Following on from what I suggested yesterday, this morning I've coded this 3D Rim Guide that is visible in the Spoke Editor.
It represents a minimum rim (like a steel rim) that should be covered to create a realistic rim.
It represents a minimum rim (like a steel rim) that should be covered to create a realistic rim.
Some thoughts...
First 2 paragraphs are just "history of last few days" you can ignore and go to "Summary of some issues" below.
1) Although I didn't want to get involved with mods again this month, I ended up falling into it when we discovered the exploits some people were using. I'm not talking about moderate amounts, but some ugly abuses of the system. In conjunction with reports of pit-out glitches, it was important to act. We need some sense in the mods. I became aware of some terrible low quality mods, for example: (a) massively high polygon model, with stripped out main config to pass the export check (b) wheels with over 10,000 triangles. So we had to do something and the obvious starting point was to enforce the limits that have always been there and are allowed in the current editor.
2) Discussion, participation and cooperation on this thread has done at least two positive things (a) increased awareness of the Rim Editor that has improved a lot since the older version and (b) increased my understanding of some of the limitations of the Spoke Editor / Rim Editor combination (especially when using the proper limits).
Summary of some issues and possible solutions, future and present:
1) The Rim Editor suffers from lack of material selection. This isn't a problem for most rim designs but there are still a lot of rim designs for which this is a serious limitation. Rims use the first mapping in the Spoke Editor, for their texture and material settings. A mapping selector could be added in an incompatible version at some point, but that is not desirable at this time.
2) In cases where Rim Editor does not provide enough flexibility, Spoke Editor's limitation of 1600 triangles can be a problem. Rim editor actually allows 22 surfaces * 60 around * 2 triangles per quad = 2640 triangles. Today I have been thinking that the triangle budget could be shared between rim and spoke object, a total of 2640 + 1600 = 4240 triangles per wheel.
3) This budget sharing suggestion allows an empty rim object and up to 4240 in the spoke object if that is the way you prefer to do it but this has a limitation that the "steel rim guide" (yellow in rim editor) cannot be seen in the spoke editor. This is a problem in my opinion because in the real world, wheels of a certain specification must have a rim flange in the right place and the right size. This is necessary so that different manufacturers' tyres can be mounted on different manufacturers' wheels. The shape of the rim flange (on the inside, where it meets the tyre) is specified by standards organisations such as ETRTO. Road cars use a "J Rim Profile" in case you want to read about it (though information is scarce). This is not easy to enforce properly in a freehand editor. I've been wondering about a 3 dimensional version of the rim guide that is currently visible in the spoke editor, for the spoke editor, showing in a bright colour the minimum amount of material that you should cover to produce a realistic rim for the given wheel dimensions.
4) Additionally the editor needs to check limits properly before export to avoid confusion when uploading. I don't see it as a big deal to release an editor test patch if the output is fully compatible with the public version of LFS.
First 2 paragraphs are just "history of last few days" you can ignore and go to "Summary of some issues" below.
1) Although I didn't want to get involved with mods again this month, I ended up falling into it when we discovered the exploits some people were using. I'm not talking about moderate amounts, but some ugly abuses of the system. In conjunction with reports of pit-out glitches, it was important to act. We need some sense in the mods. I became aware of some terrible low quality mods, for example: (a) massively high polygon model, with stripped out main config to pass the export check (b) wheels with over 10,000 triangles. So we had to do something and the obvious starting point was to enforce the limits that have always been there and are allowed in the current editor.
2) Discussion, participation and cooperation on this thread has done at least two positive things (a) increased awareness of the Rim Editor that has improved a lot since the older version and (b) increased my understanding of some of the limitations of the Spoke Editor / Rim Editor combination (especially when using the proper limits).
Summary of some issues and possible solutions, future and present:
1) The Rim Editor suffers from lack of material selection. This isn't a problem for most rim designs but there are still a lot of rim designs for which this is a serious limitation. Rims use the first mapping in the Spoke Editor, for their texture and material settings. A mapping selector could be added in an incompatible version at some point, but that is not desirable at this time.
