Tomcatz SAM factory
-
I’m not an expert but only the most critical parth which I see.
You can left thousands of polys by using this. The best way to reduce poly number is a HQ skin.
-
The performance of a model design is not at all judged on the final look of the model, it is judged on how many polygons the guy has for the visual rendering. The hard work being indeed to reduce polycount without altering visual quality
Exactly!
Molnibalage nails it ! Use skins where you can to “simulate” 3D surfaces. Use wider polygons and kick out “tactical unimportant” details.
Bring each model down to <3000 polygons and you should be fine.I tell you a story from the past: In on specific simulation we were able to add up to 50-100 ground vehicles in on place, and FPS was quiet nice flying over them.
But sometimes it became so laggy and the objective-rendering-counter (advanced FPS counter) went up like crazy and it became unflyable.
This happened because only few 3d models had so much polygons (like the Humvee i.e) that you couldnt even place 20 of them on the ground without dramatic FPS loss.It is also important to define the levels of detail in the “range-layers” in the .HDR file (LOD1, LOD2, …LOD5) as this defines what LOD-levels will be rendered at what distance. Close=detailed, further away=less details and after "beyond visual range no rendering!! (is forgotten often and if so, you use cpu-cylces for no reason - beyond visual range, right?).
Mystic used this concept to improve the FPS and the quality of units in the same time with his LOD-fix i.e.No worry Tom, you are doing a great job… See it this way… that will save you alot of work infact, creating models with less polygons
Example: http://www.atangeo.com/ or http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/ or http://3d-coat.com/retopology/
-
Tom-Catz you are forgetting 1 thing: AFAIK your models has only 1 LOD level, so you do realize that they will ALWAYS be rendered as the most detailed LOD when in the bubble. Just as an example the SA-10 has a large bubble value (maybe 50NM or even more? I don’t remember exactly) so think every SA-10 inside that range from the player will be rendered with how many polys the model is using (40K? 50K? 100K?) - This of course isn’t playable in Falcon.
What you MUST do in order to make it flyable for Falcon is:
1. Reduce model’s poly count by large numbers - As suggested above, remove any unnecessary parts which are modeled, optimize others etc.
2. Create lower lods that are using the same textures but with MUCH LESS details. So say if the 1st LOD is (example) made of 8K then the 2nd can be reduced to 500 polys. Think that the 2nd LOD for vehicles is almost always far enough to not even recognize the difference from the 1st LOD.
You have some lovely models and it would be a shame that none of them can be used but its your choice to optimize it for the sim’s usage.
Cheers!
-
If he does not intend to create new LODs for low detail, it is also an approach than only the most detailed LOD is his, and the others are remain the old ones. Other issue that some vehicles does not have flags which are allow to work properly. For me Patrior launcher radar does not move as well as Straight Flush radar. If we have 3D wheel objects allow somehow rolling feauture.
Your work is good, only minor (?) adjustments are required.
- less poly
- skin palette
- well set flags
I tested with Korea '80s where I could set well how many of new models are used. For me the FPS was low as long as models are not loaded after the bubble swith. After that time FPS fall wa only minos even without in my bubblw were the following battalions.
SA-10, 4 launcher, radar and some Kraz and Fuel tank truck.
SA-6 battalion with 4 launchers.
ZSU-23 battalion with 4 vehicles.
T-72 battalion with two ZSU-23s
T-72 battalion with two SA-13s.Rest of models were the original.
-
You have some lovely models and it would be a shame that none of them can be used but its your choice to optimize it for the sim’s usage.
Cheers!
Yeap! I think we should reach a helping hand here me believes …
-
Maybe- I can do creating more LODs with lower polycount for the middle section. At the farest distance there are still the stock BMS models working- I didn`t replaced the last two or tree LOD-long-ange-view models. With some modifications it will go faster…Thanks for the posts
-
Tom Catz you should try to lower the 1st LOD to atleast 3000-4000, or else it wont be useable, Imagine if you use the TGP what FPS you will get…. For sure under 10FPS.
