so I can't comment too much on that version. Everytime I dip into it there's something different or new it feels.
I haven't been able to justify making the leap into it fulltime yet as I feel my workflow is better in TB1. 

since Sleep implemented support for WinXP.

Better To Avoid The Fgd
I've read somewhere that .fgds are more "complete" than .defs...
OK then, I'll use the .def instead.

Everytime I dip into it there's something different or new it feels.
Pretty much like any other program under active development... 

I'm a creature of habit. Been making all my maps in tb1 since the first day 

Wow :o i couldn't stand TB1, camera movement etc. was really laggy on my system. TB2 is buttery smooth by comparison. That alone was enough to make me take the leap. 

Never really suffered with TB1. Infact a lot of my maps were made on TB1 when my main PC was a Surface Pro 1. So I made a lot of maps on a tiny 11" screen. Plus the power of a Surface Pro isn't amazing by any stretch of the imagination.

I'm on a pretty decent machine these days and it runs just as good as before 

Only thing i miss from TB1 is the neat search bar. Saw on github sleep is reworking it for the full release of TB2, though.

I figure the more I use the beta the more help i can be to get the final product done sooner, well minus the fact i have no coding skill.

Most of my brushwork has been done in Hammer so Trenchbroom is a breath of fresh air in a lot of ways. 

a lot of my maps were made on TB1 when my main PC was a Surface Pro 1.
Wow... I'm impressed! 

Just setup compile settings, and I was wondering what the "export map" step does. I assume it must do something other than just copying the file. Is this some kind of pre-processing step before sending the map to qbsp? 

 

 

J.A.C.K or Worldcraft or Hammer exports it from rmf,vmf,jmf etc. into a .map file format before sending it to qbsp.exe

Trenchbroom works with .map directly so doesn't need an actual export.

Bonus:
Rmf - Rich map format used by Worldcraft and older Hammer versions.
Vmf - Valve map format used by newer Hammer versions (Source engine)
Jmf - Used by J.A.C.K and its predecessor Jackhammer (same thing, was recently renamed)

There are alternate x versions: rmx, vmx, jmx that are used for autosaves if you have it turned on. 

Hi!

I'm using build "2f3c498 RelWithDebInfo" on Windows and I'm trying to get Trenchbroom to launch Quakespasm, but alas, I get the error message "W LoadWadFile : couldn't load gfx.wad".

I set Quakespasm's game path in Trenchbroom to
"C:/Users/Esrael/Desktop/Games/Quakespasm"
and did the following engine configuration:
"C:/Users/Esrael/Desktop/Games/Quakespasm/quakespasm.exe"

Why does Quakespasm refuse to work, even if Trenchbroom finds all the entities from the id1 pak files just fine while I'm editing the map with the above mentioned settings? Am I doing something wrong?

Mind you, Quakespasm does work, when I launch it outside the editor. Of course, I could test my map this way, but I want to be able to use all the features of Trenchbroom. Has anybody had similar experiences? 

@Esrael

its an issue with the betas.

https://github.com/kduske/TrenchBroom/issues/1428

If youre comfortable with building from source, the issue has been fixed but hasnt been released yet. 

That might be a bug in TB. The "couldn't load gfx.wad" error means that the engine couldn't locate the id1 directory in the current working directory.

As a workaround, try adding "-basedir C:/Users/Esrael/Desktop/Games/Quakespasm" to the "Parameters" text field in TB's Launch Engine window. 

Wow, thanks for the fast response guys! =)

The workaround seems to be working like a charm, so in the mean time, while I'm waiting for the release with the bug fixed, I'll just use that. 

Thanks Ericw! First time I've seen that mentioned! 

anyone willing to walk me through building TB from source?

Ive never built from source or anything in this order.

Downloaded Visual Studio and everything, but I think I dont have the proper versions.

Got to this point and had to give up.

CMakeError.log just goes on and on like this:

"Compiling the C compiler identification source file "CMakeCCompilerId.c" failed.
Compiler: cl
Build flags:
Id flags:

The output was:
The system cannot find the file specified"

command prompt is telling me about vcvarsall.bat, which has to do with visual studio?

:cries in corner: 

Is there any chance of seeing a new beta release any time soon? It's been a while since the last one, and although I imagine the goal might be to hit full release with the next update, there have been a lot of changes since the last one. For some of those, it's fixing bugs that I myself created and would rather like to enjoy the fruits of having the fixes.

I know I could compile it myself, but as I understand it the process is quite complicated due to the need to compile several different things seperately and so on. I'm not really that level of user unfortunately, so yeah... It won't kill me if I have to wait until full release for TB2, but a new beta would be nice. 

Agreed on the build being complicated. Tried to tackle it and had to give up.

Fortunately, Ericw came to the rescue with a recent build.

https://ci.appveyor.com/project/kduske/trenchbroom/build/2.0.0-appveyor-65/artifacts

now, GO MAP. or...yknow. hangout. up to you. 

Still working on TB, but at a very slow pace. I'm swamped with RL things. 

It's totally understandable that you're busy SleepwalkR, and it's even easier for me to be cool with that thanks to the ericw and the link mukor posted :D 

Is it okay to submit bugs that are from that interim build that was just posted? I found this but I'm not sure if it's okay to create an issue for a 3rd party build of the program. 

I'd say submit the bug, I'll take the blame if it's an invalid bug for some reason ;)

(That build I made is the current latest code from release/v2.0.0 and it's built by TrenchBroom's CI system, so there shouldn't be anything weird about it.)

FWIW I think I hit that bug of things going off grid as well, haven't had a chance to investigate it though.. 

Does anyone use TB on macOS 10.8 or below; would you care if TB required 10.9+? 

Personally, I try to avoid using 3-point clip whenever I can. I find it not very intuitive and often end up clipping out the part that I wanted to keep. It's quite common for me to have to do multiple tries to find the correct camera angle that will make the clip tool perform like I intended. In many cases it's faster to just do it in vertex mode.