Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: Omniscaper on February 09, 2005, 11:20:11 am
-
I'm almost done with LOD1 of the Galactica. It has a sane 5000 polygon mesh. This was modelled via splines, hopefully an approach that will allow for easy mesh reduction via spline subdivisions.
The mesh is not yet optimized. There are still wasted polygons on flat planes.
Once optimized, the ribs will be modelled next.
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/MyBSG.jpg)
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/MyBSG2.jpg)
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/MyBSG3.jpg)
-
Cool.
So when are you going to finish the Viper. (aka give it a nice cockpit, fix the textures, etc.)(alternatively you could let me play around with it :D)
-
SO MUCH on my plate!!!!
-
"alternatively you could let me play with it :D"
-
What is spline modeling ? I'm only familiar with box and poly modeling (which I prefer).
-
spline modeling is moving around curves to create the form of your model.
-
Spline modelling...
Modeling with curves (controlled by bezier control handles). The advantages of this method, allows a person to make a low polygon model, but allows for the computer to account for curve data which can automatically create smoother/higher mesh detail by increasing subdivisions dynamically (following the curves you make).
-
Is this also known as nurbs or is that different?
-
Nurbs, is similiar but instead of single curves, you deal with patches.
There are only 229 splines in the screenshots. Everything else are subdivisions composing the 5000 polygons.
Splines are abstract mathematical vectors which guides the formation and curvature of the absolute polygon mesh.
Did that make sense? I know I'd be confused.
-
and you call yourself a novice, bah!dont call yourself that you make the rest of us look bad :D
-
People who actually take 3d modelling courses, puts my skills to shame. I've been following this form of graphics since 1998, first using VERY CRUDE 3d programs and progressing 3dsmax. 3dsmax is the easiest 3d modeling package out there IMHO. Its quite easy to get into but a ***** in time consumption.
Spline modelling is no different than working with Adobe Illustrator, with an added 3rd dimension.
-
Found this interesting comparison between the old and new Galactica. After seeing, I'm further convinced that the Galactica is not a new ship, but a heavilly overhauled and refitted vessel.
(http://www.boomspeed.com/berruga/comparison_bsg.jpg)
-
Yeah I was just reading the BSG Miniseries magazine that I got as a present once. It has some good stuff on the CGI. The artist that designed it understood that it had to harken back to the original design but he also wanted it to look like a real fortress in space...but 40 years old too.
It does have that look.
I'd be interested to know if the other Battlestars, the ones lost in the fighting, looked different or not. Was there one design that was used over and over...new on the inside, similar or virtually identical on the ouside?
-
Originally posted by Omniscaper
3dsmax is the easiest 3d modeling package out there...
I take offense at this statement, I have never been able to make heads nor tails out of it.
-
Well, consider yourself offended, because it's easy as hell. :p
-
Maybe it's because the only tutorials I can find are designed for someone that has a modicum of knowledge in the arena already. I just load the builtin tutorials, mess around for 45 mins and don't remember a thing.
I need something that is for a complete, n00b level, doesn't know a polygon from a hole in his head novice. I wish I could afford some damn books, I don't do well with online learning.
-
start with DoGA first, that's all I can recommend.
But definately dont start with TS.
The damn buttons are all over hte place, you cant find a thing, and the damn models stays in the centre of the view no matter how much you try to move it somewhere different! :mad:
-
Originally posted by Singh
start with DoGA first, that's all I can recommend.
But definately dont start with TS.
The damn buttons are all over hte place, you cant find a thing, and the damn models stays in the centre of the view no matter how much you try to move it somewhere different! :mad:
Uh? That´s a good one! News to me, and i´ve been using it for a bit now.
:p
PS: You need to click on the "object move" icon. That allows you to move objects about.
-
Truespace's interface is only marginally better than your typical Battlecruiser game (insert DS references here); designed by drunken monkeys and completely counterintuitive. That said, Truespace's interface can be dealt with, though only with lots of patience. Oh yeah, and it's navigation system sucks balls.
