WIP - Guam Theatre
-
The easy way would be to exist theater id’s and that id could be in front of the index number
… and would instantaneously kills all the tools we have.
“Not” possible.
Now you said some things are needed, you mentioned craters for example.
A 3d modeler alone will think ok craters… and questions start.
How many?
Sizes?
for what materials? cement, asphalt, ground, metals?
For buildings for ships for vehicles for airplanes for just ground? for rwy for taxiway?
LOD’s how many? what distances?So providing some prerequisites set’s a clear path and one knows what to do exactly,
Nobody never said that it is easy. But how to you think we are doing internally? … Do you think that it is a big organized machine with someone telling you all you have to do and how doing it. Nope … it is not working like this. It is the same forum than here …
“You” guys want to do it more complicated than it is … Things won’t change then.
… this was my last try. So we are sailing our ship, thirds party will sails theirs.
-
… and would instantaneously kills all the tolls we have.
“Not” possible.
Well I had and an alternative which is easier. New index id for records. Current stock BMS id’s can remain exactly the same but new theater entries must start with 3 letters and you can lock the database that way. If someone tries to import an entry with no theater id first like IKA-3243 and goes 3243 which is an existing BMS stock entry u can just deny the operation.
3dparty theaters id’s entries only to be different with theater id first and then index number. like IKA-0 IKA-1 …… IKA-3432.
And as u said in your own post no one said it would be easy, but if you don’t break the eggs you can’t have omelet.With Mortesil’s tool sure u work on changes on the DB so since u r there maybe a little bit more effort to fix something that brakes all theaters each time a new release comes out.
About the rest… Well I didn’t think u do it differently and ask for internal procedures to be used publicly. But since u consider it complicated and u don’t get the picture ok.
Don’t forget that there are no two ships. we all r on the same ship. we just do different things. The goal is the same, the team is one. -
I was to start a tank and made some work on it and Eghi came up hey I already done it.
Are you speaking about “M-109”? … I don think EGHI had ever done it, and refreshed model is still needed in database (among MANY others). And I can bet that they won’t comes from the public forum side … we will have to count on our own 3D modelers almost exclusively despite the fact that there are several on ppl side with skills and knowledge to help in the tasks.
Don’t forget that there are no two ships. we all r on the same ship. we just do different things. The goal is the same, the team is one.
As soon as 3rd party don’t cares about BMS recommended specs, we are obviously in two different ships. We can’t take any benefits from them, and offers is then unilateral.
So … chit chat with you is nice my friend Arty , but I don’t think our discussion will brings anything really new …
As said, most is already said there: https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?7220-Modelling-Organisation
If other questions, it can be asked on dedicated thread.
(Sorry Demer for OFF TOPIC but I thought it worth an ultimate attempt ;))
EDIT:
As soon as 3rd party don’t cares about BMS recommended specs, we are obviously in two different ships. We can’t take any benefits from them, and offers is then unilateral.
I should better say: “and offers is then somehow unilateral”
… and as you know certainly, I do not speak for you Arty. …
-
NO offense M8’s BUT we have seemed to have followed me down the “Rabbit Hole” so to speak. THAT IS OK……please do not delete any post’s!!!
Gettin’ mighty interesting here. Shared Knowledge in Falcon is essential to further Dev’ng.
So I am going to Hi Jack my own thread to give us a POSSIBILITY of a NEW Korea….LOL!!!
In doing this exercise I will state straight that I did not believe we had this stowed away at USGS. As well I thought, last time I looked, we (The USA) did not have SAT Imagery of this area…I was wrong!
So here is what CAN be done 100 km x 100 km and this is around PingPong:Cheers, but I will comment further……in another post
demer
(BTW CE will map the UV for the Terrain Layer Top down if you wish )Hey,
Yes 30m DEM data is indeed available for Korea. But I suggest to not waste time on that, we already have such data extracted.
BTW I think the multiplier there at the first image looks too high or something, the mountains shouldn’t be that sharp, I mean.
And… please STOP with the off-topic posts about terrains! You are derailing the thread! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
-
Are you speaking about “M-109”? …
… and as you know certainly, I do not speak for you Arty. …
No not the m109 another one.
I know u don’t speak about me.
-
Hey,
Yes 30m DEM data is indeed available for Korea. But I suggest to not waste time on that, we already have such data extracted.
