I was thinking about removeing one turret which is at back of top arm and then place 2 on centrer of this arm. Then ship had 6 turrets, 2 on each arm in same place. What you think about this?Don't, or else it won't go into the MediaVPs.
I think it's awesome. Don't listen to the haters.There's can be only one hater.
Don't, or else it won't go into the MediaVPs.
those recessions make placment of the missile launchers seem improbable
Why? Maybe some explains why this strange and mist pointed placement of turrets should be saved?Because if you place the turrets elsewhere or add more turrets, the MediaVP people won't use it as it breaks mission balance.
I think it's awesome. Don't listen to the haters.There's can be only one hater.
And he hates the girders.
And still no likey girders.
DONT HURT ME
I noticed, will there be the spikes on the nose or is that being left for the Lilith
It's not really a FREDer reason. It's a FSU policy issue. With the mediavps, the retail campaign should look better, but feel and play exactly the same.Well if you can now fly into fighterbays of Destroyers that you normally couldn't because of invisible hitboxes (Orion, Hecate)... :P
Now that's the point! Personal i don't think that one turret would dealt that amount of damage to mission balance. Let the FREDers speak up.
While cool in theory, this will almost definitely lead to situations in which the arms get destroyed before the turret, and since the arms are much bigger targets, this will make disarming the cain a much easier prospect. So maybe just the front of the top arm should be destroyable?
As for the girders I like them, but perhaps if you do them a bit less regular, it will help sell the model
Because if you place the turrets elsewhere or add more turrets, the MediaVP people won't use it as it breaks mission balance.
Because if you place the turrets elsewhere or add more turrets, the MediaVP people won't use it as it breaks mission balance.
I've set to see the day when a single blob turret breaks a mission.
As has been said, it's a slippery slope. And it's definitely going to change the way the model behaves, which could break backwards compatibility with very tightly designed missions.
As has been said, it's a slippery slope. And it's definitely going to change the way the model behaves, which could break backwards compatibility with very tightly designed missions.
Meh...I play stock and other user-made campaigns with my Orion and Typhon, that have +10 turrets, and haven't really noticed any change in difficulty or breaking of missions.
You'd have to severely change the positioning and loadout for it to have any larger impact. (like adding 4 aaaf's)
Just a note: You people do know that the GTCv Deimos has two of its broadside turrets moved further back compared to the retail model right?Yes, but they weren't moved far back, only about 20 metres back. The length of how far they would be moved on the Cain would be much greater, probably ~100 metres.
That said, I don't think the girders fit. There isnt a single Shivan ship in retail or otherwise that has any girder detail anywhere. You'd think if they wanted girders they'd at least have it on the textures.I couldn't agree more, the girders just look out of place and just doesn't feel Shivan at all.
Again, Ravana and Demon. Girders. They have them.That said, I don't think the girders fit. There isnt a single Shivan ship in retail or otherwise that has any girder detail anywhere. You'd think if they wanted girders they'd at least have it on the textures.I couldn't agree more, the girders just look out of place and just doesn't feel Shivan to me.
The retail Ravana doesn't have girders, and the high-poly one is not canon so you can't use it in the argument. :PAgain, Ravana and Demon. Girders. They have them.That said, I don't think the girders fit. There isnt a single Shivan ship in retail or otherwise that has any girder detail anywhere. You'd think if they wanted girders they'd at least have it on the textures.I couldn't agree more, the girders just look out of place and just doesn't feel Shivan to me.
The girders on the Ravana are acceptable because they're used in moderation.
Spamming them everywhere is kinda...bad...
For those who dislike girder look at texture that fills part where red paint is. This texture had something similar but less scaled more regular and complexed. Girder is a skeleton for Cain which is quite light cruiser, some parts (like aft) are covered by armour some just don't.The Shivans don't build their ships with girders...
I will work at those on bottom to be less regular.
It also look like a giant utility drone in the concept art. :PThe girders on the Ravana are acceptable because they're used in moderation.
Spamming them everywhere is kinda...bad...
I agree. Maybe because there is just too much red. I also think the girder look takes away from the organic look which it has in the concept art.
The Shivans don't build their ships with girders...
Maybe a more irregular, scaled effect would do well?I would actually think that the retail textures would make for better details on the model...
Not really, girders aren't Shivan at all. They make them look weak, and the girders themselves look Terran. Plus, the retail texture looks much better and no no canon Shivan ship has girders on the texture...And yet something has to hold those "plates of armor" on the aft sections of the Demon.