-
If I'm ever going to model, its either through DoGA of i can...'acquire' 3DSMax soon......
-
*notices how none of the MAX jockeys have posted useful or witty comments about the complete lack of n00b-friendly tutorials*
-
You learn through tinkering and playing with the program's features. I look up tutorials when I have specific questions and needs. It all depends on the individual. Some people need EVERYTHING spelled out for them before they act. Some people like to get their hands dirty right away and learn through trial and error. But even those people take the time and invest in application lesson books. The question is, do you really want to learn the freakin program?
When I say 3dsmax is the easiest to learn, I say that out of experience. All together I've learned how to use Topaz (DOS based uber old skool), Raydream, Pixel 3d, 3dsmax1-6, Lightwave 5-7, and recently Truespace 6.5. Of all these programs 3dsmax has the friendliest GUI and isthe most intuitive to use.
-
Heh, if I had a Dollar for every model I've fubared in the making.....
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Maybe it's because the only tutorials I can find are designed for someone that has a modicum of knowledge in the arena already. I just load the builtin tutorials, mess around for 45 mins and don't remember a thing.
I need something that is for a complete, n00b level, doesn't know a polygon from a hole in his head novice. I wish I could afford some damn books, I don't do well with online learning.
Get the G-Max tutorials. Do them in order. By the time you finish the Aeroplane one, you'll be all but sorted.
-
the funny thing is that I've learned truespace w/o tutorials and w/o having used any 3d prog before, just clicking around, and I found its interface pretty easy, intuitive and elegant. The position of some of the advanced tools may be confusing, but most of them and all the modelling tools are in the most rational position, or pop up only when you really need them. And you can COMPLETELY edit the interface....eh.
The key features of truespace are the easyness of changing the viewpoint and the on screen editors. In the few other proggys that I tryed I've never found the same simple and fast solution to change the view, which lets you, in combination with the on screen editors, to work almost only in the perspective view at full screen.
The flaws of truespace are others IMHO, expecially the absence of some very important tools which exists in almost any other programs, not to mention the way it generate new faces when you add manually new edges... I know how it works and how to do it, and I still have problems sometimes...
Compared to truespace, I found (in the 10 minutes I used it w/o reading tuts) max4 much harder. Well, not exactly harder, but I couldn't find my own way with the workflow.
I guess that I should try it again
-
Agree with you 100% Karma. I've tried both Truespace and 3DS Max and despite reading and doing a whole bunch of tutorials for max I found the TS learning curve much easier.
I may have had trouble learning MAX but I'm not stupid enough to try to blame the program for the fact that I can't wrap my head around the way it works.
I just wish the Max users would understand that some people find a different style easier because quite frankly I'm getting sick of hearing people say that TS is hard to learn to use or that it's crap. If you can't use Truespace then the defficiency is with you as there are lots of people who have picked up Truespace and learnt to use it without a huge amount of trouble.
If you want to suggest that people try MAX before Truespace then fine but the attitude I seem to hear is don't try Truespace under any circumstances. Which when I look at all the models made by people who say they can't model with MAX but manage to make great models with TS sounds like just about the most stupid, arrogant thing I've heard in f**king ages.
If people try MAX and find it too hard it's more sensible that they know that some people find MAX hard but Truespace easy so that they try both. Constantly harping on about how hard TS is to understand means that if someone can't understand MAX they'll decide that there's no hope for them and just give up.
-
BTW Omniscaper, Democles X is planning on releasing his BSG stuff so you might be able to use that.
-
Lib: get GMax from www.turbosquid.com/gmax and download the tutorials at the same time. Look at the bottom left. Do those, and just have a play around. :)
Omniscaper: Nice model. :nod: I'm not really a fan of BSG design (what little I've seen of it) but that's looking promising. Once the details are on there it'll look great :)
-
Been there, done that, not simple enough.
Pretend I'm one of those guys that has to have everything laid out and don't know any jargon, better yet, don't pretend.
