Making a Tremulous map in Blender.

[m4gnificent_b4st4rd]

I decided to do something a bit less ambitious and make some pillars. I got one to work and then made some copies of it to make a little parthanon type temple.

This worked without any problems. The brushes that made each segment of the pillar might have been complex, but the vertices that they were constructed on were on a horizontal level, which didn't seem to cause any errors when compiled to a map. I'm pretty pleased with my little temple, not too bad considering it's constructed purely out of brushes.

Download the pk3 here.
(.map file is in the pk3)

[m4gnificent_b4st4rd]

There is a massive benefit of constructing brushes in Blender that I've not mentioned yet. You can get all your brush/meshes and Ctrl-J them together into a single mesh. They still get exported as seperate brushes as long as you don't remove duplicated vertices. The advantage of this is that you can then change the shape of all of the brush/meshes at the same time. For example, in the picture below I've joined all the brush/meshes of the temple together into a single mesh and then selected the roof and the upper parts of all the pillars. I can now adjust the height of the entire building as one piece.

This is way quicker than going around adjusting the length of each individual brush one by one. I can completely modify the height of the building and all of it's pillars in just a second.

[fleash eater]

may i suggest you start the tremulous-blender mapping trend? make a tutorial on how to set it up and use the detail...it could come in handy for some people

[your face]

it would be better to make model an md3 pillar than to make them out of brush, so you can texture/shade it better.

[MitSugna]

Blender is good for non standard, fine tuned uv mapping. Can you generate lightmaps in blender? It'd be awesome because you use radiosity.

[UniqPhoeniX]

m4gnificent_b4st4rd: That is some awesome progress
Tho you seem to make many assumptions about stuff being difficult in Radiant, it's not: I could also make that octagon thing in about 30 sec with the brush cylinder tool or patches, it's also possible to move vertices from several brushes at the same time (to adjust the height of that building), it's also possible to merge brushes together into 1, as long as it stays convex.
Also, how well (if at all) are quake 3 shaders handled?

About the edges not lining up: this happens when the shared vertices for 2 faces don't line up to grid (because 1 or both are on a weird angle), (the Radiant grid increases 2x on each 'level', (0.125, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256 units), as opposed to blenders 10x increase). I'm not sure if you need to keep vertices on 0.125x or whether you could use any 3 decimal points like .001. You could probably figure this out from a .bsp. I have always managed to avoid this issue by splitting brushes into smaller ones, that only have triangles (not quads) visible.

Have you figured out detail brushes yet? If not, get to it! And make sure to cover all unseen faces with common/caulk.
The .map you posted earlier didn't have "// entity X" in front of every entity, only the first, re-saving with radiant fixed that tho.
Some limits you may need to keep in mind:
you need to keep your maps within +-65536 units (which is huuuuuuge, 2km in every direction (32units/meter)), or preferably half that;
IIRC brushes can't have too many sides, tho maybe that was a Radiant/compiler issue in an older version;
you probably won't ever hit this limit, but you can have at most about 900 entities (+64player slots, +buildings has to be less then 1022), although even that is too much with high bps.

[m4gnificent_b4st4rd]

fleash eater - Yeah, I should get round to making a blender mapping tutorial thread. I'll start taking some screenshots of what I'm doing in Blender and document the process in detail. I could also post my export script, since I've made a lot of changes to it, I've stripped out any filters on which meshes get exported to brushes, added the ability to assign individual textures to meshes using logic properties and added a variable so you can set the output filename in the script to avoid having to use the file browser each time you export (I export a lot).

your face - You are probably right that exporting the pillars as models with decent uv mapping would look better. There are pros and cons here, models would look better, but brushes can be pasted into the .map file and forgotten about. It's tempting to stick with brushes were possible because it makes the map easier to share when it's all in one place.

mitsuga
- I think I could probably uvmap a model and then bake the light into it in Blender as long as the uvmapping didn't exceed the edges of the texture. The problems would begin when you have uvmapping that is bigger than the texture, like when you have a brick pattern and you scale the uvmapping up so that the brick pattern starts repeating, that would mess up any radiosity baking.
- As for generating actual quake3 type lightmaps I honestly don't know how that would work, since I don't know how q3map2 decides how to uvmap brushes when it comes to making it's own lightmaps.
- Something that interests me is whether q3map2 can use normal mapping. I know they aren't used in the game, but if they could be used during lightmap generation stage then I could make smooth subsurf models and using them to generate normal maps for lower polygon models and avoid having the edges show up when lightmapped.

