I figure it is best to have a single mapconv version, so I want to put in the changes of the various mapconvs in the CVS.
Which mapconvs should I use? (Links plz).
Updating mapconv
Moderator: Moderators
I second Mother's. However, if it is possible, I would like to see the auto-grass and auto-tree placement feature implemented too, maybe as a toggle option, because it does have its uses. Heck, make trees and grass seperately toggle-able, and if its not that hard to do, make the colors they get placed on user-definable, along with a fuzziness factor (how far off the RGB can be from the defined grass-placement color).
Ive also noted that geo bug. It was really annoying. At times I had about 10 geo's in one big clump. And as I was placing about 3 geo spots on the map, this really made the game run slow. Some small bugs like that to sort out, and add in these features, and there will be a realy cool new Mapconv. Also, if someone wants to make a Sharpmap clone, then that would be good to also add to the CVS.
I was about to ask you to update the CVS with a better mapconv built on mother's one Zaphod!
The best mapconv is the one from mother:
- It is the only mapconv that let me place custom features
- It is the only mapconv where the geo are placed precisely where I want and not on a random location in a large area around the point I wanted.
- It is the only mapconv that let me place tree and grass where I want, and not where it thinks it's green enough.
Here is a link to mother mapconv + source. However, this first version had a big problem. Supposedly because of some "optimisation", it was not working for me. So mother released another version, without the optimisation, found here. But this one doesn't have source included.
Also, when trying to compile mother's mapconv I get:
c:\MyStuff\Jeux\TASpring\CVS_Spring_Source\taspring\MapConv\MapConv.cpp(175) : error C2660: 'SaveHeightMap' : function does not take 6 arguments
I PM'ed mother on Sun Oct 23 but he hasn't answered so far.
I strongly disagree about people complaining they had too much geo. One pure green dot = one geo, so if you put a big clumb of ten green pixel don't surprised to have ten geo. That or your map resolution was wrong. Unless it's a genuine bug I haven't yet encountered of course.
Also, long ago Buggi had made a mapconv that supported very large map. I don't know if mother mapconv is built on it, so if not you'll have to merge both.
So, the best mapconv would be mother mapconv, without the "optimisation" that makes me crash, and merged with Buggi changes to support large maps.
The best mapconv is the one from mother:
- It is the only mapconv that let me place custom features
- It is the only mapconv where the geo are placed precisely where I want and not on a random location in a large area around the point I wanted.
- It is the only mapconv that let me place tree and grass where I want, and not where it thinks it's green enough.
Here is a link to mother mapconv + source. However, this first version had a big problem. Supposedly because of some "optimisation", it was not working for me. So mother released another version, without the optimisation, found here. But this one doesn't have source included.
Also, when trying to compile mother's mapconv I get:
c:\MyStuff\Jeux\TASpring\CVS_Spring_Source\taspring\MapConv\MapConv.cpp(175) : error C2660: 'SaveHeightMap' : function does not take 6 arguments
I PM'ed mother on Sun Oct 23 but he hasn't answered so far.
I strongly disagree about people complaining they had too much geo. One pure green dot = one geo, so if you put a big clumb of ten green pixel don't surprised to have ten geo. That or your map resolution was wrong. Unless it's a genuine bug I haven't yet encountered of course.
Also, long ago Buggi had made a mapconv that supported very large map. I don't know if mother mapconv is built on it, so if not you'll have to merge both.
So, the best mapconv would be mother mapconv, without the "optimisation" that makes me crash, and merged with Buggi changes to support large maps.
I never got mothers mapconv working right, but I'd like have the fetures it offers.
There are some other issues that may be mapconv related, terrain typemaps can give results at borders between defined areas that have a difference greater than on. It appears to be a samplig issue. The ingame resolution of the typemap is half the heightmap resolution which is always an odd number, this produces a half "tile" at south and west edge of the map. - This could easily be fixed by not resampling the typemap.
Coincidentally, this is the same resolution as the gradient map (which you see when you hit F2). This is generated from the heightmap using only even numbered x y co-ordinates, then it compares these on diagonals, halving the resolution again!
This allows a little trick, you can create heightmap features that are invisible to the pathfinding system if no large change occurs in diagonally adjacent points that are even numbered. - I don't know if it would be impractial to fix this, but it would break one of my maps if it was.
There are some other issues that may be mapconv related, terrain typemaps can give results at borders between defined areas that have a difference greater than on. It appears to be a samplig issue. The ingame resolution of the typemap is half the heightmap resolution which is always an odd number, this produces a half "tile" at south and west edge of the map. - This could easily be fixed by not resampling the typemap.
Coincidentally, this is the same resolution as the gradient map (which you see when you hit F2). This is generated from the heightmap using only even numbered x y co-ordinates, then it compares these on diagonals, halving the resolution again!
This allows a little trick, you can create heightmap features that are invisible to the pathfinding system if no large change occurs in diagonally adjacent points that are even numbered. - I don't know if it would be impractial to fix this, but it would break one of my maps if it was.
zwzsg... while I hate to point this out the person complaining aboutt he geo problem is ME. Do you realy think I'm likly to place a big blob of green insted of one pixel, or if I did, not go back and change it and try again?? I mean come on.... be sensible.
It does happen, just rarly. I've yet to figure out what sort of conditions...
aGorm
It does happen, just rarly. I've yet to figure out what sort of conditions...
aGorm
It has also happened to me. Im complaining to. When I did it, it happend multiple times. I placed one pixel of green. Well, i placed 3 pixels, but over a very wide area, as in one pixel in each corner, and one in the middle. They came out to be big clumps of Geo's. And these were not even regular shaped clumps. These were really random and weirdly saped clumps. I moved the Geo locations, same thing happened. I ended up just remiving the geo's all together.
