Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: Raptor on November 27, 2004, 08:15:13 am
-
Well, after dragging my feet for ages, I finally got my GTD Hera (formally Saturn) destroyer UVmapped, and have begun texturing this beast.
THIS IS A WIP
(http://img22.exs.cx/img22/6027/HeraTex01.jpg)
(http://img123.exs.cx/img123/9117/HeraTex02.jpg)
(http://img22.exs.cx/img22/2629/HeraTex03.jpg)
(http://img91.exs.cx/img91/5051/HeraTex04.jpg)
So far I've really been concentrating on the sides, doing the windows and details, like escape pod launch points, external hatchs, the lifts on the bridge struts(the vertical lines of blue dots) etc. The engine nacelles are seperate submodels.
By the way, apart from the maneplate, the whole ship is one single UVmap.;)
-
Excellent !! And without texture, it seems pretty good. I can't imagine when you'll texturized it , i'll say O_o
-
Promising. UV-mapping; or specifically drawing the textures; a capship is a pain the arse, I've found, so be prepared :D
-
Love the shape of the thing. Pretty!
-
As with the Saturn, I may want to customize the textures for my own use (not a mod) how hard will it be? (as before the mapping was in main sections, engines, deck, bridge ect...) Will this be harder to alter if it's mainly one map?
Just out of curiousity... ;)
Looks incredible though!
-
:yes: You're fortunate you have a relatively simple base design to begin mapping from. Try UV Mapping a Vasudanish corvette. :p
-
Just as a heads up, I might not be able to show updates until next weekend, so bare with me.;)
GRG, well I'm not sure how it will turn out. I might add basic textures to the final release (like the ones Lilith produces), with a few required things, like the spacing of the decks. Be warned though, the map I'm using for my main work is a wopping....
5120 x 2560:nervous:
TS6 can't handle that, so these screenies are using a half size one.
-
Great. Will this ever be released when done?
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Be warned though, the map I'm using for my main work is a wopping....
5120 x 2560:nervous:
TS6 can't handle that, so these screenies are using a half size one.
Most video cards don't support more than 2048x2048, AFAIK. So you will more than likely have to size them down for use in game as well...
-
You might as well use several textures than a big one.
-
Make my ATI Radeon all in wonder 7200 with 32mb explode why don't you? (kidding) Sounds great! I'll be upgrading hopefully in the next 3 YEARS... (that part is no joke).... Food and rent comes first!
-
Originally posted by Raptor
Just as a heads up, I might not be able to show updates until next weekend, so bare with me.;)
GRG, well I'm not sure how it will turn out. I might add basic textures to the final release (like the ones Lilith produces), with a few required things, like the spacing of the decks. Be warned though, the map I'm using for my main work is a wopping....
5120 x 2560:nervous:
TS6 can't handle that, so these screenies are using a half size one.
AFAIK 5120 is wrong. Sizes must be multiple of 2, so
2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 8192 etc etc
most cards don't support more than 2048 and afaik none support more than 4096.
If you don't use one of the sizes above the game will slow down.
-
Looks good. Very good. :)
-
Looks good! Cannot wait
-
it lacks that undescribable 'freespaceyness', but i like it nonetheless. reminds me of a romulan/federation hybrid from star trek. dont know why...
good though :) anyone who can unwrap a capship deserves respect.
-
unwrapping = easy
drawing actual texture = firckin' hard
-
It's hull shape looks a lot like the Hades crossed with a Warlock carrier (from INF).
-
Originally posted by Grimloq
it lacks that undescribable 'freespaceyness',..
That's not necessarily a bad thing considering the quality of most FS2 capship models...
-
Without those back wings, it would be more Freespacey.
-
It's the secret love child of the Hades(dad) and the B5 Excalibur(mom)... Thank God it has it's mother's looks... ;7
Just kidding, you know I love this ship! I STILL think this should have been HADES MKII !!!
l8tr!
-
Teh desing louks Hadesish four mee, two!
:D
-
Originally posted by Lynx
That's not necessarily a bad thing considering the quality of most FS2 capship models...
you know what i meant :hopping:
the wings make it look like something out of star wars or something. wihtout them, it olooks quite nice.
srty,fingers are very cold, hard to type :p
-
Hmm. Nice, so far. How about adding a "chin", like the Hecate and Deimos have? Just an idea.
-
You might as well use several textures than a big one.
That'd be harmful to framerates.
-
The mere presence of the ship in-game would be harmful to framerates, too.