I get confused switching back and forth betweent the tut and the program. I tried doing the mace tut one time(the first one I think) and after I finished it, I tried to duplicate it on my own. It was a joke. I fround myself wanting to rotate the model to distribute things easily, like in Blender(you use the Num Pad to rotate the "camera" anywhere in a sphere around you're point of focus) and I couldn't. That is stupid, I don't care how many features it has, if I can't manuver the camera easy and often so I can see what the hell I'm doing whats the point? That's my largest complaint, the complete in accessability of the damn view system, indeed many of what I consider to be simple and requisite controls, without being a damn, m*****-****ing super god-like advanced master of all things MAX.
-
You have a scroll button on your mouse right? Hold down alt, click and drag with the scroll button. If you don;t have a scroll button, all the camera movement controls should be in the bottom right.
-
Lib: Seriously? Is that in Gmax or full 3DS Max? Because the Gmax interface isn't complicated at all (at least for the basics). To rotate, you just click the rotate button in the corner and drag in the viewport:
(http://www.hostedimage.com/is.php?i=44939&img=gmax-controls.jpg)
D'you want to learn it? Cos I could help you if you want (If I can learn, I'm positive you can) - I'm no master, but I managed to pick up the basics pretty quickly, so I can get you started if you need someone to take you through it. :)
EDIT: Apologies for the poor quality image. Hostedimage seems to crapify them quite nicely.... :blah:
-
Like I'm going to know what those are picking up the program for the first time.:doubt: I picked blender up and in 5 mins I knew the exact button to push on my keyboard perform all the basic actions for building a mesh:
Rotate model == R
rotate view == numpad 4,5,6,8,2
zoom view == numpad +,-
Select individual points == click the poly with right mb
group selection of polies == B once for a banding box, B a second time for a brush(new versions default to selecting the front polies only)
Extrude selected polies/points == E, use the mouse to move, constrain with Ctrl or shift+ctrl
Scale selected polies == S and move the mouse, constrain with ctrl or shift+ctrl
Duplicate == D
Mirror == M
These controls are simple and beyond obvious.
The reason I wanted to learn MAX is because it's a more far reaching program. You learn it and you're set, no matter the game or project.
But it's obviously too complex for one such as I who has limited mental capacities to apply to it. Besides, online instruction and self-guided learning doesn't and hasn't worked with me. I lack the motivational willpower. Would it surprise you to learn that I almost never study? I never had to as a child. And now, as an adult(biologically and chronologically), I don't have the will to sit and read anything that's not a work of science fiction for long periods under my own direction. I think I managed a couple of hours about a year ago.
-
The thing is, those aren't even more obvious than the Max interface. Move, rotate, and scale selected objects are buttons on the top panel, rotate/zoom/PAN (which you haven't mentioned, but which is extremely vital) are controlled from the view controls box in the lower-right corner, selecting points/edges/polygons is done through a the modify object panel, and allows you to select whether you want to work with faces, edges, or points (you can also do volumes, but that's somewhat less useful), you just have to be in the modify tab instead of create or animate or whatever. Group selection is accomplished by either holding down control and clicking additional objects, or by automatic band-box selection. There's a tick box in face/edge/point select mode that allows you to include or exclude backfaces. Extrusion and beveling, as well as a multitude of other tasks, are subfunctions of polygon/edge/point manipulations and so are contained within the menu on the right. There is a specific mirror button on the top bar, and duplication is performed by holding down shift when trying to manipulate (move, scale, rotate) a selection or object. That you were able to gather all you needed in five minutes in blender is atypical; generally it takes just as long to learn it as it would Max.
-
After becoming comfortable with Max, I cannnot stand TS.
I would recoomend anyone struggling to switch to keep at it. You won't regret it. Oh, and check out 3d-palace.com for some excellent video tuts (most with commentry).
-
I learnt Max straight after learning Blender. I found the transition pretty easy; all you really need to do is learn how to make models with the same technique as before.