2) In cases where Rim Editor does not provide enough flexibility, Spoke Editor's limitation of 1600 triangles can be a problem. Rim editor actually allows 22 surfaces * 60 around * 2 triangles per quad = 2640 triangles. Today I have been thinking that the triangle budget could be shared between rim and spoke object, a total of 2640 + 1600 = 4240 triangles per wheel.
3) This budget sharing suggestion allows an empty rim object and up to 4240 in the spoke object if that is the way you prefer to do it but this has a limitation that the "steel rim guide" (yellow in rim editor) cannot be seen in the spoke editor. This is a problem in my opinion because in the real world, wheels of a certain specification must have a rim flange in the right place and the right size. This is necessary so that different manufacturers' tyres can be mounted on different manufacturers' wheels. The shape of the rim flange (on the inside, where it meets the tyre) is specified by standards organisations such as ETRTO. Road cars use a "J Rim Profile" in case you want to read about it (though information is scarce). This is not easy to enforce properly in a freehand editor. I've been wondering about a 3 dimensional version of the rim guide that is currently visible in the spoke editor, for the spoke editor, showing in a bright colour the minimum amount of material that you should cover to produce a realistic rim for the given wheel dimensions.
4) Additionally the editor needs to check limits properly before export to avoid confusion when uploading. I don't see it as a big deal to release an editor test patch if the output is fully compatible with the public version of LFS.
Last edited by Scawen, .
I've tried, but matte doesn't work, chrome sometimes is working, but not always (not sure why).
EDIT: Now I'm thinking wouldn't be better if the spoke and rim editor are merged into one 'wheel' editor? Some time after the big update of course. This will probably make it much more easier for modders I think.
Last edited by Evolution_R, .
I'm pretty proud of the result 
@R_evolution, maybe you can modify a specific texture with spoke editor. After that, maybe you can attach surface at the texture in rim editor with the same name?
@R_evolution, maybe you can modify a specific texture with spoke editor. After that, maybe you can attach surface at the texture in rim editor with the same name?
It's because I don't like that shiny edge sticking out of the tyre, I prefer a cleaner look with a rim protector, but with that option set to YES, the tyre polygons are always visible (attached RB4 screenshot).
Now I do understand how to do it properly, my only issue is that "horizontal line" is shiny and there is no option to make it matte. In the first attached shot I've added this horizontal line in the spoke editor as matte and it looks cleaner.
EDIT: added Hirochi rim screenshot from BeamNG, which is done as it should be (with the exception of the shine line
). Maybe that's down to preference (irl too I guess), I've seen (mostly online) "messy" rim/tyre situation and also a very clean combinations (latest shots).
Last edited by Evolution_R, .
I don't have an answer about the materials at this time, or seamless merging, but I want to comment about the wheels on the left (in the first 3 screenshots):
I can see the 30-around polygons of the tyre. But the rim provides 60 around which should look smooth, like the wheels in the two screenshots on the right. If the rim would protrude as it should - covering the steel rim profile, as described above - then you shouldn't see the tyre polygons at all.
But the wheels on the right look odd as well because you should be able to see the edge of the rim flange. That wheel has the look of an old-style LFS wheel from before the recent updates.
I'm not getting the message across very well so far, that the rim cross section needs to exceed the "steel rim" guide profile shown in yellow in the rim editor. I've done quite a bit of studying of wheels to produce the new system, but I have not yet made enough effort to explain it, and the thinking behind the new rim editor and how to make realistic rims.
I can see the 30-around polygons of the tyre. But the rim provides 60 around which should look smooth, like the wheels in the two screenshots on the right. If the rim would protrude as it should - covering the steel rim profile, as described above - then you shouldn't see the tyre polygons at all.
But the wheels on the right look odd as well because you should be able to see the edge of the rim flange. That wheel has the look of an old-style LFS wheel from before the recent updates.
I'm not getting the message across very well so far, that the rim cross section needs to exceed the "steel rim" guide profile shown in yellow in the rim editor. I've done quite a bit of studying of wheels to produce the new system, but I have not yet made enough effort to explain it, and the thinking behind the new rim editor and how to make realistic rims.
Last edited by Scawen, .