Not really, girders aren't Shivan at all. They make them look weak, and the girders themselves look Terran. Plus, the retail texture looks much better and no no canon Shivan ship has girders on the texture...And yet something has to hold those "plates of armor" on the aft sections of the Demon.
I still say they're girders. Unless everything's held together by Magic Glue.
(http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/8335/addgadg.png)
I reckon they should be, so that it doesn't become easier or harder to fly between them...Right now they aren't but they will be.
It's looking very good, but, frankly, I prefer the circular missile launcher enclosures more.Then everyone's going to whine about giving it a pentagonal depression, which I still say was made just to use less polygons. I say this missile launcher is fine the way it is.
(http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m173/c914/Cain_HTL_2.jpg)
(http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m173/c914/Cain_HTL_3.jpg)
I <3 that texture. And for any dolts out there who want to claim that it doesn't look Shivan... Shivan ships have girders and pipes and stuff just like Terran ships do.Hey guess what, only the Demon has anything that even resembles girders. You're using a plural when it doesn't belong.
Heck, even Vasudan ships have 'em.Hey guess what, none of the Vasudan ships have anything that resemble girders on the textures.
(that said, hades, if you really don't like it there is nothing stopping you from customizing your MediaVP installation, like what I've done to the beam glows. Just drop the retail .pof into your Mediavp's data/models folder)Yeah, I know.
Then do it yourself. :rolleyes:
And, I don't like this at all. I hope the MVPs don't use it, as, beyond the shape, it looks nothing like the retail Cain. Yes, I would use the retail model of this any day.
It's not like it's going to use that extra turret that was mentioned, so its loadout isn't breaking Canon, which people like you seem to be so anal aboutHey guess what, it's because it may break retail's missions.
The fact there's even ships that haven't been upgraded after how many years since HTL ships started showing up in the first place baffles me.Hey guess what, making a model isn't exactly the easiest thing to do.
the Deimos should be taken out then just because two turrets were moved back.Hey guess what, the Deimos's two turrets were only moved back ~20 metres, where as on the Cain it would be ~100 metres.
Oh and it has pipes on the engine when the Retail model didn't have pipes, that must be too radical of a change as well.Hey guess what, it actually didn't deviate too far from canon as the Cain does.
Quotethe Deimos should be taken out then just because two turrets were moved back.Hey guess what, the Deimos's two turrets were only moved back ~20 metres, where as on the Cain it would be ~100 metres.
beautiful, one suggestion and that would be to use a red hint in the gaps between the girdersThat'll be done with the glowmaps.
the similarity to the SD Demon is good i think, kind of tying the different era ships togetherThey're both from FS1...
the similarity to the SD Demon is good i think, kind of tying the different era ships togetherThey're both from FS1...
The current texturing looks decidedly like advanced Terran, not Shivan. Also, little head on the end of the arm is giggleworthy.
It looks VERY FS1 Shivan. If you don't believe me look at the textures for the FS1 Shivan fighters and bombers.:yes:
As has been said, it's a slippery slope. And it's definitely going to change the way the model behaves, which could break backwards compatibility with very tightly designed missions.
Meh...I play stock and other user-made campaigns with my Orion and Typhon, that have +10 turrets, and haven't really noticed any change in difficulty or breaking of missions.
You'd have to severely change the positioning and loadout for it to have any larger impact. (like adding 4 aaaf's)
I'm talking about a very tightly designed mission. Say, one in which every individual turret on the Cain was locked (for some absurd reason, I don't know why, it's a thought experiment) rather than using turret-lock-all. You'd now have a loose turret floating about, correct?
In that sense (but a tangent thereof), might it be better to use the "black" texture while incorporating the more organic appearance of the FS2 Shivan ships? You might argue that such a measure would be a logical design transition for the Shivans... if design transitions apply to the Shivans.No, I'd like to keep the cool mechanical look of the FS1 Shivan ships faaaaaaar away from the FS2 Shivan ships.
-Thaeris
I like mechanical horrors more than the stereotypical space bugs. :doubt:I agree, the mechanical horrors just seem more inspired and less generic.
i suppose to be in keeping vasudan design should be based on or round history and legend as that has a deep resonance in their psyche (ref various cannon sources)
*And no, AT-ATs don't count.
Canonically the Vasudans have based the Tauret on the Apsu-Hek.
