Is Mitering Worth It?

Discussion in 'Mapping Questions & Discussion' started by Dain, Oct 31, 2009.

  1. Dain

    Dain L3: Member

    Messages:
    106
    Positive Ratings:
    40
    Does the performance increase (if any) gained from mitering corners in hammer outweigh the time it takes to to either vertix-manipulate or clip nearly every single brush?

    i.e. Is fig. 2 really any better than figs. 1 and 3?

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Engineer

    aa Engineer

    Messages:
    1,166
    Positive Ratings:
    372
    From looking at Valve maps, it seems that fig. 2 is the best one. But as a noob, i am using fig. 1 :(
    Lets wait for somebody who can tell the difference.
     
  3. Ravidge

    aa Ravidge Grand Vizier

    Messages:
    1,544
    Positive Ratings:
    2,493
    fig 1 is the worst, because it has surfaces drawn that can't be seen. they get included in vrad process. (where the walls overlap)

    fig 2 & 3 does the same thing. And are equally good in this example.

    Edit: There are 2 thing you need to know

    1. brush sides that faces the void gets removed automatically by the compiler.
    2. brush sides that are completely covered (not even 1 unit can be seen of the face) gets removed automatically by the compiler.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2009
  4. bob+M|M+

    bob+M|M+ L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    348
    Positive Ratings:
    185
  5. Micnax

    aa Micnax I maek map

    Messages:
    2,056
    Positive Ratings:
    1,382
    I use Fig.2 for big walls, and Fig.3 for smaller things (because I'm lazy). Fig.2 gives you the sense that it's fully sealed, for some reason.
     
  6. luxatile

    aa luxatile deer

    Messages:
    2,289
    Positive Ratings:
    1,348
    There's no reason to drag out the old vertex tool every single time you make a wall, when figure 3 works just as well. Your third option is the best.
     
  7. Zwiffle

    Zwiffle L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    272
    Positive Ratings:
    81
    I miter a lot, but that's because it's a habit I picked up mapping for Quake for so many years. The need to miter sort of went away when Doom 3 came out because that compiler automatically optimized the tris for you, so you could run with figure 1 and get the same result as in figure 2. It was cool like that.

    I'm not exactly sure how Hammer does its tris, but I miter just to be safe. I don't see how mitering would make it any worse, at the very least.
     
  8. Lancey

    aa Lancey Currently On: ?????

    Messages:
    3,076
    Positive Ratings:
    1,314
    Just use clip.
     
  9. eerieone

    aa eerieone

    Messages:
    1,009
    Positive Ratings:
    569
    i thing 1&3 cut more visleafs
    with miltering you just have 2 visible sides of a brush, without you have 4, hence 1&3 are less optimized
     
  10. Psy

    aa Psy The Imp Queen

    Messages:
    1,705
    Positive Ratings:
    1,467
    I always thoughts VBSP was clever enough to merge two faces that share them same texture co-cords and the same plane.
     
  11. UKCS-Alias

    aa UKCS-Alias Mann vs Machine... or... Mapper vs Meta?

    Messages:
    1,264
    Positive Ratings:
    748
    I did some test with it and have some surprising results... The Vbsp and Vvis results were exactly the same (not that i would notice any slowdown with such small area). In vrad everything was the same except the overview that shows the object and memory count:

    Note: all similar results are trimmed out to prevent you from searching. Bold marked ones have the lowest value for that and should be best for it.

    The image of how the map looked in each stage are added as attachment.
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2009
  12. The Political Gamer

    aa The Political Gamer

    Messages:
    4,468
    Positive Ratings:
    1,682
    But thats on a very small scale. I bet if you had lots of brushes it would be a different story.
     
  13. SiniStarR

    SiniStarR L8: Fancy Shmancy Member

    Messages:
    585
    Positive Ratings:
    116
    i like mitering because it makes the 2d views look very clean, although if you ever have to rescale something its annoying as hell because you then have to fix the angles. And for me, I forget that alot XD
     
  14. gamemaster1996

    gamemaster1996 L13: Stunning Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Positive Ratings:
    131
    I'd go for fig 2 for bigobjects and fig 1 for smaller objects as fig 1 is simple and easy and also you dont need to bother much with smaller things as much as big things
     
  15. UKCS-Alias

    aa UKCS-Alias Mann vs Machine... or... Mapper vs Meta?

    Messages:
    1,264
    Positive Ratings:
    748
    Well, i expect the diffirences to grow bigger but still have the balance the same between them. But on a side note. It does show that situation 1 is the worst to use, simply as 3 beats it. However, #2 and #3 combined seem to have all the ideal values together. So i think its about having a fine balance between them.

    Personaly i prefer to use method 3. Simply because its easy to edit and better than method 1. method 2 is good for details though.

    And again notice that carve again gives the worst result. it creates situation 1. (hollow is also carve, but then only affecting the brushes you hollow and with premade brushes for you that will be used to carve)
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  16. Lancey

    aa Lancey Currently On: ?????

    Messages:
    3,076
    Positive Ratings:
    1,314
    Example 2 looks nicer anyway.
     
  17. YM

    aa YM LVL100 YM

    Messages:
    7,099
    Positive Ratings:
    5,742
    You can quite clearly see that example 2 is smaller, which is always good. its also easier to handle for texturing since you dont have that 16 unit strip at the side of the brush.

    But you've gone too far with your mitering. you've taken the technique to the pointless extreme. there is only ONE corner in your map that needs mitering, and thus only one corner is actually making any difference. you dont need to mitre the outside corner edges because the visible brush faces already meet exactly and faces touching the void are all removed automatically.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  18. Dain

    Dain L3: Member

    Messages:
    106
    Positive Ratings:
    40
    So, for example, I have mitered this whole building; have I gone too far or is this okay?
    [​IMG]
     
  19. Randdalf

    aa Randdalf

    Messages:
    1,054
    Positive Ratings:
    462
    I use both methods.

    For buildings that the player can walk around or have visible wall sides, I tuck away the corners with vertex editing, as in fig 2. In any other case, I use fig 3, simply because it's neat, easy and frankly easier to make.

    The only use I can see for fig 1, is if you have an upper floor in a building. Though I am a little OCD with my nodrawing sometimes, and I might even not use that there.
     
  20. Mexican Apple Thief

    Mexican Apple Thief L3: Junior Member<br>LEAD FARMER

    Messages:
    345
    Positive Ratings:
    60
    I just miter everything in fig 2 style, I just do it by habit.