Force water plane rendering only inside map boundaries

[Beherith]

Recently many maps have only small bits of water on them, mostly for visual effect. I would like it if we had an SMD tag that culls all water planes beyond the map boundaries, so the whole map boundary isnt rendered with water. Currently only water 0 obeys map boundaries
Thanks

[jK]

Code: Select all

endlessOcean = (!!configHandler->Get("BumpWaterEndlessOcean", 1))
          && mapInfo->water.hasWaterPlane
          && ((readmap->minheight <= 0.0f) || (mapInfo->water.forceRendering));

[Argh]

Does that work on water 1 / 3, though?

<tests>

No. And it doesn't really cut off all rendering past the map border, either. There is a wavy reflection still.

[Beherith]

Sorry, Im really thick; but i tried the smd tag:
BumpWaterEndlessOcean=0;
In the water section of smd, and it did nothing, could you please elaborate on the correct usage of this command?

[Otherside]

afaik its a option on spring settings not on individual maps

[Beherith]

Ah I see, could it be used on a per map basis?

[jK]

Ah I see, could it be used on a per map basis?

Code: Select all

endlessOcean = (!!configHandler->Get("BumpWaterEndlessOcean", 1))
          && mapInfo->water.hasWaterPlane
          && ((readmap->minheight <= 0.0f) || (mapInfo->water.forceRendering));

[Tobi]

What he means is, remove the 'planeColor' tag from the water subtable in the SMD, that has same effect as setting BumpWaterEndlessOcean to 0 in the user settings.

(Not everyone can read C++ and knows the spring source by heart...)

[Beherith]

It works just as advertised:

Remove the
WaterPlaneColor=0.113 0.085 0.015;
tag from your SMD file, and the water will only render to the map boundaries

Thank you all for the help! Ill move this thread to mapping now as that seems its logical place.

[Forboding Angel]

Well fuck me, nice find behe!

[lurker]

Nice find who?

And I don't see any need to be able to read code. It has the following English:

config something BumpWaterEndlessOcean
map info has water plane
map min height something
map info water force rendering


Basically, Beherith saw the first one and made a valid if mistaken effort at it. He should have then gone on to the other three. "has water plane" leads directly to trying to remove water plane from the smd.

[FLOZi]

Nice find who?

And I don't see any need to be able to read code. It has the following English:

config something BumpWaterEndlessOcean
map info has water plane
map min height something
map info water force rendering


Basically, Beherith saw the first one and made a valid if mistaken effort at it. He should have then gone on to the other three. "has water plane" leads directly to trying to remove water plane from the smd.

You don't see a need to read code because you can.

[Tobi]

Nice find who?

And I don't see any need to be able to read code. It has the following English:

config something BumpWaterEndlessOcean
map info has water plane
map min height something
map info water force rendering


Basically, Beherith saw the first one and made a valid if mistaken effort at it. He should have then gone on to the other three. "has water plane" leads directly to trying to remove water plane from the smd.

You have to know !! means not-not, which is just shorthand for conversion to boolean, you have to know && == and, you have to know || == or and you have to not be scared for formulas.

Besides that it isn't necessarily obvious that no water plane exists if a color has not been defined for it; many tags in Spring use a default value instead of using the existence of the tag as implicit configuration mechanism.

(For example, if you don't specify nano particle color in FBI a unit will still emit nano particles if it's a builder - it just uses the default color.)

Either way, I think it's obvious that quoting code is often not the best way to explain things.. (at best it gives a hint so someone who also happens to be able to make the same assumptions quickly can translate it into a better explanation.)

[lurker]

You have to know !! means not-not, which is just shorthand for conversion to boolean, you have to know && == and, you have to know || == or and you have to not be scared for formulas.

No you don't. I didn't even read the logic symbols when I looked at it. I looked at the words, the single = sign, and the <=, and the <= was gratuitous. I completely ignored the booleans, the parentheses, the !!, the quotation marks, the semicolon, that non-map-related word "Get", etc. In fact, I still haven't read the 'code' part of it as I make this post. Isn't everything I put in my first post just the words of the snippet plus a few 'something's?

And no, it's not immediately obvious what to do when you're trying to make it have no water plane, but you should see the 'water plane' tags and try something.

[FLOZi]

You have to know !! means not-not, which is just shorthand for conversion to boolean, you have to know && == and, you have to know || == or and you have to not be scared for formulas.

No you don't. I didn't even read the logic symbols when I looked at it. I looked at the words, the single = sign, and the <=, and the <= was gratuitous. I completely ignored the booleans, the parentheses, the !!, the quotation marks, the semicolon, that non-map-related word "Get", etc. In fact, I still haven't read the 'code' part of it as I make this post. Isn't everything I put in my first post just the words of the snippet plus a few 'something's?

And no, it's not immediately obvious what to do when you're trying to make it have no water plane, but you should see the 'water plane' tags and try something.

Or, Jk could have just given a straightforward and clear answer in the first place, and we would have avoided this pointless discussion.

[lurker]

And probably with less effort then quoting the code.

[Beherith]

Where I screwed up the interpretation is at the word waterplane. To me the word water plane means the very top of the water, not the ground beneath it. (even though i knew full well what waterplanecolor did in spring )

Also, im used to being given info in code, but i usually just keep asking till someone can tell me what it means :)

Anyhow thanks for the info guys, its a really good peice

[lurker]

But it does refer to the very top of the water in spring, what's the confusion?

[Beherith]

But it does refer to the very top of the water in spring, what's the confusion?

Gotcha
It doesnt. It refers to the extended ground plane rendered under the water.
Which is why I was confused.

[momfreeek]

imo, sides should be rendered at the map edges (in some flat, boring color i guess) so you see the map as a solid chunk of ground rather than a paper-thin floating layer.