[3D PROJECT] Hard Dack Carrier
-
You need to create a task force in the DB and include your carrier in it. Then, on the TE_NEW. TAC or on the save0.cam, you need to create an “airbase” type objective and assign the carrier to it.
Do this with Mission Commander. -
@Nuno:
You need to create a task force in the DB and include your carrier in it. Then, on the TE_NEW. TAC or on the save0.cam, you need to create an “airbase” type objective and assign the carrier to it.
Do this with Mission Commander.I explained all of this to him, with pictures, yet he seems to believe I am wrong?? Whatever!
But, you do not need to make a task force! Just the carrier alone if sufficient.
C9
-
where with pictures?
-
where with pictures?
It was just pics of a campaign file showing the objects for carriers and the object Dump, so he’d get the idea, and I explained some of the procedure vaguely. I PM’d them to him. You’ve seen them before, I’m sure!?!?
If you are more interested PM me!
C9
-
I did not setup carrier in modern times yet (it was very easy in AF - put carrier naval object + place squadron on it in tacview).
Is there some tutorial? You have mentioned MC etc…I do not need it right now, but of course - I am very interested in it. …and I luv public user made tutorials
-
I do not need it right now, but of course - I am very interested in it. …and I luv public user made tutorials
I have a small tutorial, but going though the U5 DB, I have found they have made a change when it comes to carriers. Couldn’t tell you if it was changed in U4 or not, don’t remember checking.
I’ll adjust it and rewrite the tut!!
C9
-
I’m sure there’s a tutorial somewhere here on the forum, I remember to consult it when we were developing the carrier objectives for POH but I can’t even begin to remember who’ve made the tutorial right now…
If I find it I’ll let you know.
Cheers -
Are you looking for this?
was waiting in the hotlist…
Now it must be changed and instead of “Max alt” is named Carrier Obj. CT: in the Vehicle Data Details window in Falcon Editor.
-
Are you looking for this?
That’s extremely old stuff, is basically irrelevant at this point if he just added the model in place of an existing model.
If he was attempting to create an entirely new carrier entry in the DB, that won’t work.
The problem that he need to resolve and I already attempted to explain it to him, is the object(ive) that needs to be linked to the carrier entry and that is done in the campaign or te_new.tac.
C9
-
That’s the Porblem
-
If you can’t achieve the correct hitbox for the carrier by looking at other carriers in the DB and following their settings, then there is something wrong with your model.
Irregardless of that issue, you still have to correctly link a object to it!!
So you have 2 problems at the moment!
C9
-
@Cloud:
If you can’t achieve the correct hitbox for the carrier by looking at other carriers in the DB and following their settings, then there is something wrong with your model.
Irregardless of that issue, you still have to correctly link a object to it!!
So you have 2 problems at the moment!
C9
The model is not a carrier for now… It’s a 3d box instead of runway… but the Z value of the hitbox - doesn’t changes … if the Z value is set for let’s say 100ft - and you go above the object and decent to 100ft - you will go inside it… there’s gotta be a way to make it like the carrier - an unpenetrated object… if you try to copy the 3d model of the carrier to somewhere else - it becomes ghost… there’s a specific setting to the Carrier in the db maybe - that tells it to be HARD rather than Ghost
-
CVN America Hitbox
Radius:580
___Max Min
X 559 -525
Y 120 -122
Z 0 -67 -
CVN America Hitbox
Radius:580
___Max Min
X 559 -525
Y 120 -122
Z 0 -67Those are the same in the 3d box… 1:1… but changing the Z value to -67 or more, doesn’t change the model from going inside it… the box is still ghost even if it’s higher … u can still go through it
-
Those are the same in the 3d box… 1:1… but changing the Z value to -67 or more, doesn’t change the model from going inside it… the box is still ghost even if it’s higher … u can still go through it
Like I said, there’s something wrong with your model!!!
C9
-
@Cloud:
Like I said, there’s something wrong with your model!!!
C9
No… I tried it also with copying the CVN Truman model. it became a ghost and u couldn’t land on it … same hitbox same model. but a missed settings… gotta find this setting
-
Hotbox values, radius value, correct carrier obj file, te-new file, and? Maybe the ship CT record… Check its type subtype, and specific value.
I hardly land below deck height to hit stern, but sometimes the ship hull can be flown thru.
The most annoying ghost deck bug happens to AI landing ac…i have reported it in my low poly test thread long time ago… Ac not hitting stern to explore, just fly thru carrier and fall into water.
-
Have u tried to move a bit further the landing point? Closer to the center of the deck?
Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Have u tried to move a bit further the landing point? Closer to the center of the deck?
Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
Its now object of 3d box instead of runway… there’s no landing point… it has taxipt and takeoff points - but what is a landing point?
-
In Falcon Editor
Objectives
double click to edit the objective
Point Data TAB.
0: RunwayListType0: RunwayPt
the last one 0: RunwayPt
is the point that the aircraft try to establish the touchdown point.
Heavies (Big airplane) are almost spot on.
Light Aircraft land way earlier… so this is why I say move it further.If in your tests u don’t have such structure then u r after an empty shell.
Have in mind that all values in RunwayListType of
Max Height
Max Width
Max Lengthmust be set to 10000
Additionally you must have the
RnwyDimListType
witch is a parallelogram that sets the runway deck on the carrier.
if you double click on the RnwyDimListType opens it’s properties where u must set the heading probably for carriers the default value is 360 and 170 respectively.
As it looks like the first RnwyDimListType is for takeoff and the second is for landing judging by the way of their layout.Same way First RunwayListType entry must be for take off and the second for landing.
So set all those properly and do your tests.
NOW in the back of my head I recall a long time ago some posts where a dev said to a member: make the model and give it to us to implement it correctly cause u can’t and I’m with the impression that maybe there must be something hardcoded needed to make a carrier work properly. Again not sure about it, I might be totally totally wrong.
Radium made some Carriers or another dev could enlighten us on the subject.