BAT - Getting Started Guide / FAQ / Resources / Help

[BartonThinks 3,416]

9 minutes ago, AP said:

Modelling below the surfaceline:
Is there any way to model below the 0-Line (surfaceline of a lot)? I had this question for a while and there must be some sort of solution, considering some  seawalls and other bats appear to be below the surface line of a lot like these CDKN sidewalls:

I tried just modelling in the negative z-region of GMAX, but when exporting the model it seems to lift it up and use the lowest point as 0.

Have you tried exporting using the "Foundation" option (B.A.T. > Parameters > Model Type > Foundation)?

I haven't tried this option myself, so I'm not sure if the entire model needs be under the Z axis or not. But if that's the case, you can always split the model in half along the Z axis and export the upper portion as a regular model and then then lower portion using the foundation option.

[rsc204 21,817]

On 13/07/2021 at 11:11 PM, N1_2888 said:

You may know Mas71's stairs. I like them very much, but unfortunately the smaller one lacks a mirrored version. So I BATted new stairs following the design of those from Mas71:

Fantastic modelling and texture work here, I'm a big fan of the MAS71 wall set in general, but these are a nice modern take on them.

As for the lighting, whilst you could light the model itself, there is another option of adding functional lights (not Props, but lightcones), which would have the benefit of lighting up not just the stairs, but anything around them. These are essentially the same type of lights you'll see on in-game transit networks.

Technically you can BAT the lightpoles into place, then add the lightcones in the right positions, giving you the flexibility to choose the size/intensity of light cone that works best and the shadows then get rendered in-game. The USL mod, for which the LRM mods make use of the same LightCones, has all the props you could want for doing this. You just need to add the lightcone "props" in the Lot Editor and position them, the later being the more time-consuming part.

Just a thought really, it's not like what you have already isn't looking good enough or anything.

[rsc204 21,817]

2 hours ago, BartonThinks said:

I haven't tried this option myself, so I'm not sure if the entire model needs be under the Z axis or not. But if that's the case, you can always split the model in half along the Z axis and export the upper portion as a regular model and then then lower portion using the foundation option.

See this tutorial, it shows two methods that work.

Never model the actual above ground parts below 0, it will cause hideous visual defects. In essence you split the model between the above and below ground parts, then make the below ground parts (foundation) longer (lower) than you really need it, that will it will adapt better to a larger variety of terrain. For example a foundation on a bridge pillar can be as much as 64m deep, so no matter how deep the water, it doesn't end up "floating" in it. That's probably a bit extreme in this case, but the deeper you model, the more flexible what you create will end up.

[N1_2888 306]

On 15.7.2021 at 1:36 AM, BartonThinks said:

Oh wow, that looks great. Honestly, I think you're good to go with this setup? Might be worth seeing what it looks like in-game at this point.

 

30 minutes ago, rsc204 said:

Fantastic modelling and texture work here, I'm a bit fan of the MAS71 wall set in general, but these are a nice modern take on them.

As for the lighting, whilst you could light the model itself, there is another option of adding functional lights (not Props, but lightcones), which would have the benefit of lighting up not just the stairs, but anything around them.

Thank you! Well, in comparison each method has its advantages and disadvantages. For now I've done the nightlighting the way BartonThinks suggested.

Creating these BATs is just a part of a bigger plan that aims at completely redesigning this site:

I have a certain preference for symmetry which you can't get at with Mas71's stairs, as you see on the picture above. There's still much to be done, but a beginning has been made:

 

[BartonThinks 3,416]

1 minute ago, N1_2888 said:

 

Thank you! Well, in comparison each method has its advantages and disadvantages. For now I've done the nightlighting the way BartonThinks suggested.

Looking great! I'm glad to see it worked out.

[Barroco Hispano 26,735]

@Jasoncw I noticed that the problem also happens when I save a preview as .tga in 3dsmax so I can confirm that the problem is in the .tga format.

