Ok, I've tried looking everywhere for a couple of hours now on Google trying to find a simplified explanation of how to create a sloped ground poly using SBX, the best I can get is you tube videos that go by so fast it takes you 2 hours to watch and "try" to understand what the person is telling you to do ,and it's only a 15 minute video. I need some step-by-step instructions on 1. how to even make polys in SBX, and 2. how to edit and make those polys sloped. I have a very limited knowledge of using SBX, I have only the basic program with no addons. I can "sort of" make a poly, but that's as far as I can figure out without any help. I am not a person who can learn from a video, some people can, but I'm not one of those people. I can only learn by "doing" using some sort of step-by-step guide. Learning by just reading a short article or watching some fast-paced video that assumes you know how to completely use SBX, just don't work for me. If I had some step-by-step instructions (without all the "lingo" that assumes you know what they are talking about) I could figure out how to do much more. So my question is, is there some sort of instructions (in lamen terms) that can explain how to do complicated things such as this? If there is, where do I find it? IE: there are lots of articles and some videos that explain how to use Photoshop, they are very explanatory and use lamen terms to explain how to do things. (I would probably still be learning how to use Photoshop to this day if there were no simple explanations of how to use it). This is what I need to do what I need to do with SBX. I am greatfull for all the help I've gotten from here so far, but I would like to be able to do some of these things myself without having to type a question on here then wait several days for an answer, which holds up my progress. I really want to learn how to do these things on my own, I'm just that type of "student", I'd rather learn to do it myself instead of having to rely on others to do it, then have them try to explain to me how the heck they did it.
-
Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:
- Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
- Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
- Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
- Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
- Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
- Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.
Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.
By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.
FSX making sloped polys with SBX
- Thread starter Tomt478
- Start date
Hi Tom:
Indeed, many tutorial videos which address complex subjects, or which are authored by people who speak in Laymen's terms are rather verbose, and take more time to present.
The result is that the (and I bet you can understand this as a "video" guy), videos end up very large on disk, and require more data to be "streamed" off of a computer and/or server.
So the videos. in order to fit into a smaller footprint online and while "streaming" are 'time compressed'.
That results in the videos playing back at an accelerated rate of speed; to fix this on ex: YouTube, play them at a slower rate.
I am not certain there is a specific step-by-step tutorial yet, on how to make sloped flattens with SBuilderX.
SBuilderX' Help file has instructions, and FSDev has tutorials on how to assign Altitude to entire Polygons, or to each vertex.
Additionally, some (most ?) info I previously linked you to addresses these issues; perhaps you may not yet have read them ?
It is important to recognize everyone here is already busy grappling with challenges in FS Development in limited free time.
It is also important to recognize that someone familiar with FS Development who takes their own limited free time to reply, is very likely to be providing you with info that is based on experience, and reasonably likely to prove useful to your challenges.
So, when for example, we post links to threads or downloadable tutorials, they are hand-picked for you, and quite likely useful.
I daresay none of the other forum participants here at FSDEV has an abundance of time- (and perhaps 'patience')- to retrace their steps by re-directing anyone's attention to something that already posted for them hours, day, weeks, months (...and even years) ago.
The onus is on the person asking for help to diligently scan and take note of each and every hand-picked 'iota' of linked info.
Even if the info does not make sense at the time, it may prove potentially useful in the future as one's insight begins to 'build'.
IMHO, it is best to not defer the scanning and mental note-taking process of info folks have referred you to; you may regret it.
The take-away from this assertion is, YOU must retrace your own steps in all your prior threads to review info linked for you.
Consider the impact it may have on other people's willingness to be of future help- or any help at all- if you ignore their replies.
In my years of observing FSDEV forum participant behavior, if someone fails to acknowledge- and at least scan- linked info, that person is eventually likely to experience either no replies, or a steadily declining number of replies to their inquiries.
That may be based on a perception that a recipient is not yet ready to deal with some aspects of FS Development tasks because it appears their general base of knowledge is not yet quite as widely encompassing of 'prerequisite' topics as it needs to be.
Unfortunately, all too often, we see a person who is in a 'rush' for various reasons, or who has special needs when learning.
Generally speaking, FS Development can be a highly complex task for a number of reasons, and learning can take a long time.
So one needs to 'pace oneself', or risk becoming "burnt out" or worse yet, resentful that others efforts to help are inadequate.
