Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Doom Editing Digest Vol. 01 Nr. 220
From: owner-doom-editing-digest
To: doom-editing-digest@nvg.unit.no
Subject: doom-editing-digest V1 #220
Reply-To: doom-editing
Errors-To: owner-doom-editing-digest
Precedence: bulk
doom-editing-digest Monday, 27 March 1995 Volume 01 : Number 220
Re: stair linedefs
RE: Recommend an editor
Re: re. re. transparent textures, the tiling of textures
Re: stair linedefs
WINDEU32/16
Tag 666
That max lines thing...
Re: stair linedefs
Re: stair linedefs
Re: Very Disturbing News
Re: Very Disturbing News
Re: stair linedefs
Re: stair linedefs
Re: Recommend an editor
Re: stair linedefs
Problems in WinDeu .INI
re. stair linedefs
DOOM 1 -vs- DOOM 2
Re: Where's DEU 5.3?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: a13231@mindlink.bc.ca (drake o'brien)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 95 17:27:05 PST
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
Robert Forsman wrote:
>Dave Worth wrote:
>> A better way if you want to create irregular steps is to
>>use either DOOMCAD or DOOMED, they both allow prmade steps
>>and it is easy to move the verticies to make irregular
>>steps, thats how I do it. :)
> Can you make a switchback staircase with it? I'm sure there
>are shapes that you would have difficulty twisting it into.
>Besides, it doesn't run under Linux.
Actually the Doomcad prefab stair item is quite nice, but the prefab
stair routine in DOOMCAD5.1 isn't geared to making automatic
rising-stairs or hidden-stairs. (I believe R.F.'s original post did
specify responses re. rising-stairs..). If you set the stair height at 0
and the top\bottom step altitude equal to the floor height of the parent
sector, as one would for steps meant to rise after walk over a switch, &
insert the steps as you want them and manipulate the vertices as you want
them and put in the switch where you want it, etc., the rising steps will
still rarely work. This is because in version 5.1 the boundary linedefs
all have 1st sidedef or right sidedef facing in towards the steps. This
means that the lowest-numbered 2-sided linedef whose right side faces any
particular step sector tends *not* to bound with the next step in the
desired sequence. In fact, it invariably bounds with the parent sector
because of the way DOOMCAD5.1 numbers the linedefs. Perhaps there's a
more recent version of DOOMCAD that doesn't work like this? Anyhow, for
DOOMCAD5.1 if I want to make prefab stairs into rising stairs I have to
go thru' exactly the procedure of flipping linedefs that I outlined in
the earlier post. Anyhow, even if some version of DOOMCAD after 5.1 does
all this automatically it can't hurt to understand the concept...
The idea of switchback hidden-stairs shows the limitation of the
procedure I outlined. With switchback hidden-stairs you have stairs
bounding on more than 2 other stairs (on the side as well as up\down) so
the simple 'flip bounding linedefs' procedure doesn't apply. Gives me
something to think about...
------------------------------
From: D.Casali@rea0808.wins.icl.co.uk
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 08:26:39 +0100
Subject: RE: Recommend an editor
DCK21 is very powerful, easy to use, but I have switched to
DETH, a DEU conversion that is fully Doom2 copatible. DC
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 10:01:06 +0100
Subject: Re: re. re. transparent textures, the tiling of textures
At 7:06 am 26/3/95, drake o'brien wrote:
>Steve Benner wrote:
>
>>
>
>>Err.... am I missing something here? Didn't we know all this? [Genuine
>>question--not sarcastic. I'm really worried I am missing something new but
>>I really can't see it.]
>
>In fact I do think you must be missing something, unless you knew something
>you weren't telling us about.
No -- I'd already told the list everything I'd found out some time ago...
[ Drake's explanation snipped. ]
>
>Actually, I thought there were a few things that still had to be tested out
>about the tiling issue, but since this is already well known to you perhaps
>you could post the source. It irritates me to find out I wasted my time on
>all that tedious testing!! I could've been honing my skills at DM. And
>believe me, just on this one tiny issue the testing was tedious & boring
>boring boring... Gives me some insight into the kind of work the
>programmers have to do, tho'...
Sorry, Drake, I didn't mean to suggest (in my earlier posting) that you had
been wasting your time with your experimentation, and I certainly didn't
mean to sound critical of your posting. Thanks for posting your further
explanation--you were right I *was* missing something (which was my
original concern!) and I'm grateful to you for pointing it out.