-
[].[]
with taht thing, the mere presence of it in the models folder would harm framerates...
-
Wow, really sweet good work Raptor :yes:
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
That'd be harmful to framerates.
That's why LODs are for.
-
Originally posted by Lynx
That's not necessarily a bad thing considering the quality of most FS2 capship models...
This, from a guy working on a WC mod...
-
still think the engine arms should be asymmetrical (ie, lower arms shorter than the upper arms or vice versa).....
-
Originally posted by Black Wolf
This, from a guy working on a WC mod...
Don't be an idiot.
I'm not talking about the initial ship designs, but their execution. You can't hide the fact that many FS2 ship models are made very sloppy. Just check out the models in wireframe view; intersecting parts, strangely shaped faces, and the worst UV mapping and texture use I've seen in any commerical space game. Just take the original Aeolus model for example: the multipart turrets are crap, it look like even Volition wasn't able to follow it's own modeling rules set up by their engine(not a single barrel points straight resulting the shots coming out anywhere but the gun barrel) UV-mapping is screwed in places and a really really strange texturing. Every time I look at that model it feels as if someone drives a burning stick through my eyeballs. Same with the Colossus and the Hecate.
Don't get me wrong, the ships have the potential to look great, it already got better with shinemaps and those other effects, and if the high poly remodels do the models properly and spend some time on the texturing the will look good.
I like Raptors GTD Hera, for one because he UV mapped the ship so that you can give the body an individual paintjob instead of just tiling textures. This will make the ships surface look more varied otherwise it'll look most probably dull with the same texture repeated all over like with normal tiling techniques. Another thing is that he has drawn the windows for each individual section. If you just use a normal tiling texture for the windows, some windows are always cutt of and twisted looking, which isn't the case here.
If you don't believe me just compare the Fenris with the Aeolus. Those ships look like they are from different universes. Sure it takes more time to texture a ship in a way like the Fenris, but in the end you have something really cool looking instead of a lump with some repaeating textures thrown on it.
Get it, dude?
-
Originally posted by Lynx
You can't hide the fact that many FS2 ship models are made very sloppy. Just check out the models in wireframe view; intersecting parts, strangely shaped faces, and the worst UV mapping and texture use I've seen in any commerical space game.
As you would normally never see the ships in wireframe, intersecting parts don't matter (V were working to a schedule don't forget). Plus, if the heirachy is correctly set-up, intersecting parts works perfectly well. I've noticed both Bobbaou and Dark used intersecting parts to make a whole rather than a single obj.
I don't think the UV is so bad, but the txtures are quite nasty.
-
Originally posted by TopAce
That's why LODs are for.
Wouldn't help in the slightest. Lower LODs with multiple textures will still slow down the game more than lower LODs with a single texture.
WMCoolmon is correct when he says that a single texture is better than several as far as frame rates are concerned.
-
Yes, but people prefer higher res textures over performance. If you ask me, Raptor should use only one texture, because I prefer performance myself than prettiness.
-
I think a single 2048x2048 texture counts as high res personally.
-
Ah. Execution rather than design. Gotcha.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
I think a single 2048x2048 texture counts as high res personally.
For a ship of that size? The SWC had a texture of the same size for our ISD model. It looked blurry, because it was the sole texture for a 1.6 km long ship. I don't doubt that a texture of that size is enough for a cruiser, but a larger ship will look blurry if you get close to it.
-
Nobody is forcing you to use Raptor's ship, so stop complaining.
The answer is simple: Upgrade or die. If you cannot upgrade, do not use the ship.
-
Since superdetailing is already in the works (another superb thing from Bob) I think detail textures are also possible - Bob already discussed the feasability of the idea.
So in a sense tiling and mapped textures could be mixed for Jugernaughts creating a better overall effect.
-
Originally posted by Eviscerator
Nobody is forcing you to use Raptor's ship, so stop complaining.
The answer is simple: Upgrade or die. If you cannot upgrade, do not use the ship.
That's not that simple: People can force you to use high-poly models. These people are project heads who insist on you using the high-poly ship. For a FREDer like myself, it is vital to use the exact same stuff that will be in the final release.
-
Project heads of what? Campaigns?
-
Obviously.
-
Whatever. With so many things going on, of course it is obvious. :rolleyes:
I still do not see how anybody can force you to do anything.
If you are going to volunteer to work on a project, is it not your responsibility to insure that you have the tools and resources (like a good comp) to do the job? Why yes, I think it is.
