I R Scary Eyeball
16th October 2006
Well, here's a little mapping problem I've run into: What's the best way to make a hollow sphere? I need to be able to split it in 2, so that one part is hollow glass while the other is solid metal. I'm not talking about those big, blocky, 7-sided "spheres", it needs to look round. Also, thinking about performance here, since there are 61 of them...
Blunt answer? You don't, and you're insane if you actually try as many as 61. o_0
Just one of them will kill your brush count, probably prevent your map from compiling due to a list of errors as long as my forearm, and even if it does compile it will brutally murder your FPS then pour petrol over it's corpse before dropping a lit match in the remains.
If you really want to try that, your only real option is importing the sphere as a misc_model and then adding a primitive physics clip layer around it. Just expect serious FPS lag, no matter what method you use.
I don't know how, and I don't know why, but this is totally Sheep's fault.
The one and only;3661145Well, here's a little mapping problem I've run into: What's the best way to make a hollow sphere? I need to be able to split it in 2, so that one part is hollow glass while the other is solid metal. I'm not talking about those big, blocky, 7-sided "spheres", it needs to look round. Also, thinking about performance here, since there are 61 of them...
a holow sphere. Id agree you may be insane but you could theoredicaly just make it out of patch and have a inside and a outside. If you were gonna attempt to make it out of brushes... well lets say, T hats not going to work and you should make a model of that instead.
I can see how it could be done with patch. However performance, 61 full spheres drawing double tris because there holllow.... q3map may not like.
That 61 is certainly a killer, but otherwise a model with a tolerable amount of polys would be the best best. A sphere doesn't need an awesome poly count to look good enough (or not too bad at least), this I know from experience. Of course you would need to get such a model from somewhere, and moreover one that would take two textures UV mapped so that it would suit your needs.
But that 61 ruins it no matter what. Well, assuming those 61 or even a sizable fraction of the number would be drawn at once in game.
You could try creating two cones, pulling down the top vertex to align with the middle ones to create a hemisphere and then whack them together. But then again, that means 122 cones which will probably be a bit of a problem.
You know, I've never been able to make dual-cones look perfectly round! They always look slightly oblong or pointy one way or the other, I need to learn how to do that. as for 122 cones? Who cares! Most newer video cards will be able to handle all that pretty decently. It's the compile time you need to worry about. But if you've got a few days, I do too!
I R Scary Eyeball
16th October 2006
Meh, at the moment I've settled with the 7-sided approach. Which doesn't look anywhere near as bad as I thought it would. Plus it makes it easier to out holes in the right place. The only downside is that when I tried to hollow out a seven sided "sphere" I got an error, and ended up having to make it one brush at a time...
I didn't make it!
I use cones. I just copy the first, flip it upside down, manipulate it, change the vertexes', then I clone it and Matrix it it.
First attachment is outside the ball, second is inside. Third is over 60 balls in radiant, and fourth is that same map ingame. You can see I have around 50-60 FPS.