Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: DahBlount on October 07, 2013, 10:10:20 am
-
So decided to start working on a destroyer and so far it's looking pretty good.
Unlike my first release, this will hopefully look a little more detailed as I am including a shine, glow, and normal map.
NOTE: This thread has basically turned into a how to make crappy Capships and then completely redesign them until they look marginally good.
Axem, it's pronounced New-Ah-Da
-
Looking nice. That's an esoteric design for a Terran ship; presumably a shock-jump/artillery destroyer?
-
Spot on! This thing is designed to jump in, fire off enough ordnance and beam weaponry to glass a small moon and quickly jump out. It can however survive prolonged engagements.
-
Good idea for a ship, but I foresee problems with balance. As I see it, it'll have to have limited side armaments, as well as limited firing arc for the artillery beams. I see it like a tev Narayana. A killer from the front, but a flanked Nuadha is a dead Nuadha.
-
Good idea for a ship, but I foresee problems with balance. As I see it, it'll have to have limited side armaments, as well as limited firing arc for the artillery beams. I see it like a tev Narayana. A killer from the front, but a flanked Nuadha is a dead Nuadha.
I see what you mean, it still needs to be tested though and as you can probably tell I have not even added the armaments to the model.
In the mean time I still need to figure out how to ship more than two textures with the model (ie. Normal, glow, shine) from Blender.
Turrets will be time consuming as well.
-
nice idea, nice design so far
keep it up
-
In the mean time I still need to figure out how to ship more than two textures with the model (ie. Normal, glow, shine) from Blender.
Unless I misunderstand your problem, you don't need to add the additional map textures in Blender. As long as they're named Nuadha-glow, -shine, etc. and you put them in the maps folder, PCS2 will recognize them.
-
In the mean time I still need to figure out how to ship more than two textures with the model (ie. Normal, glow, shine) from Blender.
Unless I misunderstand your problem, you don't need to add the additional map textures in Blender. As long as they're named Nuadha-glow, -shine, etc. and you put them in the maps folder, PCS2 will recognize them.
In my experience you have to assign materials to each lod and debris, and a texture to each material, before exporting. If this isn't the case please tell me.
-
You have to add the materials in Blender so that the model references your diffuse texture. Now, if your texture is called "Texture1" then FSO will automatically look for "Texture1-glow", "Texture1-normal", etc., so you don't need to add those in Blender and will take any compatible file extension, like png and dds.
-
Well now, that simplifies things quite a bit. Expect an update tomorrow at 6PM GMT.
-
In the mean time I still need to figure out how to ship more than two textures with the model (ie. Normal, glow, shine) from Blender.
Unless I misunderstand your problem, you don't need to add the additional map textures in Blender. As long as they're named Nuadha-glow, -shine, etc. and you put them in the maps folder, PCS2 will recognize them.
In my experience you have to assign materials to each lod and debris, and a texture to each material, before exporting. If this isn't the case please tell me.
It is the case. To do this successfully, in the Collada exporter GUI, you need to have 'export material textures' selected. Each image you want to apply needs to have a material, and each material then needs a relevant texture set to use the model's UV data.
-
Okay, so to set this straight finally. If I have the texture "text01.dds" assigned to detail0 as a material texture, it is the ONLY texture I require to be assigned, the game will automatically assign "text01-glow" etc. to the model as long as the base name before -glow is the same as the material texture?
-
Okay, so to set this straight finally. If I have the texture "text01.dds" assigned to detail0 as a material texture, it is the ONLY texture I require to be assigned, the game will automatically assign "text01-glow" etc. to the model as long as the base name before -glow is the same as the material texture?
After conversion, and it the text01-glow is in the proper folder... Exactly :P
-
Well, that wraps that up. The model is almost finished (ie. basic shape is finished), now comes the most difficult part of modelling capships I suppose.
It's a good thing I did my homework, except I still don't know if I parent subobjects to detail0 or fuse them to the hull.
-
Either one is valid, both options work well and have no noticeable in-game differences.
