[RWL] Grafiken und GameFonts

[melcher kürzer]

Thank you very much, melcher kürzer, for your help.

Could you tell which program you used to edit the original nif file: only NifScope and/or Blender or any more serious graphical programs?
...

Only blender. Such changes aren't possible with NifScope.
Also i have noticed some things with your files. First, your textures are way to big. I would recommend to use a maximum size of 256x256 for buildings, not more. Second, some of your buildings have way to many polygons. For example, some of your hospital buildings have ~20000 verticals. Thats 2-3 times more than my Leaderheads! And the engine loads Leaderheads every time new, buildings are stored in the graphic memory.
Third, your models have a diffrent (older) nif version. Maybe a wrong export script or false settings. That's no big problem, but sometimes a nifswap is useful or necessary. This isn't possible with your files.
How do you create these nif files, which program do you use?

[KJ_Jansson]

Hi, melcher kürzer!

Thank you very much for your answer and critical remarks.

Only blender. Such changes aren't possible with NifScope.

OK, I expected such answer. Unfortunately, I'm not so familar with Blender and at least up to now I have no successful modifications in this program. I know that Blender is a very powerful tool for 3D images editing, however I never worked with 3D programs. MicrografX packet covers all my needs in the technical drawing. Well, I have to teach Blender....

Also i have noticed some things with your files. First, your textures are way to big. I would recommend to use a maximum size of 256x256 for buildings, not more.

You are right. However, all graphical files (that I presented here) is just a demonstration of possibility to use much more perfect graphics in CivIVColonization. I can use 4-times smaller texture size, too. Of course, some quality degradation will be, however, this effect will be visible only in NifScope at higher magnification, but not in the game. Especially this is correct for the city buildings, which an usual player can see practically only in CivPedia. For the field buildings as farms, plantations, etc. I plan to use probable 2-times smaller textures.

Second, some of your buildings have way to many polygons. For example, some of your hospital buildings have ~20000 verticals. Thats 2-3 times more than my Leaderheads! And the engine loads Leaderheads every time new, buildings are stored in the graphic memory.

This is a really a very serious question. The problems is the original high-polygonal graphics. During conversion I have no possibility to deminish the number of polygons. Finally in NifScope I import the *.obj file that contains all information about his "mother/source" object. As far as I know I have no option to deminish the number of polygons in NifScope. I have no ideas about such possibility in Blender.

Third, your models have a diffrent (older) nif version. Maybe a wrong export script or false settings. That's no big problem, but sometimes a nifswap is useful or necessary. This isn't possible with your files.
How do you create these nif files, which program do you use?

I use only NifScope version is 1.0.18 (revision 4450) to import *.obj file. I have no special settings to import. I have only 2 options in NifScope: import 3DS or OBJ. I use, the last one, of course.

Moreover, I use a ready and simple nif file to import, please, see the screen.



I import my obj file in 3 NiNode, then add in the just-imported section NiTexturingProperty/NiSourceTexture, delete (Block/Remove Branch) 4 and 10 NiTriShape sections, and finally Transform/Edit my just-imported graphics.

I have no ideas why my models have a diffrent (older) nif version. Probably, this is a result of import, probably my nif file used for import is of older version, probably something else. I don't know. I'm working only with stationar objects as buildings, plants, trees. Impossible to work (import from gr2 format without terrible distortions) any "moving" objects like units (humans or animals).
To my opinion in the case of stationar objects the version of the final nif file is not so critical. At least I can create quite complex images, as this one. The mill here has no animation, unfortunately.

[raystuttgart]

Hi KJ,

by reading the comments about texture sizes and polygones, I got a little afraid.

You gave different graphics to me, for example:

Tannery
Brewery
Trapper's House

Will I get problems with these ?
Are they too big or use too many polygones ?

Best regards,
ray

[raystuttgart]

Hi KJ,

I think I would like to change my "Ropes" to "Sailcloth and Ropes".

This would still be only ONE combined Yield (for both, Sailcloth and Ropes).
So only the graphics would have to change.
(Of course also texts in XML.)

Buttons for Yield in City- and Europe-Screen, Profession Icon, Yield-Icon in Gamefonts.
Would you help me here again ?

[KJ_Jansson]

Hi KJ,

I think I would like to change my "Ropes" to "Sailcloth and Ropes".

This would still be only ONE combined Yield (for both, Sailcloth and Ropes).
So only the graphics would have to change.
(Of course also texts in XML.)

Buttons for Yield in City- and Europe-Screen, Profession Icon, Yield-Icon in Gamefonts.
Would you help me here again ?

I will make these changes.

At the moment I found only one serious reason to join Rope and Sailcloth production in one common YIELD: both of them are used the same source material for their production (YIELD_HEMP).