Read the last 10 or so posts,DonutEDIT: DROID. Yeesh, I've been watching too much RvB. :P
That is going to look very sexy with glowmaps.
Soon we're gonna have to re-HTL the deimos, sobek, etc.
Or, as a more sensible alternative, we could try to tackle everything that hasn't been done yet before worrying about whether or not older high-poly models need a tune-up. :p
Soon we're gonna have to re-HTL the deimos, sobek, etc.
Or, as a more sensible alternative, we could try to tackle everything that hasn't been done yet before worrying about whether or not older high-poly models need a tune-up. :p
'swhat i meant :p
I just... miss the pentagonal missile launchers... :sigh:Me too. I don't think that was ever meant to be irregular.
I third that motion. Pentagonal missile launchers back please.I just... miss the pentagonal missile launchers... :sigh:Me too. I don't think that was ever meant to be irregular.
Now, where are the missile launchers going to be? (They were the recessed hexagons on the sides)
To be honest, I agree. The missile launchers should be a circle, not a pentagon.I assume the arms should be curved too? And the ends should be circular? And the back should be circular?
Circles and Shivans don't mix. If anything, it would be some jagged/polygon-ish opening with a bunch of triangular missile ports in the middle. That's far more Shivan than any circle.Tear drops don't fit the Shivan aesthetic, and yet they're on the model anyway.
-Thaeris
Mmm, nope. I never actually said anything like that.To be honest, I agree. The missile launchers should be a circle, not a pentagon.I assume the arms should be curved too? And the ends should be circular? And the back should be circular?
And the Orion should actually be a large cylinder, of course.
Which being a ten year-old game, was very blocky, just like the missile launchers.
Smooth it out, blocky on smooth suddenly doesn't look right.
I must agree with Aardwolf's last point. Even if the poly count was so much of an issue back then, a hexagon or heptagon would have been used rather than a pentagon. Just look at the Argo. You can tell that the many docking ports on that thing are supposed to be round... yet they're modeled in hexagons if my memory serves me well (and it does do that...). Any shortfalling in the mesh would have also been accounted for in the texture. I'm quite certain every retail FS model follows this convention.:yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:
-Thaeris
If it's going to delay the completion of this even one second, screw the pentagonal launcher...really.And to this argument of yours, sir, I disagree!
Not worth wasting time over.
Beautiful kill, sir!
And now you will have pentagonal missile launchers in eye drop :D
End work with arm, now is time for Cain fat ass.
(http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m173/c914/Cain_HTL_06.jpg)
Edit: I was just thinking, it's not actually that bad. Just from a distance, some of the glows might look like noise more than detail. My main concern is some of the recessed areas where the diffuse/spec map seems to have a striated pattern to it
I'd tap that.
That's going to need some seeeerrriouuuuus driver forced AF to prevent it from sparkling.Don't worry, computers will catch up :P
That's going to need some seeeerrriouuuuus driver forced AF to prevent it from sparkling.
But who cares? Wow.
It takes a lot too much artistic license for my likingI'll wait 'til it's finished.
Would turning on mipmaps help with that?
They are aware, they have been in touch.
Would turning on mipmaps help with that?
No. Nononono. The -mipmap flag is badly explained; what it does is to switch on on-the-fly mipmap generation for textures that are not mipmapped already. This may fail on video cards that aren't capable of this; see the "!resize" errors the mediavps cubemap.dds caused.
You might want to lighten up the armor, though; it's looking a little too dark. I seem to recall the Cain being more gray.
Though it seems a little grainyI agree, it does look grainy, and ingame with some aliasting it will look worse... I suggest merging some of the smaller details into bigger ones(red glows for instance), Cain isn't a huge ship and most of the time you don't see it fill up the whole screen...
Though it seems a little grainyI agree, it does look grainy, and ingame with some aliasting it will look worse... I suggest merging some of the smaller details into bigger ones(red glows for instance), Cain isn't a huge ship and most of the time you don't see it fill up the whole screen...
apart from that, everything looks beautiful :D
The brown texture in the teardrop looks like wood, which probably doesn't quite fit. But apart from that, it's jawdroppingly beautiful.
No touchscreen? :no:The brown texture in the teardrop looks like wood, which probably doesn't quite fit. But apart from that, it's jawdroppingly beautiful.Its the Cain XLE model, hence the wood grain. It also comes with a GPS and bluetooth.