BTW I think the multiplier there at the first image looks too high or something, the mountains shouldn’t be that sharp, I mean.
And… please STOP with the off-topic posts about terrains! You are derailing the thread! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
LOL……:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:
Done with Meters in a quick glimpse. Not Arc degrees…;)
and NO, LET’s NOT STOP with the Off Topic post’s…let’s instead keep them going. YOUR in the “SandBox” now BUDDY…LOL…please continue to play here.
I promise that they will NOT throw wet sand at you…hear me now gents…chuckle!
Just questions
demer -
Yea yea I don’t mind being in the sandbox
-
Yea yea I don’t mind being in the sandbox
It CAN turn into “Quick Sand\Vaporware” pretty “Quick” though!!! Depends on how much the current CODE can take “Out of the Box” so to speak.:mrgreen:
So far the old beatch has been better than I thought???..LOL!
Going forward with CE and it’s insane\inane RULZ and Procedural building style it is not so far away from what we do anyway (in DX). Just need to apply the KISS rule to the app for FalconAnyhoo, an example of placing trees on the Guam Terrain at the correct Elevation and “RENDERED” in Game as BILLBOARDS…(FPS)…the same as is already done in BMS (DX)…BUT these trees are rendered to\on the Feature…and NO FPS hit…“Get It”…???
Still at GCard defined of 60FPS……NOT bad for my POS ,puter…LOL!!!
Cheers,
demer
(IF BTW you truly want to know, just PM me…OK???,) -
About the TREES!!! They are not rendering as well as I would like them to in Falcon. Looking like 1998 Falcon. Can’t have that for us in 2018!!! What? with Advanced F-16’s and PR Terrains going on???
Naw……ain’t fair.
So…we\demer makes new trees that will render in CE\3DS\Falcon with a LoPoly count:As we can see from the image it is a lot less poly wise. If I Can get to 100, then that means the Geo-Located trees can be up to 40 in and about your AirBase, more than enough for eye candy.
Correctly elevated and dispersed as an ADDITIONAL FEATURE on your OBJECTIVE!!! (Suggestion is, NOT to include them in your AB Feature,need to test that some more in Falcon)
Whats next???
Rewriting the RULZ,of course,……LOL!!!..for Mass_Texturizer in CE…so that we can apply current or new building textures in the DB to CE built Buildings.
@Ned…Guess you understand now…thanks for the offer though.
@Nunos,Artey…Generate, as far as Falcon, is your friend in CE…as well, delete the Shape Material in 3DS…Kind Regards,
demer -
For the trees I used a different approach. Same as f4bms but in high resolution and removed the direct LOS (line of sight) texture, meaning left just the top-down only.
I have a large 3d trees db I render them and take the rendered png for texture source and apply it to current texture set.
I have a thread and link to download it iirc.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Why are you handling trees anyway? The Falcon engine already renders billboards-like (They aren’t pure billboards) trees and does it pretty fast. I don’t think you can get things faster but making that as part of a 3D model.
-
opacity map ttee approach (default one) is demanding. I dont like it too much. I can see its qood for most simmers, but there should be an option to use own 3D geometry for this “particle”.
I have nice 3-tris and 6-tris trees without opacity textures. I would be happy to swap default ones in my install/theater….(current option is trees OFF for me) -
opacity map ttee approach (default one) is demanding. I dont like it too much. I can see its qood for most simmers, but there should be an option to use own 3D geometry for this “particle”.
I have nice 3-tris and 6-tris trees without opacity textures. I would be happy to swap default ones in my install/theater….(current option is trees OFF for me)That bad??
I don’t know how can you render a tree without transparency (I assume that’s what you mean by opacity map), as without it you will see the billboard background and the entire illusion goes bye bye…
Such billboarding effect with transparency work nice for most sims, even the trees in DCS are pure billboards (i.e worse than the BMS trees, especially visible on close trees from ~2-3K feet looking down and you can see the “paper shape” pretty good)
And BTW the default BMS textures are pretty low res, for sure there is a place for improvement. I’d make the 16 trees sheet on a 4096 texture, then you get some nice 1024^2 resolution per tree. For GPUs today you will almost not see the difference in performance for 1 texture fetch…
-
Why are you handling trees anyway? The Falcon engine already renders billboards-like (They aren’t pure billboards) trees and does it pretty fast. I don’t think you can get things faster but making that as part of a 3D model.
