Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: Raptor on February 17, 2004, 01:57:38 pm
-
Yes, this thread is about THAT destroyer of mine, the GTD Hera aka GTD Saturn aka Hades Mk2...
After many trials and tribulations I've decided to completely redo the mapping, using stupidly large intial textures...
I'll also upgrade the no. of polys, but I'm having trouble figuring out what to do.
If you've forgoten how it looks right now, then
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/Saturn-newlook.jpg)
quite an old picture really
Don't just say 'It's blockly'. I know this, and it is meant to be angular/faceted. It's a throwback to the Orion and other, older ships.
Comments, ideas, pointers, anything, would be helpful.
-
Textures are - um - sick... It needs a flu shot. :D
-
Looks like the spawn of a Warlock and a Hades.
-
there is a diference between angular and no detail. it does not look like an older blockier ship it looks like a new ship that was poorly modeled. and you should atempt textureing it some
-
Too too undetailed. I could never live with myself if I left square engines like that. I'd have to bump them outward or something...
-
despite the design may be interesting, she looks like if you built she with lego bricks. She has too polys too wide, with no details, and as bob said it looks more like a no detailed rather than a blocky by purpose aspect. And it's true that wide flat polys may be excused, but only if you have excellent textures, which isn't your case. Actually I can see no details from the textures at all, except for those blue things
-
MEH...Maybe I should have said before, that picture is of a TEMPORARY texture job. AND an old pic to boot. The textures will look nothing like that when its done.:rolleyes:
Let me dig up some slightly out of date pics of the new texture job I had done before starting this thread:
(http://angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/Bow1.jpg)
(http://angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/Bow2.jpg)
(http://angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/Bow3.jpg)
(http://angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/Bow4.jpg)
THIS is the sort of texturing I'm aiming for.
NOTE: Ship model was built for non-HT&L. Please bear this in mind from now on.
I started this thread in the hope that people would give me some ideas on how to flesh it out, since I'm running low...:sigh::rolleyes:
-
Even for non-ht&l, it's not refined enough, IMO. Sorry. If it's any conselation, the turrets you made for AotD were awesome. :)
-
Yeah. IMO it's TOO blocky. There's a difference between blocky (i.e. Orion) and not very detailed (i.e. yours). Just try sticking in more details. And post the new textures when it's finished!
-
Anyone else think this looks weird?
(http://nodewar.penguinbomb.com/aotd/KT/eh.JPG)
-
I like the new direction you're taking it in. Keep us updated. :)
-
Raa Tor'h
690 polys (semi trianglated) not refined enough?
Corsair
I personal consider it on par with the Hades...
KT
Two word: PLACE HOLDER
I'm begining to think that this thread was a bad idea, since there's been almost no helpful comments....
EDIT: Oh, thank you Setekh, I'll try...
-
Okay, I've rounded the engines a bit, and started adding fine details around the bow (recessing the sections where deck lights will show, rims around the missile tubes + launch bay)
Apart from the PLACE HOLDER textures, what is the main complaint? If it's the fact that the design is for a squared off look, then please give me ideas on how to jazz it up.
Nothing drastic, but try to be constructive, please, I spent almost a year and a half designing this ship,...
... it's my precious...
I may upload some new pics later.
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Raa Tor'h
690 polys (semi trianglated) not refined enough?
No, actually, it's not. Most [V] FIGHTERS have more polies than that. And pretty much ALL user-made fighters nowadays have at least twice that.
-
put large gouges into it, holes, just carve sections out at odd angles, and then exrtude some stuff. and the angles on the front need to be totaly redone
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
No, actually, it's not. Most [V] FIGHTERS have more polies than that. And pretty much ALL user-made fighters nowadays have at least twice that.
That and poly count doesn't necessarily make it refined. I could make a cube with 7000 polies if I wanted to, it's still be a cube.
I'm only trying to offer a little constructive criticism. Sorry if you're taking it wrong.
-
Originally posted by Raa Tor'h
That and poly count doesn't necessarily make it refined. I could make a cube with 7000 polies if I wanted to, it's still be a cube.
