3D modelling

Post mods you have finished or are working on here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Just a quick update. I am currently aiming to have something ready in December. I have no idea how much that will be. It might be significantly more than normal or it might not. I really cannot say.
I am picking December as I am fairly certain I can have "something" ready at that time.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Thank you for the great news!
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

Did anyone else notice missing launcher on M270? Or is it just me? :D
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Sounds like an issue with the picnums setup. It can break turrets.
I cannot check right now as I do not have any games on my laptop but you can try editing entry 2, 3 and 4 in the picnums file. These should be 0, 1 and 2 in some combination which is what dictates what is the turret. I cannot really tell you how exactly it should be as I tend to just guess and hope I get it right. The wiki is not very informative and it is faster that way than trying to figure out how it all works.

I am considering entirely stopping making revolving turrets as they from what I can tell always revolve around the origin of the scene from which the model was exported. This means the turret will either break when rotating or the model will have to be off-center for it to work.
As an example imaging the launcher of the Patriot M902 trailer rotating around the centre of the model. Originally it did that which looked quite bad. I am assuming this to be the way it works in general and not just me missing something as I have seen the M4 Sherman model do the same thing as have one or two of the original 2020 APC models.
I am assuming the M270 have the same issues as it also has its turret quite off-center.
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

Thanks for the quick response, I'll try your suggestion when I get home. Looks funny with just "carrier" running around firing missiles from invisible launcher :D

As for the rotating turrets, yeah a lot of existing APC models have their turrets revolving broken and I personally wouldn't mind if they didn't revolve at all if they can't do it right. Not sure why the tanks don't have that issue though...If my memory isn't playing tricks on me, Balth used to talk about this issue couple of years ago and I believe they did fix it at some point (tanks) but APCs got broken recently
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

I think it is simply a case of turrets rotating around the scene origin. It works great on tanks as they have large turrets near the center of the vehicle and with the vehicle centred on the scene origin their rotation axis gets close enough that it is hard to notice.

Also quick update. Not much included
Download

Changes:
Included the HMS Astute in the package (I forgot last time)
Scales changed as to the suggestions of MK4
Updated the UGBITS entry for the M270 (ID1646) hopefully it should work now. It worked in my DPRK test scene.
Note: The M270 have the same issues with the "turret" as the APCs in that it rotates far off axis. I might do a version without rotation as it is not really great looking right now but that is for another update.

I am mainly compiling it like this for the sake of simplicity. If all you need is the updated picnums entry for the M270 then it is here:
1646, 2, 0, 1, , -1, -1, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -1, 0, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 14, 2, 2, , 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1646, , , , , , 0.033,
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

No previews yet but I have got some work done towards some models including the CV9040 and Mirage 2000C. I am still hoping for a December release and hope to be able to use a bit more time on this in November than I could in October.
No promises as to when in December it will be though.
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

Thanks for the update! The new picnums line for M270 worked like a charm 8)
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Glad that it is working.

Also quick render of the Mirage 2000C. Still some work left but it is starting to look like an aircraft.
Image
The plan is to have a French, Indian and ROC version as well as a generic grey one.

I hope to have a presentable version of the CV9040 ready in a few days.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Awesome!
I hope to have a presentable version of the CV9040 ready in a few days.
Thank you for remembering about this one! Since you`ve already done so much progress on the last unit requests do you plan to finish some of your wip units for December?
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

I also have not forgotten the AAV version.
I plan to have the cannon be at roughly 60 degree elevation and naturally the air search radar be the difference.
I do not plan to include a rotating turret unless there is a demand for it. The turret is off-center and thus will do silly things when turning.

The I-15 and Mirage 2000C is fairly far along and should make it.

The San Antonio is basically done so it will make it and so is the Strike Cruiser.
If the remaining US Navy vessels make it I cannot say yet. I also have a good number of PLAN vessels but those I plan on having in the next batch of models.
The Missiles/bombs should be fast enough to finish that they will hopefully make it but they are not my highest priority.

I have also been working on stripping down the T-72 but the more I look at it the more am I not happy with whatever result I might get from that conversion. The result is that I will be making a T-72B from scratch instead. The result definitely should be better. So far the mesh certainly is.
It will also produce a model that is far easier to produce regional camouflage patterns for and given the T-72 is fairly used that might save time in the long run.
I might also do a T-72B3M while I am at it.