For some of the rims types I've managed to merge it seamlessly into the spoke part.
But for other types is just acceptable.
In Rim Editor I'm only missing that I can't choose the materials - to match the chrome/shine/matte parts of the spokes.
But for other types is just acceptable.
In Rim Editor I'm only missing that I can't choose the materials - to match the chrome/shine/matte parts of the spokes.
I understand that type of rim can present a different challenge, but I would like to understand more. So if I may ask some questions / propose suggestions and you could explain if they may be reasonable, difficult or impossible?
Is it possible to make the rim part using the rim editor, or is there a problem with material types or some other problem? I mean, do the black parts and the silver parts need a different material?
If they use the same material but only the colour is different, then I think the rim parts could be made in the rim editor using colours and smoothing groups. By careful alignment I wonder if they could then appear to merge seamlessly into the spoke part? Or does that not work out?
Is it possible to make the rim part using the rim editor, or is there a problem with material types or some other problem? I mean, do the black parts and the silver parts need a different material?
If they use the same material but only the colour is different, then I think the rim parts could be made in the rim editor using colours and smoothing groups. By careful alignment I wonder if they could then appear to merge seamlessly into the spoke part? Or does that not work out?
Update new dashboard, new dashboard update, I modeled it myself. While modeling, I had a nervous breakdown caused by blender or editor, but I somehow managed it.
While giving due respect for the pretty mod, it does have a lot of triangles (maxed out in one config and slightly over in the other config) and the wheels exceed the limit.
It's almost exactly the same story as for the N.400S here: https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2074548#post2074548
Wheels could be made more efficient by using the new rim editor, anyway all the info is in that thread.
EDIT: But I don't believe that making the wheels legal would really sort out the glitch. It should be done, and the new rim editor should be used, and that would help a bit, but I think the maximum number of polygons for the main body is really too high for most computers. Personally I would go for half of the maximum, but I know not many people will agree with me. The RB4 is 2/3 of the maximum.
Another thing on this model, a problem that N.400S does not have - the middle LOD is way too high at 8104 triangles. The maximum is 8192 triangles but middle LODs should really be less than 1000 in my opinion.
One thing I hope is that you will find the pit out glitch is reduced in the new physics and graphics version. I have worked on it. Some of it is spread over more than one frame, especially if you aren't looking at the car at the time. The physical model is built in a physical frame and the graphical model is built when necessary in a graphical frame. Also, in the case of a car that hasn't yet been loaded, and is then loaded the first time since starting LFS, the textures are loaded over multiple frames so that worst of all "first time load" glitch is further reduced.
It's almost exactly the same story as for the N.400S here: https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2074548#post2074548
Wheels could be made more efficient by using the new rim editor, anyway all the info is in that thread.
EDIT: But I don't believe that making the wheels legal would really sort out the glitch. It should be done, and the new rim editor should be used, and that would help a bit, but I think the maximum number of polygons for the main body is really too high for most computers. Personally I would go for half of the maximum, but I know not many people will agree with me. The RB4 is 2/3 of the maximum.
Another thing on this model, a problem that N.400S does not have - the middle LOD is way too high at 8104 triangles. The maximum is 8192 triangles but middle LODs should really be less than 1000 in my opinion.
One thing I hope is that you will find the pit out glitch is reduced in the new physics and graphics version. I have worked on it. Some of it is spread over more than one frame, especially if you aren't looking at the car at the time. The physical model is built in a physical frame and the graphical model is built when necessary in a graphical frame. Also, in the case of a car that hasn't yet been loaded, and is then loaded the first time since starting LFS, the textures are loaded over multiple frames so that worst of all "first time load" glitch is further reduced.
Last edited by Scawen, .
Not sure I would use that, I use the reference mostly in blender to accurately model it, and then I need it in the rim editor, but I don't know how to use it because it's a side view in a cut. And not so much the reference itself as the visibility of the spoke mesh, as I've shown in a pic, it would help more. But maybe not worth spending time on it if it's complex to develop, and I've kind of learned in rim editor to compare result to the rim in vihicle editor view and it works out pretty well, it's a matter of getting used to it.
