FG Spreadshirt Swag
Page 1 of 10 123 ... Last
  1. #1
    Waldbaer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Germany CET time zone [GMT+1/Summer GMT+2]
    Posts
    251

    FGU LOS Tool produces not working occulus data

    Hi guys,

    I have difficulties to understand why the LOS tool produces almost the same output with LOS data but not with the right dots etc. This said it leads to the fact that the data would be corrupt and does not show up correctly (s. screenshot; left side is the original and rigth side produced from the LOS program). The campaign was created in FGC and then I loaded the module in FGU - created the LOS data and then used the LOS tool which produced the corrupted data attached. Please help - it looks like just the dots are wrong but this nevertheless produces completely different results.

    Thanks for your help in advance!
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Waldbaer; January 3rd, 2021 at 03:23.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    The One who walks the woods.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    [Ultimate licence]

    .~~~~.
    i====i_
    |cccc|_)
    |cccc|
    `-==-'

  2. #2
    Zacchaeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    15,918
    Are you saying that the final map when you test it has the incorrect occluders? I've looked at a couple of my moduledb files and compared them to the occluder files produced by the tool and I can't see any kind of commonality between the two (although it's difficult just looking at a mass of numbers on two files). Nevertheless the maps have the correct occluders on them.
    If you need to contact customer support or if there is something that you would like to see in Fantasy Grounds that isn't currently part of the software or if there is something you think would improve a ruleset then add your idea to the customer support portal https://fantasygroundsunity.atlassia...stomer/portals

  3. #3
    Waldbaer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Germany CET time zone [GMT+1/Summer GMT+2]
    Posts
    251
    Yes, that is what I meant. I'll share screenshots as soon as I am back at my computer today (I could share the module, too, but would better send only via pm in case you want to look at it yourself). Maybe it has something to do with the map itself and zoom etc.? Because due to whatever reason the map starts very small when I first open the module with FGU. However, I come back to this asap. Thank you for the assistance so far.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    The One who walks the woods.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    [Ultimate licence]

    .~~~~.
    i====i_
    |cccc|_)
    |cccc|
    `-==-'

  4. #4
    Waldbaer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Germany CET time zone [GMT+1/Summer GMT+2]
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by Zacchaeus View Post
    Are you saying that the final map when you test it has the incorrect occluders? I've looked at a couple of my moduledb files and compared them to the occluder files produced by the tool and I can't see any kind of commonality between the two (although it's difficult just looking at a mass of numbers on two files). Nevertheless the maps have the correct occluders on them.
    Please see the following two screenshots: "LOS defined" shows how I defined the LOS in a brandnew FGU campaign. "LOS after extracting" shows how it looks like if I use the module where the tool copied the XML for the LOS data.

    I have an assumption what happened here: I exactly followed your description in the dev guide which sais that I should point the tool to the moduledb folder. But I do not have this folder because I opened the assets of the module and then created a new entry within images also exactly like described on the dev page. I believe it will be better if I work directly within the open module without creating a separate entry image within the campaign and thereby create the moduledb folder. This will be better I believe. For now the tool used the db.xml which seems not to work as precisely.


    FGU_LOS after extracting.pngFGU_LOS defined.png
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    The One who walks the woods.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    [Ultimate licence]

    .~~~~.
    i====i_
    |cccc|_)
    |cccc|
    `-==-'

  5. #5
    Zacchaeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    15,918
    Clearly that isn't correct. I'm not sure what the problem is - I haven't experienced any problems using the extractor tool. I'm assuming that you are creating the files from the moduledb folder in the Unity campaign that you created the LoS data in, and injecting the data into the Classic campaign/images file and then exporting the module again from Classic and testing in a new campaign in Unity?
    If you need to contact customer support or if there is something that you would like to see in Fantasy Grounds that isn't currently part of the software or if there is something you think would improve a ruleset then add your idea to the customer support portal https://fantasygroundsunity.atlassia...stomer/portals

