[morris13]

I'm working on a fighter that has destroyable bits (wings etc) and I know that i'll need both a 'normal' version and a 'destroyed' version of the objects that I want. However, does the 'destroyed' shape have to be a subobject, or can it be part of the main wireframe, with the undamaged parts just being a subobject laid over the top like a glove. As far as I know as long as the faces don't intersect this should work, any thoughts?

[Snipes]

err... the second one... methinks

[Nico]

Look at the boadicea, it should give you all the clues to make that  

-edit: just forgot a "e"

[This message has been edited by venom2506 (edited 07-17-2001).]

[Bobboau]

make sure you spell it like V did, and if it has live debris the parent object must have an axis of rotation.

------------------
Bobboau, bringing you products that work.............. in theory

[morris13]

spell what? I was planning on doing wings, stuff like that rather than turrets, so which V spelling are you referring to? If I wanted to have a wing blown off, for example, I should be able to have the small, 'destroyed' wing section as just part of the main hull, and then have a 'wing' subobject laid over the top that can be destroyed, rather than having a separate debris subobject for the wing. Is that right? It just seems easier than having an extra set of subobjects for everything.

[Bobboau]

if you did that then you would have rendering errors, and it would look better if it flung off a chunk of debris when you destroied it.

------------------
Bobboau, bringing you products that work.............. in theory

[morris13]

hrm... okay. There will be unconnected debris too, but I wanted to have a stubby ripped up chunk where the wing used to be coming out of the ship. If I want that AND floating debris I'd have to have at least three subobjects, right? One for the debris connected to the ship, one for the debris flying away from the ship, and the actual undestroyed wing that is slightly larger than both, if I understand you right.