3ds Max has a nice plugin called Polygon Cruncher that you can download, give that a try if you like, you might be able to reduce it alot.
Thx
-
Another very, very big issue. You used 100% solid models for SA-6/11. The missiles are not placed on rails from DB, they are part of the 3D model. After launch the missile won’t miss from the vehicle. IMHO this is a very serious issue. Not just because they looks strange but it has effect on tactical situation if you are close, you cannot see which launcher have been used missiles, which should be targetted.
-
Tomcatz my first posting in bms Forum may be usefull.
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?7265-WIP-Kraz-F-255B
-
Yes-that looks fine. I have to take a look after the LODs. Best regards
Tom -
Nice! Can you make that Stinger Squad mist into blood when they get strafed with 20mm?
-
OK i downloaded it how do i install it are there any load editor instructions ?
-
Simply copy the two big files into \data\terrdata\objects directory. Make a backup first!
-
These can only be used in stock korea correct?
-
For all theaters because only the 3D models are swpped, othe DB elements are untouched. It works even with Korea '80s or Korea 2011 MOD.
-
@Tom:
Maybe- I can do creating more LODs with lower polycount for the middle section. At the farest distance there are still the stock BMS models working- I didn`t replaced the last two or tree LOD-long-ange-view models. With some modifications it will go faster…Thanks for the posts
Thank you for sharing your full WIP DB to enable easy testing. The FPS hit wasn’t as bad as I feared at 30-60% on my i7 and is similar to Hayab’s models if I was to push his L1 models out to L4.
I’ve only had a quick look at the models in LE but have found a major error in your implimentation for the SA-11 that will effect the distant LOD of 75 other models.
The original SA-11 has only 1 textured model and any tank sized vehicle over 1500 distant is only displayed as a few pixels.
However new SA-11 model has also been used to overwrite LOD#127 and LOD#124 which are also the Low Poly models for the SA-6, 11, 12A, 12B (Poly count goes from 16 to 29k)
and more importantly LOD#48 which is a common distant 1 poly Flat used by 75 other CTs (Poly count goes from 1 to 29k) and may explain the extremly poor campaign FLOT FPS.
M109 (1) Parent #225-6 K1 (2) Parent #118-6 M48A5 (4) Parent #831-6 T-80 (5) Parent #878-6 T-72 (6) Parent #877-6 Low Blow (10) Parent #834-6 Long Track (11) Parent #835-6 KSAM (14) Parent #1603-6 SA-4 (15) Parent #235-6 SA-6 (16) Parent #243-6 SA-13 (17) Parent #133-6 FROG-7 (23) Parent #215-6 M110 (24) Parent #225-6 MTLB/U (27) Parent #1560-6 M3A3 (28) Parent #244-6 AAV7-A1 (32) Parent #209-6 SCUD (34) Parent #132-6 T-90 (36) Parent #878-6 LAV-25 (44) Parent #222-6 MLRS (121) Parent #880-6 Missile crusr (440) Parent #225-6 Life Raft (441) Parent #225-6 Buoy (443) Parent #225-6 M2A3 (529) Parent #244-6 M6 BL (530) Parent #876-6 M2A2 BSFV (531) Parent #875-6 M2A2 BCV (532) Parent #244-6 LAV/AT (537) Parent #224-6 LAV/AD (538) Parent #223-6 LAV/C2 (540) Parent #222-6 LAV/M (541) Parent #222-6 LAV/R (542) Parent #222-6 AAVC7-A1 (543) Parent #209-6 M9ACE (549) Parent #118-6 FAV (552) Parent #222-6 SA-8 (556) Parent #239-6 SA-9 (557) Parent #239-6 M1A1 (667) Parent #118-6 M1 MS (668) Parent #118-6 KS-19 (684) Parent #1853-4 KS-12 (685) Parent #1853-4 Fuel Truck (689) Parent #216-6 M88A2 (696) Parent #227-6 TYPE 90II (697) Parent #878-6 Type 85II (699) Parent #166-6 Type 80 (700) Parent #878-6 Type 62 (701) Parent #166-6 MDK-2-D (703) Parent #227-6 MT55BL (704) Parent #227-6 KrAz T 255B (707) Parent #994-6 2S19 (714) Parent #225-6 M-1975 (715) Parent #832-6 MTLB (749) Parent #1560-6 BM21 (793) Parent #1222-6 BM9A52 (794) Parent #880-6 BM24 (795) Parent #208-6 SA-15 (797) Parent #134-6 ZIL-135 (835) Parent #1053-6 Challenger (2068) Parent #1558-3 Leopard 2 (2069) Parent #1451-3 Marder (2134) Parent #1862-5 M-84 (2164) Parent #1417-6 Low Blow (2189) Parent #834-6 SA-11 (2264) Parent #1517-4 SA-17 (2705) Parent #1517-4 Challenger2 (2844) Parent #1612-3 Aretie MBT (2845) Parent #1613-4 VCC-80 (2846) Parent #1614-4 M1A2 (2852) Parent #936-4 SA-12A (3234) Parent #1517-4 SA-12B (3235) Parent #1517-4 Leopard 1A4 (3369) Parent #166-6 Merkava I (3370) Parent #166-6 Merkava III (3371) Parent #166-6 Centurion (3372) Parent #166-6 PzH2000 (3373) Parent #1916-5
Please note that I haven’t done any extensive testing and have just looked to see how you implimented your own models.
Thanks again for all your hard work and I look forward to seeing your new/updated models.
-
@Tom:
Well….Basecally Eminem, Rihanna, Beats … some HipHop, Pop, R&B and film musics and Rock classics. For alcohol: White rum or vodka :drink:
I found these cool video:
You should try Brown rhum (saint james is perfect for that) and banana juice (pulp juice), that mix is amazing :). About your music, not really my style :p. I’m more in metal, goa, dub (not dub stepper), reggae.
Anyway, your models looks amazing. Keep up the good work
-
I’ve switched back the original SA-11 LOD#127, LOD#124 and LOD#48 models and am getting stabler FPS now.
-
For Ramsay……There are alot of Shared Parent’s in the BMS Database……
Is this correct for Falcon??,well no and kinda.She (the CODE) doe’s better without them.
There was a big rush back then to implement new model’s(as it seem’s now),some were done correctly and some not.
Hence,shared Parent’s.(Bad List)
That is why in Some version’s,we were dropping Building’s\Jeep’s…etc…as Bomb’s…LOL!!!For Tom…Try and follow Mystic’s advise…He and I (and other’s) spent many an hour going over this for both Redflag and BFS.
You have a Polycount “BUDGET” in Falcon…don’t “Spend” it all at once, for a model that may only deagg in your bubble,WVR, a couple of time’s in game\campain’…Wasted effort IMHO.
Egos aside,I really appreciate your effort’s to Scale the model’s to Falcon ;).demer
-
For Ramsay……There are alot of Shared Parent’s in the BMS Database……
Is this correct for Falcon??,well no and kinda.She (the CODE) doe’s better without them.
There was a big rush back then to implement new model’s(as it seem’s now),some were done correctly and some not.
Hence,shared Parent’s.(Bad List)
That is why in Some version’s,we were dropping Building’s\Jeep’s…etc…as Bomb’s…LOL!!!I found that out whilst implimenting Hayab’s KS-12, 19, etc as the original DB was very “untidy” for those.
I’m sure TomCatz’s SA-11 was just simple slip-up in the rush to get the WIP “out there” as promised and sticking to the existing DB idiosyncrasies does help theater compatabilty.
Whilst I don’t see anything wrong in shared Parents for a simple Flat like LOD#48 I’m guessing from WaveyDave’s Recommendations that BMS plan to tidy up the DB as updated models are added and that external Theaters will need to update their DBs at that time.