-
Originally posted by StratComm
That you were able to gather all you needed in five minutes in blender is atypical; generally it takes just as long to learn it as it would Max.
That doesn't stop me from feeling like a fool when I DL GMax(6 times in the last 3 years) and can't make heads nor tails of it using the damn tutorial that was written for someone with lots more experience modeling than I have.
-
BTW Gmax is exactly the same as Max 5 but without the rendering tools.
-
I like max b/c it doesn't explode as/right before you save, or anywhere else (yet..)
stupid max question...is there any way to create a line between two points just by selecting those points, and then pressing something?
-
selecting two points and clicking connect. :D
-
It's probably in some esoteric menu somewhere...:doubt:
In blender you select the two points and press F
I want to learn MAX, I really do. But when you blokes tell me it's so simple and easy and I sit down and get frustrated because it's a *****, I get pissed off.
-
Originally posted by Anaz
I like max b/c it doesn't explode as/right before you save, or anywhere else (yet..)
stupid max question...is there any way to create a line between two points just by selecting those points, and then pressing something?
Select 'edge', select 'create', click twice where each end goes - I think (don't have Max handy to check).
-
You know, it frightens me to discover Cinema4D is apparently simpler to use then Max...
-
Which features does tS lack? I didn't work with other 3D-progs so far, so I'd like to know what I'm missing (this spline modeling sounds as if it's one of those... :( And though I find the tS interface quite good, I'm pretty sure there are many things it could need [mostly what I'd consider bugfixes; but tools surely as well]; and editing free-hand is virtually impossible , I mostly work by adjusting the point coordinates - takes up loads of time :( ) .
-
How about good rendering tools?
-
Anaz, actually both Raa and aldo are correct about how you'd do it. That's the thing about Max; there's almost always 2-3 ways of doing something, if you look hard enough for it.
EDIT:
Originally posted by Liberator
It's probably in some esoteric menu somewhere...:doubt:
In blender you select the two points and press F
I want to learn MAX, I really do. But when you blokes tell me it's so simple and easy and I sit down and get frustrated because it's a *****, I get pissed off.
If you keep telling us how great blender is you're not going to get much sympathy for your difficulties in learning Max, as you're showing an attachment to the way you're used to doing things instead of a willingness to learn a new way.
Anyway, 'F' seems really arbitrary for that function, whereas in Max the button is literally RIGHT BELOW the vertex select button. So it's not like it's hiding from you.
-
truespace's rendering isn't bad, and anyway, who cares about rendering in a modding forum?
TS doesn't have texture baking (well there is in ts6 but it is of no use); it is missing a tool to weld automatically double verts; to connect two faces with the same number of verts (there are some plugins for older versions for that); a region/faces taper/skewer; a non proportional scaling tool; I'd like a tool to select groups of faces with the same material; the possibility to save selections properly (it is present but I never managed to have it working); a copy/paste function for properties; the possibility to move a vert/edge inside a line/face (this is hard to explain... try to create a new vert on a diagonal line and imagine that you want to move it at a certain z quote but without creating an angle.... btw there were plugin for that but it was for some older versions); a face flattener...
these are the first things that come at my mind.
-
You dudes!!! Ramamber the Galactica? You know, the one I'm modeling? Needed feedback, suggestions, alternative approaches. How the heck did this turn into a preferencial posturing for best 3d programs?
ps: 3dsmax is the greatest
-
You could probably use Democles X's Galactica once he gets around to uploading it...
-
Originally posted by StratComm
Anyway, 'F' seems really arbitrary for that function, whereas in Max the button is literally RIGHT BELOW the vertex select button. So it's not like it's hiding from you.
F == face, technically that's what it's for, creating faces in 3 or more points.
And you're right, I have a hard time divorcing myself from things, which is yet another of my failings.:blah:
-
StratComm, Liberator,
Cut it out.