I agree with Bob Forsman's earlier posting--we need more experimental work
of this nature reporting here. Thanks Drake--again, sorry to have muddied
the waters.
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 10:46:03 +0100
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
At 1:27 am 27/3/95, drake o'brien wrote:
[snip]
>
>The idea of switchback hidden-stairs shows the limitation of the
>procedure I outlined. With switchback hidden-stairs you have stairs
>bounding on more than 2 other stairs (on the side as well as up\down) so
>the simple 'flip bounding linedefs' procedure doesn't apply. Gives me
>something to think about...
I think your method still applies, Drake. (Though I don't have it to
hand--had an accident with my mailer and lost the original!) Switch-back
stairs present to real problems beyond the tedium of flipping lines. To use
Bob Forsman's original ASCII art: if you want a self-building switch-back
staircase, thus:
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| | | | | | | |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| | | | | | | |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| | | | | | | |
| 14| 13| 12| 11| 10| 9 | 8 |
| | | | | | | |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
draw the steps in order, as numbered (assuming 1 is to be the first i.e.
lowest step) in a clock-wise fashion, starting in the south-west corner of
each of the first 7. Add the last seven sectors in order too, but drawing
from the north-east vertex round to the north-west of each step (does that
make sense? hope so!)
Having done this, you have to check the way the lines face: assuming that
all of these lines are two-sided (1-sided ones can be ignored), step 1 & 14
need their west edges flipped, Steps 1- 7 need their north edges flipped;
7&8 needs their east edges flipped; 8 - 14 need their south edges flipping.
Tedious I agree. No real problem though as long as your editor has sensible
rules about the way it numbers lines.
The editor I use (WADED but I guess others should do the same) numbers
lines in the order I draw them--mostly!! So I never have problems as long
as I plan things well in advance and draw features like this is one go. Of
course, if PFME could include a autodrawing feature for self-building
stairs, then I may have to move to Linux! ;) In the meantime, I'll just
keep my self-building stairs close to walls to limit the number of 2-sided
boundaries in use!
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: Costas Theodoridis <macedon@athena.compulink.forthnet.gr>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 13:19:38 +0300
Subject: WINDEU32/16
Last week I downloaded both versions of WINDEU (16/32).
I've installed them in my HDD (D:\doomprog\windeu, D:\doomprog\windeu16).
There were two subdirectories created (tutor and another one).
Well, I've edited WINDEU.INI in both programs to give the parameters that
are need in order to run properly.
When I execute WINDEU there is a message informing "ERROR IN OPENING WAD" or
something like that.
The main lines in .INI file are:
main1=d:\games\doom\doom.wad
main2=d:\games\doom2\doom2.wad
These directories are exactly where .WAD files are located. Although, I
can't use these programs, because they can't find .wad files. What's wrong
with it?
Thank you
macedon@athena.compulink.forthnet.gr
Sweet_Thessa_Town
Thessaloniki-Macedonia-Hellas
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 14:18:06 +0100
Subject: Tag 666
I've been experimenting with Tag 666, as I can't find any mention of it in
the Specs any more. Does any-one know how DOOM determines which monsters
activate this tag? So far my (limited) experiments show that it can be
activated by
1. The last Baron alive (not necessarily awake) on the LEVEL.
or
2. The last Cyberdemon PROVIDED there are no Barons!
No other DOOM 1 enemy can activate the tag--although I have not tried a
Spider Demon.
I know Mancubus can operate it too, but I haven't experimented outside 1.2 yet.
Does anyone have any other info on the activation algorithm?
And are there any editors that allow its use conveniently?
Just wondering?
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 14:45:55 +0100
Subject: That max lines thing...
Prompted by RF's recent mailing, I have been experimenting with the "max
linedefs"/"max visplanes" conundrum. I have no concrete findings on the
visplanes problem yet, but I can report some findings on the max lines
question. I don't think it adds too much to current knowledge, but here
goes:-
I have a WAD with 65 sectors in a grid: from one corner, all sectors are
visible at once. I have set all floors and ceilings such that there is a
step between every adjacent sector. I have not managed to obtain the "No
more visplanes" message yet! I can predict which lines will Hom and from
what viewpoint, however. In v1.2, DOOM stops rendering the image after it
has looked at a total of 128 lines in the current view. This is true
regaredless of the textures they each carry, and how many surfaces they
expose. So a 2-s line counts as one line regardless of whether it has one
texture slot visible, or three, and regardless of whether floor and ceiling
textures differ on each side of it. My earlier thoughts that DOOM was
limited in the number of its polygons of texture are clearly wrong.