UniqPhoeniX
- I've dabbled in Gtkradiant in the past, but I didn't realize how much could be done with it, thanks for setting me straight on that. Can you think of anything that is difficult to do in Gtkradiant that might be easier in Blender? It'd be nice if I could concentrate on useful stuff like that instead of trying to re-invent the wheel.
- With that claw thing I tried setting the grid to 1 unit and then snapped all the vertices to grid before exporting it,but I was still getting errors, not really sure what the problem is there.
- I've not figured out the detail brush thing yet, any chance you could make a simple box map containing two brushes, one detail and one non-detail? If I could see the .map file for that I should be able to work out how it's done.
- Quake3 shaders seem to work ok, I can assign textures to the exported brushes (which I can with my modified script) and then q3map2 does it's job ok as long as I've got shaderlist.txt in a scripts folder in base. (I had make a link to base and rename it baseq3 to get q3map2 to work, seems I've got it set up for quake3). I've been tinkering with that temple model I made and it's got a pool of water that I can jump into an swim around in, so everything seems ok.

[m4gnificent_b4st4rd]

I've scaled that temple model up and tinkered with it a bit. In the middle of the temple are some circular steps leading up to a pool with working water (I've got q3map2 working with shaders).

Download pk3 here.
(.map is in pk3)

[CreatureofHell]

here is a .map file with one detail brush and one normal (structural) brush:

Code: [Select]

// entity 0
{
"classname" "worldspawn"
// brush 0
{
( -16 128 64 ) ( -16 -128 64 ) ( -64 128 64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0
( -16 128 64 ) ( -64 128 64 ) ( -16 128 -64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0
( -16 128 64 ) ( -16 128 -64 ) ( -16 -128 64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0
( -64 -128 -64 ) ( -16 -128 -64 ) ( -64 128 -64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0
( -64 -128 -64 ) ( -64 -128 64 ) ( -16 -128 -64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0
( -64 -128 -64 ) ( -64 128 -64 ) ( -64 -128 64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0
}
// brush 1
{
( 64 128 64 ) ( 64 -128 64 ) ( 16 128 64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 134217728 0 0
( 64 128 64 ) ( 16 128 64 ) ( 64 128 -64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 134217728 0 0
( 64 128 64 ) ( 64 128 -64 ) ( 64 -128 64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 134217728 0 0
( 16 -128 -64 ) ( 64 -128 -64 ) ( 16 128 -64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 134217728 0 0
( 16 -128 -64 ) ( 16 -128 64 ) ( 64 -128 -64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 134217728 0 0
( 16 -128 -64 ) ( 16 128 -64 ) ( 16 -128 64 ) common/caulk 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 134217728 0 0
}
}


[UniqPhoeniX]

I haven't used blender a lot, but perhaps aligning textures to weird angled surfaces would be easier; also making stuff that is fully round (Radiant deforms curves a bit (perhaps because of bounding boxes being, well boxes, or to keep vertices on grid), tho it's possible to compensate somewhat)

About that claw thing: you can't just snap vertices to grid, because radiant works with faces which are defined by 3 points (and only convex brushes). So a n-gon is only guaranteed to have 3 points on grid, others are where the planes intersect (which can be off grid). You can try splitting it to several brushes, but I'm not sure how exactly you can do it in this case.

[m4gnificent_b4st4rd]

CreatureofHell - Ah, it's just the 6th number at the end of the brush face line, that should be easy to implement in the export script. Thanks for helping with that.

UniqPhoeniX - I reckon you are right. Building the claw out of 4 sided polygons when it was going to be exported to triangles was a bad idea. I'll construct the model out of triangles this time and see if that works. Makes sense to have the model start as it means to finish.

Something that's occurred to me that might be very useful. Say I had a complex mesh that I was exporting to an Ase model and I wanted it to be solid in the game. I could make it solid with spawnflags, but that would make every single triangle solid, which would slow down the game. A better approach would be to make some brushes that closely follow the general shape of the mesh and set them to be invisible, but solid in the game. Then export the Ase model and the brushes to a map file, grab the relevent code and rewrite it to be a group. A mapper could then simply paste this code into their map and every thing would be set up.

That code for the detail brushes has got me thinking. I'm guessing that number isn't just used for detail brushes, it probably covers all kinds of brush functions, I'm going to see if I can find any info about what can be done with that. It's possible it's like binary flags or something.

