Mootilda, there's another test version still sitting in post 275.

I'm up to page 17 in the old posts now, but won't do any more for a while. Need to see my kids sometime today...

Not a test version. Just an old release version of the software.

Thanks for all of the work that you've done. I put a link to your TOC post in the first post, to help people navigate through all of this information.

How about getting a group account for the group to start the new threads and to edit the TOC posts?

We're gonna share this group account that means we all know the password for it, so we can all do and update the TOC listings...
The only problem is when we're simultaneously accessing it. :P

lol, I've made up some title shorthands for my posts based on Mootilda's list. I'm still working on my posts to categorise the multiple contents with the shorthands in the hope to make my posts clearer.

Note, I categorise the z value, left,top ,etc as rotations.


1) New LotAdjuster: UI and test version issues
[LA/LE - UI & versions tests]

2) Lot shrinking - all techniques
[Lot -shrinking]

3) Row houses (walls on the edge of a lot) - all techniques
[Row-houses]

4) Lots > maximum size (6 neighborhood tiles)
[Lots > maxi.size]

5) Lots with sizes which are not a multiple of 10 (does this include lots < minimum size of 1?)
[Lots (non-10x)]

6) Rotation of neighborhoods and lots; sun direction; top, left, z
[Rotations: all 3]

7) Standard road locations and associated pedestrian, car and service portals
[roads & portals]

8) Non-standard roads: lots with no roads, lots moved away from the road, lots built over the road
[roads non-stand.]

9) Beach lots, beach portals and waves
[beach lots]

10) Internal record formats for neighborhood and lot packages
[record formats (lots and neighbourhood)]

11) Creating a 1x1 lot
[Lot (1x1)]

12) Modifying the neighborhood terrain; adding roads to an existing neighborhood
[neighbourhood - terrain & +roads]

13) Correlation between lot and neighborhood terrain; smoothing the lot terrain, blue gaps and ridges.
[lot-neighbourhood terrain sync.]


14. Researching how Maxis lot template works
[lot templates]


[build mode - roof infos]
[build mode - partition infos]
[build mode - windows infos]

[fencePostLayer]
[lot level number]

Mootilda, you forgot to include the new information I posted about the XOBJ (yes I know the thread is impossible to take in at times lol) That gives us:

80 Bytes - unknown (all zero)
80 = 0x50: Float (single) - X coordinate
84 = 0x54: Float (single) - Y coordinate
16 Bytes - unknown
DWORD - Version
0x6A: 2 bytes instance UID of lead object tile (this is also the instance number for the object's OBJT)
7 DWORDs - unknown
If Version is 12: 2 additional DWORDs - unknown
Byte - Direction (Left = 0, Top = 2; Right = 4, Bottom = 6)
Version 08: 0x7C: 4bytes GUID of lead object tile
Version 08: 0x1E8: 2 bytes instance UID of lead object tile (this is also the instance number for the object's OBJT)

Additional info: The lead tile of a multi-tile object is not necessarily the one at sub-index 0,0. When an object is placed partly over the edge of a lot using move_objects, it is the lead tile that will refuse to pass the edge line. As move_objects is a built-in cheat, we may be able to assume it's safe to have any object off-grid other than the lead tile. I cannot find the other tiles of multi-tile objects in the lot file at all, so it looks as if the game arranges them in place at runtime based on the location of the lead tile. Therefore if you wanted the LA to move objects onto the grid during shrinking, you probably have no need to worry about what happens with the other tiles in a multi-tile object.

Later still: Jasana Bugbreeder has provided the information that the mesh (and therefore presumably everything in the RCOL chain) is oriented respective to the lead tile also, so if for instance you did move the lead tile of each tangible object that was originally on the grid onto the grid once more, the mesh and all sound and lighting resources would know where they were meant to be. Looks like this move would be at least a safe one, even if it turned out not to be relevant to any problems. My next test will be to try and find out the origins of the lots to see if they start at 1 or 0, so as to narrow down what coordinates of objects would denote an on or off-grid position.