Hi I-Hawk,
The reason for “Handling Trees” in GUAM is simple. The Falcon Engine will not…ATM…render the trees at the correct elevation to the projected terrain.
I will give the reason why in Pics: First here is the “TERRAIN” of GUAM (Feature\3D Model) rendered over the current L2 wireframe.As you can see the only elevated L2 wireframe is only that, that is needed, for the PHD\PT Data (ATM, hoping BMS gets Z working for that DATA) on the Airbase. The rest of the L2 Wireframe is FLAT.
See, I told you the Falcon World was flat!!!LOL
Lets look at it another way:
We could just assign Areas on the 15 or so Green tiles and project the trees via BMS and yes I agree the textures used for the trees could use a bit of TED magic.But, why should we, other than Poly Count, when we can get them at the correct elevation to the (Feature\3D Model)???
Most of the Falcon trees would be rendered below the (Feature\3D Model) elevations anyway.BUT…heh,heh,heh…demer may have found a way to bring back the DEM2Terrain L2 in GUAM and utilize it, if so then we will just use the BMS trees:
See City Engine allows us to produce\render Terrain layers in differing depths of Resolution. Kind of like L0,1,2,3,4. The “Trick,Hack,Cheat, No Scruples” approach is to find the Base Resolution for an elevation layer in CE that most closely matches Falcons L2……;)
Then we can MERGE the more detailed Layers to it…BAWAHAAAAHAAA…Hardy…Har…Har…Pirates we BE!!!We don’t know what we don’t know, BUT we can find out what we don’t know,
demer -
Cool trick Dave. Now will this trick/hack allow us to have high altitude lakes filled with water?
-
Yes. And for sure something I want to work on for years now:
Dams which maybe will include and a bonus script animation with water flowing from the dam with pressure…
How does that sound?Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Cool trick Dave. Now will this trick/hack allow us to have high altitude lakes filled with water?
Yes. And for sure something I want to work on for years now:
Dams which maybe will include and a bonus script animation with water flowing from the dam with pressure…
How does that sound?Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
Sure will, with waterfalls and raging rivers to boot……chuckle, Chuckles…!!!
Seriously though, it does allow for the illusion\render of Negative Elevations in the Terrain as exampled in the ROTA movie of the latte stone quarry east of the runway (Still haven’t found that Rogue Poly…LOL…maybe a GFX glitch).
The “Hole” is in the Terrain MODEL and cannot go below the level of the L2 Wireframe beneath it (BMS does not support negative elevations). You could raise the Terrain Model abit or lower the L2 Wireframe a bit to allow for them, the latter is used in Guam.
A pic is worth 1K words:As far as the Dams, ( I’m thinking a BIT outta’ the box here :madgrin: I hope that doesn’t surprise anyone :rofl:), you could take over a bridge model in the DB and use it as your Dam feature on your objective. It would have value for managers\AI i.e. to produce attack missions in BMS and easily placed correctly in CE (CE allows us to use “Static Models” as .obj matched to the terrain) that would translate correctly to Falcon……
Cheers,
demer -
Great info Dave/Arty. I was thinking with a trick like this, we could have hydroelectric dams as eye candy/immersion as well as objectives for AI. In this way we could really replicate a South Central Europe (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Czechoslovakia, Italy) for a 64 European Theatre but with less city/town/village objectives than what we have currently have with Tom’s Theatre. Would make a great ‘Cold War’ Theatre, hint, hint Dave.
-
Well a dam can be broken in x pieces and once bombed just affect the corresponding part only and replace it with damaged and destroyed one. Once a part is destroyed you can add the script and have water flowing from that part and raise the level of water in the area after the dam and lower the water area before the dam.
Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
It has been a Falcon Minute or 2, but back to the Geo-Located Trees for GUAM as I promised…Did I Promise Anything???..LOL!
A Lo-Poly Tree,remember I stated I would like to have it <100 Polys and still render in game nicely:So I got that,not too bad, better than what was done for MW EONS ago…with their mighty engine…LOL!!!
Dropped it into CE and:Convert to .obj for 3DS:
Convert to LOD for Falcon:
Then shove it into my DB for in game, and I mean SHOVE, it CTD the first attempt. But she’s all fixed up and fine now….:D!!!
OTW:From the Pit:
So that is done (Proved) and more to come……:mrgreen:
BTW the CTD was on the Terrain mesh,not the Trees…fixed.Have fun,
demer