I have also been talking a bit on the SRU boards on steam and from that I have decided to make a T-90A. I will have to check how much of the MS version I can reuse.
The A variant is far better fit than the AS/MS version both for the version India uses and the early versions used by Russia.

Also based on this conversation I also intend to convert the T-72B into a M-84D.
The T-72 itself can represent a M-84A fairly well and the T-90A is a good stand in for the M-84AS. This should give the former Yugoslavia a fairly decent representation in terms of armour while also helping countries like Russia.
I know the vehicles only resemble the M-84A/AS but finding good reference is far, far harder and the time I save will probably be comparable to building 1 or 2 additional models.

No sure they will make it but there is also the T-22M3, Mi-28 and a collection of aircraft based on the An-12/Y-8 platform.

Finally I have a few Japanese vessels that are mostly done and will hopefully make it.


Everything is naturally subject to change and highly dependent on how much time I can find to work on it.
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

Image
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

You might as well have added the text under the picture: This one`s for all the T-72 nuts out there!
:P
I also have not forgotten the AAV version.
Thank you!

I think a T-72 without the ERA would be a welcome addition (I presume that`s the point of the T-72B). There were and still are plenty of T-72s and derivatives without ERA out there. The upgraded M-84 would be cool too.

I have a question. Does changing the number (and size) of the tank wheels require just a texture edit or are there some modeled parts too?
No sure they will make it but there is also the T-22M3, Mi-28
Not that I want to hurry the process - it takes as long as it takes - but I`m really looking forward to these two. I think they`re a very important graphical addition to Russia, a few other states and everyone fighting against them.

I have to say, your modding efforts have changed the way I relate to the game. When SR2020 came out I was mostly just guessing what units I was facing at a time (i.e. what those generic graphics stood for; which was not that far away from using NATO counters). Now, I can immediately differentiate them in action. It adds alot to immersion (not to mention functionality).
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Yes the point of the T-72B is to have an early production model that can represent anything from early T-72A or M variants to copies like the Assad Babil. I picked the early B variant as that is the one I have the best reference for (At least the description says it is that anyway. The T-72 is not one of the vehicles I am all that familiar with).
The T-72B3M is lower priority than the others though as it is mainly a "good to have" model given that it does to some extend resemble the T-90A.


All wheels are drawn texture objects only. As long as the shape of the track arrangement does not change changing the number and size of the wheels is fairly easy.

Here is a rendering of the T-72B and CV9040B/AAV. The way their tracks are constructed is basically identical. The CV9040 is only UV-mapped.
One of the reasons I have the skirts on the T-72 is that it hides the top of the tracks and that saves tris I can use on other parts like the turret.
Image

The mi-28 ia actually fairly far along in that it has some texturing done. The tu-22M3 is only UV mapped so there is a bit more work. I hope they will be ready but I cannot make any promises.


I did actually consider making Nato style symbols at one point but I ended up deciding against it as it would require locking the rotation of the unit down.
Also I have always played Paradox's Hearts of Iron using unit symbols instead of a graphic representation but that is now quite a few years ago.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Nerei wrote: All wheels are drawn texture objects only. As long as the shape of the track arrangement does not change changing the number and size of the wheels is fairly easy.
Cool! What about adding something to a turret? For example those "Dolly Parton" armour add-ons on the turret of a T-55 and maybe a turret bustle? Would this be just a - relatively - simple add-on to your T-55 model or would it require quite alot of work?
I`m aware of where the project is currently and what constitutes priority btw so this isn`t about asking you to actually do anything in the foreseeable future.
I did actually consider making Nato style symbols at one point but I ended up deciding against it as it would require locking the rotation of the unit down.
I am aware that some people do not buy games unless there is at least an option for NATO counters, but I have never seen the point in using button like images in games that were made to use 3d graphics, especially considering that these were tailored for different functionality. PG type games for example have no fixed scale, depend on equipment type, not on real formation classification etc. The whole point of games like PG and SR is that you can recognize (and visually enjoy) hundreds or thousands of different equipment types on the map.
Post Reply

Return to “Modding Show & Tell”