MAX_TW_VERTS (12) exceeded + Node without a volume

[lukesandylowground]

       59 light entities
--- SetupBrushes ---
      905 opaque brushes
--- SetupDirt ---
       48 dirtmap vectors
--- SetupFloodLight ---
       64 numFloodVectors
--- SetupSurfaceLightmaps ---
     3128 surfaces
     2508 raw lightmaps
       46 surfaces vertex lit
     3082 surfaces lightmapped
     3064 planar surfaces lightmapped
        0 non-planar surfaces lightmapped
       18 patches lightmapped
        0 planar patches lightmapped
--- SetupTraceNodes ---
************ ERROR ************
MAX_TW_VERTS (12) exceeded

############### model 0 ###############
block size = { 1024 1024 1024 }
BSP bounds: { -10197.000000 -4661.000000 -45955.000000 } { 9756.000000 15304.000000 16566.000000 }
Lightgrid bounds: { 99999.000000 99999.000000 99999.000000 } { -99999.000000 -99999.000000 -99999.000000 }
--- PatchMapDrawSurfs ---
DrawSurfaceForMesh: bogus plane
DrawSurfaceForMesh: bogus plane
DrawSurfaceForMesh: bogus plane
DrawSurfaceForMesh: bogus plane
DrawSurfaceForMesh: bogus plane
DrawSurfaceForMesh: bogus plane
       19 patches
       10 patch LOD groups
--- FaceBSP ---
     5421 faces
    48117 leafs
--- MakeTreePortals ---
WARNING: node without a volume
node has 0 tiny portals
node reference point 0.00 0.00 0.00
      268 tiny portals
        0 bad portals
--- FilterStructuralBrushesIntoTree ---

I am 98% of my map finished, but when i compile it to test it, the following errors appears above.

[NAB622]

http://nab622.com/tutorials/MappingErrors.html#compile_time_errors-max_tw_verts

Quote

TW stands for TraceWinding.

If you have this error, then you have a cluster of geometry getting sliced up too much in the compile.

Common causes of this error are things like the 'Cap' faces on 12-sided brushes or larger.

Find the offending brush, split it into several smaller brushes, and try again. Alternatively, if you know which brush faces are the offenders, you can caulk them.

(It could just be something as simple as running a brush cleanup to fix a corrupt brush.)

 

The node without a volume is just a warning - I wouldn't worry about it unless you see something wrong when the compile is complete. But it is entirely possible the two errors are related:

http://nab622.com/tutorials/MappingErrors.html#compile_time_errors-warning_node_without_a_volume__node_with_unbounded_volume__node_has_0_tiny_portals

[lukesandylowground]

Ok,  but what is the "cap" on 12 sided brushes or larger?

Plus, there is another error during compile named: MAX_MAP_VISIBILLITY EXCEEDED

[NAB622]

The cap pieces are the end pieces. Let's say for instance that you made a long, tall column using a 24-sided brush. The top and bottom pieces of that column that contact the floor and the roof are the "Cap" pieces. Those are usually the culprits with this error.

 

I wouldn't worry about any other errors until you have the TW_VERTS error fixed, since a rogue item can cause numerous issues. However, that web page I linked should have just about every error you can have during compile in it - save the link, it's a great reference! MAX_MAP_VISIBILITY is a toughie, though, because even though the cause of the error is always the same, it generally means combing through your work to fix your technique.

http://nab622.com/tutorials/MappingErrors.html#compile_time_errors-max_map_visibility

[lukesandylowground]

So basically caulk the cap pieces of closed off cylinders?

[NAB622]

That's one possible solution, yes.

If you need the edges to be rendered, then you'll have to split the brush up along its length into multiple brushes. The clipper tool can do that for you in seconds.

[lukesandylowground]

Im having a lot of trouble identifying the possible geometry that is causing the map to not compile correctly.

Could i send you the map file and have you take a quick look?