Thanks for adding the new information. I was working on the XOBJ record last night and it obviously still needs a lot of work. Couldn't find any information in the wiki at all. Found another version = 11 (0x0B), but I'm still trying to determine what changes for the new version.

My goal is to rotate the mailbox and phone booth after moving them to their standard location on the lot, to help the rotation tutorial.

I must admit that I don't really understand much about group acccounts, etc.

Have we decided to request a group public forum for our lot modding discussions, in addition to the group private forum for our dangerous downloads?

Have we decided that splitting off various topics into new threads is the right way to go? If so, is it better to just have one person who owns each thread and commits to maintaining the TOC for that thread? If not, is there a likelihood of us overwriting each others changes?

Is there a password that I'm supposed to know?

Mootilda,
The group account is gonna be like a normal member account only that we all in the group knows the password. Should that be an option, we'll have to let one another know when one is doing the update to avoid simultaneous over-writing on the posts. But, this is for keeping updates in a longer term.

Yet, some of us starting the new threads are not a problem either coz we can ask moderators to help switch the post access to the next updaters until the threads end.

either or other ways work.

Er... can I just check it's ok for me to opt out of the admin rota? I really don't think I can face doing thread housekeeping. I will try to post appropriately as far as possible and won't complain if someone moderates me :D

Seems to me that administrative work is an opt-in thing, not an opt-out thing. Administrators are donating their time and energy to the group and no one can really be forced to participate.

At this point, I don't think that we've reached any concensus on whether to ask for a public lot-modding forum, whether we should have a group account, whether to split off this research thread into multiple threads on more specific topics, or what other methods we should be using to keep the current thread under control. This isn't a decision that I'm qualified to make ... I keep hearing about new options like special forums and group accounts that I know nothing about.

I'm also still waiting to see how the new dangerous testing forum works out. I added a download thread for the current test version. I'm hoping that other people will create threads for their test lots there.

The advantage to a separate forum with threads on more specific topics is that it could be more organized, so that people can focus on their own areas of interest. The disadvantage is that less people might be reading each post, since people could be focusing on their own areas of interest. I know that there are areas where I'd be more or less likely to participate, myself. Splitting into multiple threads might severely curtail the energy that we get by participating in this all-in-one research thread.

I noticed that several people are adding titles to their posts, so we should get a feel for whether that idea helps or not. aelflaed has kindly taken on the task of creating an initial TOC, so that we can see whether it's helpful and also whether it's manageable.

I think that a lot of people here have more experience than I do with this type of forum. This is the first one that I've ever participated in. I just don't know what's helpful, what's possible, what's difficult.

My concern is that keeping a huge TOC up-to-date will be an overwhelming task. I could be wrong, but it seems like a lot of work. In fact, of the possible solutions that I suggested, I think that keeping a TOC up-to-date would be the most difficult.

aelflaed would probably be the best person right now to comment on the amount of work. Is anyone here willing to volunteer the work required to update the TOC for several pages every day?

Initially, I was thinking about a TOC as an aid to a moderator in splitting off each topic into its own thread. If we create an initial TOC and then split off threads on individual topics, is there a continuing need to update the TOC?

I am not personally convinced that splitting this thread into that many threads is the right thing to do. Not only is it going to flood the R&D forum with new lot-related threads, but also there is huge overlap of required info in some of those topics, we're gonna end up having to post the same info in more than one thread to answer issues that come up in many of them. I think the only thing wrong with this thread at all, that has made it get unweildy, is it has tried to be the LA development thread as well as the general lot research thread. Loads of posts in here are dealing with issues over the development and distribution of the LE/LA tool, the lots made with it, and the ethics/dangers therein. And now we've got loads of posts about administering a forum and/or usergroup too! I reckon if you split off those posts and moved them into the private forum, what was left here would be just info about the lot files, which is what the title of this thread would have people believe they were going to find.

It's certainly quite a bit of effort to read through every one of the old posts and try to decide what heading they would go with - sometimes several, naturally. It's a tedious job that I wouldn't want for the long term, although it is worth doing once to help people find what they need on this enormous thread.