I'm only trying to offer a little constructive criticism. Sorry if you're taking it wrong.
Ok, it doesn't necessarily make it refined, but you can still do more with 2000 polies than you can with 650. And, if you're a good enough modeler, you're not going to be making a 7000 poly cube, are you? :p
-
Well, maybe I was a bit cautious about satbilty issuses...
But most :V: capship hulls are a round ~600ish
UT, wrong. Just had a look.
Medusa: 308
Athena: 323
Hercules: 331
Hercules Mk2: 407
Perseus: 420
Yes, overall they have more, but I was only talking about the basic hull, no LODs, no submodels or turrets, etc...
And yes, the most recent fighters have more polies, but they have been designed for HT&L, this was not.
Bobboau, I'm not getting what you mean about the bow. What needs to be redone? in which way?
Raa, sorry, but sometimes it didn't come across as constructive.
I admit, I'm touche about this one.
Say, I think Ommi may be intrested in a 7k poly cube...;7
-
I like what you're doing with the Hades shape.
I'd be inclined to use V textures personaly though.
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Well, maybe I was a bit cautious about satbilty issuses...
But most :V: capship hulls are a round ~600ish
UT, wrong. Just had a look.
Medusa: 308
Athena: 323
Hercules: 331
Hercules Mk2: 407
Perseus: 420
Medusa, Athena and Herc are both Fs1 ships, though. Highest poly FS2 fighter/bomber is 544 polys.
Although you can easily take the main hull into the non-SCP limits nowadays without problems. I find it impossible to be happy with the details on a sub-800 poly ship nowadays.
-
Okay, I get the point...
So a few questions:
1) what is a good limit of polys to work towards, for the basic hull of a destroyer class ship, under HT&L?
2) when using HT&L, I've heard that it auto-trianglated all models by default, so this means I don't need to in TS, right?
3) if a ship has large textures (2048x2048+) then are they scaled down in game? (thinking about using 4096x4096 maps, so each pixel on the maps = 1/4 meter on ship;) )
-
1) Under HT&L? Big, around 2000-5000.
2) Not sure
3) Don't think so.
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Okay, I get the point...
So a few questions:
1) what is a good limit of polys to work towards, for the basic hull of a destroyer class ship, under HT&L?
2) when using HT&L, I've heard that it auto-trianglated all models by default, so this means I don't need to in TS, right?
3) if a ship has large textures (2048x2048+) then are they scaled down in game? (thinking about using 4096x4096 maps, so each pixel on the maps = 1/4 meter on ship;) )
1) Depends on what you're after. Omni's Star Trek ships can be up to 10,000 polys. The limit was 25,000 triangles per subobject but it might be even higher now. The risk you run as you go higher is that some people won't be able to play the game with your ship in.
One factor is the number of ship of that type that will be in the mission. If there will only be one of those ships on screen in a campaign that is mostly non-HTL models you can afford to be a little less restrictive
2) Not only do you not have to triangulate it's actually a bad idea since it would lead to larger file sizes and longer load times. However it is worth saving the model and triangulating to check for errors in the geometry (TS tends to crash if you have any!).
3) Believe so.
-
UPDATE:
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/newengine01.jpg)
The new, rounded engine pod. Still not sure about what to do on the front of them though...
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/newengine02.jpg)
The really detailed rear of the engines.
(Excuse the lack of contrast, I'm having trouble getting good lighting in the sence:nervous:...)
Next step:
After a little more recessing of deck light areas, I'll start creating rasied mounts for the turrets along the main hull...
-
Better. The square engines are what bugged me most. Keep it going.
-
Engines nowe look very good:nod: :yes: Continue your work, i can't wait to see Saturn with details.
-
Thanks guys!:D
-
UPDATE!
Sorry, got a little side tracked for a while...
Images! (I've made parts of the detail a darker colur so they stand out...)
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail01.jpg)
Around the bow...
