TheDarkSide Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 As a newbie Radiant mapper, I've come across several sources that say the CSG hollow function is the greatest thing for carving out rooms. I've also read many times, how all your brushes should butt up and not overlap. Sooooooooo.........when you hollow out a cube, Radiant auto generates an overlap in the newly created brushes on all the edges. Do you just leave it alone, or do you then manually go in and move the brushes so they are all butting together? Thanks in advance for your help here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniKorn Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 Overlapping brushes are to be avoided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDarkSide Posted May 2, 2002 Author Share Posted May 2, 2002 Well I am correct then in saying that CSG hollow is fairly useless then? If you have to go back and touch it all up and stretch/contract it, why not just duplicate your room brush first, expand it by your wall size in all directions and then do a CSG subtract? BTW Uni - I'm finally getting the hang of radiant...I tried gmax tempest but never got the paths to sync up where it would work right. The GTKradiant is much nicer to work with then the JOradiant tool. Thanks for your help. TDS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniKorn Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 Small extra explanation maybe. It is best to miter the brushes as well. __________ |\ | \___________ | | is better than x_________________ | | | |_______________ | | | | | | why? Because there will be 1 face less that is drawn. Where the x is, when that part needs to be visible ingame, you need to apply a texture to it that is not caulk => it will be draw. When mitered it can be caulked and will not be drawn. It saves you 2 poly's that aren't drawn. If you do that for as many corners as you can (sometimes it is too hard to handle the brush with a mitered side) you might increase the performance of your map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDarkSide Posted May 2, 2002 Author Share Posted May 2, 2002 miter the wall joints eh? Seems like that would probably be one of the last steps in map-making. It seems to me that would cut down on the "editability" of your structure. I can see what you are talking about though since you have a wasted face, and caulking the mitered faces would be ideal. Question: If your two walls meet at a vertex with nothing behind them (no overlap, no miter, they just meet at their interior vertex), does this cause a bsp hole or leak? You've been a great help, Unikorn. TDS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.