I am prepared to update/revise my TOC post for the time being, if others think changes are needed - whether that be new headings or a different place for some posts. I tend to think it will be enough for this thread to have that post, hopefully fairly comprehensive, linked from the start commnets, so people can find what they want. It does save double-posting information, although more referrals between posts would be good at times.

Surely the rate of change on this thread is going to slow down. It will be reasonable to let people use the TOC as far as it goes, then wade through for themselves from that point on.

I know I overlook some of the more technical posts already, so I would be unlikely to keep up with lots of threads of minimal meaning to me.

Mootilda could paste my list into the start comments (or another message close to the start) if she likes, so people don't even have to click on a link. Of course, then SHE would have to keep up with anythig I add to my list. Best wait a while for that.

I think Inge has a good idea there, about stripping off the specific LA development posts, testing and admin angst, and putting THEM somewhere else. However, can that be done without taking information away from here, that should remain public?

Maybe I need a couple more headings for the TOC - Ethics maybe? I haven't reached that section of the thread yet anyway.

This sounds like a very reasonable idea, to me. Split the thread into two: one research and one development. I'm quite happy to have the development thread in the hidden private forum, if that's the right place for it.

OK, let me see whether I can get together a list of the development threads. Then, we'll see whether it's possible to separate them out from this thread.

Inge: the voice of reason. I place my vote with this idea.

By the way, Niol's title listings are being very useful in allocating subheadings. It saves me having to wade through every post all over again. Thanks.

I've added my lot files to the new forum - should I take them away from this thread now?

I think that we should move this organizational stuff into my "Thread Organization and Splitting" thread in the other forum. Let's leave this research thread for stuff directly related to lot modding.

Directions are as viewed from a conventionally placed road in lots that have not been edited. Does not change when lot moved to another direction
U11= 0 : 0,0 is at front right corner x=parallel to road
U11= 1 : 0,0 is at back right corner x=perpendicular to road
U11= 2 : 0,0 is at back left corner x=parallel to road
U11= 3 : 0,0 is at front left corner x=perpendicular to road

Objects are usually centred at 0.5,0.5 but I guess theoretically 0,0 is in world, so -1,-1 coords represent Out Of World objects. Looking at a few of them in the file would seem to bear this out.

If you move a buyable object in-game to a new position, the original coords remain in the XOBJ file.
If you delete a buyable object in-game, its old XOBJ and OBJT remains in the lot file. If you buy another of the same object, it makes an additional pair of XOBJ and OBJT.

Can you tell whether -1,-1 is the only valid out-of-world coordinate?

Ouch! Although, that might work well for us... Is there a flag which marks the object as deleted?

Don't know and don't know - yet. Can look further tomorrow, that was just the spade work In the meantime can you tell me any other resources and locations you know of that appear to be storing coordinates so I can compare their results with the XOBJ 0x50-53 and 0x54-57?

Well, if you're asking about the OBJT record - there are a ton of coordinates per object and the LA doesn't have any of their locations in the OBJT record because I haven't had a chance yet to try to clean up the OBJT record processing. The only information that I have is what the debug LA is printing out into the LADebug.txt file.

Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you asking for a list of all of the record types that the LA processes and the locations of all of the coordinates that it changes?

I'm afraid I probably am. Well I know you must be changing some object coordinates otherwise when you shrink or expand a lot from the 0 edge, the house would move over sideways (ie it would still be relative to the new 0,0). Ideally I should know everything you already know so as to be sure I am adding to it not just duplicating it. It will save time and duplicated effort. If it's already written somewhere just point me to it.

It's written in the C# source code. If I'm going to translate the C# code for you, I should probably just take a bunch of time off from programming and update the wiki. As far as I know, the XOBJ and OBJT records are the primary records that are very poorly documented by the source code.

If you want to know which values the LA changes in the OBJT record - anything that is marked as X= or Y=, as opposed to B=, F=, String=, ... or whatever other variable names that Andi chose.

I could look at the source code and find it out from there, if you'll let me. I believe you deleted it from the other thread?

Ok I will go and grab it, thanks.

I don't believe that there are any posts specifically about expanding lots across a road. Are you looking for something in particular?