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail02.jpg)
This shows the mounts for the Dorsal/Ventral Pulse Cannons, the flank Point Defence Turrets, and the flank Fighter-Killer beams. The slots are meant to be heak sinks...;7
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail03.jpg)
Forward superstructure
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail04.jpg)
Cross-bracing for strength, and the row of turbolifts servicing the command section...
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail05.jpg)
Some detail around the tail
-
second set!
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail06.jpg)
Couldn't resist show these off again.:p
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail07.jpg)
"GTC Agrippa, this is docking control. You are clear to depart"
I have also taken this time to upgrade the turret models. Here are to good ones...
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail08.jpg)
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail09.jpg)
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail10.jpg)
Closer look at the detail on the forward pulse cannons...
There is more to come, so stay tuned!
-
Don't everyone post at once...:rolleyes:
I'm also considering giving this ship a 'bubble' shield, like on fighters and bombers. Please give me your comments.
-
Looks good raptor. I'm looking forwards to seeing what you can do with this.
-
Those turrets...i love them:D
-
BUMP!
Actualy, some more progress shots.
First, the new heavy anti-fighter pulse, or point-defence, turret.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail11.jpg)
The 'Business' end...:devil:
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail12.jpg)
The first try at detailing the engine intakes
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail13.jpg)
First stab at adding detail to the engine spars, akward things...
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail14.jpg)
Please post your views!:nod:
-
Did somebody already say those turrets look cool? Bah, I say it anyway. Those turrets look cool! :D
-
I love the new point-defense guns! :D
-
turretts are cool, but can't say more w/o a more general view
-
Wow, this thing is looking VERY nice. The only thing that I seem to have a problem with is the fact that the engines are in a wing-type look. It just doesnt seem all that awesome-ness looking, although I must say its only a small problem. The turret is one *****en-mofo, and I would be scared to approach it in a fighter. Nice work. :yes: :yes:
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
I love the new point-defense guns! :D
:nod: Agreed. They look like they could really kick some ass. Are they anti-capship?
-
Originally posted by Setekh
:nod: Agreed. They look like they could really kick some ass. Are they anti-capship?
Not quite;)
The three in a row earlier are pimarly anti-cap, with the big beam cannon and pulse cannon having the 'huge' flag. Both types can only fire forwads, but they will shred any capship in the destroyers path!
The barrelled turret is meant as a kinda jack-of-all-trades weapon, best suited against cruisers, but since SCP didn't really look at the turret targeting idea i put up, these guns WILL shoot at you!:eek:
The last one is, basically, a gatling gun mounting fighter grade weapons, for use against bombers, fighters and incoming torpedos (hence Point-Defence). While the standard ones use the Subach as the base weapon, these 'Heavy' turrets will something a bit more deadly....:devil: Not sure what ATM.
I'll get a overall screenie ASAP. The overall shape hasn't really changed, but I've been mainly working on the details.
-
Here we go, one long distance shot of the GTD Hera.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/Hera.jpg)
-
BUMP!
Any comments people? Even if you only think the above screenshot is a good one, Please post!
-
Well, from this vantage point it's short on that mid-level detail that Freespace ships really need. The greebling looks great, but if you can't distinguish it from a texture at medium range it's only polish. If course the same could be said about a lot of my ships, but it needs something more.
-
What you've done so far is good :yes:
Just don't stop there :)
-
Originally posted by StratComm
Well, from this vantage point it's short on that mid-level detail that Freespace ships really need. The greebling looks great, but if you can't distinguish it from a texture at medium range it's only polish. If course the same could be said about a lot of my ships, but it needs something more.
I understand were your coming form SC, but I am loath to alter the overall shape in any dramatic way...
I'll have a think about this.:drevil:
-
does EVERYONE do a four 'stalk' engine ship wth a long front?
bleh :blah:
typical
it looks good btw... ;)
-
Originally posted by Raptor
I understand were your coming form SC, but I am loath to alter the overall shape in any dramatic way...
I'll have a think about this.:drevil:
Adding in some medium sized detail need not change the overall shape. See the Design a Destroyer thread; a simple design can get a lot of moderate detail without going to the extremes of splitting every poly down to less than a meter wide.