Though it seems a little grainyI agree, it does look grainy, and ingame with some aliasting it will look worse... I suggest merging some of the smaller details into bigger ones(red glows for instance), Cain isn't a huge ship and most of the time you don't see it fill up the whole screen...
apart from that, everything looks beautiful :D
i noticed this with textures for the hercules mark 2 and erinyes. a good example to follow would be the texture for the htl valkyrie model.Hell, no. That's what makes the Herc and Eri look metallic. The Valkyrie is a bit plastic-like without that surface finish IMHO
Rule of Cool invoked.
(or in this case, aesthetics)
Bah, comparing FS2 ships to present day products of aerospace industry is very moot. The surface of airplanes is smooth because it produces predictable laminar flow of air. No need for that on space. The surface textures can be whatever is easiest to make, so if Herc 2 uses some specific armour material that naturally has a grainy surface like that, there's really no need to use too much effort to smooth it away is there?
Bah, comparing FS2 ships to present day products of aerospace industry is very moot. The surface of airplanes is smooth because it produces predictable laminar flow of air. No need for that on space. The surface textures can be whatever is easiest to make, so if Herc 2 uses some specific armour material that naturally has a grainy surface like that, there's really no need to use too much effort to smooth it away is there?
That could actually explain why the Valkyrie and Perseus have "wings".
possibly coated with rubbery ablative substance
Let's please not try to bring realism into this, okay? There's little in FS that makes sense in this respect.Subluminal lasers.
Let's please not try to bring realism into this, okay? There's little in FS that makes sense in this respect.
That could actually explain why the Valkyrie and Perseus have "wings".
Wings and long noses may be used to position manoeuvring thrusters further away from the primary mass centre ensuring better manoeuvrability in combat.Quotepossibly coated with rubbery ablative substance
that will melt instantly after the first hit? :doubt:
Fighter hulls must be constructed using multilayer composite armour technology - just like modern tanks.
Outer layer - ablative heat and particle dissipation (possibly carbon based and nanostrengthened) material that will diminish depending on damage rate but insure other layers are intact. Outer layer is also very easy and quick to fix even on the battlefield (to apply small portions of fresh material in a gel form over the diminished one and wait till it hardens. The gel has its own "memory" and will take a different form depending on the part of the hull it was placed on, so you won't have to polish it or anything like that and any extra portions of the gel applied will simply fall of the hull by themselves or after the wash.) or by replacing damaged and diminished sectors of the armour with new ones in the hangar.
Medium layer - thick and tough layer of conventional plating made of, let's say, wolfram-titanium-carbon nanotube composite. Insures protection in case the outer plating has been breached. It is relatively not heavy if to say about the mass, but not as light as the outer layer. Very tough and resilient but all heavy damage to it is permanent, so damaged sectors have to be replaced.
Inner layer - smart fibres coating that protects from radiation and heat in case of massive hull damage it also has self sealing abilities insuring integrity and protection of the crew and equipment.
either way, i just don't see why ships should look like they performed atmospheric reentry at the wrong angle of attack.
First nothing says it was the the same Lucifer that destroyed the Ancient homeworld, no even that it was a Lucifer-class. All we know is that it was a ship with shields, and shields the Ancients couldn't bypass.
Second, the same thing applies to the Cain. Nothing says it wasn't here back in the time of the Ancient, but nothing says it was either.
composite materials are often rubber-like in appearance.
Subluminal lasers.
(is that even a word?)According to one commercial "Volcanicity" is a word, so you never know. ;7
either way, i just don't see why ships should look like they performed atmospheric reentry at the wrong angle of attack.
[Snip]
I think that looks pretty damn good. :)
Glowmaps next! :D
I don't like the orifice/sphincter-thing... It makes the ship look too organic. I think we can all agree that we've had enough of giant space bugs...
I think (still) that the arms need a more firm-looking attachment to the hull.I thought the arms weren't attached yet as they were going to be destroyable.
I don't want to jump on the missile launcher discussion bandwagon so I won't :PI actually think it will retain its appearance of being a high-detail model because of the amount of texture work done to it. Having some more red glowmapping on the parts that are already done (Whether or not it is like the Cain already I need to check) would be nice, the missile port could be less organic looking but overall I think this work is superb.
What I think so far is that the texture is too dark overall (even for a shivan vessel), and most importantily, too uniform... not only it will look like a blob at mid/long range, but even worse you lost some of the great modelling detail you had before, because of the texture.
