3D floor over deep water - underwater colour

[Enjay]

Again, this is an "I don't know if it is supposed to be this way" possible-no-bug. It may also be an "I don't know how to do this" possible-no-bug.

I just put a 3D floor over a deep water sector. I was pleased to find that it was a simple task - I was worried about having to create all sorts of multiple control sectors or maybe the 2 features being somehow incompatible. But it was easy and the 3D bridge appeared just where I wanted it to first time trying.

However, whilst splashing around in the water under my 3D bridge, I noticed the underwater colour (a muddy brown created by putting the colour definition on the lower sidedef of the transfer heights line) was not present below the water under the bridge. I checked the transfer heights lines - they were all set up correctly. I messed with the flags for the 3D floor line, and couldn't get any under water colour. I eventually solved the problem by colouring the deep water control sectors using Sector_SetFade in a script. That allowed the water under the bridge to have a colour (and actually looked better) but I'm just raising the issue in case it is a genuine bug.

I no longer have an example WAD handy, and can't make one until I get home from work tomorrow, but if you need one, I'll easy throw one together then.

[Shinjanji]

It probably has to do with the light transfer of the 3D floor that's over top of the sector. Does it occur if you set the flag for the 3D floor to 1?

[Graf Zahl]

Please do so. A test WAD would be a great help. But this is strange. I have seen colored water under 3D bridges

[solarsnowfall]

transfer heights

Is there some advantage to using transfer heights, as opposed to using swimmable 3d floors?

[Phoenix]

well, transfer_heights can use Eyes Above/Below Fake Floor/Ceiling. and in a couple other very special cases transfer_heights may be needed. that's it, i guess.

[solarsnowfall]

Eyes Above/Below Fake Floor/Ceiling.

For teleportation?

[Enjay]

transfer heights

Is there some advantage to using transfer heights, as opposed to using swimmable 3d floors?

In this case, yes, the 3D floor is a solid bridge over a much larger pool of water. It's a normal deep pool of water, nothing fancy, no need for a 3D floor. In fact, it was an old WAD that used to have a water area with a bridge made out of bridge objects (9990) and steptop sidedefs over it. I was just updating it to have a proper 3D bridge.

I think I did try setting the flags to 1 (is that the one to not use light effects under the bridge - if so, I did that). However, this didn't work and has the negative side effect of not allowing me to make it darker under the bridge - which is a cool effect.

I'll try again when I get home.

[Graf Zahl]

Apparently I was too tired last night when I read this.

If you put both 3D floors and Transfer_Heights in the same sector there is interference between two vastly different lighting methods so one takes precedence - which are the 3D-floors. You can try to use a 3D-floor that does not alter lighting below but if that doesn't work you have to make your pool with 3D-water.

[Enjay]

Ah, OK then. I figured it might be something like that. No need for an example level I take it?

As I said, you can get round the problem by changing the deep water control sector fade colour. That gets applied under the water below the bridge just fine.