-
Well now. Thanks for the info.
-
So before I screw something up, I want to know if I have the turrets set up correctly.
The orange dots are the turret base and turret barrel's origins.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Not sure if that's the correct way or not. I've always thought it's 'turret01-base' and 'turret01-arm' but that didn't auto-setup for me, so I don''t know. Might I suggest applying edge-split modifiers to your ships so you can get smooth surfaces by selecting everything and pressing W and selecting shade smooth?
-
Holy Crap, that looks so much better. Thanks.
Upon closer inspection of the turret tutorial I believe the origins are fine.
I believe I can go full steam ahead now.
-
I don't think PCS2 actually cares what the turret arm (or the turret base, for that matter) is called as long as its parent is the turret in question. I always went with Turret01 -> Turretarm01. Obviously, it's best to call it something recognisable so it's easy to tell PCS2 what turret01's arm is when you're setting your turrets up.
It is worth noting that I set up all firepoints in PCS2, rather than using empties in Blender like I think Esarai does.
-
I don't think PCS2 actually cares what the turret arm (or the turret base, for that matter) is called as long as its parent is the turret in question.
It doesn't matter at all what the arm is named.
The base, however MUST contain the substring 'turret' to be recognized as a turret. PCS2 doesn't care, but FSO does. But you can go really stupid things 'antidistabilishmenturretenism' and it'll work...given you don't run into string limits.
-
Ah, that makes sense.
-
I think I'm going to stick to turret## and turret##arm.
In the mean time, all flak and laser turrets are added. Check the P3D embed.
-
Not really sure how to describe it, but turret placement right now is....weird? Try downsizing the turrets a little bit and removing some of the centerline turrets, I guess.
Seems like what I'm getting here is that it's a bit cluttered.
-
Well crap. Looks like I'm gonna have to make the dreaded multi part on an angled surface.
-
Here the turrets are, scaled to about 75% of their original size. I also deleted two of the center line turrets and spread them out a little bit more.
Yes, I know they are floating, I just need to know if they are spaced better along the Y-axis now.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
:yes:
You fixed whatever I kept getting when I was looking at the turrets at their original size. Not sure about the angled turrets, but yeah.
Edit: I noticed you updated the P3D with smaller turrets. Looks great!
-
Well that's a relief. I'm working on adding beam turrets (ie. single parts) right now. Should be an update some time tomorrow morning (relatively speaking).
-
To be honest I would like see rather more detailed base model. It looks like in too-early stage of modelling to be textured/turreted. Anyway I like the shape, it's very exotic and extraordinary :yes: .
-
All I can see is Funnels. Funnels everywhere. That's no destroyer, it looks more like a tiny little flying turret recursively possessing turrets itself.
-
I am sorry, but I agree with AoD's sentiment. It could really use more work.
Try making a sketch and add more details (No matter how "terrible") and make several derivatives. You'll learn there are many things you can add.
And don't worry, you can take all the time you want. You don't have any sort of pressure... :nervous:
-
I hope by detail you mean greebling and more complex hull/armor shapes because I had several drawings made of it and this was the most logical to make in Blender. THAT I can do. I had originally planned on relying on normal maps for detail that would be too complex in Blender but if I work at it, I can make it work eventually, albeit at an extreme time cost (trying to make certain recesses and raised portions are difficult at this point in modelling).
I don't understand what you mean by funnels. Do I need to change the engines and remove the bow cannons?
I was originally hoping to release this before the contest extension was up but it appears that the almighty FreeSpace gods are thinking differently.
-
I was originally hoping to release this before the contest extension was up but it appears that the almighty FreeSpace gods are thinking differently.
The contest extension only applied to ships that had been announced as started - but not completed - prior to the close of the original deadline. This was to allow people like Esarai, Oddgrim and others to finish - basically recognizing that they'd put in a tonne of work but had been beaten by the clock. While you're obviously working hard on this too, given that you didn't announce it before the cut off, it unfortunately wouldn't have been acceptable for this particular contest anyway. So don't worry about your release date, and instead focus on making the model as good as you can.