So far, I have found two things which turn one line into more that one
line, as far as this line count is concerned:
i. Any intervening solid surface--a pillar, say-- which splits the view of
the line;
ii. Any splits that the Nodes Builder applies to a line. These do count
towards the total. I have proved this by slanting one line slightly. It
suddenly contributes two to the count-- my editor shows an extra vertex in
the middle of the line marking the node which splits it.
Lines after the first 128 (in v1.2) simply are not rendered, and
consequently HOM. They also do not contribute any clipping to the flood
filled floor or ceiling texture immediately adjacent to them, so the HOM
will continue up and down to the next clipping line/texture change.
DOOM seems to take the nearer lines before farther lines, so the HOM will
always be in the area furthest from the player.
I'd guess v1.9 does the same, but with its higher limit--can't be bothered
to build a big enough map to check that out though!
As I say, most of this is known, but I hope that this contributes something...
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: Matthew Miller <rmiller@infinet.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 09:48:48 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
On Sun, 26 Mar 1995, drake o'brien wrote:
> Robert Forsman wrote:
> >Dave Worth wrote:
> >> A better way if you want to create irregular steps is to
> >>use either DOOMCAD or DOOMED, they both allow prmade steps
> >>and it is easy to move the verticies to make irregular
> >>steps, thats how I do it. :)
> > Can you make a switchback staircase with it? I'm sure there
> >are shapes that you would have difficulty twisting it into.
> >Besides, it doesn't run under Linux.
> The idea of switchback hidden-stairs shows the limitation of the
> procedure I outlined. With switchback hidden-stairs you have stairs
> bounding on more than 2 other stairs (on the side as well as up\down) so
> the simple 'flip bounding linedefs' procedure doesn't apply. Gives me
> something to think about...
Only way I can think of getting hidden switchback stairs is to put a
small gap between the rows, like so:
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| | | | | | \
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | \
| | | | | | 6 \
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| |
| 7 |
| |
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| | | | | | 8 /
| 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | /
| | | | | | /
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
Anyone got a better idea?
Matthew Miller -- rmiller@infinet.com
------------------------------
From: rem@datapoint.com (Ray Morford)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 09:05 CST
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
One last item that may (or may not) be commonly known:
the sectors used in the stairs do not have to start out
at the same height.
I know that because I created a set of rising stairs that
started on one ledge, crossed a -64 deep moat and ascended
to a door high up on a wall.
Yes, all of the floor levels rose at the same rate, so it
took a little while for the steps that started out at the
bottom of the moat to reach the proper level. But each one
stops 8 above the previous step.
As far as I can see, the most important factor is the
orientation of the linedefs. Keep side 1 to the outside of
the sector except for the linedef common to the next step:
flip that one.
See ya...
Ray
rem@datapoint.com
------------------------------
From: brad.willman@bbs.uniserve.com (Brad Willman)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1995 13:24:00 -1320
Subject: Re: Very Disturbing News
oh yeah...
I did NOT intend my program to be distributed by ANYONE...
NOR did i actually ever use it in deathmatch
you can consiter the program removed from my HD'd... its not fair anyways for
the other guy...
(even though i do likke cheating from time to time i NEVER use it in
deathmatch)
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
brad.willman@bbs.uniserve.com (Brad Willman)
------------------------------
From: brad.willman@bbs.uniserve.com (Brad Willman)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1995 13:21:00 -1320
Subject: Re: Very Disturbing News
you guys only found out about the invunerability thing NOW eh?
i'm one of the origional concept people of it .. although i never actually
released the prog ... its possible someone could have gotten it off my bbs
somehow...
.. i also made some other progs ... like start with ALL weapons... FULL
ammo... unlimited ammo..
there is another version of the unlimited health thing flowing out.. ALSO by
me... of course.. someone could have gotten it again if they knew the D2d
passwordS on my board...
this one adds on only 1% health at a time .. and another ver... 25%...
heh....
i hacked the thing .. true enough... but i made a prog that does that FOR
me...