[NAB622]

Sure, I can do that! Might take some time, though. Depends on how complicated the brush work is.

[lukesandylowground]

Ok, look through your messages.

[NAB622]

I found a few things of interest. Do you mind if I post a few images here?

[lukesandylowground]

Sorry for posting late, go ahead.

[NAB622]

Okay. I'd just rather have this posted publicly for people google searching it later on.

 

I identified three brushes that are likely to be causing your MAX_TW_VERTS error. I have them selected in the image below, and outlined the offending faces in green:

http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_1.png

There still may be other offenders, but these are definitely causing a problem.

The pillars should be simple, just use the clip tool to split those two brushes into 4 smaller ones each.

The glass is easy to fix, just make it a 4-sided brush like this:

http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_2.png

Since it's less triangles, it's more efficient on the renderer anyway.

As for MAX_MAP_VISIBILITY...ultimately, this is being caused by the way you're using CSG subtract, but it's fixable without too much trouble here. In the future, though - when you CSG subtract something with a lot of edges into a gigantic brush, you should do two things as good technique:

1. Split the large brush so you have a smaller brush that encompasses JUST the areas you are subtracting, so you don't get any rogue slices that span great distances.
2. Make the larger brush a func_group before subtracting. This way it is easier to edit later.

With these in mind, here's what you have now:

http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_3.png

And if you use step 1 above, this is what it should look like:

http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_4.png
http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_5.png

Visually in the game, these two techniques are identical. But the second method prevents huge slices from creating extra geometry over long distances. This will help with your visibility error because there will be far less portals generated.

 

As for what is actually causing your MAX_MAP_VISIBILITY error, I'd wager this little thing is singlehandedly the cause:

http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_6.png

Make the entire thing detal.

EDIT: The metal framework across the window is also not detail. You should make it detail as well, that's a lot of slices.

EDIT2: Also, make this thing detail, and the entire catwalk and railings attached to it:

http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_7.png

 

Also, I did notice you have a large, open area outside the playable area - if making that pillar detail does not help, you might need to increase the _blocksize in your worldspawn to 2048. Just be very careful how you use CSG subtract, or rogue slices will cause the error again. ;)

[lukesandylowground]

Oh, you are my savior!

Thanks mate.

[NAB622]

One more point of interest on the MAX_TW_VERTS error. This brush will also be an offender:
http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_8.png

 

And since the above post had a broken link in it - this thing, in fact the entire platform attached to it and the railings, should also be detail:
http://storage.nab622.com/MAX_TW_VERTS_7.png

 

[lukesandylowground]

Though the amount of portals dropped from 17000 to atleast 6600, it still has the MAX_TW_VERTS error, but the max map visibilitiy is fixed.

[NAB622]

Keep looking. Any place where you used a 12-sided brush or larger, the end cap pieces will cause this error. I only pointed out the three that I saw, but I'm sure there's more. (MAX_TW_VERTS can be caused by other things, but I didn't see any of those conditions when I was looking.)

If you don't have any luck I'll take another peek, but I don't have time right this second.

[lukesandylowground]

I found 2! The top and and bottom of the shaft.

[lukesandylowground]

Should i make the vane brush detail?

[lukesandylowground]

Alright, i made a lighter version of the map, check your messages again.

[NAB622]

I did a test compile with the new file you just sent, but I don't get the MAX_TW_VERTS error. Are you still getting it on your end?

As far as VIS goes - honestly, in this map, almost the entire thing should be detail, except for the outer walls of the shaft. There's just nothing to hide from any viewing angle. It can be done, but I wouldn't worry about it too much on something this small, since the performance gain would be marginal regardless. If your VIS compile takes more than one minute you should poke at it, but otherwise it's fine with whatever.

If you're actually interested in in-game performance, you would see a much larger gain on this map from learning various brushwork/patch techniques than you would from VIS. But that's another topic entirely, and quite complicated.

I really need to get going on those tutorial videos mumble mumble mumble...