With regards to the model specifically, I actually really like the shape - it really seems to capture the FS2 Terran design ethos - the wings evoke the Hecate, and the basic, shape-focussed design isn't an unrealistic projection of how Terran design might go - a sort of Orionesque design methodology but projected forty years into the future - a sleeker version of Inferno's EA stuff, maybe.
If you're looking for places to add detail, I'd suggest looking at the bridge and wings first, as they're discrete parts that can be worked on somewhat independently from the rest of the model. Also, consider detailing up the turrets and fighterbay - these are the areas that players are most likely to spend time very close to, after all. That sort of squashed-cylinder between the two prongs might also be a place to add some cool greebling too. Anyway, target the low hanging fruit, then take the work you did there and apply it more broadly over the rest of the hull. But don't touch the basic shape! It's really good. :nod:
-
Ah well then, I guess there's no real need to rush then.
Thanks for the recommendations, I can see what you mean though.
The cylinder (reactor core for the top bow cannon) actually was not complete yet upon further inspection and I am working on detailing the wings better. Basically, expect more detailing of poor regions.
-
Yeah, it's a really cool design. Thumbs up all round so far. Just a tiny niggle, is it possible to add a few pictures of areas you're working on for those of us looking at this on a phone?
-
Ask and ye shall receive.
Wings:
(http://i.imgur.com/tOOWwnr.png)
Main Cannon Reactor (ie. cylinder) :
(http://i.imgur.com/2miXoua.png)
Turret type to be detailed:
(http://i.imgur.com/gtXzrPX.png)
-
Nice job there! I doth approve.
-
Here is an update on the cylinder thing (We really need to give it an official name).
(http://i.imgur.com/MNArYvt.png)
Edit: What if I removed the bow cannon and made the cylinder some sort of super beam emitter?
-
Something like Sajuuk? How cool would that be!
-
I don't have any objections to it, but I would stick with the bow cannon and leave the cylinder as the reactor. That said, it's your ship design.
Although, the reactor being the cylinder makes for an interesting way to make missions against it. Blow up the reactor before a friendly ship gets on firing range to disable the main beam (which I see as being inset into the hull a fair bit).
-
Hmm the question remains if I could make it a subsystem. Make it an engine and name it as reactor probably?
Edit: Based off the pictures, what do y'all think I could do to improve the detail of the ship?
-
Well...there's a lot of details that can be added at this point. Things like armor plating designs, sensor gubbins, greebles...quite a fair bit.
-
In my original design sketches, it did have several sensor probes on the front prongs I just couldn't find a way to integrate them. There are some designs on the armor plates but those will be part of the normal map mostly. I could add some recesses along the barrels of the turrets to put glows on and there are for sure going to be glows on the main hull.
-
Okay, decided to trash the current wing design as it is starting to look out of place.
-
Here is a possible derivative.
(http://i.imgur.com/0Ha6yY0.png)
-
I must say I liked the winged version better.
-
Interesting... I thought people would like this version better. My main problem is the lack of possible details I could add to the winged variant. If you could make suggestions that would bring me back to using the winged variant.
-
Flight pods. Make the wings into hangar sections, ala BSG. Crapton of details you can add then.
-
Flight pods. Make the wings into hangar sections, ala BSG. Crapton of details you can add then.
I will attempt to convert the wings into hangars. Might take some heightening and a few other scale edits but it is definitely possible for me to do.
-
Quick update on the hangar wing.
Looking good so far, I believe I could fix this up into something nice.
(http://i.imgur.com/iMyktl6.png)
-
Looks pretty good. I loved the hangars in BSG, looked awesome there. I think it looks practical and cool here to.
-
Yeah after thinking about it, there is some greebling I could add to the inside of the hangar. I think right now the outside matches the rest of the ship fairly well so I'll leave that alone for now.
-
Also, hangar pods, nameplate. Now that I think, it's a great place for potential detail.