The trick is to get the right size spokes, and if you have found the dimensions from the reference it will help a lot, I did not find them, so I had to sweat a little bit.
P.S. The same picture shows my progress on getting closer to a more correct rim shape. I reduced the diameter of the spokes and now it's better. And it's still pretty close to the reference.
Last edited by Aleksandr_124rus, .
To illustrate what I am trying to say, here is the reference image aligned so the wheel rim is *just* visible inside the LFS tyre.
I did find this hard (and it's probably not accurate) because the reference image is so dark, and the tyre cannot be viewed as a wireframe.
[EDIT actually my alignment is quite bad, I start to get better results by repeatedly pressing "show wheels"]
[EDIT2: added a second attempt. This is tricky, especially with a black wheel!]
I'm wondering what could help, if the tyre and the rim could have a "wireframe" image option for 2D views, in the rim editor and the spoke editor? That wireframe view would appear simply as circles, for the LFS tyre and the user defined rim points.
I did find this hard (and it's probably not accurate) because the reference image is so dark, and the tyre cannot be viewed as a wireframe.
[EDIT actually my alignment is quite bad, I start to get better results by repeatedly pressing "show wheels"]
[EDIT2: added a second attempt. This is tricky, especially with a black wheel!]
I'm wondering what could help, if the tyre and the rim could have a "wireframe" image option for 2D views, in the rim editor and the spoke editor? That wireframe view would appear simply as circles, for the LFS tyre and the user defined rim points.
Last edited by Scawen, .
I'm interested in this task of matching a reference image.
I think the approach is to start by aligning the reference image with the edge of the visible tyre.
The way I have done this, in order to reduce the number of flexible tyre triangles (which are very expensive as they are downloaded to the GPU every frame) I have started the visible tyre at a level which is the same as the outer diameter of the wheel rim. Not the "rim diameter" but total diameter of the wheel, including the "rim flange" that holds the tyre on.
So you can actually see that in the spoke editor if you go to "wire" view. You could align the reference image so the outer part of the rim is just visible inside the visible part of the tyre.
I understand there appears to be no simple way to continue to align the various "rings" of the rim with a reference image. Maybe there should be an equivalent of "wireframe" for the rim object.
I don't know if my rambling text can be followed. But this may be good stuff to include if I make a video.
I think the approach is to start by aligning the reference image with the edge of the visible tyre.
The way I have done this, in order to reduce the number of flexible tyre triangles (which are very expensive as they are downloaded to the GPU every frame) I have started the visible tyre at a level which is the same as the outer diameter of the wheel rim. Not the "rim diameter" but total diameter of the wheel, including the "rim flange" that holds the tyre on.
So you can actually see that in the spoke editor if you go to "wire" view. You could align the reference image so the outer part of the rim is just visible inside the visible part of the tyre.
I understand there appears to be no simple way to continue to align the various "rings" of the rim with a reference image. Maybe there should be an equivalent of "wireframe" for the rim object.
I don't know if my rambling text can be followed. But this may be good stuff to include if I make a video.
You could try and do a 2 tri square with an alp texture in front and line up your points as a reference, I've done that in the editor before but not the spoke editor yet.
Thanks, that's good that you did the cleanup and reduced polygons.
As far as I can tell you have plenty of detail in the spoke object. But I would like to talk about the rim profile, for you and anyone else reading.
I really need to do a video about this but I had a cold during the holidays. Now I can talk normally again so maybe I should get on with it. I think the new rim editor is not well understood yet, and as it now has so much flexibility there is also potential for errors.
The rim editor contains a "STEEL RIM" profile shown in yellow which is the least amount of metal to make a rim. Alloys really have the same shape inside but have a different outside (thicker metal for strength, also potential for styling).
So taking your mod, the way you have done the new rim is really not correct for this wheel size. I've done a quick edit to show an example that is realistic in the rim area for this wheel diameter. Although there is a lot of variety in alloy styles, it should not be *above* the steel rim profile. Just *outside* it. I hope my attached screenshots explain (also in the first post of this thread but I think I need to explain this more).
By the way, if sharp edges are wanted you can use smoothing groups on the surfaces.