Those with special needs in learning are at the mercy of 'acts of generosity' from others; learning for them can take a long time.
In your case, you have been posting here ONLY since August 2024... which as of this date is now ONLY a mere 6 months ago.
You have indicated that you have some prior experience working with FSX and ADE in the past, and wish to learn more now.
Initially you literally ignored most of the very few replies you received to your posts.
Eventually a few of us here cultivated some interaction with you; you then began acknowledging replies, and clarifying goals.
IMHO, that is all potentially auspicious progress towards achieving your FS Development goals.
All that said, it has ONLY been 6 months since you undertook this concerted effort to test the FSX SDK as a "RPG" platform.
I would suggest adjusting your expectations for mastering FS2Kx' SDK in ONLY 6 months, and take your time with learning.
BTW: I personally do not recommend that you use FSX as a "RPG" platform to make money from by "streaming" of content.
It is not an impossibility that MS could regard that as a type of public presentation for profit.
Rather, I would recommend that each "player' in your "D+D_RPG" should purchase FSX and have your scenery project installed.
But that latter issue is something you personally must address with a properly qualified / uniquely experienced attorney.
"Slow down, and enjoy the ride"; that is what you want your RPG 'passengers' to do ...right ?
Your posts here have genuine merit, and are interesting as a non-traditional use of FS2Kx' SDK as a 3D world rendering engine.
MS-ACES originally envisioned this to be stand-alone product derived from "ESP" code base; Lockheed-Martin uses it now.
And when I say Lockheed-Martin uses it now, I mean quite likely the US Military uses it now, as a platform for RPG "Missions".
Early FS3Kx had "Adventures" and even a "Adventure BASIC" programming language; FSX / P3D has "Missions". Flight! had a gaming mode involving "Aero-caches"; MSFS now has "Career Mode" with amazing animated avatars and stunning scenery.
Please allow yourself time to learn all you need technically- and in social networking- to fulfill your aspirations in this genre.
I am glad to see you feel ready to begin the process of creating a sloped flatten in SBuilderX.
I would like to be able to tell you it is always an uncomplicated process, but that would not be true.
That is why I need you to make a decision for this initial test of concept for your project, whether you want the base plane of the scenery area (including the base of the sloped flatten) to be AGL relative to the surface of default local terrain mesh, or a custom 'level' flatten at a much lower assigned Altitude.
Currently the ARP would be at ~452 Feet AMSL versus a RWY draped onto the IRL ground surface at 6,000+ Feet.
In either case, the current 1-piece level flatten Polygon must be segmented in a specific way to prevent over-riding the vertices for a sloped flatten.
I will explain more if necessary later pending your decision on an initial scenery Altitude preference.
I shall show you how to do this for yourself as well.
PS: I have previously cited a number of issues related to this and other aspects of your project here:
Code:
https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/roads-vanishing.459657/post-931401GaryGB
Last edited:
To keepme from having to modify the altitudes, I would rather just keep the bottom of the slope at ARP level (452.113). It's too much trouble to have to rework objects and things when I change any altitudes, I'd rather just leave them as they are. I know that from looking at google earth the GL for KWR1 does not match the real world level of the ground, (it's much lower), but that's because the project was started before I had any knowledge of how to do any of this. I was just going by the altitude shown in FSX when I chose the location, FSX isn't very accurate with location altitudes, or even GPS coordinates for that matter. When I start undertaking a new project, I will not be relying on FSX for placements , I'll be sticking with Google Earth for that. I really do want to learn how to do the more complicated stuff such as this. I eventually want to add some hills and mountains (not landable ones) into the project, to give things a more "less flat" look. I want to "clean-up" a lot of the vectors and overlaps, along with fixing the roads and adding in light poles and maybe even some utility poles, but a better understanding of SbuilderX is going to be needed for all of that to happen. All I can do right now is play-around with a (experimental) copy of the project to see what I can actually do with things. I keep my original project in a safe place and work with a "trial" copy of the AD4 file, that way if I screw something up, I can always go back to my original unchanged project. I've been experimenting a little with slopes by just drawing a poly in Sbuilderx and adjusting the individual vertices to various altitudes just to see what happens, so far the best I came up with is a "hole" in the ground, nothing usuable though.