3DSMax preview (If I save it in .png format it looks the same as it does in the 3dsmax preview).

.TGA after saving it in 3ds max (TGA hate dark colors ).

I think the only solution is to make the temp files that BAT4MAX generates to be .png and not .tga (I have no idea how to do it but I know that code is in CPBuildingMill.ms)

Portable_Network_Graphics interfaces

Maybe @Jasoncw or @Raymond7cn can help us.

[deanva 70]

If I would like to save a BAT on my hard drive (Windows 10) so it can be edited at a later date, what extension should be used before exporting to the game or for use in the Lot Editor?

I have come across where my previous BATs that are in the game I can not edit, the original BAT file because it is not saved on my hard drive. Do not know if I should have saved it a certain way before exporting..Would creating a new file folder with copies of the original BAT model work so I can copy and paste to the GMAX if possible? Hope I am not being too confusing in what I am asking.

[rsc204 21,817]

When you are working in gMax (SC4BAT), you are using a 3D modelling application and you must save your files (.gmax format) within it if you wish to edit them later.

When you export an .SC4Model file, that is just pre-rendered textures with a simple LOD, it literally does not contain the necessary information with which to further edit it, regardless of the file extension you might use. The key point here is that Exporting (creating the SC4Model) is NOT saving the file, simply rendering it.

If you have not been saving your files from gMax itself, then when you close the application, everything needed to edit it later has been lost. Whenever you process a render, it asks if you want to save your gMax file, there is also an autosave function, perhaps you'll be lucky and some .gmax files exist on your hard drive. It's also useful to know that just the .gmax file itself may not be enough to open and work with a file, all the linked assets like the cameras, textures etc must be present too. This really only matters if you subsequently re-install gmax for some reason or another, in which case you need to take care you've a copy of everything.

[deanva 70]

I did use the save button in GMAX but for some reason the original GMAX files have vanished this has been more than probably a year or more.

[rsc204 21,817]

Well I can only speculate on why they would be missing and suggest doing a full HDD search for .gmax files to see if they've moved somewhere unexpected.

[Raymond7cn 6,772]

Hiya @deanva,

14 hours ago, deanva said:

I did use the save button in GMAX but for some reason the original GMAX files have vanished this has been more than probably a year or more.

In your gmax root directory, There is supposed to be a file named "gmax.log", Can you find out some "ERR" words within? and what's the latest content in that file? Sorry If it's not relevant to your issue.

Sincerely,

-- Raymond

[deanva 70]

There is no such file.

[davide1983it 5,404]

Hello 
This building I slip in two part because is so huge and gmax give me error

But I've this problem with CAM
The building change color in dark

[rsc204 21,817]

The camera/light rigs can be thought of as part of a studio where a film or TV show was being made, the viewport is your 'set'.

A set of lights would be setup, such as to light the entire building, but importantly, it's only a single set of lights, which is designed to replicate the sun shining upon your model. When making very large buildings, in order to keep it so the lights reflect upon the upper parts of the building, the light source is further from the ground, hence the special 'rig'.

If you think about it, unless such a tall building would be alone in a vast expanse of nothingness or otherwise surrounded by very low density development, it would be pretty accurate that lower portions are darker. Since the sun wouldn't be able to penetrate the other buildings around it to light the surfaces directly. As such, most of the time the ways things work would be beneficial.

Whilst you can mess around with the lighting rig, it's pretty complex stuff, I don't know of any tutorials on the subject.

[davide1983it 5,404]

18 hours ago, rsc204 said:

The camera/light rigs can be thought of as part of a studio where a film or TV show was being made, the viewport is your 'set'.

A set of lights would be setup, such as to light the entire building, but importantly, it's only a single set of lights, which is designed to replicate the sun shining upon your model. When making very large buildings, in order to keep it so the lights reflect upon the upper parts of the building, the light source is further from the ground, hence the special 'rig'.