As far as I can tell you have plenty of detail in the spoke object. But I would like to talk about the rim profile, for you and anyone else reading.
I really need to do a video about this but I had a cold during the holidays. Now I can talk normally again so maybe I should get on with it. I think the new rim editor is not well understood yet, and as it now has so much flexibility there is also potential for errors.
The rim editor contains a "STEEL RIM" profile shown in yellow which is the least amount of metal to make a rim. Alloys really have the same shape inside but have a different outside (thicker metal for strength, also potential for styling).
So taking your mod, the way you have done the new rim is really not correct for this wheel size. I've done a quick edit to show an example that is realistic in the rim area for this wheel diameter. Although there is a lot of variety in alloy styles, it should not be *above* the steel rim profile. Just *outside* it. I hope my attached screenshots explain (also in the first post of this thread but I think I need to explain this more).
By the way, if sharp edges are wanted you can use smoothing groups on the surfaces.
Last edited by Scawen, .
This is my mod and I have already explained my position on this matter. As for the spokes, it's a bit surprising to me to see messages about "hacks", when the LFS official discord channel was calmly discussing instructions from draggo on how to do it and there were mod reviewers there as well. And I thought it was common practice to do, just dont need to be an moron and make spokes over 10k and veh file over 2mb. And because it turns out to be such a big deal seeing this thread yesterday I started changing the spokes and rim to hit the limits. Its your game and your rules.
And I uploaded it to the site today with other fixes over an hour ago, but for some reason the LFS still has the old version. And new version is not published
Because the rims in this mod were made before the rim editor was updated, which allowed making details like flanges and bead and what I was talking about earlier. And because of this, I had to use the spoke editor in those days..
Last edited by Aleksandr_124rus, .
Limits are now enforced when mods are uploaded
We learned that some mod creators have discovered loopholes and used hacks to exceed the limits for models.
The limits are needed to provide fast loading and the smooth online experience that LFS is known for. They are defined and enforced in the editor to maintain high frame rates and minimise glitches when people leave the pits or when their car is damaged.
These limits are now checked by our online system when a mod is uploaded and it will be blocked from online use if the limits are exceeded or there is an invisible LOD as described below.
New checks:
1) One notable loophole was that the local editor did not check all configurations before allowing the model to be exported. Some people submitted mods with a lot missing in the main configuration, to allow them to include excessive detail in other configurations.
To check this before submitting a mod with multiple configurations:
- Enter the modeller from the vehicle editor
- Click the configuration buttons below the layer switches
- If a configuration exceeds the limit you will see a red number of "tris" or "pts"
2) Another method used to bypass the limits was a hack for spoke objects in which a model with much greater than allowed size is placed into the veh file using external software.
The rim editor was improved a lot in version 0.7E, allowing much more flexibility in the rim design. Mod creators should become familiar with it because in most cases you can use the rim editor as intended (for rims) and use the spoke model as intended (for spokes). But some rim designs may be better suited to being part of the spoke object. A new triangle limit of 4240 has been set, which is shared between the rim object and the spoke object. This is supported in the new Editor Patch and there is a new video about creating realistic rims in the LFS Editor.
3) Another mistake was often made by some mod creators, who submitted mods with nothing at all in LOD2. It causes cars to have no shadow and to disappear in the middle distance. There is no need for this. It is acceptable for an unfinished mod to only have 2 levels of detail. This is explained in the thread about Invisible LOD2.
Current limits:
LOD1: 65536 (points or triangles, including all subobjects)
Middle LOD (if there is one): 8192 triangles / 12288 points
Total for rim object and spoke object combined: 4240 triangles
NOTE about limits:
The limits are very high and are not targets to aim for.
Higher triangle counts are bad for performance and load times.
LOD1 65536 is really too much and can cause various types of slowdown.
LOD2 8192 is really far too much - a sensible number would be around 1000.
Editor update:
A new editor has been released to help with limits and wheel editing: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/106792
The limits are needed to provide fast loading and the smooth online experience that LFS is known for. They are defined and enforced in the editor to maintain high frame rates and minimise glitches when people leave the pits or when their car is damaged.
