Modelling Organisation
-
On Switch behalf:
That’s actually not true.
To get damaged models, models of normal parents need two texture sets, the second one being same that first one but with damages on the textures (burnt spots, ….). Then, you use same parents for normal and damaged.
That’s something that should be actually mandatory but it seems people forgot about that.
Cheers,
Switch
-
On Switch behalf:
I said bullshit!
Fok my life … this is only valid for Features.
Gonna eat tomato and cucumbers.
-
Ground vehicles not require damaged models. Normal and destroyed required.
It is important that vehicles of one battalion will use the same texture, if possible. It doesn’t matter how much space you want to use for each model on texture, don’t need to split into regular squares. You should consider which vehicles will be on this texture and how much space each one needs. One more thing, if any vehicle is launcher (e.g. SA-17, Patriot…etc…), the missile should also be on this texture.
So I recommend to working with four vehicles in the same time. It is much easier to organize your work.The following Q’s are addressed to anyone that knows not just to Eghi.
1st: This thing with the same battalion let’s clear it out.
Example the M109.
To find the battalion it is in I go to Class Table TAB in Falcon Editor. Locate the M109 and double click.
On Class Data Pointer at Data: I click Open.
This opens Unit Data window.
Name is SP Guns and flagged as Battalion.
At the bottom of this window I see the ranks of first vehicle in the slot…
and in there are
M109
HMMWV
K200-AD
M997
Fuel Truck
M998Am I at the correct point? are those the battalion elements?
So I must group those 6 vehicles to 4-2 or 3-3 and if are old I must recreate them and use the sharing texture thing.
K200-AD looks old also and is on the list.Now in campaign in MC I found a battalion where M113 are there also but not in the previous list.
2nd: This thing with the asterisk and the “Parent numbers listed with a * share a parent with another object.”
example M113 has it so same parent is used for another object records and those are:
M113 (29)
M901 (30)
M113A3 (544)
AVLM/MS (553)
VTT-323 (748 )
ACRV (755)
WZ-551 (756)
YW-531 (792)
M106 (832)
M992 (3368 )
so it must be generic to look alike those sharing objects? or I just opened the pandora box and I must do all of them so to be separated and unique records each?
Or the team wants them as is and will not make them unique for optimization reasons?
If it’s because those models don’t exist to replace them then they should be on the modeling organization list and I - we should start building them. Right?
Or they are not priority? -
Hi Arty!
I am not a big guru of that kind of stuff yet, I am still learning … but I can tell you that a big cleanup and purge has been done in the database to suppress doubloons, old models and unused vehicles … parent has also been deeply reorganized following the cleanup … so the best IMO, would be to send the files (source files if possible) plus LOD and textures to Eghi or me, and we will transfer them to Switch for proper DB integration with good parents … etc …
Too bad that Switch is not on PPL forum anymore coz I would probably be able to answer your questions.
-
Thanx for the valuable info.
No prob. As long as the job get’s done this is the target.Found some 3d free models of tanks that are way old or shared parents in the 3d database…
I already started reducing one to meet the BMS prerequisites.In case u wonder it’s from http://www.cadnav.com and IIRC we said it’s ok to use them for BMS.
This site is a treasure…Their license thing says:
This file download from the CadNav
50000+ Free 3D Models & CAD Models download(http://www.cadnav.com)
High quality 3D Models Library, online 3D Models resource for CGI graphic designers and CAD/CAM/CAE engineers, daily updates will be posted on our site. (http://www.cadnav.com/3d-models/)
You can download polygonal mesh 3D Models, 3D CAD Solid Object, Textures, Vray material, 3D works, CAD drawings,etc.
All of them in our website are FREE download.
INFO: Please read and comply with the terms and conditions, otherwise please don’t use this model!
1. We doesn’t accept any claims regarding quality of 3D model or any standards conformity.
2. We will not participate in any technology or copyright issues.
3. This file (models or textures) may be used in any commercial way only as a part of artwork or project. Single reselling or redistribution of this model is prohibited.
4. This file (models or textures) may be freely modificated or elaborated.
5. If you use this file (models or textures) in your project or website, please indicate the source from cadnav.comThank you for reading this file.
If you wanna rerelease the file in another website, please keep this info file included, thank you.
ENJOY!