Therefore, complaining about the work of another modder, just because you lack the capability to use his work, is both useless and silly.
-
You don't get what he's saying. If the project lead of a campaign makes it so that the campaign uses the super-detail ships, and doesn't provide a low-poly alternative, then if you want to play that campaign, you will have to use the super-detail ships.
-
So don't play the campaign.
Or get off the mod team, if that's much of a problem.
-
It is impressive how quickly this project went off-topic. ;)
-
@Lynx: This coming from a WC modeler? Dear god, man, have you seen the errors in some of those models?!
@Woo: Very, very right. Normal capships can be a pain in HTL if they've got a lot of textures... that thing would knok my framerate to about 5... when it's normally about 30.
-
Let's see some big missiles coming out of those engine pods.
-
Originally posted by ngtm1r
So don't play the campaign.
Or get off the mod team, if that's much of a problem.
How'd you like to sit around, hearing about how great mods like Inferno or BWO, or even how awesome SCP is, and know that your comp could never run it. You are basically alienated from the community. It's a *****.
-
Off topic? I think not. The discussion at hand directly affects the topic of Raptor's wonderful ship.
Striker: I agree, it IS a *****. But on the other hand, you have to keep up with your hardware to keep up with software outside this community. REAL developers are not going to hold your hand and wait around for you. No, they are going to do everything possible to put out a state-of-the-art piece of work (and often fail, but I digress). Why should this community be any different?
To expect otherwise is totally unrealistic.
-
Actually, it IS totally realistic to think that (for a commercial game developer). Why do you think PC games are just NOW starting to be able to compete with console games? We had the power before, why did we never use it? Because game developers had to curtail their usage of new technology, to keep their games runnable on older systems.
Why is it realistic to think this only for a commercial developer? Because commercial developers have to reach everyone: that's their bread and butter. So if they dont' reach the low-end crowd, they'll cut out half their profits. However, a mod project, while it would be nice, doesn't have to do it because he doesn't have anything particularly important, at least monetarily riding on it.
-
Originally posted by TopAce
Yes, but people prefer higher res textures over performance. If you ask me, Raptor should use only one texture, because I prefer performance myself than prettiness.
It is, however, a monumental pain in the arse to manage a single extremely hi-res texture, not least in terms of the space it takes up in memory when you are editing it (including the layer details and the modification stack in photoshop, for example). It becomes very difficult to organise it too; it's easier to maximise the space use ( simply have more 'room' to arrange small maps into position) and to a degree to ensure uniform shading, but it's also a lot more difficult to actually keep track of what texture area is on what part of the model.
The last capship I made uses 3 1024x1024 & 1 512*512 'templated' map and an additional 512*512 tiled map (plus a 512*512 map for the turrets. I made a simple compromise between overall texture size, texture numbers and the ease and efficiency of creating said textures.
(Even at that, it's not especially high-res in game; i.e. not 'pin sharp')
Now, what I'm working on - in general - at the moment is targeted to be as close to 'cutting edge' as possible. If people can't run it, it isn't my problem; my problem is getting the best visual quality of mod ingame, that can run on my PC.
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Actually, it IS totally realistic to think that (for a commercial game developer). Why do you think PC games are just NOW starting to be able to compete with console games? We had the power before, why did we never use it? Because game developers had to curtail their usage of new technology, to keep their games runnable on older systems.
Why is it realistic to think this only for a commercial developer? Because commercial developers have to reach everyone: that's their bread and butter. So if they dont' reach the low-end crowd, they'll cut out half their profits. However, a mod project, while it would be nice, doesn't have to do it because he doesn't have anything particularly important, at least monetarily riding on it.
Just NOW beginning to compete with consoles? I think you have that the other way around. PC games commanded the *lion's share* of the market as well as technological advancement until very recently. It is only recent market shift that has pushed the PC to the back seat in earnings potential for games. The numerous layoffs and dismantling of over two dozen PC game developers in recent years is testimony to this.
I partially agree with you on the rest. However, I am sure you know as well as I that PC game developers never neutered themselves to reach an entire audience. You had to remain at at least the industry standard if you wanted to compete. When we made Starsiege at Dynamix, for example, we made it for mid to high P2's. We left the P1 crowd in the rain because doing otherwise would have meant an inferior product. Look at the latest games on the market now, like DOW and R:TW. If you are running a P3, forget about playing them. If you are running a card less than a 9000, forget about it again. Hell, even when HW2 can out ages ago you could run it for nuthin on a P3. That is why I upgraded to a P4.
