Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
    • CommentAuthorSaito S
    • CommentTimeMar 1st 2018
    I feel like this shouldn't be THIS hard, but...either it is, or I'm missing something. Either way, I can't figure out how to do this. Have searched in the forums, but I didn't find anything I could duplicate to successfully do what I want (entirely possible I misunderstood something, which is why I decided to just ask for help).

    So: For things like rivers or streets in overland mapping styles, they are actually smooth paths (not, I assume, in ALL overland mapping styles out there, but it seems to be quite a common way to do rivers and streets in CC3). There's no "edit" function since it's smooth and has no "nodes" to hook onto, so my question is in the title: say I have a river, and I realize later I want to extend it further. Is there any way to just draw the extension, then attach it to the original river, so they are from then on one single smooth path entity?

    This would be a more complex procedure for roads, at least in the "Modern City" style from the 2007 annual, since in that style, streets are made up of a path with a second path (an outline) on top of it. Still - if there IS a way to combine smooth paths, I could just combine the main entity, then combine the outline, as separate operations. Main thing is, again, I just have no earthly clue how to successfully combine 2 smooth paths, if there is a way. Thanks in advance~!
    • CommentTimeMar 1st 2018
    There are two ways to go about this

    - You can still use the node edit tools on smooth paths. For smaller changes, this is the best, just use node editing to move and add nodes.
    - For adding larger sections, you can use combine paths. Unfortunately, this doesn't work out of the box on smooth paths, but you can use smooth to straight on the two paths to combine, then combine paths to join them, and finally straight to smooth on the resulting path to make it smooth again. All these three commands can be found by right clicking the explode button.
    Do note, the Node Edit tools have to click on the underlying entity and not the visible entity. What I mean is if your river has a width, then you have to click not on the visible edge of the river, but instead on line in the center of the visible river. When I'm zoomed in close, sometimes it takes me a couple of try to get the entity.
    • CommentAuthorShessar
    • CommentTimeMar 1st 2018
    If you type CTRL F (toggle frames) it shows a line indicating where the nodes are, even on curved paths. Hitting CTRL F again toggles the frames off again.
    • CommentAuthorSaito S
    • CommentTimeMar 2nd 2018 edited
    Great! Thanks all, I figured there had to be a way, and that I was just missing it, haha. I'll try all this out tonight!

    One related question actually, I've noticed that when I try to trace a smooth object (a smooth path such as a river, or similarly, the mountain contours in the "Modern Political" Annual style which are made up of smooth polygons), it doesn't trace the actual, viable edge of the object. The path traced is way off. Until I read the replies in this thread, I didn't realize that smooth paths still had nodes, they just work a bit differently. Is the inability to trace smooth objects properly because of this? The trace function hits the nodes, not the visual edge, and in a smooth object, said nodes don't actually line up with the visible edge?
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeMar 2nd 2018
    I have used multipoly. to trace smooth areas. So I'm not understanding what you mean about not being able to trace it.
    • CommentAuthorSaito S
    • CommentTimeMar 3rd 2018
    Hmm... not sure if we're talking about the same thing or not (I don't think I've ever used multipoly, certainly not often if ever, so I don't know how it works really). What I mean is this: if I have a smooth path already on the map - a river - and I want to just draw a new river, that follows the exact same path as the old one, then I use the river tool, and trace the old river. If I do so, the new river does not match visually with the old one. (Reason for wanting to do this: before coming here to ask about combining smooth paths, I though this might be a solution to the problem of not being able to "edit" with the river tool. If I have a river I need to extend, I just draw a new river, using trace to make it follow the exact path of the old river, then simply make it longer than the old river, then delete the old one).

    Another example: the mountain and hill contours in the Modern Political annual style are filled, smooth polys. If I have a blob-shaped contour on the map, and I want to draw another object (any object, doesn't matter what kind) that exactly borders that contour blob, I cannot simply trace the edge of the contour when drawing the new object, because it again doesn't track. If I use trace in that situation, the edge of the new object being drawn ends up overlapping the edge of the contour blob, rather than being flush against it.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMar 3rd 2018 edited
    Would it take too long to switch on the Attach function (a button in the line down at the bottom right of the screen) and trace the river by hand, clicking on each of the nodes as you go with the new line?

    (you would have to turn Attach off as soon as you got to the end of the existing river)
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2018
    What kinds of overlap are you talking about here? Smooth entities are a bit tricky, because their shape is determined by the nodes and a formula, CC3+ doesn't store each individual pixels like in an image. This means that minor overlaps can occur, especially with two different polygons side by side edge touching (as opposed to one inside the other), but in my experience and testing, those are extremely minor. Same when I tested the river experiment you mentioned, but in this case, do note that since adjacent nodes will influence the smoothing, you can't really draw two individual river segments, then trace them, and get the exact same look at the "joint", since this will now be controlled by the formula and affected by the new nearby nodes that came into play. The rest of the river should look the same, but there will be a change at the join area.
    • CommentAuthorSaito S
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2018
    I may not be explaining it well. It sounds like, from your last post, Monsen, that it's more or less what I suspected: that the trace function uses nodes and therefore won't necessarily follow the visible edge of whatever you're tracing.

    Regardless, it's not something that presents a huge problem, was more just asking out of curiosity, haha. Thanks for the help!