Detail wise the texture is really cool though, I just believe you forgot the "big shapes"
You misunderstood me I think. I believe it is a very nice piece of work, and of corse it still looks high-poly. :)
What I was trying to say was that:
1. the texture is not complementing the model. Why make all that cool details in the model, if the texture makes them extremely hard to see?
2. The texture is too regular: its all the same material, makes "reading" the model somewhat difficult (this is also tied to 1). Look at the retail Cain: the diferent construction materials are obvious, they have different colors, different light reactions (1 material is more specular than other, etc). Even in a low poly model the Cain is extremely easy to read and understand, due to those separations of materials. This texture for the high-poly model doesn't have that.
But of course, in the end of the day, this is my opinion :P
I thought the arms weren't attached yet as they were going to be destroyable.
You're talking about nose?Yeah. On the original they're more red but here it's black. I think it'd look better if it had some highlights like the other arms.
Already mentioned why the arms do not completely meet with the hull.
...the arms weren't attached yet as they were going to be destroyable.
I don't know the first thing about modeling or anything, but couldn't you make a destroyed looking "core" inside the arms, that's surrounded by the destroyable "healthy" shell?
Or maybe you need to let him finish the lods first :nod:Maybe these could be suggestions to look into and think about whether or not they'll be good to implement or not before adding the LODs. :nod:
Or maybe you need to let him finish the lods first :nod:Maybe these could be suggestions to look into and think about whether or not they'll be good to implement or not before adding the LODs. :nod:
I still only have ONE complaint, it's that the central triangle needs more glow. Just do that and I promise I will love you forever.
Open your eyes mate, the Cain's red triangle has never been its beam cannon, the underside turret is.Yeah but it's still an iconic part of the design.
It used to be the same way until the textures for the original Cain and Lilith were swapped.
Open your eyes mate, the Cain's red triangle has never been its beam cannon, the underside turret is.
Lucifer - 3 (2 Ship killers on the arms and the planetary bombarment beam on the nose)Hmm...that probably explains the "three flux cannons" remark in the Lucifer's original FS1 tech entry. Cool.
Anyway... where's the Cain? Is it done?
That would look a bit weird, don't you think?No... Why would it look weird?
The texture style on this one is quite different from the retail LODs.
Isn't that the entire point of LODing?QuoteThe texture style on this one is quite different from the retail LODs.
Also shape is different, new Cain has new details which do not have old one.
*waits impatiently for HTL Cain for cb_anis*
PM re send, Rga_Noris if you like do this nasty job its all yours ;7Quote*waits impatiently for HTL Cain for cb_anis*
POF file type will be good?
PM re send, Rga_Noris if you like do this nasty job its all yours ;7Quote*waits impatiently for HTL Cain for cb_anis*
POF file type will be good?
You can export DAE from POF, so I would assume so.
actually it dosn't always want to make the conversion, quite a few times it crashed on me when trying to save DAE from a pof file... :(I guess your POFs just make it sad. :p
Now Rga_Noris has original model to play with, and now I can go to my holidays :D
Perhaps a more elaborate mounting point for the LRed could be cool as well. It bugs me that a beam ball the size of the cruiser comes out of a tiny rock-like thing on flat hull.Probably not happening, since they decided to reject changing the multipart beam cannon on the orion :/
Perhaps a more elaborate mounting point for the LRed could be cool as well. It bugs me that a beam ball the size of the cruiser comes out of a tiny rock-like thing on flat hull.Probably not happening, since they decided to reject changing the multipart beam cannon on the orion :/
They said they had to keep it a tri-barrel cause of FSPort or something... no matter how horrible and WRONG the beam looks coming from the tri-barrel multipart.
Why they don't just have a FSPort_mvps version I don't know.
Probably not happening, since they decided to reject changing the multipart beam cannon on the orion :/lolwat?
They said they had to keep it a tri-barrel cause of FSPort or something... no matter how horrible and WRONG the beam looks coming from the tri-barrel multipart.
Why they don't just have a FSPort_mvps version I don't know.
I assume this "Capella-era Orion" is TrashMan's?
Zis is great news, comrade.Indeed great news.
unf unf unf unf
unf unf unf unf
What?
Very nice! :yes:
One nitpick though, The glow doesn't fade and brighten like on the rest of the shivan vessels.
I have it now...
I made a fast tryout and it didn't load up :mad: ... will check why later
now running to the bus stop.
Very nice! :yes:
One nitpick though, The glow doesn't fade and brighten like on the rest of the shivan vessels.
Animated glowmaps will presumably be done separately as they're a massive drain on the engine.
