1488 replies to this topic

[jpsalas]

Both PM5 seems to work the same when nudging (the old one has the ball going under the playfield bug)

 

The only difference I see between PM5 and VPX nudging is the ball not moving in VPX, but it seems to work very similar. Well, the screen don't move visually in PM5, and in VPX can it be turned off, but this has nothing to do with the actual nudge. I think the ball moving during a nudge in PM5 was not very realistic.

 

I think the nudging routines in VPX doesn't need to be changed, as they seem to do job. But what I think it is wrong are some values of some variables/constants used in the nudge routines. I guess some values got changed with the new physics, and some did not change. So what we have now is that a ball must be very close to an object so the nudge works, this means the ball must be nearly touching a wall to the nudge have an effect on the ball. This can be fixed by increasing the force of the nudge in the script, but then the actual force transmitted by the object to the ball feels like a cannon.

 

I don't think that the nudge in VP8 is right either as both the ball and screen moves and can't be changed. But in VP8 there was a balance between the distance between the ball and the closest object and the force transmitted.

I don't think we need the visual movement of the ball as in PM5. As I can see PM5 has the same kind of nudge as in VPX, with the difference that the ball doesn't move visually. Both have the unbalance between the distance between the ball and the objects and the strength transmitted. It looks to me like the strength transmitted is the same as in VP8, but the distance has been increased about 10 times. So for a nudge to be effective in VPX (and PM5) you need a force of about 20 against a force of 2 in VP8. I don't know how to explained better. But this is my opinion of what I see. Shockman seems to know more than me about nudging

 

So to me the force transmitted to the ball in VPX (and PM5) is too high. All the other parameters in the physics have changed, so why must we continue to keep the nudging with a force value of 2? If the force transmitted to the ball when hit by an object is reduced by 10 then I guess the problem with nudging will be fixed, as we can use a force of about 20, and a closer object will be able to hit ball and the ball won't feel like it has been hit by a baseball bat.

 

Well, those are my ideas.

[toxie]

But the ball not-moving part i do not get. If i set the force to 20 like you suggested, i see it moving, similar to PM5..

[blindpeser]

@Shockman: Nice to hear have some ideas. But please be as kind as possible to guys that create the magic here. You shouldnt be that rude to guys that spend their spare time for us for free! This is no product you paid for. If you want to complain about it, just stay away from VP.

[Shockman]

Stay away from VP? As I said That is an option I may take if they say it's a good option.

 

I told him they work the same because I tested them minutes before I posted.

 

I'll try 20 and see if that works. But I would expect 19 to "work" less and 21 to "work" more before I could agree with the use of the word works. Maybe it just needs 19 to show as zero in the UI, or more precise zero in the UI mean 19 in the end. But if that's the case 20 should not be noticeable without very careful observation. 

Edited by Shockman, 18 October 2019 - 05:44 PM.

[jpsalas]

But the ball not-moving part i do not get. If i set the force to 20 like you suggested, i see it moving, similar to PM5..

If you load the nudge test table, that I uploaded in an early post, in PM5 and look at the ball in the center (not the one in the plunger), and nudge you'll see the bal making a movement og going back. Åpen the same table in VPX and you'll see that the ball doesn't move at all. You'll need to set the visual nudge to 0 so the table itself doesn't move.

 

The strength in that table is just 4, which was very strong for a VP8 table, but it is almost useles in PM5 or VPX unless the ball is much closer to a wall. In PM5 you see the ball make a move and go back to its original position. But the wall will not hit the ball unless it is very much closer. And the same its true for VPX, the only difference is that the ball will not move.

 

The ball in the plunger moves with less nudging strength due to the ball is very closed to the walls.

 

If you change the stregth to 20, in both PM5 and VPX, then the wall (at the center of the table) will hit the closer ball, but the wall will hit the ball really strong.

 

That's why I mean the nudging settings in the code for VPX (and PM5) are not balanced, and it must include some old code/values that was not changed when the new physics were added. In VP8 the distance "the table" moves corresponds more or less to the strength of the nudge that's why it felt better, since the object where able to "hit" the ball. Now you need a strength of about 20 to get "the table" move enough so an object can hit the ball, but then the strength is too high. If you use a value about 6 or 8 it will nudge the table a bit too strong, but only if the ball is really close to an object, almost in contact with the object. That's why a nudge is almost useless in both PM5 and VPX since "the table" doesn't move enough to hit the ball. And mostly only works if the ball is resting against an object. And by "the table" I don't mean the table itself, but that algoritm that must find out if an object is close enough to trigger a hit. I haven't looked at the code since I won't understand it anyway

 

I don't know other way to explain what I see. I can make another table so we can try the settings. Making tables is easy to me

[Shockman]

I haven't see an algorithm to check distance in the source code. I assumed the contact between the ball and element is what would decide and trigger a response.

 

One other strange thing about VPX nudging is the default strength of the visual aspect is way too strong. You have to add a lot of zeros to the start to mellow it out. The numbers it actually uses is no big deal, but in the user interface it should be converted to something logical. The visual nudge should be tied into the physical nudge. Not an issue with non working nudging though.

[jpsalas]

I set Visual Nudge Strength property in the editor to 0,0015, and with a nudge force of 6 or 8 in the script. I know that currently a strength of 6 or 8 is too low to make an effective nudge, but its what I use in my tables, at least if the ball is resting against a wall, a nudge will make the ball move.

 

And the visual movement corresponds to the force used. The higher the force the higher is the visual movement. That value, Visual Nudge Strength, is a kind of factor. So yes, the stronger the hit the more visually the screen moves. And yes, Shockman, the default value 0.02 is way to high

That's what I said, the nudge system in VPX is very nice, and the only wrong thing I find it is that the force transmitted to the ball is too high, other than that everything you want in a nudge is there in the VPX. We have been using too low values to make a decent nudge that's all.