As top-grade systems become more affordable, as they are these days, developers no longer have to cater to such a wide audience to make a profit. The evidence we are seeing coming out of the workshops proves this more than anything that I can relate on a stupid internet forum.
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Actually, it IS totally realistic to think that (for a commercial game developer). Why do you think PC games are just NOW starting to be able to compete with console games? We had the power before, why did we never use it? Because game developers had to curtail their usage of new technology, to keep their games runnable on older systems.
Why is it realistic to think this only for a commercial developer? Because commercial developers have to reach everyone: that's their bread and butter. So if they dont' reach the low-end crowd, they'll cut out half their profits. However, a mod project, while it would be nice, doesn't have to do it because he doesn't have anything particularly important, at least monetarily riding on it.
Just NOW beginning to compete with consoles? I think you have that the other way around. PC games commanded the *lion's share* of the market as well as technological advancement until very recently. It is only recent market shift that has pushed the PC to the back seat in earnings potential for games. The numerous layoffs and dismantling of over two dozen PC game developers in recent years is testimony to this.
I partially agree with you on the rest. However, I am sure you know as well as I that PC game developers never neutered themselves to reach an entire audience. You had to remain at at least the industry standard if you wanted to compete. When we made Starsiege at Dynamix, for example, we made it for mid to high P2's. We left the P1 crowd in the rain because doing otherwise would have meant an inferior product. Look at the latest games on the market now, like DOW and R:TW. If you are running a P3, forget about playing them. If you are running a card less than a 9000, forget about it again. Hell, even when HW2 can out ages ago you could run it for nuthin on a P3. That is why I upgraded to a P4.
As top-grade systems become more affordable, as they are these days, developers no longer have to cater to such a wide audience to make a profit. The evidence we are seeing coming out of the workshops proves this more than anything that I can relate on a stupid internet forum.
-
Ah, sorry no major updates this time round. Distacted (lots of new books to read):nervous:
Well, we've got a good discussion going here haven't we? Now to answer certain points, in order of post:
@Topace:As it's meant to become the flagship mod of the campain I have planned, I kind of have to finish it, don't I;)
@Raa:The mega map is really only for doing the texturing. It will use smaller maps ingame.
@Grimloq:Well, 'Freespaceyness' is defined in the eye of the beholder, isn't it? How can a group define something that is highly subjective?
@Kosh:I based the Saturn (the Hera's first incarnation) on the Hades, so no surprise that there's a resemblence(SP?)
@Getter Robo G:Thanks man!:D
@Mitac:It has a chin, only instead of engines, it houses the fighter launchbay;7
@HIG:Glad you approve;)
@Kietotheworld:No, no missile out of the engines. BUT under the prow are two ISBM (Intersteller Ballistic Missile) tubes.......with 2500 Mgt warheads;7:devil:
A little point. I'm planing on this being both LOD1 and the basis of LOD0. LOD0 would have a submodel, called 'Detail', which would include things like raised hull plates (I do know that the flanks are very flat), destroyed turrets, pipes etc...
Oh, and I got a PM from some who asked if he could use this ship in a Fanfiction Crossover! Don't who with yet, but at least it will give me an excuse to sort out the tech room info:D
-
who ripped off my ragnorok design? :D
-
Wouldn't that be Squaresoft? FF8...
-
Smallish update here. Sorry it took so long, but after I lost some work that took me a couple of hours, I didn't really feel up to it:(
(http://img64.exs.cx/img64/3766/heratex057er.jpg)
(http://img130.exs.cx/img130/1746/heratex060fg.jpg)
Done a few more deck lights, added some detail the sides of the engines, and have begun to remove the dark edging.
I'll start doing panelling soon;)
-
Holy **** on a shingle! I don't think this thing is gonna run on my system!!! I love it so much :shaking: :shaking: :shaking:
-
It's an overkill. Simply too much of details ...
-
And let the whining begin!
Ignore it Raptor. Your work on this thing is awesome. It prolly will not run on my primary system either, but I will upgrade so that it will. :)
-
Eh, I don't think it has so much more detail than other high poly ships out there to justify bying a new computer(unless all the other high poly remakes run slowly on you PC). This just shows what correct UV-mapping and good texturin can make a difference. You could take the stock model of the Hecate and with good UVmapping ad detailed high res textures(no Volition tiles since they suck rotten eggs, best no tiles at all) it would look light years ahead of the original without more polies.