-
Nameplates are gonna be fun. Only question is: How do I create a zone for them to be placed?
So yeah, here is one detail I plan to add to the hangar bay.
It's such a beautiful pipe...
(http://i.imgur.com/1Zo5ayg.png)
-
Nameplates are pretty easy. Just make the nameplate a separate object, and as long as the texture for it has -trans appended to the end (like blahblah-trans), that texture will render transparency properly.
-
Uhh still doesn't make sense to me. So it is a subobject appended to the main hull?
-
Can be. But render order issues mean that it's best unified with the main hull object and just given its own specific -trans texture. Best advice I can offer is to just look and see how other models have done it. The MVP Fenris is a good one to look at IIRC.
-
Okay that sounds reasonable. Now to figure out how to give specific vertices a trans map. I guess just make the map with only the vertices in question?
-
I'm not sure quite waht the process wll be in Blender, but in Max what you need to do is pretty simple.
Create a new plane, ideally in the proportions of your nameplate image.
Assign it a planar UV map, and apply the nameplate map.
Position it wherver you want on your main model (The detail0 submodel).
Attach it to the detail0 submodel - attach is the Max word, I'm not sure what the Blender one will be, but essentially it makes them the same submodel.
But if I were you, I'd do this later, once you've already applied your main detail0's textures. It shouldn't need to be a priority just yet.
-
I understand now.
In Blender we call merging two objects into sub models "parenting". Rather the plane would become a subobject like a turret.
-
No, that's the point. It shouldn't be a child subobject of detail0, it should be part of the main detail0 mesh, otherwise you can have rendering issues where you'll be able to see through the whole ship (though not always).
-
Okay then. So I would just add it and position it then.
-
Update: It's been several days since the last update and I've mostly been working on new concepts for the way my turrets are designed. Here is one possible iteration.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Update here with a proposed VLS system and little bit more detailed turret. Would VLS systems count as a turret?
(http://i.imgur.com/VC6RWfp.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/soBefUh.png)
-
Yes, the VLS systems would indeed count as a turret. The UEFg Narayana and UED Solaris from Blue Planet have plenty of them, if you want an example to go off.
-
Thanks. So what do you think of the turret designs now?
-
I think I liked them better before the new turret design. The raised thingy on the back looks...strange. Unless you're intending to move the barrels onto the raised thingy?
-
That was not my intention. I just really need to improve my modeling overall until I become (hopefully) as good as Esarai or Dagger... Maybe someday.
In the mean time, do you any specific recommendations as to what I could do about the turrets?
I thought about making it similar to an IRL battleships big guns and then adding some greebling to make it more detailed.
-
Personally, I think your current turret design is alright.
-
That was not my intention. I just really need to improve my modeling overall until I become (hopefully) as good as Esarai or Dagger... Maybe someday.
In the mean time, do you any specific recommendations as to what I could do about the turrets?
I thought about making it similar to an IRL battleships big guns and then adding some greebling to make it more detailed.
Hmm, okay. I'm not really sure to recommend at the moment, so go ahead with the IRL battleship thing, and let's see how it goes!
-
The model is looking great :yes:. I'll just say that you need to think more on the overall shape rather than individual details. For example, the back looks a bit odd because it seems that the ship just stops and then someone glued the thrusters. As an example, look into Hades' Hemera (http://p3d.in/68J6W) or Aesaar's Erebus (http://p3d.in/60bLX) for two different approach on that. And don't get fooled by the details and eyecandy, the overall shape is very important. So concentrate on the flow and shapes, then add detail. But always keep in mind the overall shape and flow, so it won't look as if a tone of cables was just straped to the surface of your vessel for no reason. The only way to get good at this is to see other peoples work and think on the way the used shapes, skipping the details.
-
The model is looking great :yes:. I'll just say that you need to think more on the overall shape rather than individual details. For example, the back looks a bit odd because it seems that the ship just stops and then someone glued the thrusters. As an example, look into Hades' Hemera (http://p3d.in/68J6W) or Aesaar's Erebus (http://p3d.in/60bLX) for two different approach on that. And don't get fooled by the details and eyecandy, the overall shape is very important. So concentrate on the flow and shapes, then add detail. But always keep in mind the overall shape and flow, so it won't look as if a tone of cables was just straped to the surface of your vessel for no reason. The only way to get good at this is to see other peoples work and think on the way the used shapes, skipping the details.
I think I understand what you're getting at. Expect big update in future.
-
Thanks for the comment, Dagger. I was going to go ahead and edit my post with something more in-detail, but you ninja'd me. Ugh, I can't think lately in regards to giving advice/criticism. :blah:
-
So I think this might be a bit better than the original aft end. Thoughts?
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Way better!! :yes:
-
Splendid! :yes:
-
So I got some public opinion (Some personal friends and classmates) on my turrets. After some collaboration, I have a new base design that can be worked on. Thoughts?
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Overall, it's freaking awesome. Can't wait to see this in a campaign.
-
I'm guessing I can keep this turret then?
Now I have some questions regarding textures, should I put the UV maps from the hull and turrets all into one texture (and if so, how)?
-
For a capship like this, you'll probably need multiple textures, covering different sections, and so, multiple UVmaps. I think you'd be well advised to just make a separate UVmap for the turrets.
-
That's what I figured. Capships like the Hecate and Orion use multiple tile maps and they are applied to specific regions of the ship, so I am stuck using a texture for each kind of turret as well as the hull.
I'm pretty much gonna get started on UV mapping right now since I don't see any arguments against my current turret layout. Full steam ahead!!!
-
You should be able to put all the turrets into the same UV layout and texture.
-
Yeah I did a render and when I assign the textures to the main hull as a single material, all the textures (that I've made so far) get rendered properly across any subobjects with the same Smart UV Layout. There will still be quite a few textures, I'm guessing around 6 diffuse. Thankfully I will only have to make one glow, shine, and normal map. 9 textures is a terrifying amount, don't you think?
-
You do not need 6 diffuse maps.
Could probably get away with 2, 3 tops : 1-2 for the hull (perhaps one for the debris), and one for all the textures, (each with their respective glow/shine/normal), so about 9-12 textures in total (3-4 base textures - what you see in PCS2). If your UVs don't fit well, either use a larger texture, or pack those islands better.
You don't really want to use a diffuse texture without its accompanying shine/normal maps, really - it will be noticably lacking especially next to ones that do.
-
That leaves me with the question of how to fit multiple UV maps into a single texture. In Blender for some reason it is impossible to just UV all the sub objects at once.
-
You using an automatic UV or something? (that's horrible, automatic UVs suck)
Not that I know anything about how blender works but I don't see why you couldn't do it manually.
-
No, I always adjust UVs personally.My problem is that Blender doesn't read subobjects grouped together as one object. Basically you have to UV the hull, turrets, and turret arms as desperate maps.
-
fuse em then split em back up (then duplicate turrets and turret the thing as necessary)?
-
After some looking around, I believe that is pretty much spot on because UV data is preserved over images, so I could make the sub objects into a single object and then UV map as one object. What you end up with is a texture that contains all the UV data of the objects as one piece but when you reseparate them, the maps stay in the same position on the texture with the same dimensions.
Basically, I have a lot of work to do. No big deal though, it was going to be a painstaking process anyways.
-
yeh, uvmapping is long tedious and boring
and isn't to mentally stimulating as well, it's kind of like, the most boring part of making models
its no surprise why many people just stop at a complete mesh and then sit around waiting for other people to UVmap for them, etc.
-
And then no work gets done.
-
What I do is bake AO or something onto the texture and then use that to guide my placement of other objects' UVs. Blender is supposed to have a 'draw multiple objects' function in the UV editor, but for some reason that function does not work. Infuriating.
-
For UV mapping different objects into one UV there's a new addon called Texture Atlas included since Blender 2.68.
Instruction on the 2.68 release notes and/or blender wiki.
-
It's little bit late for all this. Already have the texture started in GIMP.
-
Nevermind, strange magic is afoot with the (failed) texture. I'm currently in the middle of learning how to use that Texture Atlas. I'll let you know how it goes.
-
Okay, so Texture Atlas does not work with parented sub objects. Whenever I try to unwrap it fuses them into one object which is not what I need.
-
When you hit "start manual unwrap" it will fuse all your objects but hitting "finish manual unwrap" will separate them again even with parented objects. It works well for me. However, do not start manual unwrap if some of the objects on the map are hidden... it'll probably crash blender.
-
Well crap. Thanks for letting me know. Big help. Lettuce see what happens now.
How does one AO Bake to the Atlas UV?
-
The easiest way is to bake the objects one by one. Just remember to uncheck the "Clear" case after the first one so you don't loose your progress. Another way to do it is to export everything by pieces and use GIMP or Photoshop.
-
So I would end the unwrap and then re select everything individually and Bake?
-
The heck is this crazy pixel stuff?
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
That's usually a hiden face, a double face, a hiden but rendered object and/or bad mirror modifier.
-
They are from non-mirrored objects and they aren't hidden unless something went wrong. How do I check for double faces?
-
Go to edit mode, remove double vertices and move things a bit to see if you can spot them in wire mesh view. You should also check the normals.
-
Okay did that, Only the VLS had doubles (removed 6), all normals were consistent (Out). No idea what could be wrong, It only does this to the VLS, Turret base and barrel, and the Beam turret.
-
Dunno. Upload or PM me the .blend, I'll check it out if you want.
-
Nevermind, I have mirror modifiers applied to them and I need to remove them.
Update: I present a working AO Bake!
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Yep, you had a mirror modifier. You also have an impresive quantity of faces that are neither quads nor triangles. That could give you some troubles while exporting, but if it works fine, leave it that way.
-
Yeah, it's little mistakes like that which really teach you how the program works. In the mean time, what do you think of my concept texture?
(http://i.imgur.com/t4omWfm.png)
-
Does anyone know how to anti-alias in GIMP? I am getting some very bad aliasing when I apply the texture to my model.
-
*ppl shouts
P3D! P3D! P3D!
you heard the ppl.
-
P3D updated
-
I'm liking the aesthetics of your model very much, I don't understand the hole on the underbelly though. Is it some kind of hangar entrance?
-
Yeah, it is a fighter bay. I'm trying to fix the edges of the lines on the texture as they look very jagged. Any suggestions?
-
Higher rez maps maybe?
From what I understand your base texture file should be somewhat large, and for final product you reduce the quality or shrink the image.
-
So I make the texture in something around 4096 and then scale down to 2048?
-
If you use the brush tool in gimp, it is antialiased by default, contrary to the pencil, which is not antialiased (but that would make the line jagged even when looking at it in GIMP).
Also, Rodo is right, if your texture resolution is not high enough, you can get some jagged edges. You should increase the texture size (going from 2048 to 4096) or the size of the mapped part in you UV map (though that would also imply redoing your UV map which I wouldn't do if I were you). On a second thought, 2048 feels a little small for a capital ship so go ahead and increase it.
-
There is a problem. Gimp is giving me crap about the image being too large (over a certain data limit, around 300 MB) whenever I try to scale it. I will redo the lines with brush and see what happens.
-
I've made textures with several layers at 4096 and GIMP prompts me saying that the texture is too large. Still, it can handle it rather well on my system.
-
Well, I went with scaling the image and it looks much better now.
-
You can set GIMP to work with larger image files somewhere on the settings, it will not bug you again about size if you pump the max value a little bit.
-
Yeah I found it already and bumped it to 650 MB. Now all that's left is to make a good texture. I'm not that good at this.
-
Can I get some feedback on my texture? I know I'm being a little bit demanding but if you guys have something to say then say it or you'll have to deal with blue glowy stripes all along the hull and stuff.
I find there to be a lack of racing stripes in FS2.
-
Your basic texture looks alright to me. When making an FS2 Terran ship, I'd advise keeping the color scheme somewhat conservative; nothing really flashy. It's your model, and other people might have different opinions, but this is my 2 cents.
-
I really have no idea for texture suggestions, tbh. Given it's shared "wings" with the Hecate though, I'd recommend giving it a similar texture - the metallic bronze-green and such.
-
Something more like this?
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Looks good so far in regards to color, though the texture is a bit...basic? I imagine you only just started on it.
-
i liked it more when it was white and blue, a lot
-
I don't remember a blue texture, just a grey thingy. :confused:
EDIT: Oh, the blue stripes.
-
I agree with fightermedic, your first grey and blue texture was so much better colorwise.
-
Well it's good thing I always keep spare texture files until things are finalized. I can continue edit the white and blue texture.
-
The original colors fit the model better. But you couldn't really pass it off as a GTD unless you had an entire fleet to go with it since the original color/texture didn't fit with any existing FS2 Terran design.
The new colors does help with that, but you probably have to work on paneling and maybe remove of those white stripes. (An idea would simply be to paint "tiles", as in, tilemaps, via a custom brush over areas to get the paneling and details while making it fit nicely with canon/established designs)
-
Yeah. TBH after playing BP:WiH it looks more like what the UEF would do if they got their hands on stolen beam cannon and flak gun tech from the GTVA.
While it may not seem wise, I could just change the designation seeing as how it is going straight into my mod.
-
Okay, so this might seem a bit strange but as I was driving today, I had this great inspiration. I'm going to be changing somethings. Namely this model will forever be known as the old, crappy version of the Nuadha.
-
Sure, finishing models is overrated anyway.
-
Well it's not that I'm not finishing it. It will most likely be repurposed.
Tbh I couldn't tell if that was sarcasm or not.
-
Bump to let everyone know my best redesign is on the p3d.
-
Nice! It looks considerably more like a capital ship and less like a Fin Funnel. :P
-
Thanks! I've still got quite a bit to add but I believe it's coming along well now.
-
TBH she lost all of her orginality :(. While I liked the idea of smoothed Agressor-class destroyer, now she looks pretty generic for a GTVA destroyer.
-
Tbh I've never even heard of the Agressor until today, the similarities are... disturbing. I will change somethings.
-
Got to agree with Bet, the previous shape was fresh and somewhat innovative.
You could actually think about giving particular roles/special abilities to the previous model, now I can just think about giving it a regular carrier/destroyed role.
-
Hmm. I just suck at modelling capships I suppose. I like my old model as well but it looks like a cheap attempt if anything. I could try to redo it but don't expect much.
I would like to know what technique people use to get the basic shape started because right now mine seems to weird to be used on a capship. Currently, I start with a basic block and do loop subdivide in spots that are important connection points or are getting extruded. The current p3d is the best attempt using that.
-
Maybe you could go for a mix between the unusual original design and the generic-looking current one; preserve some of the "space gun" feel of the old one, while keeping the overall design somewhat closer to regular GTVA capship aesthetics.
-
It's a possibility.
-
Here is a mixture between the old and new.
-
Personally, I approve of this direction. :yes:
-
Nice. The big spinal-cannon layout isn't even necessary now.
Hm, I wonder how it would look if you "Hecate-itized" it with a double-bridge and added the blocks around the "wings" as detail...
-
If I did that, it would be getting to look something like a Raynor/Hecate mix with some personal flare, which may be a good thing, I'll get right on that.
-
I like the double bridge idea, but don't make it as loud as the Hecate bridge. Less Hecate-y more Venator star destroyer bridge, just shorter. A lot shorter. No higher than the current Raynor design's bridge. But it's only my opinion, and until I can model like Aesaar, or Steve-O, or Oddgrim, or any of those great modelers, my opinion ain't worth a dog's former lunch. It's your model, do with it as you please.
-
May I point something out? The 'wings' can be really used to enhance the 'aggressive' feel of the ship. Currently, they are rather static, absolutely horizontal as they are.
Tilt' em down, by about 20 degrees. This will really change the image of the ship
Flipping them back to front, with the wide end forward and the thin end back would probably add a feel of 'speed' to the ship as well. Not that sure about that - try it and see what works.
Just my 2 cents, since you've been asking about ideas.
-
Enioch, I like your idea, p3d updated.
-
Better, if may say so myself.
-
Concept looks good.
However, its creating some smoothing/lighting errors the way you did it. Might just be p3d, but if it isn't it's definitely a major problem.
On closer inspection, same thing seems to be happening with the tail. I would recommend making them entirely separate objects just sitting on the hull rather than trying to have them joined in, since there is absolutely no reason to "boolean" all the parts together like that for a manifold mesh - FSO does not require it at all, and you can save polies and reduce the potential for lighting/smoothing error.
This sort of "bad boolean" technique (I know it might not be a boolean) is what causes much of the lighting/smoothing errors on many models - for example, the very fist iteration of the FD Vexor. I cannot advise against it enough.
(http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/1276/manifoldu.jpg)
(image shamelessly stolen from FSF's shipbuilding tutorial)
-
The warping isn't noticeable in Blender. I will work on making the mesh better though to avoid any future problems.
-
Your ship is not symmetrical... why aren't you using a mirror modifier? It'll decrease your work twofold :p.
-
I am using a mirror modifier...
-
Then there's something wierd going on in p3d, because when looking at the mesh it clearly isn't... maybe it's just an triangulation or exporting thing. Back to the model, I really like the doubled bridge. Gives the ship an even more distinctive look.
-
Okay. I'm going to start making the model more complex because I want it to look more like an HTL model than a 10 year olds work.
-
I like it quite a bit. It's very good.
-
It's gonna look even better when I'm through with it.
-
Got some work done today during my lunch break. Here's a preview of the bottom prong for now.
[attachment deleted by an evil time traveler]
-
I'm assuming the thing in the middle is a big gun?
-
Nope. It's hopefully going to be a functioning EM Catapult. Droid803 put something similar to it in Dimensional Eclipse.
-
So, a big gun that shoots fighters ?
-
Put bluntly I suppose it is. Is there anything wrong with that?
-
So long as it remains an option for the Nuadha to use the catapult fighters at enemy capital ships, I see no problem. :pimp:
-
I can only imagine. You're out of torpedoes so you just strap some Helios warheads to a fighter and launch it at a Ravana.
-
I prefer the idea of a BFL: a Big Freakin' Lazor and launching the fighters from the wings. But I will always approve whatever direction you go with this model because; it's YOUR model, not mine.
-
There is always the top prong.
-
;) :D :pimp: ;7 any more emotes, ah yeah :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes:
-
Thanks. I've actually got the big cannon all figured out. You're gonna love it.
-
Bigger than the Raynor's? Death Star levels of blowing stuff up, ala RotJ?
-
Thinking of making it only able to fire on Destroyers and Juggernauts.
-
I like that a lot right now.
-
Yeah. The thought came to me and now I may even go so far as to make animated mechanisms for when it charges up. Is there something like a "when weapon is charging, activate animation" sequence I could use for that?
-
Yes, but only for singlepart turrets.
You want 'weapon-firing' animations (check out the animation code article in the wiki). You will also need to create your own weapons, with the 'wait for animation' flag, so that they fire after the animation is done and not while it s happening.
-
Hey everyone, sorry about the long wait, been preparing for finals week and whatnot. I have a fancy new update for you guys. This is the new top section I have been working on. Got some WIP armor plating on the engine blocks right now and the "wings" will be added soon.
-
I recently upon some inspiration for this ship, so I'm starting to work on it again.
Forward Cannon Redesign:
-
Nice to see that this project's still alive. Cannon looks fairly good, though the emitter looks a bit small for a super heavy artillery beam cannon.
-
Everything is all relative, just wait until you see it actually on the hull.