If you think about it, unless such a tall building would be alone in a vast expanse of nothingness or otherwise surrounded by very low density development, it would be pretty accurate that lower portions are darker. Since the sun wouldn't be able to penetrate the other buildings around it to light the surfaces directly. As such, most of the time the ways things work would be beneficial.

Whilst you can mess around with the lighting rig, it's pretty complex stuff, I don't know of any tutorials on the subject.

mmmm

[BartonThinks 3,416]

@davide1983it The Gmax lighting rig is set up for smaller models. Larger buildings require a custom lighting rig. A user called Caliban on SC4Devotion made one that you can download here: https://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=725

You will need to follow the instructions carefully when you install the new lighting rig. Unfortunately, the instructions are missing from the file. Instead, you can find the instructions in this post from @T Wrecks:

 

[Rott 2,351]

Well I guess it was a matter of time before this happened... 

I tried to merge it without the camera and lights (it only has nightlight windows so that shouldn't be the problem)

And also redid the LODs, but still it occurred. Anyone?

[mattb325 28,880]

I assume you have the various bat texture fixes and patches in place (as you've made models previously without issue). So, in a brand new scene, merge all elements except the following:

LOD3, LOD4, LOD5, TB2CameraHandle and Thumbnail Camera

Hopefully, that should address the issue.

[Rott 2,351]

Ah, yes I think we got it now. I swear I did this exact thing and it didn't work but I may have overlooked something. Tough to tell if it's Gmax being Gmax or me being a forever noob, thanks again Matt.

[BartonThinks 3,416]

Hey, guys. I was wondering if anyone has tips on how to deal with the kinds of discrepancies between preview renders and exports that I've been getting when attempting to model flowers. I suspect this is just a limitation of Gmax or the BAT in terms of how it exports elements with semi-transparent edges.

Here's a comparison of one BAT to show what I mean...

Preview at 100% zoom:

Export at 100% zoom:

Preview at 800% zoom:

Export at 800% zoom:

For what it's worth, the model was previewed and exported in HD with quality set to "High" in both instances.

Two questions...

1. Is there something I'm doing wrong when exporting the model? Or is this just a limitation of Gmax and/or the BAT that I'll need to live with?
2. If it's a limitation of the program, does anyone have tips on how to work around this discrepancy? Or should I just skip the "Preview" button on these kinds of models and hit "Export" to see how the FSH files turn out?

[Barroco Hispano 26,735]

@BartonThinks That happens because of fsh compression. The fsh compression was useful in its time (save disk and ram space) but now, in 2021, it has no use other than damaging the quality of the BATs.

What I do is open the fsh in photoshop and then use the uncompressed .bmps output to generate a new fsh and then insert it into the .sc4model file (I did a little tutorial a while ago but I can't remember where it is) 

This is what a bat looks like with uncompressed fsh's.

By the way, the only way to fix that problem (at least in 3DsMax) is to wait for @Null 45 to revive and modify the fshwrite.exe so that we can save the fsh's without compression.

[BartonThinks 3,416]

12 minutes ago, Barroco Hispano said:

@BartonThinks That happens because of fsh compression. The fsh compression was useful in its time (save disk and ram space) but now, in 2021, it has no use other than damaging the quality of the BATs.

What I do is open the fsh in photoshop and then use the uncompressed .bmps output to generate a new fsh and then insert it into the .sc4model file (I did a little tutorial a while ago but I can't remember where it is) 

This is what a bat looks like with uncompressed fsh's.

Hmm. Interesting.

Do you know how I'd find those uncompressed BMPs if I'm using Gmax? Or is this one of those things that's only workable with 3DsMax?

[Barroco Hispano 26,735]

Maybe you can find them here but I'm afraid that BAT4GMAX doesn't save the output files.

[BartonThinks 3,416]

30 minutes ago, Barroco Hispano said:

Maybe you can find them here but I'm afraid that BAT4GMAX doesn't save the output files.