-
turrets = teh rock.
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Here we go, one long distance shot of the GTD Hera.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/Hera.jpg)
model needs lots of work but you in good way to do it :nod:
-
dude, dont say that! Some of the guys will freak out just because you didnt include details! Hide! :nervous:
-
I was wondering wheter this should replace the orginal Hades in Freespace Silent Threat Reborn...
-
I was thinking the same thing! It looks almost EXACTLY like a Hades :D
-
Much improved from the original. Keep up the good work :)
I think that the SCP also have some sorta weapon flag that allows the barrel to spin around gattling gun style. I could be wrong though. ;)
-
Not to detract from Raptor's work, but is it woth making deatiled engine nozzles, given that there will be glows in the way ?
Same for the Guns. Will the detail be noticeable ingame ?
-
Originally posted by magatsu1
Not to detract from Raptor's work, but is it woth making deatiled engine nozzles, given that there will be glows in the way ?
Same for the Guns. Will the detail be noticeable ingame ?
Well, IF I can ever get my campain going, there will be pently of times when the engines are off-line;) Besides, others do it.
As for the guns, oh yes, the level of detail is quite noticible (to me, at least)
I notice there's been very few comments about the engine spar detail attempt. Too regular, not enough depth, what?
-
BUMP!
Okay, I've deeped the recesses in the hull for the deck lights to show though (I know it's hard to tell the differance from the screenies below but trust me they are deeper, up to 5m ingame), added a heat sink array to the rear of each of the forward cannon mounts, and finished the engine intakes.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/Hera2.jpg)
The engine detail really gobbled up polys. I MIGHT have overdone it a bit...:nervous:
Now, I REALLY need comments on the engine spar screenshot I posted before. Those spars are really the only thing left outstanding (IMHO)
-
Do you guys have any good ideas for a Vasudan Warship? I mean, this is great, and there are tons of other great Terran capital ships and corvettes and fighters, I would love to get my hands on. But, the Vasudans seem to get the very short end of the stick. I dont see any "major" Vasudan warships, that get "recognized" very much in the game. In fact, I see a lot of Sobek, Aten, and Hatshepsut, but that is the very gist of it. I see a WHOLE bunch of Hecate, Orion, Fenris, Leviathan, Deimos, Colossus (although the Colossus is Vasudan AND Terran constructed, the Terrans take credit for a lot of it) and so on and so fourth. As you can see, there are very very very few Vasudan captial ships to call their own, and the GTA fleet seems to be comprised of a massive fleet.
Once I get 3D Max 5 to work for me and I upgrade my version, then I will be happy to "make it on my own" like a lot would recommend I do. Well, I try...
-
Looking much better :D
Raptor, this is meant to be a destroyer or super destroyer isn't it? You'll probably only see one or two in a mission at a time so 4000 polysisn't really that much. Some of Omni's ST ships use more than double that. Hell Karma's Fenris used more IIRC. :D
Those engines are some of the nicest features on the damn thing. You should definately keep them that way :D
Just do the same to the rest of the ship :)
-
I also agree, it looks totally *****en...
So I'll just ignored what I said back there...
-
how about making the upper spars longer than the lower ones, or vice versa ?
-
^^^
Lower should be the longer ones, absolutely.
-
...Raptor? If you were capable of this, why on earth did you settle for the really (sorry) crappy low poly version? :confused:
-
Originally posted by .::Tin Can::.
Do you guys have any good ideas for a Vasudan Warship?.
Yep.
-
The new model's nicer but all that lovely detail on the engines is going to be occluded by the thruster glows, surely.
-
Originally posted by Raa Tor'h
...Raptor? If you were capable of this, why on earth did you settle for the really (sorry) crappy low poly version? :confused:
Cause he started this before HTL was in the code :) Like me he obviously takes ages to finish anything :)
Originally posted by SadisticSid
The new model's nicer but all that lovely detail on the engines is going to be occluded by the thruster glows, surely.