These limits are now checked by our online system when a mod is uploaded and it will be blocked from online use if the limits are exceeded or there is an invisible LOD as described below.
New checks:
1) One notable loophole was that the local editor did not check all configurations before allowing the model to be exported. Some people submitted mods with a lot missing in the main configuration, to allow them to include excessive detail in other configurations.
To check this before submitting a mod with multiple configurations:
- Enter the modeller from the vehicle editor
- Click the configuration buttons below the layer switches
- If a configuration exceeds the limit you will see a red number of "tris" or "pts"
2) Another method used to bypass the limits was a hack for spoke objects in which a model with much greater than allowed size is placed into the veh file using external software.
The rim editor was improved a lot in version 0.7E, allowing much more flexibility in the rim design. Mod creators should become familiar with it because in most cases you can use the rim editor as intended (for rims) and use the spoke model as intended (for spokes). But some rim designs may be better suited to being part of the spoke object. A new triangle limit of 4240 has been set, which is shared between the rim object and the spoke object. This is supported in the new Editor Patch and there is a new video about creating realistic rims in the LFS Editor.
3) Another mistake was often made by some mod creators, who submitted mods with nothing at all in LOD2. It causes cars to have no shadow and to disappear in the middle distance. There is no need for this. It is acceptable for an unfinished mod to only have 2 levels of detail. This is explained in the thread about Invisible LOD2.
Current limits:
LOD1: 65536 (points or triangles, including all subobjects)
Middle LOD (if there is one): 8192 triangles / 12288 points
Total for rim object and spoke object combined: 4240 triangles
NOTE about limits:
The limits are very high and are not targets to aim for.
Higher triangle counts are bad for performance and load times.
LOD1 65536 is really too much and can cause various types of slowdown.
LOD2 8192 is really far too much - a sensible number would be around 1000.
Editor update:
A new editor has been released to help with limits and wheel editing: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/106792
Last edited by Scawen, .
Regarding the N.400S GT4
The spoke object does exceed limits. It has 6095 triangles but the limit is 1600 so this has been inserted into the veh using a hack.
The main model is only 20 triangles below the limit at 65515 triangles. This limit was only intended for extreme cases, it's not a target or a guide. Really models should be a lot lower than this and still be good quality for a game. Lower polygon count is better for game models.
Given the very high resolution main model, I don't know how much of the generation time is caused by the spoke object. But the spoke object is excessive and also wasteful - there is a lot of detail also in a rim object that mostly can't be seen as it is hidden by the so-called spoke object.
Given the new rim editor allows good detail to be produced by the rim cross-section, I can see no reason why the rim editor could not be used as intended in this case and use the spoke model for... spokes.
I totally agree with you I suffer from the same problem whenever the server is crowded (30 players plus) I start get pit exit lag and sometimes it freezes for few seconds specially when someone is using those drift spec cars (s13, s14, s15), and now since I discovered that high poly rims have something to do with pit exit lag as scawen says I'll have to fix my mods too.
after all I don't think this decision is bad at all since we have rim editor that allows pretty good and detailed rim lip, on rim spoke we just need to get creative.
It seems to me, two pieces actually. On a traditional steel wheel, the "Rim" part and the "Spoke" part come from separate pieces of metal.
I found this video very interesting:
By the way, does everyone know that in the spoke editor, if you are actually using "number of spokes" more than 1, the editor allows you to stitch one spoke perfectly to the next? Triangles can be connected from the "main" spoke to the one to the left of it (magenta points). Then click "wire" view mode to check that edges are shared correctly.
Well, I don't really expect you to understand unless you've tried coding a 3D graphics engine. You'll just have to take my word for it.
So far you're not really trying.
Try to really understand the diagrams in my first post. if you don't listen, you won't learn. What you are calling a steel "rim" is actually a whole wheel, and the rim itself looks nothing like a real steel rim. A steel rim follows the yellow lines in the rim editor, which you are failing to observe.
You really need to try and learn to use the rim editor and then you will find there are plenty of triangles left for your spokes.
Also, go for a walk and have a look at some real steel wheels.
Last edited by Scawen, .
I have been working as an industrial designer for over 10 years, (primarily modeling) I model all my mods myself. I hope this makes you aware that I know what I'm talking about.
Even in the mobile gaming industry, racing games the limits are higher than 11k tris for car. Unless the graphics are stylized to low poly. In modern PC simracing games LFS has the smallest amount of polys right now.
I wouldn't say that, my slogan is beauty in the details. The more details, the more realistic the mod looks. I can working with a 65.5k limit on a car (But sometimes I wish there was more). But 1600 for spokes, that's too low for many cases. Yes, if your spokes are 5-6 relatively straight sticks, there's nothing complicated here. (and even then we won't see modeled nuts and air valve there...and the constant use of hard edges with is not good for realism) but if the spokes are more complicated, that's where it gets tricky and there's a loss of details to get to the limits. And I have no idea what to do if you have to make rims with complex designs like BBS. You'll have to make a lot of sacrifices in the form of giving up some details like pattern in middle and nuts.
In my mod, I had to remove the nuts and add them as hub obj and use a hard edges. Hard Edges are bad because they literally don't exist in reality, which is why it often looks weird. There is no object in real world that converges towards the edge with a 90 degree surface, everything has a chamfer. For example, on the picture with the real rim on which I used as a reference clearly visible chamfer on the spoke, which has a specific shine that makes this rim even more beautiful, this shine is impossible in LFS with hard edges (with different color groups). But it is possible with a chamfer (bevel). Also in blender hard edges should be "looped" that it would be correctly transferred to the LFS editor as it is converted to color groups and that makes it even harder to use. (in blender shading it is not necessary to loop the hard edge to see the result) Instead, I prefer to use the bevel with additional edges wherever possible..But the limitation on spokes makes this almost impossible. And that's not even taking into account other rims with complex designs.
EDIT: I made a version my spokes with nuts and bevels in necessary places and I got 3.7k..
Even in the mobile gaming industry, racing games the limits are higher than 11k tris for car. Unless the graphics are stylized to low poly. In modern PC simracing games LFS has the smallest amount of polys right now.
I wouldn't say that, my slogan is beauty in the details. The more details, the more realistic the mod looks. I can working with a 65.5k limit on a car (But sometimes I wish there was more). But 1600 for spokes, that's too low for many cases. Yes, if your spokes are 5-6 relatively straight sticks, there's nothing complicated here. (and even then we won't see modeled nuts and air valve there...and the constant use of hard edges with is not good for realism) but if the spokes are more complicated, that's where it gets tricky and there's a loss of details to get to the limits. And I have no idea what to do if you have to make rims with complex designs like BBS. You'll have to make a lot of sacrifices in the form of giving up some details like pattern in middle and nuts.
In my mod, I had to remove the nuts and add them as hub obj and use a hard edges. Hard Edges are bad because they literally don't exist in reality, which is why it often looks weird. There is no object in real world that converges towards the edge with a 90 degree surface, everything has a chamfer. For example, on the picture with the real rim on which I used as a reference clearly visible chamfer on the spoke, which has a specific shine that makes this rim even more beautiful, this shine is impossible in LFS with hard edges (with different color groups). But it is possible with a chamfer (bevel). Also in blender hard edges should be "looped" that it would be correctly transferred to the LFS editor as it is converted to color groups and that makes it even harder to use. (in blender shading it is not necessary to loop the hard edge to see the result) Instead, I prefer to use the bevel with additional edges wherever possible..But the limitation on spokes makes this almost impossible. And that's not even taking into account other rims with complex designs.
EDIT: I made a version my spokes with nuts and bevels in necessary places and I got 3.7k..
Last edited by Aleksandr_124rus, .
It's not the time to talk to me about changing the limits. I am working on other things and could do without a battle against mod hackers.
The rim editor updates were introduced during the test patch stages. It would have been good to discuss it at that time, as you may know that is what test patches are for. To introduce updates and test them. The idea of a test patch is not just to keep quiet and hope I don't notice the use of hacking tools, which I admit I have been slow to notice.
There is a rim editor, a spoke editor and there are also hub objects, that you are free to use within the limits.
