Page 2 of 2

Re: model in 3.10 not correct but 3.9 O.K.

Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 6:53 pm
by JeffR
Just to be sure, but in your last update with the side by side in the sector demo, you said that both are using the 137 bone rig. DId you up the bone count limit?
If not, go ahead and just bump that guy up to like, 140 or whatnot and see what it does.

I've been using 100 in my personal test builds, so it's not like 70 is a "go past this and she 'asplodes" limit or anything, more just for efficiency/compactness as a default setting.

Re: model in 3.10 not correct but 3.9 O.K.

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 5:58 am
by fLUnKnhaXYU
No , I had not edited the source file . I believe that would do the trick though . Thank you , Jeff .

Re: model in 3.10 not correct but 3.9 O.K.

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 6:27 am
by JeffR
Yeah, no problems. Let us know if bumping that limit worked. If so, then another approach if you want to keep the bone limit low would just be to split the mesh up into a few submeshes. the bone limit number is bones per-submesh, so if upping the limit works, then either of those approaches would work.

Re: model in 3.10 not correct but 3.9 O.K.

Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 6:32 am
by fLUnKnhaXYU
Oh , sm = sub mesh , Thanks a lot , Jeff . I,ll give that a try that with the v3.10 then

Re: model in 3.10 not correct but 3.9 O.K.

Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:13 am
by fLUnKnhaXYU
That worked , Jeff , this is 3 armatures and 3 sub-meshes in 1 model using version 3.10 . You can see the gaps between the meshes but all animations work well .
137 bones total
Image