Except when they are turned off :) If he's planning any missions around the ship being disabled it makes sense to make the engines look good :)
-
Ah good, that got a responce!:D
In order of post;
Tin Can: Yes it's true people tend to do Terran ships, mainly since Vasudan ships are based around lots of organic curves, which are a (BEEP) to do right. But don't worry, at some point I have serval Vasudan Projects planed:
-New cruiser, simular role to Aeolus (I've posted a early version here before...)
-Carrier vessel, about Iceni size, poorly armed
-Possible remodelling of the Satis and Isis craft (complete redesign:nervous: )
Karajorma: Thanks, I think your my biggest fan!:D
The Hera will be a sort of 'heavy' destroyer, on the large side at 2.5km long (Orion/Hecate ~2km). It will be more powerful than any other destroyer, but a true super destroyer would have a small advantage in hull strength (because of their extra size). Those it can out run though.
What it can't outfight, it will out run.;)
Magatsu1 + Janos: The spars will stay the same length. I could say its all about balanced thrust and turning moments (I am studing engineering:D ), but my must admit I do tend to prefer balanced, symetric craft, particularly when it comes to firepower. If you look closely, you might notice that the weapons coverage is the same dorsal/ventral, and port/starboard...
Raa Tor'h: As Karajorma stated, I started this ages before HTL was in the code. Hell, I started the intail models (in a CAD system) before the SCPers even thought of including HTL. When I finished the mesh last time, HTL was still in it's early days, and buggy. I always intended to do a overhaul however....
Also, I'd best point out that I work on something when I'm in the mood. I didn't touch anything to do with this ship for a couple of months. doing other stuff. Once I focus on something however...
SadisticSid: There will a quite a few missions were the ship will be
a) disabled
b) still under construction and in the ship yards
c) a bug has developed and needs to be fixed. It's still an experimental vessel, brand new, and no ship performs perfectly straight out of the docks. Needless to say, those faults will happen at the worst possible time!;)
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Also, I'd best point out that I work on something when I'm in the mood. I didn't touch anything to do with this ship for a couple of months. doing other stuff. Once I focus on something however...
Hehheh, me too:p
-
need opinons...
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail15.jpg)
As you can see, I've recessed the faces of the engine spars. But should I model in the bracing 'rings' (like on the underside/topside of the spars), or should I just use the textures to show them?:confused:
I ask cause adding those bars to the mesh is going to be very difficult, multiple angles need to be juggled, postions and sizes need to constant, etc...:hopping:
-
Textures...
Actually, alot of the greebling you're doing could be done convincingly with textures, as it'll be hard to map most of it.
-
I know Raa, and most of the detail will come from the textures. By recessing parts of those areas, I add depth
New Sscreenies. Test fit with some of the new turrets.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail16.jpg)
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail17.jpg)
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail18.jpg)
Also added a little bit more work around the bow. More deck lights on the back face of it, while that square ridge in front of the forward cannons will surrond the ships name.
BTW, would anyone object if I started posting in this colour text?
-
Not if you don't mind me posting in this color. :p
-
Now that's a big gun! :D
-
Not at all Raa.:nod:
yep it is Kara, though really it's just a BBlue beam, simular to the BGreen Beam , but more advanced. Has better range, bit more damage, faster rate of fire, things like that. Most of the time you only see the forward element.:D
Though both it and the cannon alongside it can only hit capships, so you in your fighter are safe (from THOSE guns anyway...;7)
-
Had an intresting idea the other day...
It concerns the mounting points for the weapons along the the main flank. Up till now they would have been part of the main hull subobject. Given that they would be difficult to do a proper texture job on using any of the main textures on the hull, I was thinking about texturing them seperately.
Now, I was also planing on adding in 'Destroyed' versions of each Turret the main hull, to avoid excessive submodel use.
But my thought was this: Why not use collective submodels for each type of turret? As I currently have 28 submodels spare, including all turrets, barrels and LODs, but no debris (working to a limit of 110), I can afford to shell a few out for this sort of thing.
Screenies speak better than words.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail19.jpg)
This is what you see normally (need to texture base part).