Personally I've always preferred the no-glowmap look on debris. If the thing's in pieces, I don't see what could be powering the glowy bits.
Personally I've always preferred the no-glowmap look on debris. If the thing's in pieces, I don't see what could be powering the glowy bits.
fires?
Anyone else think that this should receive a Highlight?Along with the Hattie, hell yeah.
Something like Savior of Forgotten HTLs. :)
The problem that arises is that, to my knowledge, there is no way to disable the glow maps from the debris. So unless you make an alternative map just for the debris, thus adding more bmpman slots to be used, you cant really do this. And IMO, it isn't worth the extra slots are performance hit.
Bald dude, loves Tiberium, also the Messiah.I had a feeling you meant the person, though I wanted to make sure it wasn't a ship I haven't seen.
The problem that arises is that, to my knowledge, there is no way to disable the glow maps from the debris. So unless you make an alternative map just for the debris, thus adding more bmpman slots to be used, you cant really do this. And IMO, it isn't worth the extra slots are performance hit.
Glowmap deactivation is possible thanks to SEXPs, but I don't quite believe we'll be going to edit all missions to turn glowmaps on whenever a Shivan ship dies... :nervous:
God. There are so many things to think about when making a model. :o
Currently the mass is much too high, and slows down freighter Halkins to 3 m/s while towing it.That actually effects towing speed? Learned something else about the game just now.
Nice to see it finley finished :D
I know it can be hard to trust someone wth your 'baby', so it's super appreciated that you did.
COLOSSUSWasn't the model originally made by Ragingloli?
sorry, what? Oh right. Um, try and see if you can get a hold of Galemp's colly. Would love to see that beauty finished, with his permission of course.
It was made by him.COLOSSUSWasn't the model originally made by Ragingloli?
sorry, what? Oh right. Um, try and see if you can get a hold of Galemp's colly. Would love to see that beauty finished, with his permission of course.
COLOSSUS
sorry, what? Oh right. Um, try and see if you can get a hold of Galemp's colly. Would love to see that beauty finished, with his permission of course.
NO, please do the Argo.OMG OMG OMG DO THE BELIAL
For the love of god! do the Argo!
Wasn't the model originally made by Ragingloli?It was made by him.
Don't worry about this. That is all.
Or the Boacidea! D:Ragingloli is actually making this too.
Will it have Nx's Iceni in the middle?Or the Boacidea! D:Ragingloli is actually making this too.
Not sure, the only shows the outside in the one picture on his photobucket he has.Will it have Nx's Iceni in the middle?Or the Boacidea! D:Ragingloli is actually making this too.
Or was, his last post for anything was in December.Or the Boacidea! D:Ragingloli is actually making this too.
You do know that hard-light isn't the only website on the internet, right? :pOr was, his last post for anything was in December.Or the Boacidea! D:Ragingloli is actually making this too.
Well it'd certainly be great if the usernames between here and Photobucket were remotely alike instead of bat**** apart. :doubt:Your photobucket (and wyrdysm) account names are Spoot Knight, so you have no room to talk. :p
He also maintains an actively updated photobucket account and occassionally posts on /3/ on 4chan.
There are many Shivan fighters that need an upgrade..
Does anyone can tell me what ships are'nt yet touched, MediaVP Assets Status topic is waaayyy to old to be a reliable source.Here's what I can think of, for ships that do not have any type of remade model that can be used ingame as of now.
Yeah, with maps that make them look a hell of a lot better, neither the Tauret or Bakha have any more polygons now than they did in Retail.
Unless they're being held back like the Hades (Or so I assume that's what going on with the Hades).
Wait...what?Have you looked at them recently?
Yes, about 30 minutes ago. On normal view on the Ship Lab then on Wireframe. They don't look any different, no extra faces, they just have well-done textures.:wtf:
Unless you'd like to show screens of a high-poly Tauret or Bakha flying about in a mission...they have the same polycount, good textures to compensate.
3.6.10 with the patch.Ah, right. I'm on 3.6.12. :P
And then there's the Hades, which I've heard is 100% complete...yet no downloads exist.Uhhhh, where exactly did you hear that? I wasn't aware this was the case. Last I checked I was still building it. :p
Well I'll never be able to find the post on the PoS search, but it was something someone mentioned.
If someone has the WIP in a modeldump or something, we should get RgaNoris on it or something. :ick:
If someone has the WIP in a modeldump or something, we should get RgaNoris on it or something. :ick: