The angle inside is more than 180 degrees there, so that would not be a convex hull.
3 Likes
Should the option not be “Convex Hull” instead of “Hull” then?
1 Like
Why isn’t this property scriptable? I was trying to whip together something that would convert all of the CSGs in a certain type of model to “Box” quickly and it wouldn’t let me.
3 Likes
Physics stuff is calculated in studio, so eh…
EDIT: I remember that today’s update added the new enum, but not a property using it.
It’s probably one of those studio-only properties, just as with a few studio-only classes.
EDIT2: Alhough it would be nice for plugins to be able to set the CollissionFidelity of an union
4 Likes
Yep, that’d be great for automation purposes where I can loop through a bunch of unions at once and change their CollisionFidelity at the same time. It’s fine even if it pauses studio until all of them are done because I can leave it to do that and go do something else important instead of manually going through and changing the CollisionFidelity of the unions.
2 Likes
Does changing the property fire .Changed?
In that case, you could write a plugin that does something like:
for k,v in pairs(game.Selection:Get() or anotherTableOfPartsWantedToBeConverted)
game.Selection:Set{v}
v.Changed:wait()
end
You would just need to click the dropdown menu and select the option and repeat.
Still a pain, but less…
2 Likes
@Khanovich
Thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you.
3 Likes
Since @Khanovich can’t talk in this thread…
There were some technical issues with providing script access to plugins so we decided to ship a version without it first. We can revisit this next year if there is sufficient demand.
3 Likes
There is a small issue I have found with UnionOperations created by Instance.new:
If you create a union as such and set the collisions to Box physics, there will still have no collisions data. This use case is for my in-game scaling of armor for the guis that allow me to scale parts as small as I want without parts being larger than they are.
1 Like
Remove size constraint from Custom FormFactor or riot!1!1!1!
5 Likes
The restriction exists (at least, this is the old reason) is because 0.2 is the minimum size for collisions. Not sure if this is still the case, but this what I saw.
1 Like
Is there ever going to be an option for higher fidelity collisions? I unioned ships in my game to reduce lag when moving and it turned the collision boxes in to really weird, unusable abominations that I can’t fix.
example:
from
4 Likes
Maybe it’s “low detailed” because of the max amount of voxels allowed?
You should try having sub unions, like a tower, a wall, …
(If you copy-paste one wall-union for the other one, it’ll even reuse some of it for less lagg)
2 Likes
Lol, why isn’t he talking?
Also, is it possible to get 1:1 CSG collision boxes?
2 Likes
He’s playing a game.
2 Likes
I love Convex Hulls, they make collision so much cheaper.
The Source Engine uses them for collision models automatically, and thus my Rbx2Source tool automatically has them for character models and hats.
4 Likes
I made a giant box of 4 walls around my map and unioned it. The collision boxes ended up ruining the corners of the map making them not passable.
I don’t get why this happens either, it actually seems to add more polygons than the shape itself.
2 Likes
The collision boxes are percent-based, not size-based.
You probably shouldn’t need to be unioning those walls anyway.
1 Like
Yea I un-unioned them as it wasn’t super necessary lol
1 Like
You can get a part with a size less than 0.2 by unioning a part, scaling it down, then separating it. The collisions actually work fine at small sizes.
1 Like