[Blender 2.79b] Triangulate the faces or not?

[Maroonroon]

Hello.
I take advantage of being "converting" my files (to use them with Korman), for trying to optimize them.
For this purpose, I would like to be sure to not make mistakes with triangulate or not the faces of the objects...
I think knowing that we need to triangulate the faces of visible objects, but do we have to do it with the colliders and regions, please?

[Tsar Hoikas]

There is no need to triangulate any faces at all.

[Maroonroon]

/scratchhead Including visible objects?

[Tsar Hoikas]

Especially visual objects... There is no need to triangulate anything.

[Maroonroon]

So, triangulate some faces was only for PyPRP?

[dendwaler]

as far as i know , you model needs tri's or quads, ....... not ngon's!
if you have een ngon then you triangulate it to get rid of it.
after that you can combine the tri's to quads again.

in blender 2.49 you could not make ngon faces but 2.79b can, don't use them.

[Tsar Hoikas]

You may use ngons in Korman as well, just beware the vertex count on export may be higher than you expect.

[Maroonroon]

ngons = more than "4 vertex" face?
And then, better not use ngons?
Is it better to use "3 vertex" faces or "4 vertex" faces? And only for visible objects or also for colliders and regions?

[dendwaler]

Well , hoikas told you that ngons are technically taken care off in Korman.Since he builded it , that is undoubtely the truth.
Personally i still prefer to avoid ngons for a different reason, more depending on your goal.
I can try to explain , but the next article can do this better.
https://www.creativeshrimp.com/ngons-tutorial.html

[dendwaler]

Is it better to use "3 vertex" faces or "4 vertex" faces? And only for visible objects or also for colliders and regions?

I mostly prefer quads , it looks better.
But a quad always consists out of two triangles, so its basicly the same.
Having said this ,it counts for alll types, visible objects aswell for colliders and regions.

Additionaly an answer to an unasked question.

When to use colliders and which type?

the game engine has to check whether or not your avatar collides with an object face, otherwise you can walk through it.
if the mesh itself is used as a collider the game-emgine has to check for a collision against a long list of faces.
The reason to use a collider is to shorten this list and shorten the processor time needed for it.

therefore you can conclude that a modelled collider makes only sense, if the vertex count of that collider is lesser than the vertex count of the object you want to collide.
So if you have an object somewhere high in the air which is not in reach for any avatar, it does not need a collider at all.
if it is a small object with many faces, then place a cube or triangular tube around it , or use the bounce type "bounding box"
if the object is square then a collider makes no sense because the collider has the same number of faces and vertices as the square object.
so a rectangulair wall inside a square collider mesh is not necessary because you can use bounce type: convex hull
..and some of the other bouncing types as well.

if you look to it this way, then it might be possible for you to simplify the nodesystem for your moving door, if you only had choosen for different collider options.