Gmax doesn't permanently save the files in that location, but they show up there during the export process. I was able to grab one of the files before it disappeared to do a comparison. The Gmax files are TGAs rather than BMPs, and while the TGAs differ slightly from the FSH files in the SC4Model file, the difference is minimal. Based on this, it seems the discrepancy is mainly rooted in how the model is being rendered for preview vs. export, rather than any post-render compression.

Preview render:

Temp TGA:

Final FSH:

[Barroco Hispano 26,735]

You're right, compression happens earlier, even gmax removes any kind of antialiaing. I suppose that can be fixed by modifying the scripts (BuildingMill.ms) but I don't know how to make it and I doubt that there are people who are interested in doing it. 

[BartonThinks 3,416]

50 minutes ago, Barroco Hispano said:

You're right, compression happens earlier, even gmax removes any kind of antialiaing. I suppose that can be fixed by modifying the scripts (BuildingMill.ms) but I don't know how to make it and I doubt that there are people who are interested in doing it. 

I think the biggest issue is the alpha maps generated by the BAT export tool. In the preview render, the Alpha maps allow for semi-transparent areas, which makes anti-aliasing possible along the edges. In the BAT export, the alpha maps are solid black and white, and any area that appeared as semi-transparent in the preview render is made 100% opaque.

You can see the difference by placing a solid plane behind/beneath the object in question, so that the edges of the object are no longer defined by an alpha mask. Here's what the renders for the same prop look like when I add a floor and a wall to the scene. (For whatever reason, the sizes don't match up this time. I left the sizes as is to avoid distorting either image.)

Preview:

FSH:

---

Edit: Found a post on SC4D that might solve the problem. Will give this a shot sometime tonight. https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=12322.msg360276#msg360276

---

Edit 2: Early results are promising! Here's how the color and alpha maps turned out after exporting with the new script. In the Reader, the transparency seems to work without any problems.

Still need to test it in the lot editor and the game to see if it functions properly. The post on SC4D said that the model needs to be run through Cogeo's Model Tweaker, which I haven't done yet. In any case, looks like a big step in the right direction.

[AP 3,588]

Would be cool if there was an easy solution applicable by the broad mass to increase the quality of exports!

[Barroco Hispano 26,735]

@BartonThinks The transparency method that sc4 tweaker uses makes SimCity 4 use the alpha channel correctly but causes graphical problems (I've been trying to fix it for more than two years but it's impossible.

Before:

After

What I do is use the tweaker to assign the transparency and then change the "Always" parameter to "greater". At least it looks a lot better than the default parameters.

[BartonThinks 3,416]

It seems to be working fine for me with the standard settings. I run into some minor visual glitches in the PIM-X lot editor, but they don't seem to translate into the game. When playing the game, I get a visual glitch when I'm plopping or bulldozing a lot with the transparency-enabled models. But the models otherwise appear just fine at other times.

The screenshots below use a new version of the prop -- I made some modifications in light of how the transparency alters the prop's appearance (I'll probably end up remodeling it completely sometime soon). To test the transparency, I clustered a bunch of the models together and placed one of Girafe's fence props behind the models to see if I'd end up with any noticeable glitches.

I'll probably need to do some more testing to be sure. But so far, so good.

@Barroco Hispano I tried modding the Alpha Function of all the S3Ds for the model in the Reader, as per your suggestion. However, when I did a direct comparison of the in-game models with and without this change, I didn't see any difference.

 

[AP 3,588]

On 30.7.2021 at 12:30 AM, Rott said:

Ah, yes I think we got it now. I swear I did this exact thing and it didn't work but I may have overlooked something. Tough to tell if it's Gmax being Gmax or me being a forever noob, thanks again Matt.

Did you fix it?
What happenes to me sometimes is that I accidentally include the CameraHandle into one of the groups that I merge over to the new file and then I have two, while one of them  is not listed (being hidden in a group) which I think causes an issue.