... doesnt confuse me at all =)

and why would anyone think it would mean the pixels on your screen? would be retarded to think like that in a 3d world...

you can always compare to the texturemap pixels, draw a line of 100 pixels, go ingame and you see your unit range reaches the end of the line from the start of the line... makes perfectly sense.

"elmo" just confuses by its bizarr name which means nothing, and it supposedly means 1 heightmap square, which is 8 pixels, which is also stupid way of representing any units in the engine since all units are based on "pixels" anyways.

also the spring coordinates are based on pixels...

[FLOZi]

why dont you call them pixels instead of elmos? since the texture aspect ratio is constant... makes more sense xd

also the unit weapon ranges etc are measured in pixels...

Pretty sure weapon ranges are in elmos in Spring.

[Argh]

"elmo" just confuses by its bizarr name which means nothing, and it supposedly means 1 heightmap square, which is 8 pixels

No... 8 elmos == 1 heightmap square.

1 elmo == 1 diffusemap square, assuming that the heightmap is absolutely flat and you're looking straight down.

And yes... elmos are used for weapon ranges... but they're also used by BOS. 1 linear unit in BOS, or [1], is 1 elmo in length.

And yes... using "pixels" is not a good idea.

Which pixels? Heightmap pixels? Diffusemap pixels? Featuremap pixels? Rasterized pixels? Are we talking an absolute, or a non-constant?

That's why we use "elmos". It's like calling an arbitrary length a "meter"- it gives us a measuring tool for things that are a lot bigger than the smallest distances OpenGL is capable of handling.

[TradeMark]

why dont you call them pixels instead of elmos? since the texture aspect ratio is constant... makes more sense xd

also the unit weapon ranges etc are measured in pixels...

Pretty sure weapon ranges are in elmos in Spring.

i just tested, and they are in pixels

"elmo" just confuses by its bizarr name which means nothing, and it supposedly means 1 heightmap square, which is 8 pixels

No... 8 elmos == 1 heightmap square

1 elmo == 1 diffusemap square, assuming that the heightmap is absolutely flat and you're looking straight down.

oh you are saying, elmo = pixel ? ok, case closed =)
lets just call them pixels...


if you tell some noob mapper/modder anything about elmos, he'll just get confused... makes more sense when you just say weapon ranges equals texturemap pixels, 200 pixels = 200 range in the weapon. also easy to see where the weapons can reach on your map when you know this..

[Argh]

oh you are saying, elmo = pixel ? ok, case closed =)

No, I'm saying that you don't know what you're talking about. I just explained to you that elmos are NOT equivalent to a diffusemap pixel, except under very specific circumstances... quit thinking in 2D.

If two diffusemap pixels have a large height differential, then the true distance between their centers can be a lot larger than an elmo, which is why we have a specific name for that distance, because it's a constant- with some exceptions, weapon ranges are not 2D

Call 'em whatever you want, just be prepared for a lot of "huh" if you use a generic term like "pixels".

[jK]

oh you are saying, elmo = pixel ? ok, case closed =)
lets just call them pixels...

texturemap pixel = elmo * elmo = elmo^2 != elmo (same as m^2 != m ...)

[TradeMark]

im not thinking in 2d... omg... whatever you calculate, the result is in pixels anyways, since all the coordinate systems are based on pixels...
you know its possible to calculate "10.125 pixels", right? doesnt mean they must be integers...

Edit: i just tested, and even the height is based on pixels, my map has 64x64x64 cubes, and the height difference was 64 between cubes...

so, just call them pixels, makes more sense and less confusion

[Tobi]

It is important to use consistent and unambiguous terminology.

Elmos is unambiguous because it isn't used for anything else.

Pixel could, as you proved yourself in this thread, mean diffuse map texture pixel, unit texture pixel, unit second texture pixel, unit shadow texture pixel, cubemap pixel, heightmap pixel, mipheightmap pixel, minimap pixel, screen pixel, projectile atlas pixel, metalmap pixel, typemap pixel, featuremap pixel, LOS map pixel, air LOS map pixel, radar map pixel, sonar map pixel, jammer map pixel, etc.

[TradeMark]

yeah but elmo sounds retarded, and anyways the coordinates uses texturemap pixels, so it makes more sense... if i make a 3d model, then its easy to fit it on the map texture because you know 10 pixels is as wide as 10 units in the 3d model, so it matches perfectly.

[Nemo]

TM, the game/mod dev community has been using "elmos" as a unit of measurement for literally years. You're not going to suddenly convince all of us to switch to inferior (ie, more vague) terminology.

[TradeMark]

but i explained why...

[Tobi]

I'd consider fact that 1 texture map pixel = 1 elmo just coincidence. Wouldn't surprise me if in SM3 this isn't necessary valid.

[Forboding Angel]

Elmo was a term coined by smoth when he was talking about the awkward scale of trees in spring. The term kinda caught on and tbh, as tobi said, it's not used anywhere else and everyone knows what it means (except you apparently )

[TradeMark]

i knew it was smoth with his puppets... >_>

[Gnomre]

We called them elmos in TA long before spring came around.

I don't know if a TA elmo and a Spring elmo are the same off the top of my head, though.

Also this is a stupid idea, just uvmap the features normally, christ