The rim editor updates were introduced during the test patch stages. It would have been good to discuss it at that time, as you may know that is what test patches are for. To introduce updates and test them. The idea of a test patch is not just to keep quiet and hope I don't notice the use of hacking tools, which I admit I have been slow to notice.
There is a rim editor, a spoke editor and there are also hub objects, that you are free to use within the limits.
Hey Scawen,
Expanding on the above...
I've spent this morning doing some research into different rims within LFS now that the limits are being enforced.
I've attached a sheet that I've looked at some of the staff picks, approved, and unapproved mods with triangle count for the rims, whether they are using the rim editor to it's potential, or if they opt to use the hub obj.
I believe that the 1600 tri limit is way too low for any reasonable amount of detail. Especially if you want to include some details like better lug nuts, or bolts around a 3 piece wheel. Texturing doesn't cut it, tried that method. Using a hub obj doesn't always cut it either, unless you designed the mod with that in mind from the beginning, many mods are already 60k+ tri. I'm sure this was plenty when designing the XRT at 8k tris total for the mod.
Compared to the main mod that has the limit of 65k, the rim detail doesn't match the quality we can do in the main mod.
As for the right amount of tris, I think 4096 would be enough to provide the detail that we are trying for (maybe others can chime in here), especially after working so hard within the 65k limit for the main mod to provide as much detail as efficiently as possible. For example, I aim to have base models at around 50k tris, to allow for modifications like body kits, and other detailed accessories that are part of drifting and racing.
If there is a concern for upping the limit, it seems that people have been skirting around the system since the limit is too low. Since avoiding the whole check, there could be rims at even 22k tri, resulting in 88k tri total, agreed that is far beyond what lfs was designed for and can cause issues with pit lag, which is compounded when mods have configs that go above 65k tri max...
When you mentioned that there was a high poly count in one spoke, often modders will import from blender which contains the whole rim, and just use "1 spoke", this is especially true when the rim has say 6 spokes, but only 5 lug nuts, which using the spoke system doesn't really work for.
Again, I'd love to embrace native tools, and work with the system, but I think the limit needs to be increased before any take up from the modders. Maybe a staged approach could be considered, from 1600 to 3200, to 4096, or above.
Expanding on the above...
I've spent this morning doing some research into different rims within LFS now that the limits are being enforced.
I've attached a sheet that I've looked at some of the staff picks, approved, and unapproved mods with triangle count for the rims, whether they are using the rim editor to it's potential, or if they opt to use the hub obj.
I believe that the 1600 tri limit is way too low for any reasonable amount of detail. Especially if you want to include some details like better lug nuts, or bolts around a 3 piece wheel. Texturing doesn't cut it, tried that method. Using a hub obj doesn't always cut it either, unless you designed the mod with that in mind from the beginning, many mods are already 60k+ tri. I'm sure this was plenty when designing the XRT at 8k tris total for the mod.
Compared to the main mod that has the limit of 65k, the rim detail doesn't match the quality we can do in the main mod.
As for the right amount of tris, I think 4096 would be enough to provide the detail that we are trying for (maybe others can chime in here), especially after working so hard within the 65k limit for the main mod to provide as much detail as efficiently as possible. For example, I aim to have base models at around 50k tris, to allow for modifications like body kits, and other detailed accessories that are part of drifting and racing.
If there is a concern for upping the limit, it seems that people have been skirting around the system since the limit is too low. Since avoiding the whole check, there could be rims at even 22k tri, resulting in 88k tri total, agreed that is far beyond what lfs was designed for and can cause issues with pit lag, which is compounded when mods have configs that go above 65k tri max...
When you mentioned that there was a high poly count in one spoke, often modders will import from blender which contains the whole rim, and just use "1 spoke", this is especially true when the rim has say 6 spokes, but only 5 lug nuts, which using the spoke system doesn't really work for.
Again, I'd love to embrace native tools, and work with the system, but I think the limit needs to be increased before any take up from the modders. Maybe a staged approach could be considered, from 1600 to 3200, to 4096, or above.
Are you sure you are using the correct version?
Does it show 0.7E on the entry screen when you start the editor?
Does it show 0.7E on the entry screen when you start the editor?
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG