Sharing my "Object-folder"
-
In FC2 I flew the Su27 only. I Thing that is is still the most beautifull fighter in the world. Strong russian power, powerfull Sensors and with R-77 very dangerous Missiles against other fighters. And big just like an B-24 in WW2. A imposant Beauty…
this is an ED Skin but I hope that somebody can do like this
The Kuz`was builded in 2006 - It was my very first ship. Yes for FC1. After landing on the stock ED deck the model needed to polish up. And so I did…
It was very interedting to learn more about the russian Ships, technics and weapons…
in BMS of course without that Sea-Flanker and Persons on deck and Tower…
-
Hi Tom!
@Tom:
But I used the models since years without any Problems. And my PC is an old i3 dual core 1.8 GHz with a 1Gb RAM graphic card and 4GB RAM.
But I don’t wanna save polygones any more because There are many many LODs in game and the BMS Engine is very strong.
Cheers
TomJust know that future version will be certainly much more demanding (especially in terms of memory for textures) … non optimized models could suffer from much more FPS hit than now.
But I’m not 100% sure about that … will see in 3 - 4 weeks.
-
Tomcatz KC-10 Test
Janhas F16 Models + Tomcatz KC-10 Models. Training mission refueling, Before: 60 FPS, after 60 FPS
i7940@3,80Ghz
Asus P6T v2 Deluxe
6Gb DDR3 RAM Mushkin Redline PC 12800 CL6
Vraptor dedicated
Nvidia GT-780 3Gb -
Try it in a campaign…
What were your CE settings…?
Believe me I know when is useful a model and when is not…Busy air bases 35 fps were in campaign. What is a CE setting? I have everything maxed out and turned on. I lose about 10 fps in campaign and busy AB. This is flying in an F-16 cockpit not an F-15 cockpit as in the pictures, if that is what you are talking about.
-
Tom is talking about F-15’s cockpits, are they available to install? Will love a F-15E Strike Eagle cockpit!!
-
OMG.
:bdance:
-
Busy air bases 35 fps were in campaign. What is a CE setting? I have everything maxed out and turned on. I lose about 10 fps in campaign and busy AB. This is flying in an F-16 cockpit not an F-15 cockpit as in the pictures, if that is what you are talking about.
Main: i7 3930k @4.8Ghz, 32Gb 2133 Ram, GTX 580 3Gb SLI, 256Gb Samsung 830 SSD + 600Gb + 2x 300 Gb VelociRaptors, 1.5kw PSU, Recon 3D Fatal1ty,Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Surround, 30" Dell LCD + 24" LCD, Logitech G11, 4X CH MFP’s, Cougar MFD’s, Cougar FSSB-R2 + Simpeds, BU0836X + assorted switches.
And 35 FPS…? ----> Unusable stuff. Sorry…
I saw the Kuznetsov. Tom, it is nice to see your models but they are simply not fit in Falcon world… Why can’t you reduce the polycount to a reasonable level…?
-
Molny u r hasty on results - verdict… Look at the resolution then judge… This is not a normal one on the 30" Dell and the 24" for instruments probably. We all know those setups kill the the fps.
For me having 35 with this setup is ok.
Also don’t forget the synch problems of the SLI’s… -
But regardless of this molnibalage is right. Unfortunately.Same looks matter cockpits Nizmo-completely wasted potential.
-
Tomcatz Sovremenny model, Kuznetsov in the background
-
Tomcatz KC-10 Test
Janhas F16 Models + Tomcatz KC-10 Models. Training mission refueling, Before: 60 FPS, after 60 FPS
Well, this is not representative. Fortunately, two models won’t brings FPS hit.
Must try in campaign around Seoul with several a/c on the runway within your field of view… add some PS effects… and wait for the 4.3x to have an idea of the result.
Whatever, if is is ok for you, good deal.
-
Well, this is not representative. Fortunately, two models won’t brings FPS hit.
Must try in campaign around Seoul with several a/c on the runway within your field of view… add some PS effects… and wait for the 4.3x to have an idea of the result.
Whatever, if is is ok for you, good deal.
I am not trying to argue with anyone Dee-Jay. Actually I see your point and Molnibalage’s and if I were you I’d probably do the same and ask Tomcatz to reduce the polys for the general benefit.