If it’s a problem then please let me know so to stop working on those and start them from zero… it even has the M109 I’m building… DOH
-
Hey Arty,
yep you’re correct at point one.
But it’s also up to you, how you want to design your M-109 battalion.
Here’s something from RL (dunno which time frame):
As the HMMWVs and trucks are very general and used by a lot of units, I would not place them on the same texture as the M-109.
But if you want to build the M992 also, this should be definitively on the same texture like the M-109.BTW better try to finish your M-109, you’ll learn much much more than if you start converting those existing 3D models (even if they don’t look bad).
Cheers
Biker -
Thanx biker.
This M992 is much alike by a first look with the M109…
So it wouldn’t be that difficult I believe if the main body is the same. -
As said above, there has been lots of cleaning and fixing in the database. If you want to make some vehicles, I could make you a list of what still needs updating and how the units are organised.
As for that M113 thing, you opened the pandora box. Lots of vehicles use same parents and db is/was full of shit added by previous teams. Not saying they did garbage, just saying lots of stuff has been duplicated, thinking “we’ll find/add data/models later”, but at the end of the day, they never did.
I’m more like let’s find data and make model first instead of just add it and we’ll finish later…
-
Yeap I heard Pandora calling and screaming… :lol:
Well by all means please do so.
We must start from somewhere.
Going totally blind is worst than having a lighted candle, or a flash light or:
-
I’ll give you that list by the end of the week. I started but not finished yet.
-
Just so you know, I didn’t forget you. I was just busy last wk on other stuff…
I already have the list of vehicles types per battalions though, just haven’t listed crappy/remade models for all of them yet.
I’ll try to finish as soon as I can. Sorry for the delay…
-
No problem at all.
After all I have things to do and the list doesn’t hold me back.So take your time.
-
@ Manos:
- NORINCO YW531 (Type 63)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_63_(armoured_personnel_carrier)
https://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=851
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/type-63.htm
https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk02-Buh2p87lrMIfWEQdaDJVus1jNQ:1585908880495&q=NORINCO+YW531&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=firefox-b-d&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjM7d77gszoAhWJDxQKHV0mD-QQsAR6BAgMEAE
And its North Korea equivalent (licensed copy)
- VTT323 (M973 Sinhung)
https://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=394
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/type-85-apc.htm
…
**DISREGARD! We already have the NORINCO YW531 (using the 3D model of BMP-1 with is simimlar) ! So the VTT323 can use the same 3D model.Stay tuned for another suggestion! … I’ll have to dig the DB more seriously. ;)**
- NORINCO YW531 (Type 63)
-
- Tank Centurion
Or
- If you look in Tacref Artillery, you can choose whatever you like here. MANY of them are very old model or not using the right 3D model (using another one).
Just tell us what you choose so w can monitor and coordinate.
-
- Tank Centurion
Or
- If you look in Tacref Artillery, you can choose whatever you like here. MANY of them are very old model or not using the right 3D model (using another one).
Just tell us what you choose so w can monitor and coordinate.
will check and tell you soon
-
Hi Dee-Jay and Manos,
First of all, thank you Manos for your availability in getting BMS better for all of us.
May I suggest the SA-15, as in tac ref it seems the original version one:D
Thank you very much both of you
Cheers -
@Alienslayer:
Hi Dee-Jay and Manos,
First of all, thank you Manos for your availability in getting BMS better for all of us.
May I suggest the SA-15, as in tac ref it seems the original version one:D
Thank you very much both of you
CheersSA-15 is a good idea.
But please do not interfere and let the Dev managing the coordination. Otherwise you might suggest something already done for the next version and then, wasting resources. -
@Manos:
Don’t do the M113 / M106 / M901
Radium has panned it already.
…
(I will try to open a coordination room when able , but I don’t now when I will be able. I am over tasked and can’t progress on regular duties on DB)
-
Wilco!!
-
Centurion is a must to change. Got a look here is what can benefit from better models in Tank/Artillery with a quick look i made:
Centurion
M60A3 (and M40 (?))
PT-76
M-1974
M-1973
M-1975
M-109 (maybe update it to M-110?)
PzH2000I probably start with Centurion and see how it will go
There’s a lot of models that can be benefited in airplanes as well but thats another storyCheers!