-
I agree. But I was gonna upgrade anyway.
-
Originally posted by Getter Robo G
Holy **** on a shingle! I don't think this thing is gonna run on my system!!! I love it so much :shaking: :shaking: :shaking:
Originally posted by Eviscerator
Ignore it Raptor. Your work on this thing is awesome. It prolly will not run on my primary system either, but I will upgrade so that it will. :)
TO be honest I'm not sure it will run on mine either:nervous: But thanks for the praise:D
1.4 Ghz Celeron processor
340 mb RAM
Geforce 5200 FX PCI[EDIT]checked and corrected[/EDIT]
But with only -spec and -glow, the max fps I get is:
37.5 fps
:wtf:
The same as when I only had 128mb of RAM
:wtf:x2
Particles (particularly the trails from hits on hostile fighters) cause MAJOR slow down. And the system is a bit buggy sometimes:hopping:
-
Who cares? Everyone should be granted the option of an "uber quality" and a "average computer" version of this ship. Heck, all HTL bustin' ships should be offered in an "uber" and "average" version.
In other words Raptor, make one version of the GTD Hera as you are doing it right now, and then afterwards, release a second version with a much lower detail level and polycount...the second, "faster" version would be optimized so that your system runs fast with it (over 60 fps).
Don't pay any optimization notice to the first version.
-
seems odd the leading edge of the engine pods is round but the rear end is square cut....
-
but that looks cool! its a part of what makes this ship so l337.
EDIT: ONE MORE THING about the advantage of releasing two versions of this ship:
The first version (the giga high polygon one with no attention paid to framerate) would be suitable for use as a BENCHMARK between people's different systems. FreeSpace 2 OSP is so sensitive to video card and CPU arrangements that the presence of a high poly ship can determine whose rig is better.
Plus, as video cards and CPU's get better, we won't have to redo this ship to improve it, we'll have a high polygon one waiting for us to "grow into" with our gaming technologies. It's only going to get faster, so we might as well plan ahead, eh?
As for the second version I propose, yes, that one would be designed for use on general FreeSpace 2 campaigns and the like and as such would be dumbed down in detail to be fast.
-
Okay, new pic, testing out various ways of doing the armour plating. PSP7 user. Opinons please.
(http://img149.exs.cx/img149/3166/heratex077ul.jpg)
I would import the tech description I've written, but it's just too LONG;)
-
Simple textures rule!
-
Don't worry Raptor, there is no such thing as too much detail.:D Well, maybe Lo-mac, but keep up the good work.
I give it Three :yes: :yes: :yes: Thumbs up, but sadly I only have two.:sigh:
-
I'll stick my neck out and say embossed.
-
I think the Embossed area looks better. The Edge Enhanced area just looks horrible.
-
I'd say embossed too.
-
Same here: Embossed part of ship looks better
-
*does the victory arm pump thing*
-
Thanks peps. I was leaning towards the embossed look too.
I've had a look back at my second stab at texturing this beast. Now I know what I did before, I should be able to the plating better;)
-
Out of those options, embossed for sure; but I think you could play with it further and extend the depth of that texture. Give it some more character, perhaps add some more overlays.
-
Yeah, but the tone overlays shouldn't be too dark and not too much contrast to retain a flat, metallic look for the plates.
Volition tiles are a good example how you *shouldn*t do things like bringing out the edges of structures too much, overly roughening up the plates making it look like cobblestones. The best tile is those used on the Deimos though even they are not great.
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Actually, it IS totally realistic to think that (for a commercial game developer). Why do you think PC games are just NOW starting to be able to compete with console games? We had the power before, why did we never use it? Because game developers had to curtail their usage of new technology, to keep their games runnable on older systems.
Why is it realistic to think this only for a commercial developer? Because commercial developers have to reach everyone: that's their bread and butter. So if they dont' reach the low-end crowd, they'll cut out half their profits. However, a mod project, while it would be nice, doesn't have to do it because he doesn't have anything particularly important, at least monetarily riding on it.
They're more than catching up with console games. PC Doom 3 is so much more impressive than the XBox version that it's not even funny. The XBox version has NO normal mapping at all and vastly inferior lighting and detail.
-
Originally posted by WeatherOp
Don't worry Raptor, there is no such thing as too much detail.:D Well, maybe Lo-mac, but keep up the good work.