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail20.jpg)
When turret destroyed, you see the destroyed version:nod::yes:
I might expand the area covered by the turret, but that would require remaping and texturing...:doubt:
Tell me what you think.
-
Now that's an interesting idea :)
I don't know if it would work so well with rotating objects but it may work here.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Now that's an interesting idea :)
I don't know if it would work so well with rotating objects but it may work here.
Destroyed versions of rotating stuff is stationary right? If the destroyed model completely covers the destroyed object, no matter what angle it is at, then it should work.:drevil:
Done the flak gun version as well. The domes for the muzzles are modelled in (the guns are mounted in ball and socket joints).
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail21.jpg)
Here is the sort of thing I was implying when I mentioned expanding the 'turret' submodel. The pair to the right would replace the lefthand pair, and cover the central ones. These two could then have modelled damage (gapping holes, broken pipes, etc).
Good, Bad?
-
If I were you I'd stick one of these on a cube and do some in game testing cause I've never seen anyone do damage models this way before.
It may just be that it wasn't worth the polys before HT&L though :D
The turrets themselves are pretty nice :D
-
Yes they are.
I would have to say this is a big step from the standard "destroyed" turret, where it would just make it a black lump and disfigure it. This is an awesome idea of actually adding some type of variaty to your "destroyed" objects. Paired with the decal damages though, this might prove to be out of date if Bobbau ever gets the bugs fixed.
-
I don't think decals won't replace this sort of thing. Decals are temporary and only a certain number can exist on a ship. This is more permanent.
-
Well, I acted on your advice Kara, and created a test .pof
PCS refused to convert:hopping:, but cob2pof did.
After much headaches (my copy of FS2 seems to like crashing recently..:mad::hopping: Really been causing me trouble while I'm trying to play the Inferno release...) I managed to get these.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/test01.jpg)
Intial status. I haven't a clue what going on within the yellow circle:confused:
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/test02.jpg)
Another view. Again something werid is happening.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/test03.jpg)
Turret destroyed.
I'd say this was a successful test. But I think I'll partly remake the 'base' sections to try and avoid the problems metioned before (and hopefully to get PCS to convert the model!:mad2: )
-
Looking very good. Nice work indeed.
-
Well, that was intresting...
I was about to post that my second attempt was much better than before, but PCS still refused to convert the .cob file.
I decided to run PCS one more time so I could jote down the error message incase someone knew what it meant.
But when I ran it, it converted the model:wtf:
I THINK my graphical problems beofre were due to using Cob2FS2 to convert the model, it couldn't handle faces with inside corners.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/test04.jpg)
-
I really, really like the progress you've made. Don't stop!
-
Thanks for the support guys!:D
Okay, PCS is really begining to annoy me...:hopping:
It will only convert the test object under very certain circumstances...
The block is meant to be 80m x 80m.
However PCS only converts the 1/4 scale version when the 'conversion scaling factor' is set to 1. ANY other attempt causes it to throw up this error message:
"Did tyou use something other that TrueSpace?"
'Stack overflow protection was engaged,
please correct the errors in this model (too many polygons in the same average location).'
'Compile Aborted after GenerateBSP reached depth of 1000 recursions.'
I assume someone here knows :wtf: that means? I haven't a clue.:confused:
I'd best point out this copy of PCS crashes every time I try to convert a high-poly craft (well, I sould say high-vertext craft. Anything with more that 4000 verteices/points -> crash).
-
Kazan told me the default conversion factor is supposed to be set to 20.0
Try that.
Edit: And the overflow thing could be a polygon with too many sides. You might , as a test, want to triangulize a copy and see if that helps.
-
Make it so that the shinemaps on the cannon blend in with the shinemaps of the ship.
-
All right, an update is overdue, so here it is.
After a while of not doing anything about this, I decided to try another test of the turret idea.
Main reason for delay was Hammanos(sp?) Ticonderoga had arrived, and I was, er, making a few minor changes, mainly in the turrets...:nervous: (this is why I posted that 'Small favour' thread, which no one replyed to. Not that it matters now...)