Let's see on old engravings.

Ropemaker


Sailclothmaker


Thus, theoretically both these products (ropes and sailcloth) could be produced in the same building. But practically....., I don't know.

[raystuttgart]

My reasons of combining into 1 Yield are simpel:

1. I do not want to have another yield. (And both use same raw material.)
2. I use "Rope and Sailcloth" only for one thing: Ships.
3. I use Harbour-Buildings for the production and not any other specialbuilding.

I really do not see any benefit of splitting.

Achtung Spoiler:

If I would introduce "Sailcloth" as its own Yield, I would have to introduce another Yield to keep the balance again or I would have to delete a yield I already have planned.
Currently I do not want that.

The only reason why I want to turn "Rope" into "Sailcloth and Rope" is the following:

I do not want to use "Cloth" (which is made from Cotton) as material for building ships anymore.
(This is the way TAC has done.)
This is unrealistic and I want to abolish that.

[KJ_Jansson]

My reasons of combining into 1 Yield are simpel:

1. I do not want to have another yield. (And both use same raw material.)
2. I use "Rope and Sailcloth" only for one thing: Ships.
3. I use Harbour-Buildings for the production and not any other specialbuilding.

I really do not see any benefit of splitting.

Achtung Spoiler:

If I would introduce "Sailcloth" as its own Yield, I would have to introduce another Yield to keep the balance again or I would have to delete a yield I already have planned.
Currently I do not want that.

The only reason why I want to turn "Rope" into "Sailcloth and Rope" is the following:

I do not want to use "Cloth" (which is made from Cotton) as Material for building ships anymore.
(This is the way TAC has done.)
This is unrealistic and I want to abolish that.

It's quite reasonable. I have to think....

[raystuttgart]

I could do the following:

New Yield "Sailcloth" (MultipleProfessionsPerBuilding in Harbour-Buildings, own Profession, own Specialist).
Another new Yield to keep the balance.

But which other new Yield would fit ?
(I do not want to delete one of the existing / planned ones.)

Next Problem: AI

It is very problematic for AI to have one raw for 2 produced !
Especially if they use the same specialbuilding.

I would have to implement DLL-Logic.
(I will do that for tools, weapons and cannons already.)

No no, I really do not think it is a good idea.

I really think it is better to have 1 combined yield.

[KJ_Jansson]

I could do the following:

New Yield "Sailcloth" (MultipleProfessionsPerBuilding in Harbour-Buildings, own Profession, own Specialist).
Another new Yield to keep the balance.

But which other new Yield would fit ?
(I do not want to delete one of the existing / planned ones.)

Your Harbour and Shipyard are different buildings?

The Harbor building in the original game produces nothing. This building just give + X food from water tiles, if I remember correctly.

In your mod you will have some working places in Harbour building.

One of them for "Rope/Sailcloth master". Right?

Additional question: Are you plan to repair damaged ships on Shipyard and lost the quality of wood/rope/sailcloth proportional to damage percent of the ship or to leave the situation as now: couple days in the city and the damaded ship is 100% perfect again without any losses in materials?

[melcher kürzer]

...
OK, I expected such answer. Unfortunately, I'm not so familar with Blender and at least up to now I have no successful modifications in this program. I know that Blender is a very powerful tool for 3D images editing, however I never worked with 3D programs. MicrografX packet covers all my needs in the technical drawing. Well, I have to teach Blender....

It's a bit tough in the beginning. But once you know how to work with blender, you will love it!

You are right. However, all graphical files (that I presented here) is just a demonstration of possibility to use much more perfect graphics in CivIVColonization. I can use 4-times smaller texture size, too. Of course, some quality degradation will be, however, this effect will be visible only in NifScope at higher magnification, but not in the game. Especially this is correct for the city buildings, which an usual player can see practically only in CivPedia. For the field buildings as farms, plantations, etc. I plan to use probable 2-times smaller textures.

Fine, it's good you are already aware of this.
Actually for me it's better you attach files with the larger textures. I can use them otherwise, adjust or resize them myself.

This is a really a very serious question. The problems is the original high-polygonal graphics. During conversion I have no possibility to deminish the number of polygons. Finally in NifScope I import the *.obj file that contains all information about his "mother/source" object. As far as I know I have no option to deminish the number of polygons in NifScope. I have no ideas about such possibility in Blender.

There are some possibilities in blender to reduce the number of polygons.
But easy solutions are very limited. In case of the hospital building (3th level with ~20000 polygons) it's possible to reduce the number about ~8000 polygons with the deleting doubles-script. The number is still to high. Further reducing would need way more work, not sure if that is worth it.

I use only NifScope version is 1.0.18 (revision 4450) to import *.obj file. I have no special settings to import. I have only 2 options in NifScope: import 3DS or OBJ. I use, the last one, of course.

