Spline Crossing using Skew vs "Blender" Crossing

Welcome to the OMSI-WebDisk!
As guest you can only see content in your selected language! Registered users can choose the visibility of other languages in their control panel, more informations here. All topics are marked with a language flag inside the forums: = English [EN], = German [DE], = French [FR].
If you're not able to speak the topic language than write in English!
  • Hello,


    I learned how to create nice crossings in Blender but I feel limited regarding further modifications and since I work on a real map I want to be able to change something in future.


    The main reason why I wanted and learned how to build crossings in Blender is because when you use radius in the editor it adds so many meshes.


    But,


    I switched to wireframe mode and I decided to try to use the skew feature to reduce the mesh count.


    Here are steps that I follow:

    1 - I create a spline with radius, I want to have something to "follow"

    2. I start with a 1.5m spline, then I hit N and rotate that a bit and so on until I finish.

    3. I delete the radius spline that was used as a template.


    Main questions:

    1. Will using skew (instead of radius) save FPS like "Blender" crossings?

    2. Is there any "side effect" of using this (regarding the overall map stability and during work (I don't want to face bugs in the editor)?



    s1.png

    FC Internazionale Milano 1908

    Edited once, last by milosh-96: typo ().

  • Advertisement
  • 1. Will using skew (instead of radius) save FPS like "Blender" crossings?

    It depends on how many crossings you have on your map. I would say that on average the performance improves, but not very much.

    2. Is there any "side effect" of using this (regarding the overall map stability and during work (I don't want to face bugs in the editor)?

    There may be problems if the "skew" spline contains a path (e.g. pedestrians), but everything else should work IMHO.

  • 1. Will using skew (instead of radius) save FPS like "Blender" crossings?

    It depends on how many crossings you have on your map. I would say that on average the performance improves, but not very much.

    Aus reiner Eigeninteresse:

    Heißt das im Endeffekt, dass Objektkreuzungen i.d.R. immer (deutlich) performance-freundlicher sind im Gegensatz zu Spline-Kreuzungen (egal ob per "radius" oder "skew")?


    Does it mean that crossings modelling by 3D software are generally more gentle in contrast to spline-crossings?

    du bist so wunderbar, Berlin

    Edited once, last by Coladose485 ().

  • Wobei das nur ein netter Nebeneffekt sein dürfte. Unsere Bus-Bauer beweisen schließlich immer wieder auf's Neuste, dass es nicht auf die reine Polygon-Anzahl ankommt, sondern auch auf Texturen (das ist auch beim Kreuzungsbau zu beachten) und Scripts (beim Objektbau nicht relevant). So viel rausschlagen dürfte das nicht.

  • There may be problems if the "skew" spline contains a path (e.g. pedestrians), but everything else should work IMHO.


    I thought about this, I plan to remove paths from crossing splines and then place an AI cube or invisible splines there for paths. My main goal with skew is to fix sidewalks, those curves are the worst. Maybe I model a crossing if I'm 100% sure that it won't need modificatons later :)


    Is there any tip regarding textures (format, file size,resolution...)?


    By the way, I really like how Addon Hamburg is created. They haven't used splines, only 3D models, and they wrote in Developer Tips PDF how splines are used only at few places on the map.

    FC Internazionale Milano 1908

    Edited once, last by milosh-96 ().

  • I thought about this, I plan to remove paths from crossing splines and then place an AI cube or invisible splines there for paths. My main goal with skew is to fix sidewalks, those curves are the worst. Maybe I model a crossing if I'm 100% sure that it won't need modificatons later

    This sounds like a good plan.;)

    Is there any tip regarding textures (format, file size,resolution...)?

    Some days ago there was a discussion in German and there is also a Wiki entry about textures. (The Wiki entries will be translated by PG_97 bit by bit.) You may use deepl.com to translate German, this works well. :)


    Dimensions: We recommend textures with a power of two as width and length (e.g. 256x256px, 64x64px, 256x32px, 1024x512px, 2048x4096px, ... - textures do not have to be quadratic).

    Format: The common opinion is to use BMP, DDS and TGA format (only DDS and TGA support transparency), OMSI deals with them very well. Don't use PNG textures because they cause problems. The main difference between TGA and DDS is the compression: TGA files are less compressed and have a larger file size, DDS files have a smaller file size but are sometimes heavily compressed. Some developers prefer DDS, some prefer TGA and the OMSI developers Marcel & Rüdiger preferred BMP - You're completely free.:P

    Resolution: It depends... Make the textures as small as possible, but as big as necessary. I personally prefer 256² textures for halfway smooth surfaces without profile (e.g. asphalt, concrete slabs, ) and 512² textures for more detailed ones (e.g. cobblestone, gravel, interlocking paver).

  • Thank you for these tips and help, I really appreciate it. I have one more question :), what is your opinion about spline fences and walls?

    FC Internazionale Milano 1908

  • what is your opinion about spline fences and walls?

    Mmm... I don't really have an opinion. If possible, I would create fences as a spline with transparent textures (one "face" on one side, one "face" on the other => not much polys :D), but sometimes this is not possible (e.g. if you need pillars) => Then I would build the fence / wall as an object and assign it to an invisible spline (or a spline besides).


    Maybe you could specify your question a little bit? ;)