DamoclesX, finished his Galactica already!? Well, if he does release an excellent model, and he gives permission for our mod to use it, this will take huge load off my shoulders.
If not, I still need flexand excercise my modelling muscles.
-
On the note of this thread's intention, I must say that you've got the shape down pretty well. It's going to be considerably more difficult to model those ribs if you're going to do it with extrusion, but you should be more than able to get it with a bit of patience.
-
I apologize, I'm just being my usual jerk self.
-
I started meshifying the splines with 3 subdivisions. This will be LOD-2:
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/MyBsg4.jpg)
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/MyBsg5.jpg)
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/MyBsg6.jpg)
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/MyBsg7.jpg)
These are not the final textures, just wanted to get ahead of myself to see what it will look like.
Polygon count:
6816 polys
-
:jaw: Holy Crap! dude that's one Amazing looking Galactica. i wonder what it'll look like with the proper Textures.
-
Once again, I have been shown how inadequate I am....
-
I think it's definitively too much for a lod2, and you are far from a lod0. IMHO you are spending too polys on the body, but I guess you still have to optimize.
-
Thats what I love about Karma, always keeping me on my toes.
Yes, it still needs to be optimized. Too many polys linger around flat planes. I changed my mind, this model will be used as LOD 1 out of a 3 detail level model because this model's dimensions are huge. Larger than FSO's Colossus. Getting distance from this ship will require either long cruising time, or faster engines (unlikely to change). I prefer to use LODS where the transition is not so obvious. I hate models that pop into higher detail noticeably. I believe this model is good to use at a distance of 10km.
By the time this lod is finished it will probably have around 8k polys (with turrets). Lod-2 I will aim for 10k polys (without the turret models)
Lod-0 will be the UBER model with 18k at LEAST. The detail will NOT go into the structure (which the foundations have already been laid out by this mesh), but will go into the ribs and flight pod detail (including BSG's lower hangar deck which would lead to her trianglular launch tubes, yes call me crazy)
BTW karma, Homeone is gonna be re-modelled using my re-flexed spline skills, once I finish birthing my new baby. I found much easier to produce higher polygon models via low polygon modelling with this spline method. N
-
mmm I expressed it bad, I meant that it's too much for a lod2 with THAT wireframe, but if you are going to optimize then the things change a bit. (but 10k for a lod 2 remain a bit excessive)
I didn't know that the galactica was that big, and since I've never seen the new show, my only reference is the old one so I can't say good or bad as a piece of artwork, I can only judge the mesh.
Anyway, from the few that I've seen I prefer, as a design, the old galactica:p
-
Though raised on Starwars design, I'll choose ribs over greebles anyday.
-
Originally posted by Omniscaper
I started meshifying the splines with 3 subdivisions. This will be LOD-2:
[snip]
These are not the final textures, just wanted to get ahead of myself to see what it will look like.
Polygon count:
6816 polys
Not so long ago, this would have been LOD0. ;)
-
God bless SCP geniouses
-
Spline are good for smooth shapes like that, but be sure to check all the angles and smoothgroups, it can do weird things from times to times, tho they're very easy to fix.
Anyway, 7000 polys for a lod? For lod2?!? Man, that's nonsense.
-
Just a word on the flight deck stuff. Bobboau recently implemented some abilities for dealing with the flight decks and added details in that area of the ship.
-
Any and all help from those geniouses are quite welcomed. Anyword on auto landing, and launching capabilities from different dockpoints?
-
Originally posted by Nico
Spline are good for smooth shapes like that, but be sure to check all the angles and smoothgroups, it can do weird things from times to times, tho they're very easy to fix.
Anyway, 7000 polys for a lod? For lod2?!? Man, that's nonsense.
Hey, I'm personally not a fan of LOD's period, but after running some test furballs with 20+ fighters and the 50k Galactica, those polygon crunching numbers turns the game to a near slide show of 12 FPS.
The 7000 poly lod1 is much less than the 18k (with deck detail)lod0. Lod2 will have 2k. I can perhaps go even further and go for 800 polys with an lod3.
