What Do You Mean by old version, previous i.e. 1.07?

Yes, I used the previous 1.06 one before I updated it yesterday. And I still don't know why it works better now...(??)

By manipulating a light entity, a leak would appear/disappear nearby

Typically, these problems come when complex brush (i.e. staircase maker, arch maker, etc...) exist in the map... It can also appear/disappear with a polygon add/substract... It's again a mysterious work way..

Well, sure you are right in your analysis.. You are too strong man ;-)

Thanks again

Bye 

Hello,

I'm back with my beginner's problem... :) I'm currently mapping a base-based map, and I would like to know how to change the key looks like in the game. When I use keys, they preserve their castle-gothik looks, and I would like a "base key card" look...
So, what is the additional field I have to add in my key description ??

Thanks 

...open map properties and change ambience to base. 

Set worldtype 2 as a worldspawn key.

Stuff like that would be easier if you were using gtk. 

Well, so I need to change the map ambiance property by the worltype field in the worlspawn description
...
Thank you very much, I was looking about item_key properties only, so after a carefull look at

http://www.gamers.org/dEngine/quake/QDP/qmapspec.html

I found what I was a looking for... Thank you very much for your help...

Bye.. 

Please don't be afraid to post, or send me any links like the above that you come across. I like collecting stuff like that, so when I am the last man alive still playing around with Quake I can have as much info as possible at my disposal 

Happy to see you enjoy the link... Just an additional information: this link describes only standard Quake Map Specifications, and many other fields can be added (for example in lights description or worlspawn description, or others...) which are specificly used by BSP / VIS / LIGHT tools... (see light aguirRe's VIS and LIGHT tools for example..) but I'm pretty sure you already know that ;) 

Those of you that are building Q1 maps with terrain generators might have noticed that the player can sometimes get caught on invisible objects while moving close to the terrain.

This is due to limitations in the brush expansion logic for the clipping hulls in qbsp. To get a better understanding of how this logic works, you can enable the -hull 1 option in Tx/TreeQBSP to make hull 1 visible.

Then you'll actually see the protruding objects that the player collides with. You'll probably also notice that some brush designs will produce worse results than others. 

A-ha! ( not the nordic pop band, mind you ) There's an example of this in my terrain map where a steep angular hillside sticks out onto a ledge; there's already limited space to move over to the end of the ledge to get a health pack, and both I and the monsters in the area get fux0red by something sticking way out from the slope.
I'll maybe try -hull 1 and see what's what.
Still can't run a full vis on the thing though, since it estimates over a month in compile time o_O 

and most monsters use hull 1 for collision detection, while e.g. shamblers use hull 2 which is even more expanded (looks really weird).

Making the clipping hulls visible doesn't fix anything but it might help understand why these symptoms occur. There is an option -altexpand to alter the behaviour of the brush expansion logic, but it's a bit controversial and usually doesn't really fix the problem. 

Just a general question... if only large monsters use hull 2 (and the player does not use it at all), would it be possible to remove that hull from a deathmatch-only map and save some space?

Of course the reduction in file size would probably not be significant at all, so I doubt it would be worth it. I don't necessarily want to do it, I just want to know if you <can> (potentially). 

Can covering the offending area in clip brushes sometimes help this problem? 

and now my Quake1 cries with SIGSEV failures... 

This isn't what you wanted to know, but if you did that then you couldn't play the map in DMSP. 

It's pretty hypothetical but yes, in theory it should be possible (if the engine also was changed in a similar way).

Other games (e.g. Hexen2, HL, Q2) has an extra crouching hull so I can't see any obvious reason why it should be impossible to remove the shambler sized hull if there are no shamblers around that can complain.

You wouldn't save much space, though. Especially since DM maps are generally smaller and with less detail to keep r_speeds low. 

Yes, if the clip brushes would completely cover the invisible protruding objects in the hull in question.

The clip brushes get expanded the same way as other solid brushes so if you can't confirm by "feeling" that the the clip brush works, you could use another texture momentarily and build with -hull 1 to visually confirm it.

The main problem with the expansion is that it gets unexpected on complex brush shapes. It's always simple to imagine how a cube is expanded, but pointy triangular shapes that look great in the editor, can grow like cancer in the other hulls. 

I've spent some time looking at the expansion code, trying to solve the strange clipping bugs you guys are talking about. It SEEMS like the code was designed the way it should be, and i wonder if there just isn't some implementation bug. Or, a precision problem?

I never checked out your visible hull stuff, and it would probably help me understand exactly what wrong results the current expansion code is generating.

Anyway, this is one of those things i really wish could be fixed in qbsp, if anyone ever finds the bug or realizes why it doesn't work. 

AFAIK the brush expansion isn't really a "bug" since there's no obvious way to do it without getting protruding parts in some junctions.

Changing this logic is controversial because most experienced Q1 players (not to mention speedrunners) know how a map should "feel" when they see it.

Me and Tyrann have spent a long time spanning several years trying to find the cure for the brush expansion related problems, especially the theoretically impossible leaks in hulls 1/2 (when hull 0 is sealed). Same for the annoying clipping errors; there are a whole list of variants just for them.

I've also contacted XP-Cagey who works with the HL tools and he confirms the problems and it appears that in HL, the situation is even worse. Apparently, he's found some kind of solution (or at least improvement) for HL and I've tried to translate it to Q1 but I've only managed a partial implementation so far (available with the -altexpand option).

Any help or suggestion regarding these problems are welcome, but I've a feeling that the solution might be complex. The whole build process seems to be something of a hazy floating point stochastic (or even chaotic) process, where small changes can have large impact elsewhere. I hope I'm wrong ...

But check out the hull visualization, I think it's a real eye-opener for most mappers (and players too). 

mention that the brush expansion logic is also the reason why I think that e.g. creating a block of natural rock from one multifaced brush is better than several triangular ones that together form that block. Even though there's no difference when looking at it in the editor, the expansion might be different.

The multifaced brush will just expand pretty logically outwards and will not generate any weird protruding objects. The expansion is always done for each brush separately so it won't notice that after expansion, the brushes might not join nicely anymore.

There are probably other aspects of this issue too. 

creating a block of natural rock from one multifaced brush is better than several triangular ones that together form that block

Now that would be particularly relevant to Gensurf created terrain, because the t-mesh is neccessarily composed of individual triangular brushes.
The more I read in this thread, the less I want to finish my map :( 

When I was working on the terrain in RPGDM1 recently, I noticed that entire vertical patches of triangular brushes could be exactly reproduced by clipping pieces off of a 6-sided block. That was quite cool, and really helped the clipping problems.

/me HUGs 3-point clipping

________
Hmm. After writing this, it seems less relevant than I thought. 

discouraging, there are other opinions that promote triangular brushes instead (which may very well be right) so the case isn't clear.

I'm just trying to rationalize around the brush expansion issue to help mappers understand some of the underlying structure.

I also forgot before to add a link to XP-Cagey's interesting article in the subject: http://xp-cagey.com/?article=1000 . 

Thanks. 

So if Quake1 doesn't work under WinXp, I tried the WinQuake program. And then it does.
But when I run my convertion with my selfmade monsters, they don't appear in game.

The program starts at the start.bsp without messages, but when I run a saved game, it suddenly comes with all those errors asking for the monsters I put in the progs.dat?!

Why doesn't it do so when I start a game? 

Are you running the game from your own custom directory? e.g. c:/quake/winquake.exe -game madfox