Author Topic: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!  (Read 5267 times)

Crash

  • PGP
  • Posts: 30
Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« on: February 13, 2006, 07:16:34 PM »
hey i finished my map, it has about 22,000 numportals so it wont compile. I made almost half the map into a func_wall to lower the numportals to 5,000. Even then it doesnt finish compiling with VIS.

I could delete a FEW brushes but even then it will only go to about 16,000 numportals. I dont want to sacrifice some brushes because it will take away from the map design. Any ideas? im willing to send someone the .map to help me with this.

Also, func_model cannont be an animated model. Is this hardcoded or can i add a keyvalue or worldspawn flag to fix this? I am adding a hanging flag banner that has animation to it ( from base1 in q2 ).

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Dirty_Taco

  • Map Committee
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 1630
_
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2006, 07:31:13 PM »
Post removed
« Last Edit: July 26, 2010, 12:56:56 AM by Dirty_Taco »

Eiii

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 4595
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2006, 07:55:38 PM »
Deeeeeeeetail brushes. Func_walling is a bad idea. Makes the map... ugly.

jitspoe

  • Administrator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 18802
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2006, 08:27:37 PM »
I can see about adding animation to func_model, but you can't use the banner from Quake2.  It's copyrighted.

Edit: And zip/post the .map so we can see what's causing the issue.

Crash

  • PGP
  • Posts: 30
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2006, 08:31:30 PM »
ide rather not post the .map so everyone can download it. add me on AIM , zipyourface and i can send it to you.

im not sure how to do detail brushes so. jitspoe would you have to make an update for it to work, or can i do something in the ent's to fix it?

Hobo

  • VM-68
  • Posts: 166
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2006, 08:39:43 PM »
 From what I've read, detail brushes are meant to be used for brushes which don't block the players view. For example trim around a door or colums against a wall, etc.  So... maybe give those brushes the detail tag as suggested first.
  For Draw.bsp, I had to increase the max patch size from 32 to 64. 64 might be higher than I needed but it seems to work.  Draw.bsp has 8005 numportals last compile and vis seemed to poop out with much more than that, around 8100 or so.  22,000 numportals is alot, must be a huge map or have alot of detail and stuff in it.  I haven't tried func_wall, only know it's sometimes used for sealing off areas when a team isn't playing, like on a 4 team map or whatever.
  Maybe elimate and/or combine some brushes into one to decrease the count?
  It won't compile with 5K numportals? Does it error out or are you just impatient and stop the compile?

S8NSSON

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 709
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2006, 09:18:17 AM »
darkages is about half the size it was meant to be because of numportal problems.

How about concentrating on expanding the map tools.


This is what I first wrote but decided to say something nicer:
Quote
I hear the community cry out for more original, large, complex, unique maps...MAYBE someone should stop meddling with impact grenades and MAYBE start meddling with expanding the map limitations so we can actually create more complex original unique maps.

Kind of PISSES YOU OFF when you spend hours upon hours on a creation only to have to chop it to bits to get it to even compile.
ATTENTION: our computers can handle more polygons now-a-days. If you have an 800mhz machine too intercoursein bad.

I play BF2 on an AMD2800 w/1gig ram and a 9600pro radeon and it hurts bad...EA created an experience based on higher technology...they didn't say "maybe some poor sap from OKIE, LA in the back woods still has a WIn3.1 60MHZ P1 w/16meg ram so we better dummy it down." They wanted to make something exciting and require a modern PC to run it.

We need a petition: PUT THE REFLECTIVE WATER, IMPACT GRENADES, BUNNY PAINT BOMBS, CL_YOURMOTHERSUCKS CLIENT SIDE HORSE excrement AWAY AND EXPAND THE MAPPING.

jitspoe

  • Administrator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 18802
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #7 on: February 14, 2006, 01:23:18 PM »
Crash: email it to my @planetquake.com account and I'll take a look at it.

S8N: Everything mapping related is going to be redone, but it's going to take a while.  Not because I don't care, but because it's going to be almost a total rendering engine rewrite to do it properly.  Not to mention the tools.

Crash

  • PGP
  • Posts: 30
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #8 on: February 14, 2006, 08:27:12 PM »
ok i will jitspoe, im fixing some of the brushwork right now so i can get the brushcount down. also eiii pointed out some good things i need to fix first. wen im done ill send you it jitty

S8NSSON

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 709
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #9 on: February 15, 2006, 07:39:21 AM »
But you are GOD.
There is no such thing as time to you.
Discontinue anything that resembles a life and get to work!!!

Crash

  • PGP
  • Posts: 30
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #10 on: February 16, 2006, 03:27:57 PM »
ok sent you my map, it has a leak that i cant find or pinpoint Take a look!

jitspoe

  • Administrator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 18802
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2006, 04:42:21 PM »
Did you do a leak check?  BSP draws a little line to the leak: file | leak check | load pts, I think.

I'll look at the map when I get home.

Crash

  • PGP
  • Posts: 30
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2006, 09:29:52 PM »
yea i see a long yellow line, but i  cant pinpoint the leak =/

Eiii

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 4595
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #13 on: February 16, 2006, 09:43:24 PM »
Somewhere along the line is the leak.

jitspoe

  • Administrator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 18802
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2006, 02:51:00 AM »
Found your leak -- there's a func_door with nothing under it.  The leak check points right to it.  Also, I'm getting a bunch of "mixed face contents" when I compile.  You should probably fix those.

Eiii

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 4595
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #15 on: February 17, 2006, 09:07:41 AM »
...The leak check points right to it. ...

Those are the exact words I used when talking to him over IM. Weird.

Crash

  • PGP
  • Posts: 30
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #16 on: February 17, 2006, 02:49:52 PM »
fixed the leaks, now its just too complex for VIS to compile. quake 2 engine is pretty sad, if you ever make paintball mod for quake 4 ill start mapping lol

jitspoe

  • Administrator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 18802
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2006, 05:02:21 PM »
Did you detail all those pipes and stuff?  Things like that with lots of surfaces tend to give vis a heart attack.

Reed

  • VM-68
  • Posts: 242
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #18 on: February 17, 2006, 07:57:03 PM »
Could he try moving some objects so that there is a gap of 1 unit between them.

Instead of:
|
|
|

Try:
||
||
||

Or put some big ugly vis blockers in there :D

I dont know if this'll speed up compiling but if you ever get it done itll reduce the r_speeds.

jitspoe

  • Administrator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 18802
Re: Map finished, but too big/complex to compile!
« Reply #19 on: February 17, 2006, 09:02:58 PM »
Adding vis blockers would probably worsen the situation, as there are already too many portals.  I don't know about the 1 unit gap trick, but that tends to look ugly, so I'd avoid it if possible.

Send me the leak fixed map and I'll take another look at it.