  6. #6
    Waldbaer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Germany CET time zone [GMT+1/Summer GMT+2]
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by Zacchaeus View Post
    Clearly that isn't correct. I'm not sure what the problem is - I haven't experienced any problems using the extractor tool. I'm assuming that you are creating the files from the moduledb folder in the Unity campaign that you created the LoS data in, and injecting the data into the Classic campaign/images file and then exporting the module again from Classic and testing in a new campaign in Unity?
    No, actually I created a module in FGC. Then I opened the module in FGU in a new unused campaign without any extensions or other modules (only original 5E ruleset). Then I browsed to the asset folder and imported the image into the campaign by dragging it into the maps folder. Next step was unlocking it and doing all the LOS work. Then save and close FGU. Last step is using the tool to extract LOS data from "db.xml". Because above procedure does not create a moduledb folder. I have put the LOS xml into the unzipped module.

    That is why I believe I should work directly in the module after opening it in FGU instead of importing a picture into the campaign. I will try this out today and report back.
    Last edited by Waldbaer; January 3rd, 2021 at 23:35.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    The One who walks the woods.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    [Ultimate licence]

    .~~~~.
    i====i_
    |cccc|_)
    |cccc|
    `-==-'

  7. #7
    Waldbaer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Germany CET time zone [GMT+1/Summer GMT+2]
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by Waldbaer View Post
    I will try this out today and report back.
    It did not work - same result. So my question would be: how could I add LOS data to my module? I attached the extracted LOS data to this post.

    Thanks!

    Attachment 42512
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    The One who walks the woods.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    [Ultimate licence]

    .~~~~.
    i====i_
    |cccc|_)
    |cccc|
    `-==-'

  8. #8
    Kelrugem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland, and Lyon, France
    Posts
    2,690
    Make sure that you did not move any of the image tiles, do not rotate them, nor scale them that won't be extracted, such that offsets are possible. So, just create the map entry with an asset, then only add the LoS; some people moved the tile then etc., and got such different LoS things

  9. #9
    Waldbaer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Germany CET time zone [GMT+1/Summer GMT+2]
    Posts
    251
    that'll be it I guess...only thing I did a lot was zooming in and out with mouse wheel. Do you mean this with scaling? I did not rotate or anything like it. But I zoomed like hell
    I doubt it can be easily done without it when working with such a 14MB map...it feels to me as if you are right. Would it help if I just change the "offset value" in the code to "0" again or something like that?

    I tried it again with importing into the original FGC campaign like you wrote above with again a strange result (s. another attachment). This really looks as if scaling would be the problem (you can see the small map in the background and it really is not small... ).

    strange result.png
    Last edited by Waldbaer; January 4th, 2021 at 00:03.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    The One who walks the woods.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    [Ultimate licence]

    .~~~~.
    i====i_
    |cccc|_)
    |cccc|
    `-==-'

  10. #10
    Kelrugem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland, and Lyon, France
    Posts
    2,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Waldbaer View Post
    that'll be it I guess...only thing I did a lot was zooming in and out with mouse wheel. Do you mean this with scaling? I did not rotate or anything like it. But I zoomed like hell
    I doubt it can be easily done without it when working with such a 14MB map...it feels to me as if you are right. Would it help if I just change the "offset value" in the code to "0" again or something like that?

    I tried it again with importing into the original FGC campaign like you wrote above with again a strange result (s. another attachment). This really looks as if scaling would be the problem (you can see the small map in the background and it really is not small... ).

    strange result.png
    Just zooming is okay that is not actually changing the image data (that is then just about the "camera"), but changing the size of the layer with mousewheel and Ctrl (? forgot the hotkey; alternatively changing the size in the sidebar) is problematic Difficult to say whether it is that, without overseeing your process of making that

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Fantasy Grounds Fridays Pre

Log in

Log in