Considering the size of that ship, I still think LOD's won't help the scenario by much, because you can never get that far away from her during a typical dogfight. To have 3 lod transitions spanning across 30km I think would be sufficient.
Of course I can speed up ALL fighters to have a max speed of 200+ and minimum of 100. Are there any mods that sped up their fighters, without affecting AI stupidity?
I've assembled 1932 polygon LOD3, still looks accurate (my perfectionist side is hating this)
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/Bsglod3.jpg)
(http://www.game-warden.com/bsg/staff_images/Galactica/Bsglod3_2.jpg)
Keep in mind none of these meshes have been optimized and visually nitpicked. So those poly numbers will keep shrinking.
Does anyone want to help with this mesh beast?
-
well 2k for a lod 2 sound more reasonable than your first statement of 10k:)
I think you still could cut something (for example, 4-5k for lod1, 1-1,5 for lod2 and 300-500 for lod3) but it should already work. Probably you could cut some mesh details from the lower lods using baked textures from the top one?
-
There was mods like Sushi's Velocity mod that would double the speed for the regular FS and FS2 campaigns ( mmh, wisely made, like he recaculated all the missile locking duration, etc ) I was a big fan of that, and, well, the Ai would go too fast to actually bump against anything it would just miss it, bombers wouldn't stupidely run into their target as they blow up, etc. I think the dumbiness of the AI is actually helped by a higher speed. Also makes dogfights much more... more :p
As for Lods, no matter what the main lod is, I try to keep lod 1 below 1000 triangles and the other lods are half the previous lod. Last lod has 50 polys max, I suppose. There's really no need to go overboard with polys, dunno, look at my ezechiel fighter, the main lod as a whooping 4367 triangles, wich I consider is an awful lot for a fighter, but, on the other hand, lod 1 is only 351 triangles. Passed a certain range, range that is not necesseraly too far away, polycount and curves don't really matter, you can simulate a very detailled ship very well just thanks to a good overal shape and a good map. A single rendered map, btw: I don't see what's got into :v:'s mind, using toned down tiled maps on lods is... dumb.
Anyway, really, I too try to keep it as close as possible as the main lod, I hate deleting whole details too, but, ingame, that just doesn't show.
-
I'm actually not sure if he did the Galactica, but he has done a cruiser and a couple of Viper incarnations. (he still hasn't uploaded his stuff yet so it's a moot point) And he already said he doesn't care what people do with his stuff.
-
Originally posted by Nico
There was mods like Sushui's mod that would double the speed for the regular FS and FS2 campaigns ( mmh, wisely made, like he recaculated all the missile locking duration, etc ) I was a big fan of that, and, well, the Ai would go too fast to actually bump against anything it would just miss it, bombers wouldn't stupidely run into their target as they blow up, etc. I think the dumbiness of the AI is actually helped by a higher speed. Also makes dogfights much more... more :p
As for Lods, no matter what the main lod is, I try to keep lod 1 below 1000 triangles and the other lods are half the previous lod. Last lod has 50 polys max, I suppose. There's really no need to go overboard with polys, dunno, look at my ezechiel fighter, the main lod as a whooping 4367 triangles, wich I consider is an awful lot for a fighter, but, on the other hand, lod 1 is only 351 triangles. Passed a certain range, range that is not necesseraly too far away, polycount and curves don't really matter, you can simulate a very detailled ship very well just thanks to a good overal shape and a good map. A single rendered map, btw: I don't see what's got into :v:'s mind, using toned down tiled maps on lods is... dumb.
Anyway, really, I too try to keep it as close as possible as the main lod, I hate deleting whole details too, but, ingame, that just doesn't show.
Sushi :p
One problem with the mod is that if you activated subspace drive while going fast, you ended up flying right past the portal (and then the game would end).
Mmmm, I still think I have the source files on my computer.
EDIT: Bah! His My Documents folder is locked!