Anyway, I tested this idea of mine on my version of it (the Ticonderoga), but the differance was that the 'Base' sections were part of the main hull, rather than a submodel.
PCS converted without any problem, works fine in game. Me quite happy.:nod::yes: Needs more work, but looking good ATM.
I may not do much to the Hera for a bit, now KARMA's lovely new Hi-poly Fenris is out. I'll proberly spend ages messing around with turret arangments, and I've got another project idea spining around my head right now...
-
Personally i think the Hera looks good enough as it is. As much as I love to see hyperdetailed models, I hate it when modelers go overboard because the public keeps demanding more detail. I myself ruin drawings I make because I must add ONE MORE THING to it and end up destroying it. :(
I think the Hera would be perfect right now as "the culmination of GTVI research into the rogue GTI's GTD Hades project" :yes:
and I agree, btw, with whoever said it looks a lot like the Warlock carrier...heck, in the Inferno mod, the Vasudans built "a superdestroyer originally designed by the Hammer of Light" --- so why not a new "derivative of the rogue GTI's GTD Hades project"? it would fit right in with the GTCa Independence's fleet in Inferno. ...heh...hint hint...give the Hera to the Inferno team ;)
(im an Inferno fanboy...what can i say? :p )
-
I have to admit, these turret details will most likely be the last thing I do to it, in terms of modelled details. There there still is the issue of texturing and LODing, but over all, the work is about done.
If people ask nicely, I'll let them have it, but it is primarly for my own planed campain. I'll most likely stick up a general download. I feel that all work should be released ASAP.
I'm going to be away for a day or two, so don't be alarmed when I don't post right away.;)
-
I'mmm BACK!
And with some new screenies!
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail22.jpg)
Addational engine detail.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail23.jpg)
Divisions of the main hull.
Still need to sort out those turret related points....
-
Like I said before, its looking VERY good... :yes:
-
Alright, I am now getting annoyed!:hopping:
I just ran a test of ALL my new turrets for this ship in PCS. Just as a check.
Not one converted.
A couple came up with 'You forgot to group these objects'
Most spat out the same error meesage as before.
Guess I'll just have to remake them, again, to make sure PCS converts them...:mad::mad2::mad:
-
:hopping:
It's a pain when programs get in the way of modding rather than help the process along. Have a break, and keep at it. It'll be so worth it in the end. :)
-
Originally posted by Setekh
:hopping:
It's a pain when programs get in the way of modding rather than help the process along. Have a break, and keep at it. It'll be so worth it in the end. :)
Too true Setekh, and thanks for the encouragement!:yes:
But heres something to wonder about...
I took one turret, added the light (It's a single 'geo' turret), and split up the faces till it would work under non-HTL. PCS converted it.
I then tried two of the turrets that wouldn't convert before.
They converted. :eek2:
Then I tryed my turret test block mk 1. It didn't convert.:sigh:
After that, NONE of the turrets converted.:wtf:
Needless to say, I'm :confused:
I think I'll take a break from the turrets for a while, get the main hull UVmapped:shaking:, and concentrate on LODs and debris.
-
Yes, I know I'm bumping...
Just letting you all know of a few minor changes...
Since I've split the mesh to make it easier to UVmap, I've altered the lines a little.
Bow
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail24.jpg)
Around the bridge.
(http://www.angelfire.com/space2/raptorsnest/HeraDetail25.jpg)
Oh, and will someone PLEASE undo all the 'olde' talk nonsense!:hopping:
-
The Olde English will be gone at midnight, GST.
-
Rebuttal originating from the wisdom of Woolie Wool
The Olde English wilt be gone at midnight, GST.
And not a moment too soon!
-
I like the idea of the destroyer-cargo container hybrid.
It gives a "1980's Toyota" look to the ship.
-
Originally posted by Turambar
I like the idea of the destroyer-cargo container hybrid.
It gives a "1980's Toyota" look to the ship.
:wtf: Cargo container... CARGO CONTAINER!!??!!:mad2:
Please someone, change my title back. I am not a 'stableboy'!
Come back Bakha, all is forgiven...