[m4gnificent_b4st4rd]

UniqPhoeniX - You were absolutely right about the problem being my use of quads when the map format only deals with triangles. If you look at the pic below the claw on the left is a new one I made in Blender using only triangles (before I broke it into segments) and on the right is the finished result in Tremulous. It works perfectly now, thanks for that.  

[m4gnificent_b4st4rd]

I've done a bit of experimentation and I've found that the basic classnames you need to make map function are-

info_player_intermission
team_human_spawn
team_alien_spawn

-this is just enough to make it so you can spawn in the map and take a look around.

[m4gnificent_b4st4rd]

I've done a fairly detailed tutorial here. Shows you how to make a basic box room with spawns, a light and a model. I figured it would be really useful for modellers who just want to look at their models in the game without having to learn an new program.

[Hector]

A Spork -

In all reality, it'd probably be just as easy to just learn Radiant....After all, its designed for that.

Obviously if I met someone who wanted to make maps and had never used either Blender or Gtkradiant then I'd advise them to go for Gtkradiant,..

I find myself disagreeing with you m4gnificent_b4st4rd.
I'm equally unfamiliar with Radiant and Blender but lets look more carefully at the choices. With Blender I'd be learning to master an open source 3D modelling, rendering and animations package with which I can play around for many years to come (since the community behind it will constantly improve it) and tackle innumerable projects at work and home. With Radiant I'll be trying my hand at building my own maps for Tremulous and perhaps Nexuiz, briefly. Given this comparison I'm sure you'll agree Radiant almost seems a waste of effort. If mapping was considered an important part of the game Radiant should have been included in the Tremulous installation download. All the bits and pieces needed to make Radiant work in Tremulous seems to be scattered all over the net with a few broken links and the inoperable Rapidshare thrown in for good measure. So I thank you for sharing your good work. And I ask if you can perhaps host your example Blender map somewhere more accessible?

[nubcake]

A Spork -

In all reality, it'd probably be just as easy to just learn Radiant....After all, its designed for that.

Obviously if I met someone who wanted to make maps and had never used either Blender or Gtkradiant then I'd advise them to go for Gtkradiant,..

I find myself disagreeing with you m4gnificent_b4st4rd.
I'm equally unfamiliar with Radiant and Blender but lets look more carefully at the choices. With Blender I'd be learning to master an open source 3D modelling, rendering and animations package with which I can play around for many years to come (since the community behind it will constantly improve it) and tackle innumerable projects at work and home. With Radiant I'll be trying my hand at building my own maps for Tremulous and perhaps Nexuiz, briefly. Given this comparison I'm sure you'll agree Radiant almost seems a waste of effort. If mapping was considered an important part of the game Radiant should have been included in the Tremulous installation download. All the bits and pieces needed to make Radiant work in Tremulous seems to be scattered all over the net with a few broken links and the inoperable Rapidshare thrown in for good measure. So I thank you for sharing your good work. And I ask if you can perhaps host your example Blender map somewhere more accessible?

That may be true but remember that GTKradiant is extremely simple and easy to use (perhaps blender is too i dont know)

[Plague Bringer]

tl;dr, blender is better than gtkr

If you want to model, use Blender. If you want to map, use Radiant. Each was designed around a purpose that the UI, filetypes and buildmenus support. Sure, Blender can be used for mapping, but if you just want to map, it's a waste of time learning the UI and the limited functions necessary to make a map.

(My apologies for the short and rushed post. Gotta get to school; will be back in 5hrs.)

[A Spork]

A Spork -

In all reality, it'd probably be just as easy to just learn Radiant....After all, its designed for that.

Obviously if I met someone who wanted to make maps and had never used either Blender or Gtkradiant then I'd advise them to go for Gtkradiant,..

I find myself disagreeing with you m4gnificent_b4st4rd.
I'm equally unfamiliar with Radiant and Blender but lets look more carefully at the choices. With Blender I'd be learning to master an open source 3D modelling, rendering and animations package with which I can play around for many years to come (since the community behind it will constantly improve it) and tackle innumerable projects at work and home. With Radiant I'll be trying my hand at building my own maps for Tremulous and perhaps Nexuiz, briefly. Given this comparison I'm sure you'll agree Radiant almost seems a waste of effort. If mapping was considered an important part of the game Radiant should have been included in the Tremulous installation download. All the bits and pieces needed to make Radiant work in Tremulous seems to be scattered all over the net with a few broken links and the inoperable Rapidshare thrown in for good measure. So I thank you for sharing your good work. And I ask if you can perhaps host your example Blender map somewhere more accessible?

as PB said, Blender can map, but its not designed for it.
GTKradiant isn't in the trem install cuz 1) it would add unnecessary size to it, and 2) Most people dont map, and dont care to.