But if he cant/does not have the time, yet from an end user point of view, specially one who knows how to import and export models, is good to have them and have the option to use high poly models in some situations. For instance, I have a jgsme enabled install, if I like to have a refueling mission with all the goodies I activate the Tomcatz models. Sometimes I just stare at the models like in a sandbox. When I go into campaign I deactivate it in a matter of seconds and get the good things from BMS standards. So for my is a gift too have both options.
Also if I am not wrong a lot of these models are already in Rthorflech custom folder.
I think both worlds can coexist. If someone comes in the future and reduces the poly counts keeping the amazing detail of TomCatz models the better.
-
Will be great once 4.3x feature list is released, can’t wait. Until then will check If this pack include a cockpit for the Strike Eagle.
-
I am not trying to argue with anyone Dee-Jay. Actually I see your point and Molnibalage’s and if I were you I’d probably do the same and ask Tomcatz to reduce the polys for the general benefit. .
Sure we are not arguing … Tom’s model are really candy eye (probably as pretty as DCS one … or even more), but we can’t (and wont) guaranty acceptable results under the future version as we can’t guaranty (with more margin anyway) good results in current version under campaign or heavy TE. It will be reserved for ppl with very strong hardware and of course, no need to ask him, or us, to add anyone of them in the stock install. It will not be possible.
-
-
It will be reserved for ppl with very strong hardware and of course, no need to ask him, or us, to add anyone of them in the stock install. It will not be possible.
My computer isn’t the best, but I still have a decent FPS despite using higher-res mods (haven’t tried this folder yet though), so if people think or know they have the capacity, why not immediately provide the best to them?
As an idea, would it be possible to provide multiple or modular versions of the 4.3x installer? That way, people could choose whether they want to try the high-res/high-poly models or not.
If you’d make it modular, a main installer with possibility to download and install separate content/mods for free, you could also keep track on what is downloaded most, and perhaps use that information to better select priorities towards the future? And as has always been the case here, you could still hold on to the argument that the mods released by users are provided and allowed, but that support can not always be guaranteed.My two cents.
-
^Imo It does not make sense.The most important is a stable basic version.And later you yourself can install what you want.
You have a lot of extra mods with better graphics, and theaters with better graphics.Free choice. -
My computer isn’t the best, but I still have a decent FPS despite using higher-res mods (haven’t tried this folder yet though), so if people think or know they have the capacity, why not immediately provide the best to them?
As an idea, would it be possible to provide multiple or modular versions of the 4.3x installer? That way, people could choose whether they want to try the high-res/high-poly models or not.I said above, “do not ask for Tom’s models into stock install”. AFAIK, Tom didn’t offered anything (with all the requirements) and we have ours anyway.
And what you are proposing is already a reality. Not with 3D models, but with textures because not all configurations will allow to use hi-definition textures. Doing the same with models is too complex and time consuming to propose different models associated to different mapping, textures id, dof … etc … Hi poly models must (and will) remains additional mod with all the associated drawbacks (including retro compatibility)
… so if people think or know they have the capacity, why not immediately provide the best to them?
Providing the “best” must not be equal to “non optimized” … for us … it is simply not acceptable.
If we have to save resources for other (future) possible features, we can’t consider models without multiple lods (which is one of the greatest point of BMS) since it is possible to make excellent models (within BMS’s limitations and requirements) and save precious resources:
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?17846-Mitsubishi-F-2A-and-B/page29
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?19381-WIP-Mig-29A
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?13888-WIP-AV-8B&p=203780&viewfull=1#post203780
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?17722-WIP-Mig-27
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?16562-F-16-retrofits
…
Hi ploy with no lods = additional mod. Not other possible choices.
-
I seriously think that as Thread starter should have the chance to delete posts.
1. I know that the Level O Detail is very important for the workload and framerate
2. It is very easy to build the LOD2…3…4…5…levels BUT when the main model is ready and complete
3. I asked for HELP about the Skins - I asked for IDEAS and not for meanings some persons told to the world thousand times again and again
4. The models works very fine for me. The look is much better them the stock models and I`m very very happy and proud with them!
5. Use it or loose it- But dont nerve me!My intention was to show that things I have right now. Noone is be helped when I work for myself years and years without any results. I want to show new ideas, new models, some things that could be newer or fresher. I`m so bored about that old discussions "useless, too much polygones, too big textures in TE wont work bla bla bla bla bla … BORING!
-
I tought that this will end in the manner. Tom I apreciatte your work. Can’t wait to install your mods and I hope you don’t retire the files.