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
brad.willman@bbs.uniserve.com (Brad Willman)
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 11:37:07 EST
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
Matthew Miller <rmiller@infinet.com> ,in message <Pine.3.89.9503270947.A17456-0
100000@rigel>, wrote:
> Only way I can think of getting hidden switchback stairs is to put a
> small gap between the rows, like so:
ASCII art deleted.
> Anyone got a better idea?
Yeah, reorder the linedefs so it works. Of course, it's possible that the
fact the adjacent sector has already been raised will cause the algorithm to
pick the next linedef anyway. I haven't tried it yet.
There's also the fact that reordering linedefs is a SERIOUS pain in the
ass. I think I'll add a function to my editor to let the user do it easier.
SortMarkedLinedefs.
I'm sure there are other linedefs besides stairs that could use this
feature.
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 17:30:09 +0100
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
At 3:04 pm 27/3/95, Ray Morford wrote:
>One last item that may (or may not) be commonly known:
>the sectors used in the stairs do not have to start out
>at the same height.
>
>I know that because I created a set of rising stairs that
>started on one ledge, crossed a -64 deep moat and ascended
>to a door high up on a wall.
>
Yes-- all steps will end at the correct height. Steps that start out too
high will snap down to their finishing height instantly. Others will rise
at standard rate to their finishing height. Ceilings won't stop them
either: all floors will carry on rising through their ceilings to the
finishing height. With full crush, too. This applies to standard 8-unit
stairs, not just Turbo stairs as suggested in the DOOM specs.
The DOOM specs are also wrong on changing line-types lock-outs too, btw.
The only actions that lock out sectors from all further change are the
perpetual crushing ceilings and lifts. As these actions never terminate
(they can be paused, but they never terminate) their sectors become
permanantly engaged once activated. Floor changers do NOT lock out further
changes. At least, they don't in my WADS!
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: thekid@ornews.intel.com (Brian Kidby)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 08:26:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Recommend an editor
>
> (Please kick me)
> Raphael's been telling me wonderful things about DEU 5.3. He seems to think
> it will rock the world when released. Unfortunately, that time may never come ;)
> But seriously, 5.3 is supposed to address all of your editing woes in one
> easy-to-digest package.
Until that day comes, check out (cringe) WinDEU 5.23. The reason I
"(cringe)" is that I know how most of you feel about Windows-based editors.
It is an "official" DEU (meaning that it comes from the DEU team). Also,
because it's using Windows' memory management, it will handle really big
levels (as opposed to levels limited in size by DEU2's <640k).
Both 16- and 32-bit versions are available. You need Win32s or Win NT to
run the 32-bit version. I've been running the 32-bit-er all weekend, and
it is very stable. (Using Windows' 32-bit Disk and File access, and by
auto-starting WinDEU at Windows startup, my development cycle is nearly as
fast as if I was using a DOS-based editor.) ("Development cycle" here
meaning edit-test-edit-test iterations.)
Oh yeah, I almost forgot, it fully supports Doom2 and Heretic, too!
Hope this helps someone.
Brian K.
- --
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Kid My thoughts and actions are strictly my own.
thekid@ornews.intel.com Do not hold my employers responsible.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Greg Lewis <gregl@umich.edu>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 12:40:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
> One last item that may (or may not) be commonly known:
> the sectors used in the stairs do not have to start out
> at the same height.
> I know that because I created a set of rising stairs that
> started on one ledge, crossed a -64 deep moat and ascended
> to a door high up on a wall.
Yep, this much at least I knew. (Check out Tree2.WAD, released last
June for Doom 1.2, it's got a funky stair structure, with a "moat" to
cross.) Stairs will always end up 8 units apart, no matter where they
start from. I believe they will also lower if they are too high. They
can also branch into two sets of stairs, if one stair is not a precise
rectangle. Doom just regards any linedef that's oriented correctly as a
"next stair". Note: no official testing on any of this, just my
observations.
> As far as I can see, the most important factor is the
> orientation of the linedefs. Keep side 1 to the outside of
> the sector except for the linedef common to the next step:
> flip that one.
Yep.
