Some troubles with LODS

[NoctisLucisCaelum 0]

Hi,

Recently I´ve been making some 3d models in sketchup (they are bridges), but when it comes to object builder I can´t add some mass to it. When I pack it in my addons I find it is completely traspassable, I would like to know hot to make the LODs so vehicles and people can walk trough, I also have some kind of fences in the sides of the bridge so it´s impossible to fall down.

Can somebosy help me? I´ll be thankful.

Thanks for your time.

[warlord554 2065]

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/LOD

[NoctisLucisCaelum 0]

I´ve alredy seen that but I can´t.

This is the bridge:

https://gyazo.com/744be7b249676bfdbea5959c74a4e385

And I simplified it to see if it was because it´s very complex, and made this, but doesn´t work:

https://gyazo.com/2ea9428c74bd7e4f7bceb22744683301

[opteryx 1562]

Quote

Must be closed and convex

I suggest you make the geometry/fire/view LODs with just boxes in Object Builder.

[NoctisLucisCaelum 0]

Im not really experienced with this programs.

I can´t understand you opteryx.

But if it´s supposed to be closed an convex I can´t make some fences around the bridge to protect the drivers.

And making the LODs is creating some big trouble.

[opteryx 1562]

Look at the Geometry LOD bit in this tutorial http://pmc.editing.wiki/doku.php?id=ofp:modeling:brsseb_lesson8

It's for OFP, but still relevant to Arma models.

[NoctisLucisCaelum 0]

Can I make models with sketch-up?

[opteryx 1562]

Yes, I do it all the time, but it's not recommended because the topology that you export to OB is very bad, I suppose it's sort of fine for only the res LOD if you remove degenerate faces and delete the UVs made in Sketchup. For the collision LODs and shadow it's best you make them in OB or some better modelling software.

[NoctisLucisCaelum 0]

But would it be possible to make some bridges in Sketch-Up and make the LODs in a good way?

[Whitefame 16]

For the geo lod everything most be convex and closed! But you can have more then one mesh:

 

every parts need a named selection thou component01, component02,.... and so on!

[NoctisLucisCaelum 0]

But if I want the fence to be like in this one is it possible? https://gyazo.com/744be7b249676bfdbea5959c74a4e385

 

[Macser 776]

If I was to do an object like yours, I'd make the Geometry (collision mesh) in the same way Whitefame showed above. Adding complexity wouldn't make it function any differently.

 

If you need rounds to pass through the rails you can add simple cuboids in the right shape. But that goes into the Fire Geometry LOD. 

 

Keep the Geometry LOD as simple as you can. It's simply there to prevent things passing through your mesh and to add mass. It's not something you'll ever see in game.

[NoctisLucisCaelum 0]

Ok thanks, to everyone, but one last quest.

Can I make the LODs in an object like Witheframe and then put them in a more complex model?

[Macser 776]

There's nothing actually stopping you from making an lod complex.

 

The issue you face is whether or not it's worth doing. Keeping the Geo as simple as possible cuts some of the load on your CPU,as far as I'm aware. Someone with more technical knowledge could clarify that.

 

But the engine has to keep track of it and it's interactions with the other objects in the environment. Plus everything else going on in a frame. 

 

The more complex it is, presumably the more data has to be processed. You're also less likely to get unusual behaviour when it's kept simple. Adding complexity is redundant when it's simply acting as a barrier.  Is there a specific reason you're keen to make it detailed?

[NoctisLucisCaelum 0]

I´d like to make complex the design, not very complex but I don´t want to leave some square formed bridge.

 

[x3kj 1247]

dont you understand that visual LOD can look vastly different than geo LOD and still work good?

[Macser 776]

Ok. Bear something in mind. The arma games are "simulators" in essence. But objects can't act exactly as they do in real life. It's too processor intensive. And also, for a game it would be very annoying for players to get stopped by smaller details that don't really add to the experience.

 

Taking your bridge as an example. Both of these, as collision meshes, will function almost exactly the same. One may be slightly more detailed. But the purpose is to prevent characters and vehicles from passing through. Which both will do. You or any other player isn't going to notice the difference.

 

Making it more complex is unlikely to fix any issues you're currently having, if that's what you're thinking. In fact it's more likely to create issues.

 

You cannot create anything other than the resolution and view lods in sketchup. Geometry, Fire geometry, memory and the other types are best done in Object builder. Because they have special properties that the engine requires.