-
typo :p
Yeah, your ship would go too far compared to the subspace rift, but that was the only problem I've ever had.
-
Just how big is the Galactica supposed to be?
I was under the impression that she was around 1.2 km at best. That would make her smaller than an Orion, no?
-
Galactica around 4000 feet long.
What would be the best way to have Caprica look like she's being nuked? Are the use of ani's possible with a skybox? I was thinking putting som explosion ani's underneath transpraent cloud layers to my Earth skybox ( heavily modified to look like Caprica)
-
mmm what about 3d shockwaves? it'd be a bit cartoony but you could make some relatively high poly lightning spheres growing under that cloud layers
-
Originally posted by Omniscaper
Galactica around 4000 feet long.
What would be the best way to have Caprica look like she's being nuked? Are the use of ani's possible with a skybox? I was thinking putting som explosion ani's underneath transpraent cloud layers to my Earth skybox ( heavily modified to look like Caprica)
That's a bit more then a mile...
The Galatica would come in at or slightly above two kilometers, then. Roughly Orion-sized.
-
*is wanting that 51,634 poly Galactica* :nervous:
-
51000 polys? doable in TRUESPACE! ^_^
nice model... mm.... *munches on model happily* tastes like... tastes like spahgetti :wtf:
-
Originally posted by ngtm1r
That's a bit more then a mile...
The Galatica would come in at or slightly above two kilometers, then. Roughly Orion-sized.
A mile is 5280 feet. 4000 feet is around 1300-1400 meters, give or take. The Galactica is smaller than most Destroyer class vessels in Freespace.
-
Yet, it seems so much larger and has so many more guns;7
-
does it have any large weapons, or just lots of small point defence turrets ?
-
Well, I can't say about the 'New' version, but I can tell you about the Originals sizes.
Like all Si-Fi show, the Galatica kept changing sizes, depending on which shot you used and what you used as a mesuring stick.
I won't go into details, but heres the summary:
Offical length: 600m (no chance, and has no On-Screen support):hammer:
~1.2Km long (Based off Vipers landing in bay and launch tubes)
~4Km long (based off Raiders shadows as they fly over Galatica)
~6Km long (I think this was based off comparision of just launched Vipers with side hanger pods)
Note: the length of the Viper is uncertain. The full size mock-up was ~9m long, but the miniture used in the space shots was (apprently) proportionly longer. Go figure.:sigh:
-
Originally posted by Roanoke
does it have any large weapons, or just lots of small point defence turrets ?
Based on the miniseries (Just screened here, and I am addicted already :) ) I think it'll have nukes for ship to ship.
-
Omni, cut out triangles on the landing pods, so theyre lit properly for the LOD change, you know, where the opening is, you may even want to consider putting a rectangular hole through the pod. Imagine that youre approaching Galactica from the front from a high LOD to a low LOD and from LOD2 to LOD1 or whatever, youre suddenly able to see through to the other side of the landing pod when it stops being a texture and starts being the landing pod. or from the top, you'd be getting closer, and it'd be lit like a flat plane, then you cross the LOD border and it becomes lit like its supposed to be lit.
shouldnt take too many polys, just cut out where that texture is, maybe put a rectangular hole in it, so you can see through on approach from really far away
-
1.2km (at a minimum)has my vote, though I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being larger eventually... Rememebr kiddies just like in the old series the vipers launch at an angle out the sides of the landing pods. Measure how long the tracks are plus the angles and you got the size of the bay needed , also on screen support is CANON, not book numbers. If it looks like ****e in game that's the developer's fault. If it looks good in game but people scream about canon "book" numbers then that's their fault for being anal and ruining our gameplay enjoyment...
I got that problem with hundreds of ships including Trek, Did you know the delta flyer is too big to go in and out of the bay it's stored in? One of MANY examples where a "reasonable" person will compromise a bit... Same thing with the Defiant, it's own shuttle (correct sized with visuals) can't fit through the hatch on the botom cause the book numbers are too small.