3D modelling

Post mods you have finished or are working on here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Looks great as usual, but what`s with the white dots on the center of the wheel discs?
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Paint I assume. It was on an illustration I have and it is not green so it will add a bit of colour to it. Most of the generic textures are fairly green.
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

The T-72B family photo.
Image

I might find something to tweak but it will probably only be minor changes.
The 2nd from the left is my take on region group X/fictive Yugoslavia camouflage. The one farthest to the right is a T-72 pretending to be something like a ZTZ-80 (it should be closer than what is currently available and it is quite fast to make). Also slight colour change to the PRC vehicles. I was not entirely happy with it so I decided to change it. I might repaint the S-300 PRC regional texture set at some point.
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

Looking great Nerei!

Though to be honest when I was saying T-72B I was thinking more specifically about the variants of T-72B that were fitted with Kontakt-1 style ERA giving it a considerably different visual look to the original T-72 'Clean Skin' Variants..... Quite a few units in game and more variants that arguably a couple maybe that should be added along with major operators - Russia, Belarus, India for example will have their operational T-72s in such a scheme)

Personally though I think this model is good enough to be used for most all T-72 variants currently in game (and thanks to the color schemes most all nations), including as you prepared for ZTZ-80s

A lot of tanks probably for Communist Block Countries can probably be impersonated in the game by I guess 3 basic shapes schemes

One without ERA - clean look
One with 1st Generation Kontakt-1 ERA (Brick style exterior, typically any variant )
One with Kontakt-5 ERA (Wedge shaped ERA or whichever next Gen ERA is applied (NOT to be confused with the wedge shaped layout of ERA on say T-64BV or T-80BV which use 'bricks')

Though of course varieties exist so its a question of how specific you want to be or how hard these are to transform into different varieties (Like the difference between say this T-72 you have made and one like this "T-72B": https://www.armyrecognition.com/images/ ... gy_004.jpg)

Or say T-72B3 http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t72b3.jpg and T-72B3M https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 017-40.jpg

As for the Yugsolav Camo, though it may not have been used in the JNA it still appears in recent pictures so good decision IMHO - https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BD4vkKwAboc/ ... -84_VS.jpg so not exactly fictive :), looks good

In regards to the white dots on the road wheels of the plain green one, typically the white was only ever applied in Parades (often not just the wheels but other parts of the hull like mud flaps etc), you can see examples of this also in current Ukrainian Independence Day Parades on things such as T-64s taking part, (though I dont think ever in operations.. Ukraine has however applied white Lines to many of its equipment in the War in Ukraine as a visual ID like so: http://www.pravda-tv.ru/wp-content/uplo ... /08/11.jpg)

also good job on the decals for both Soviet/Chinese models almost begs a Red Dawn style scenario!

~edit~

Not sure where to place this so i'll say it here...

Hopefully you have all had a merry christmas and before long - a Happy New Year!
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

The main reason I made the T-72 like this was that Number47 requested a conversion of the old T-72 into one without ERA. I did not consider the result acceptable so I made a new one instead.


The T-72B with kontakt 1 ERA is probably not too hard and would mainly involve drawing ERA blocks on the current model. I can probably rasterize some layers in photoshop, cut pieces out and replace them with ERA blocks
Possibly also a few minor changes to the mesh but nothing major.
I would probably replace the old ERA equipped T-72 with this one as they fulfil the same role and honestly the old one is not very good by comparison.

The T-72B3 should be fairly easy. The chassis is fairly identical and can largely be reused with only minor modifications. The T-90A might be a better model for it though as the chassis might almost be completely reusable. In either case though the turret would have to be rebuilt.

The T-72B3M would probably be the most tricky as it would involve some changes to the chassis. It might be possible to simply add parts but the question is how much space on the texture map this would require.
I am not sure what model would be easier to work with. Part of the T-90 is closer to it than the early T-72 but the T-72B texture map has more free space to work with.


In all cases the camouflage will be redone but that is manageable and it means greater visual difference between the units. In general making vehicles with markings when possible is a significant reason for making these in the first place. Markings would probably also be changed a bit to again add more variety.


I might do some of this for the next batch of models but for now I will probably focus on finishing off some models like the M48, MCH101/AW101, the Type 214 and Mashu. I also got some missiles I need to finish.
How much of that I can make I do not know.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Great job on the T-72! Quite alot of regional versions too. Out of curiosity, what are the main differences between the actual ZTZ-80 and the T-72 variation that you`ve done to hold its place? I haven`t looked much into the Chinese tank designs so far.