Moreover, I use a ready and simple nif file to import, please, see the screen.
I import my obj file in 3 NiNode, then add in the just-imported section NiTexturingProperty/NiSourceTexture, delete (Block/Remove Branch) 4 and 10 NiTriShape sections, and finally Transform/Edit my just-imported graphics.

Okay, i see. I have never imported a file in NifScope myself. Usually i use a nif swap for this (copy and paste parts from one nif to another).
It's necessary for all models with animatons (uints etc.) anyway. For static buildings i export the model already in a working nif file.

I have no ideas why my models have a diffrent (older) nif version. Probably, this is a result of import, probably my nif file used for import is of older version, probably something else. I don't know. I'm working only with stationar objects as buildings, plants, trees. Impossible to work (import from gr2 format without terrible distortions) any "moving" objects like units (humans or animals).
To my opinion in the case of stationar objects the version of the final nif file is not so critical. At least I can create quite complex images, as this one. The mill here has no animation, unfortunately.

Then the nif files you are using for import have an older version. But you are right, it's not critical. Only it's not possible to make a nif-swap with them, because the have a diffrent version number. But that it's no big deal, easy to fix if needed with one simple import/export in blender.

And please, could you attach this windmill here? I would love to try something.

Edit:

Hi KJ,

by reading the comments about texture sizes and polygones, I got a little afraid.

You gave different graphics to me, for example:

Tannery
Brewery
Trapper's House

Will I get problems with these ?
Are they too big or use too many polygones ?

Best regards,
ray

These buildings should be fine, the polycount is not too high. I would recommend to reduce the texture size, but unless you have no troubles, it doesn't matter.
The hospital buildings are the only ones i'm a little bit afraid about.

[raystuttgart]

Your Harbour and Shipyard are different buildings?

The Harbor building in the original game produces nothing. This building just give + X food from water tiles, if I remember correctly.

In your mod you will have some working places in Harbour building.

One of them for "Rope/Sailcloth master". Right?

Additional question: Are you plan to repair damaged ships on Shipyard and lost the quality of wood/rope/sailcloth proportional to damage percent of the ship or to leave the situation as now: couple days in the city and the damaded ship is 100% perfect again without any losses in materials?

My 5 Buildings for Specialbuilding_Dock (Landing-Stage, Harbour, Shipyard, ... Naval Port) have increasing number of working places ("Ropemakers") and production increases (on rope) like every other Specialbuilding that produces something.

Otherwise they are the same buildings as in TAC.
They give X bonus on fish, they allow building of different ships, ...

Repair-Situation I will leave as it is now.
I am not interested in changing anything there because it is not important for me.

[KJ_Jansson]

And please, could you attach this windmill here? I would love to try something.

Hi melcher kürzer!

Here full set of "Mill on the wheat field". Yesterday I worked number of hours to create this improvement.

Good luck in your "try something". I believe you will be successful and then it would be a miracle.

[Commander Bello]

Looks really magnificent!

[melcher kürzer]

Hi KJ_Jansson!
Thanks for the file. I have made some changes, you notice something?



I removed the wheat, because i think it's better to use this improvement dynamic in the Lsystem. Maybe it would be nice to replace one of the three farm buildings. But that is just an example. If you want i can make the improvement as you like, just let me know.
The rotation isn't perfect, but should be enough and hardly noticeable.

PS: You forgot the transparency again.

[KJ_Jansson]

GREAT WORK, melcher kürzer!

The mill is working! Quite tricky that the unit must work on mill-having tile, but everybody can find how to start rotation.

The rotation isn't perfect, but should be enough and hardly noticeable.

No, to my opinion the rotation is very nice. Plus, please, take into account that this mill about 519 years old (2011-1492).

I removed the wheat, because i think it's better to use this improvement dynamic in the Lsystem. Maybe it would be nice to replace one of the three farm buildings. But that is just an example. If you want i can make the improvement as you like, just let me know.

Yes, I see. I now "Lsystem" for field improvements and SpecialBuildings for city production, but I'm not happy with both of them.

I have a little bit different ideas about both field improvements and SpecialBuildings.

For SpecialBuildings:
Partially I tested this idea in my previous mod for Alcohol production. I partially moved the Alcohol production on field tiles and produced wine in Wineries, home-made alcohol from food outside the city walls, too, etc. Everything worked perfectly. I know many of modders are not agree with me, but why I cannot use this trick is I see no problems?

Practically similar with "Lsystem". Maybe to be better, if during couple days I prepare a set of images where explain my idea concerning field improvement. To my opinion it's more simple and logically correct. In such case "Lsystem" could be simple "switch-off".

One again, melcher kürzer, thank you VERY MUCH for your excellent work!