 

Now that I look closely to the VPX nudge, and that I have set to 0 the Visual Nudge Strength, I see that the ball moves just like in PM5. I don't know why I didn't see the ball moving before. Maybe the computer at work, where I did almost all my testing, is too weak and I have almost everything turned off, and I also used RDP to conenct to that computer.

 

And here I'm talking about nudging when I can't even nudge a real table

[jpsalas]

Now I understand why I didn't see the ball moving making a nudge. If you have turned off the table's visual nudge, this is by setting the Visual Nudge Strength to 0, then the ball moves like in PM5. If the value is higher than 0 then the table moves and the ball doesn't move Perfect for cabinet and for desktops

 

Now if we could reduce the amount of force transmitted to the ball in a nudge then it will be perfect. I don't think the problem is the distance, as I can see the problem is that the force transmitted is way to much. Just as it was in the older physics, where we used a force of 1.5 or 2 max. 

[jpsalas]

And here it is a nudge test for VPX. It is the same table as before. But saved with VPX

 

 

I have used a force of 20, and the side nudge angles are a little upwards, like a normal nudge should be.

 

The nudge seem to work really fine, only too strong of course

 

You can see the table moving in desktop mode (adjust the Visual Nudge Strength to 0,001 or lower), and the ball moving a little in a cabinet (with that VNS set to 0), and the real nudge will not be executed unless the ball is close to the wall and it hits it.

If you nudge upwards you'll see that the strength is too strong.

Edited by jpsalas, 19 October 2019 - 10:50 AM.

[Shockman]

I disagree that the visual is tied into in any way the physical, but it may just be my build. I'm using the one labeled in about as VP10.6 final. What build do you use?

 

I also disagree that this is good for desktop. 

Edited by Shockman, 19 October 2019 - 07:30 PM.

[Thalamus]

No surprise there.

[rothbauerw]

This has probably been asked before, but I can't find it anywhere.  Is there a way to change the physics material assigned to an object in the script?

[jpsalas]

I disagree that the visual is tied into in any way the physical, but it may just be my build. I'm using the one labeled in about as VP10.6 final. What build do you use?

 

I also disagree that this is good for desktop. 

 

I use the same build, 10.6 final.

 

I agree with you that just now the nudge in VPX is not very useful, since the ball needs to rest on something, and you have to use a low value to the force in the script, which again is not enough to trigger a nudge with a close object. Have you tried with a force of 20 or more? Then you'll see that the visual movement is actually linked to the force used in the script. But then the nudge is too strong, but if you ignore for now the result of the nudge force transmitted to the ball and check how the ball and the world around reacts, you'll see that the visual movement of either the ball or the world is linked to the force in the script. By setting the visual nudge property in the editor to 0 then the ball will behave just the same as in PM5, which is good for cabinets. And if you have a small value, like 0,001,  there you'll see the world (table) moving according to the force. Try changing the nudge value in the script.

 

To me the only thing that needs to be done in the source is to reduce the force transmitted to the ball.

[toxie]

This has probably been asked before, but I can't find it anywhere.  Is there a way to change the physics material assigned to an object in the script?

 

I don't think so, but you can change all material parameters of a material by now.

[kiwi]

error message  ver 3788  os win10 pro  1903 18362.388  nvidia 436.48

 

I had a similar error,
I launched the table and VPX closed, and then the error.

 

[rothbauerw]

This has probably been asked before, but I can't find it anywhere.  Is there a way to change the physics material assigned to an object in the script?

 
I don't think so, but you can change all material parameters of a material by now.

That's actually better. Can you point me to where I can find the proper naming convention for all the parameters?

[chepas]

I am about to try this with a game now but surely its on the commandreference.txt?

UpdateMaterial(string, float wrapLighting, float roughness, float glossyImageLerp, float thickness, float edge, float edgeAlpha, float opacity,
               OLE_COLOR base, OLE_COLOR glossy, OLE_COLOR clearcoat, VARIANT_BOOL isMetal, VARIANT_BOOL opacityActive,
               float elasticity, float elasticityFalloff, float friction, float scatterAngle) - updates all parameters of a material (same input ranges as used in the material editor)

This would be alot easier when updating physics if we can have a smaller method that just has the physics params (which would leave the other params intact).

 

Or does it mean only the name of material is required here? The rest are optional params?

UpdateMaterial (string, float wrapLighting, float roughness, float glossyImageLerp, float thickness, float edge, float edgeAlpha, float opacity,
               OLE_COLOR base, OLE_COLOR glossy, OLE_COLOR clearcoat, VARIANT_BOOL isMetal, VARIANT_BOOL opacityActive)

UpdateMaterial (string, float wrapLighting, float roughness, float glossyImageLerp, float thickness, float edge, float edgeAlpha, float opacity,
               OLE_COLOR base, OLE_COLOR glossy, OLE_COLOR clearcoat, VARIANT_BOOL isMetal, VARIANT_BOOL opacityActive, float elasticity, float elasticityFalloff, float friction, float scatterAngle)

UpdatePhysicsMaterial (string, float elasticity, float elasticityFalloff, float friction, float scatterAngle)

Edited by chepas, 20 October 2019 - 04:07 PM.

[chokeee]

Guys. Until now I played all tables on beta 3541. I Instaled final VPX6 and now the tables look different. Lighs are "stronger" and the flippers, flashers primitives, looks less sharp. I have last nvidia drivers etc.

https://ibb.co/McnQSnR

Edited by chokeee, 20 October 2019 - 05:42 PM.

[Thalamus]

@chokeee : My understanding of it is that some bugs got fixed and that has lead to what you are seeing.

[chokeee]

Not sure. The tables looks better in the old version.