About the T-72 sub-versions discussion though. What exactly was your old T-72 based on?

Happy Holidays to everyone!
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

Nerei wrote:The main reason I made the T-72 like this was that Number47 requested a conversion of the old T-72 into one without ERA. I did not consider the result acceptable so I made a new one instead.


The T-72B with kontakt 1 ERA is probably not too hard and would mainly involve drawing ERA blocks on the current model. I can probably rasterize some layers in photoshop, cut pieces out and replace them with ERA blocks
Possibly also a few minor changes to the mesh but nothing major.
I would probably replace the old ERA equipped T-72 with this one as they fulfil the same role and honestly the old one is not very good by comparison.

The T-72B3 should be fairly easy. The chassis is fairly identical and can largely be reused with only minor modifications. The T-90A might be a better model for it though as the chassis might almost be completely reusable. In either case though the turret would have to be rebuilt.

The T-72B3M would probably be the most tricky as it would involve some changes to the chassis. It might be possible to simply add parts but the question is how much space on the texture map this would require.
I am not sure what model would be easier to work with. Part of the T-90 is closer to it than the early T-72 but the T-72B texture map has more free space to work with.


In all cases the camouflage will be redone but that is manageable and it means greater visual difference between the units. In general making vehicles with markings when possible is a significant reason for making these in the first place. Markings would probably also be changed a bit to again add more variety.


I might do some of this for the next batch of models but for now I will probably focus on finishing off some models like the M48, MCH101/AW101, the Type 214 and Mashu. I also got some missiles I need to finish.
How much of that I can make I do not know.

Good to know, I wasn't sure if when I talked of the T-72B if one was thinking the original base model without the ERA but if it was as per Agent 47s Request I don't feel so bad :) Indeed its actually a very appropriate model for the majority of T-72s pre ERA... (Which is most of the in game ones at current)

T-90A might indeed be a good use indeed for any original T-72B3 (or if one is really perdantic also could replace a T-90S )Remove the Shotra in both cases, add some K-5 ERA in its place, and maybe change the Sights a little and its probably mostly appropriate in both cases... The Hull of many T-72B3 has the side Plates of ERA which looks pretty much as per T-90A also....

T-72B3M as you say might require more changes - It is also I think a lower priority need in game, at current only one user (Russia) and as by the end of this Year (its first real year of production) there is about 154..... Still it probably presents a good 'final model' of T-72 evolution as of right now...

Your other projects, I must say really looking forward to the Type 214 and M48, the 214 is a good choice because as far as I can tell, not only do you get to continue the rearmanent so to speak of ROK but (Haven't done too much research) physically it should appear as per the 212 Submarine and with both classes today being about 23 in service, many more under construction and about 6 Navies utilising...

MK4 wrote:Great job on the T-72! Quite alot of regional versions too. Out of curiosity, what are the main differences between the actual ZTZ-80 and the T-72 variation that you`ve done to hold its place? I haven`t looked much into the Chinese tank designs so far.

About the T-72 sub-versions discussion though. What exactly was your old T-72 based on?

Happy Holidays to everyone!
Happy Holidays MK4!!

IMHO ZTZ-80 series (Until about 85-III) and T-72 can probably both be played by Nereis T-72 model...

To put it very simply PLA Tanks are typically about a generation behind the Soviet/Russian Tanks, Border Clashes (and likely a few foreign provided samples) very very slowly changed this over the cold war... ZTZ-80 does however become a Tank that after its original model goes on in the form of the ZTZ-85 series to resemble T-72s a lot more (new welded Turret for example) whilst the ones previously are all T-54/62 style

Once the cold war ends, China gets its hand on Ex Soviet T-72 and other such and the gap closes considerably (Along side Russian Stagnation)
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

MK4 wrote:Out of curiosity, what are the main differences between the actual ZTZ-80 and the T-72 variation that you`ve done to hold its place?
The ZTZ 80 chassis I would say has a closer resemblance to older USSR vehicles like the T-54 and T-62 which makes sense as it is based on the ZTZ-59 and ZTZ-69 which in turn is basically the T-54 and a modified T-62 respectively. It shares some design ideas from the T-72 although I am unsure how much is specifically copied from the T-72.
I suspect it is more of an upgraded T-62/ZTZ-69 than a copy of the T-72 as the ZTZ-96 from what I remember actually features a chassis derived from the T-72.

Likewise the Turret has some features that are distinctly not like the T-72. The ones I find the easiest to notice is the way the left side hatch is built and the placement of the smoke grenade launchers which on the ZTZ 80 is located further forward.
The shape of the turret as a whole has some distinct T-54 or T-62 features.