Greg
------------------------------
From: mneves@venus.rdc.puc-rio.br (Marcus Vinicius de A.B. Neves)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 14:50:26 -0300 (BSC)
Subject: Problems in WinDeu .INI
> The main lines in .INI file are:
> main1=d:\games\doom\doom.wad
> main2=d:\games\doom2\doom2.wad
>
> These directories are exactly where .WAD files are located. Although, I
> can't use these programs, because they can't find .wad files. What's wrong
> with it?
Well, even if I don't have WinDeu (IMHO DCK is the best!),
try to change the lines above and put *only* the specified diretory (cut
"\doom.wad" in the first line and "\doom2.wad" in the second). With this,
WinDeu will *search* in the referenced directory and *possibly* will find
the .WAD they're trying to find...
I think this should work, but someone have something to
say?
Bye,
Marcus Vinicius Neves (mneves@eros.rdc.puc-rio.br)
------------------------------
From: a13231@mindlink.bc.ca (drake o'brien)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 09:27:04 PST
Subject: re. stair linedefs
Steve Benner wrote:
>To use
>Bob Forsman's original ASCII art: if you want a self-building
>switch-back staircase, thus:
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| | | | | | | |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| | | | | | | |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| | | | | | | |
| 14| 13| 12| 11| 10| 9 | 8 |
| | | | | | | |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
>draw the steps in order, as numbered (assuming 1 is to be
>the first i.e. lowest step) in a clock-wise fashion, starting
>in the south-west corner of each of the first 7. Add the last
>seven sectors in order too, but drawing from the north-east
>vertex round to the north-west of each step (does that
>make sense? hope so!)
<SNIP about how lines face>
Yes, makes sense. Glad B.F. can draw good ASCII!
My original method for straightforward no-switchback stairs is of course
simpler. Regardless of what order the stair sectors & linedefs were
originally drawn, you just flip all the perimeter linedefs so right-side
faces away from the stairs, then flip all the connecting linedefs so the
right-side faces away from the direction you want stair to rise. Do it
regardless of whether it's technically necessary - why not? it's easier than
cross-checking umpteen numbers..
Switchbacks are way more complex anyhow you cut them.
I tried your method using DEU, which doesn't quite number the lines in the
order I draw them. But close enough so your method worked. To simplify
your method, why not proceed as you state, drawing from the bottom-right
corner of each proposed step sector & proceeding clockwise & in regular
order thru' as many switchbacks as pleases, taking the switchbacks in any
direction that pleases. Then simply flip all linedefs on the perimeter of
the stairs block so the right-side faces out? I say this because using DEU
& WADED produce different sets of perimeter linedefs that are technically in
need of flipping - but it seems that in both cases it is only linedefs on
the perimeter of the whole block that ever need flipping if you draw in the
order you specify (a big 'if'). So probably a general method that works for
all editors is to proceed in the order you specify & then flip all linedefs
on the perimeter of the stairs block so r-side is out.
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 13:43:36 EST
Subject: DOOM 1 -vs- DOOM 2
For those not interested in the stairs question, here's one for you.
What happens if you use one of the linedefs that was introduced with 1.666
in a normal DOOM 1 wad? Are they used anywhere in the DOOM 1 missions? Are
the necessary sounds in the WAD? Will they work? Should we allow users with
only registered DOOM 1 to easily use these linedefs which were obviously added
to support DOOM 2?
I just realized that the PFME doesn't support DOOM 1 :/ Adding support is
pretty trivial. I just want to make sure I do it right.
------------------------------
From: mneves@venus.rdc.puc-rio.br (Marcus Vinicius de A.B. Neves)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 15:40:09 -0300 (BSC)
Subject: Re: Where's DEU 5.3?
> I Believe we already have someone working on an OS/2 port... Unless you are
> that person. I know someone is working on the windoze port and the linux
> ports (X and Svga). No idea how long after DEU 5.3 these will take. Who
> knows. We might release those versions before the DOS version for testing
> purposes (sort of like what iD did with DOOM 1.0: NeXT version was out before
> DOS.)
No, I'm not. If someone is already porting DEU for OS/2, please
mail me so I may try to help, right? If not, if someone would try to
participate in the conversion, "please come in"...
> Ask Raphael for details on an OS/2 port. I don't know them myself.
Ok , I will...
Thanks for your help!
Marcus Vinicius Neves.
------------------------------
End of doom-editing-digest V1 #220
**********************************
