Making Collision for Inverted Objects?

Calshatra · Oct 2013

So I was wondering about these corner pieces that are inverted to have a negative space. I heard UDK doesn't really do shapes with cut outs inside it, as it will just fill up the mesh collision.

I was wondering is there a method of making collision with such objects.

So for this piece I would want a UCX in order to have collision with the mesh but not necessarily wanting the space in between the two corners on the left and bottom.
:poly142:

passerby · Oct 2013

use multiple physics hulls, since they can only be convex, use more than 1 of them

r4ptur3 · Oct 2013

yep -- I second passerby. keep this stuff in mind as well:

naming convention is:

UCX_nameofobject_001
UCX_nameofobject_002
UCX_nameofobject_003
. . .

you can also use UBX_ if you are using box collision (in most cases you probably are -- it's cheaper).

do not use numbers in your asset's naming convention. it'll screw up the UCX_ _001 part.

do not merge your collision hulls or UDK will count it as a single concave hull.

make sure to check "one convex hull per ucx" in the UDK import screen if you are using more than one hull.

Calshatra · Oct 2013

Woah, I never knew having numbers in the name of the object would screw up the collisions.

Just to clarify, what exactly does having numbers in the name do?
For example if I put "UCX_Box_V01_001" with V01 being a version number, what happens?

I have been bypassing the screw-up using
UCXA_Box_V01_01,
UCXB_Box_V01_02,
UCXC_Box_V01_03,
etc.

I don't know if this naming convention is to the same degree as the mentioned one.

I'm just starting out on UDK so I got a lot to catch up on.
Thanks!

!

r4ptur3 · Oct 2013

Yeah that naming convention might screw up when you try to import. I actually switched to letters instead of numbers. Maybe you will have better luck than I have but I avoid it at all costs now.

also do not forget the "_" after UCX

Making Collision for Inverted Objects?

Replies