ATTACH Transforms

[Jahulath]

Hi folks, I have been looking at the bit of text quoted below and trying to implement it but it does not seem to want to work... I take this to mean that you can set an attachment point for your part using a blank game item instead of a set of coordinates but I am having a hard time getting it to work I named my blank game item AttachmentNode and put it in the right place but the object still just uses it's models origin. As far as I can tell I need to get the code to read:

ATTACH

{

name = srfAttach

Method = LOCKED_JOINT

transformName = AttachmentNode

}

Is that right?

ATTACH Nodes

Previously, part configs had to define attach nodes with messy position values in the base config. Now you can define an attach node as being linked to a transform on the model. To do this you define an ATTACH config node like this..

Code:

ATTACH

{

name = top

transformName = myTopTransform

}

ATTACH

{

name = srfAttach

transformName = mySrfAttachmentTransform

}

There are two key names of attach nodes;

There is the 'top' node, this defines the traditional part heirarchy structure. If you only have one attach node then it should be called top.

There is also the 'srfAttach' node, this defines the surface attachment point. The name 'attach' is also valid for this node, you can only have one surface attachment node.

You can define two other values; size and method.

'size' allows you to change the node's sphere size in the editor and has no effect on gameplay.

'method' allows you to change the physic joint type. Its values can be; FIXED_JOINT, HINGE_JOINT, LOCKED_JOINT, MERGED_PHYSICS or NO_PHYSICS. Not sure what madness you can do with this value, will leave it to you all to play.

NOTE: Attach nodes defined in this way are not animated with respect to physics and should remain static on the model.

[Greys]

ATTACH{} doesn't work, it's been bugged since release in 0.20.0. There's supposedly some way to make it happen, but I haven't seen it happen, or been able to make it work myself.

At this point you're best off using regular node_s and using transforms to help figure out their coordinates. Just know, the angles in node_ definitions are weird, it's really hard to describe, experience is all I can suggest; and node_ definitions can only be angled freely along one axis, if you try to angle it along two they can only exist at -1, 0, and 1, on either.