Also, Radiant is all in one place. I only added 1 extra .pk3, and that was just to fix the ret models.

You have pretty much no experience it would seem, and you come in here, say we've all been doing it wrong, and say Radiant is a waste of time. That sounds like an idiot to me.

tl;dr: dont be an idiot plz kthxbai

[Hector]

A Spork - A .map file is supposed to be a file, not lots of nonsensical code...

Are you trolling me or something? Grab one of the map files from inside a Tremulous pk3 and they will look pretty much exactly like the "nonsensical code" I just posted.

A Spork: you seem to regard yourself as a major authority, yet perhaps your time is better spent doing your schoolwork than trying to ridicule people? If your undue hostility is the prevailing attitude to be found on this forum it is little wonder you claim "most people dont map, and dont care to".

http://tremmapping.pbworks.com/GtkRadiant1_4-Win32
"Note: Almost all files which follow can no longer be directly downloaded due to hosts going offline. If you require the files PM Survivor at the forums and we will work something out."

Perhaps my effort to encourage m4gnificent_b4st4rd appear a bit heavy handed. But I'm sure it is a lesser evil than simply dismissing his efforts because Radiant is "the way a real man makes maps"?

[A Spork]

1.5 is the newest radiant....That would be likely why you're missing stuff.
And that quoted comment was me being over-tired and not thinking straight.(My apologies)
And you were seeming fairly hostile yourself.

[mooseberry]

A Spork - A .map file is supposed to be a file, not lots of nonsensical code...

Are you trolling me or something? Grab one of the map files from inside a Tremulous pk3 and they will look pretty much exactly like the "nonsensical code" I just posted.

A Spork: you seem to regard yourself as a major authority, yet perhaps your time is better spent doing your schoolwork than trying to ridicule people? If your undue hostility is the prevailing attitude to be found on this forum it is little wonder you claim "most people dont map, and dont care to".

http://tremmapping.pbworks.com/GtkRadiant1_4-Win32
"Note: Almost all files which follow can no longer be directly downloaded due to hosts going offline. If you require the files PM Survivor at the forums and we will work something out."

Perhaps my effort to encourage m4gnificent_b4st4rd appear a bit heavy handed. But I'm sure it is a lesser evil than simply dismissing his efforts because Radiant is "the way a real man makes maps"?

Quoting a month old post is stupid. There was a dumb argument and now it's over, you missed out. Don't try at start something again which was ended. Yes spork was stupid, but that's old.

And now here's something for you to think about, quoted from the guy who you were "defending."

 
If you'd actually bothered to read my posts you'd see that I never said that Gtkradiant's interface was hard, I just said it was "painfully different" to Blenders. Blender's interface might seem "confusing" to you, but once you get used to it it becomes second nature, which is why I found it very hard to use Gtkradiant, because I'm so accustomed to a radically different UI. You seem to be trying to turn this into some kind of flame war about which is the better package, Gtkradiant or Blender, but you are totally missing the point. I've already stated that Gtkradiant is better for mapping

m4gnificent_b4st4rd - I'm aware that Gtkradiant is the best option for serious mapping

and I've stated that someone who wants to start making maps should use it

So, if you are happy with [Blender] go ahead and use it. Just don't feel the need to come here and start a Gtkradiant/Blender flamewar with someone who has already said that Gtkradiant is the better tool for the job.

He had the right idea in the first place. For people who know blender but not radiant, I imagine this will be very helpful. For people who allready are talented at using radiant this isn't really useful. This topic wasn't ever meant for a flamewar over which is better. Some dumb people tried to flame blender, now you come in and flame radiant. Just to everyone, please don't, your ego or feelings toward a program has nothing to do with what this guy wanted this thread to be about (and worked hard for).

P.S. Complaining about how the files are missing or it's outdated and than talking about an old version makes you sound stupid, to be frank. 1.5 or NetRadiant are much better suited to the task. (And their files are quite easy to obtain.)