I give it Three :yes: :yes: :yes: Thumbs up, but sadly I only have two.:sigh:
I once played a Doom level with over 25,000 linedefs and 3,000 monsters (the map was called Deus Vult) that made my Athlon 2700+ and Radeon 9200 beg for mercy, so I disagree about there never being too much detail.
Even worse was this map that had a tad fewer linedefs and sectors but was much smaller in the physical size of the play area (so the linedefs were more densely bunched together) and was filled with scripting, ambient sounds, and moving **** that made my comp run like a slideshow.
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Out of those options, embossed for sure; but I think you could play with it further and extend the depth of that texture. Give it some more character, perhaps add some more overlays.
I'm planing that for LOD0, there will be a submodel, made up of lots of small bits, that would add extra detail. Things like raised hull plates, hatches, etc.
Latest hull plating work. Reworked the plating. Still needs more detail.
(http://img137.exs.cx/img137/4217/heratex080sw.jpg)
I'll see about getting the rest of the hull like this before doing any other detail. Getting those lines to go around the edges will be hard though...:nervous:
-
Hmmm, 24 hours and no replys....:sigh:
Forgot to mention this yesterday. What would people say to the idea of this ship having partial shielding, covering vital sections of the ship (turrets, engines, hangerbay, etc...)?
-
i like.. and nice model, reason i didn't reply, 'cuz i haven't noticed it until now.. if i had, and haven't noticed ;)
-
No replies cause my only possible reply would have been exactly what I said last time. Nice work, keep going :D
-
Using the emboss tool to make those plates, eh? Cheater. I draw in my highlights by hand. :p
-
Originally posted by Raa
Using the emboss tool to make those plates, eh? Cheater. I draw in my highlights by hand. :p
True, but a) its faster & b) my PSP skills are nothing compared to others around here.
Besides, Could you handle doing all those highlights on a 5120x2560 map, by hand? I do the basic panel lines by hand, and it takes ages
-
Could I? Nope. :p That's why I never try. :p
-
Originally posted by Raptor
True, but a) its faster & b) my PSP skills are nothing compared to others around here.
Besides, Could you handle doing all those highlights on a 5120x2560 map, by hand? I do the basic panel lines by hand, and it takes ages
I did it on 4 1024*1024, 1 512*512 and a 256*256 map for a ship, does that count?
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
I did it on 4 1024*1024, 1 512*512 and a 256*256 map for a ship, does that count?
It does:D
-
Like I said before Raptor, try making multiple versions of the same ship. Performance vs. quality, or semi-shielded vs. total shielded. :)
Personally...I think it would be cool if it were entirely sheath-shielded (as in the shield is JUST above the ship's hull, enough to prevent player fighters or AI from flying thru the shields and then bombing it)...all shielded except for the engine. I wouldn't expect a sleek ship like that to have shielding on its engines cuz I'd expect a sleek ship like that thing to be nice and fast...you could state that due to the design of the engine (as new as it is) it cant shield it...
One more thing, I have a question about the Hera design...how many dock points does it have (it oughta at least be capable of docking with an Arcadia if it needs to...or docking side-side with another capship)...and where are they anyway?
-
Occasionally I would figure some ships are too big to "dock" with other things aside fom the construction yard, and from the size of the Hera I figure that's what it's shuttles are for... Am I right Raptor?
-
ATM, it has two dock points, just forward of the cruiser bay, for Argo type transports. Smaller transports will use the main launchvay under the prow, and cruiser class ships will dock in the bay underneath. So far those docks haven't really worked.
Might see if it could dock with another destroyer, but that depends on a) where the dockpoints on the secnod ship are, & b) the geometry of the second ship.
Oh, and the Hera's slated to be 2.5Km long. Larger than than any other destroyer, but smaller than a super destroyer (ie Hades)
-
I don't get it why you guys are all freaking out over Raptors ship; sure, it's detailed, but as far as I can see the detaillevel is compareable to most other HTL capships if not a bit lower. Most of the surface detail like window areas are texture only. The performance won't drop dead with that ship, it'll run fine even on most older machines.
-
I hate being the bearer of bad news, but...:nervous:
This morning I added the outlines of the polys on to my work image as a layer. Unfortunately, when I saved and exited the program (PSP 7), it merged the layer with the background.:snipe:
Now, I could possiblely recover from this, but I'm not that good. To be fair, I'm struggling with it anyway. My texturing skills suck.:(
Is there a good texturer out there will to have a crack at this?