Also one advantage of using the T-72 as a stand-in for the ZTZ 80 is that it means it is easier to have a broad set of regional textures. With this setup the USSR can sell T-72s to the PRC and they will look like PRC tanks instead of being generic green. The alternative will be to make a large number of regional textures which quickly will become a very large workload.

Speaking of using the T-72 as a stand-in for PRC tanks the ZTZ-88 can probably also be represented by one as it is a fairly direct upgrade of the ZTZ-80 but yes the ZTZ-85 is not really going to work out as it has a fairly angular western style turret. The ZTZ-85 though has a decent resemblance to the ZTZ-96 so one model will cover both of those and the ZTZ-96 is really the main MBT of the PRC today.
The ZTZ-99 however is visually different so it can do with a separate model but just one will of the ZTZ 85, 96 and 99 will go a long way towards accurately representing the modern PLAGF tank force.
DasVivo wrote: Good to know, I wasn't sure if when I talked of the T-72B if one was thinking the original base model without the ERA but if it was as per Agent 47s Request I don't feel so bad :) Indeed its actually a very appropriate model for the majority of T-72s pre ERA... (Which is most of the in game ones at current)

T-90A might indeed be a good use indeed for any original T-72B3 (or if one is really perdantic also could replace a T-90S )Remove the Shotra in both cases, add some K-5 ERA in its place, and maybe change the Sights a little and its probably mostly appropriate in both cases... The Hull of many T-72B3 has the side Plates of ERA which looks pretty much as per T-90A also....

T-72B3M as you say might require more changes - It is also I think a lower priority need in game, at current only one user (Russia) and as by the end of this Year (its first real year of production) there is about 154..... Still it probably presents a good 'final model' of T-72 evolution as of right now...
With the T-72 versions I might prioritise them in the order of T-72B with Kontakt 1, T-72B3 and T-72B3M.
This is in part simply down to the amount of work I expect them to require to make.
The alternative is to do go with the T-72B3 first as it is probably the one which right away will have the highest benefit as there already is the old Kontakt 1 T-72. It is not good and I would prefer it to not see the light of day anymore but it can work for now. there is also the the option of doing other vehicles such as the TOS-1.
Ultimately though trying to plan anything is probably completely pointless as I will probably select it at complete random. I tend to work like that.

IF/when I do a T-72B3 it will however very likely be with a nearly full rebuilt of the turret. The way it is made I will probably have a bit of a fight getting it in the right shape anyway and if I do it from scratch it will probably be better overall.

Also I tend to agree that the T-72B3 might be a fairly decent representation of say the T-90S Bhishma. so far I have turned off the red glow for the Shotra on most regional versions of the T-90A in order to try and hide it but with a T-72B3 painted as say an indian vehicle it could probably just be used instead and all T-90A's could then have visible Shotra on all versions.
MK4 wrote:About the T-72 sub-versions discussion though. What exactly was your old T-72 based on?
I do not remember exactly but looking at it I would probably expect it to be an early version with 1st gen ERA. Considering the placement of the smoke grenade launchers it could actually be an A version but from what I remember when I made it I was mostly concerned with making a T-72 and less what version so I might have used illustrations of different vehicles for reference

More work done on the M48. A few additional changes, some shading and regional textures and it will probably be close to completion. It also need a good deal of grime
Image

No additional work done on the Type 214 but it is a submarine so the work required is not that much compared to say a tank.
We will have to see what exactly makes it. I also got a I-15 and MCH101 that needs to be finished and ideally also a few other models that have been in a state of semi completion for some time now.


Also happy holidays to you all or in my case "happy yet another play-through of Nier: Automata." Admitted I have done other things but they are not better ^_-
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Nerei wrote: The ZTZ 80 chassis I would say has a closer resemblance to older USSR vehicles like the T-54 and T-62 which makes sense as it is based on the ZTZ-59 and ZTZ-69 which in turn is basically the T-54 and a modified T-62 respectively. It shares some design ideas from the T-72 although I am unsure how much is specifically copied from the T-72.
I suspect it is more of an upgraded T-62/ZTZ-69 than a copy of the T-72 as the ZTZ-96 from what I remember actually features a chassis derived from the T-72.
Speaking of using the T-72 as a stand-in for PRC tanks the ZTZ-88 can probably also be represented by one as it is a fairly direct upgrade of the ZTZ-80 but yes the ZTZ-85 is not really going to work out as it has a fairly angular western style turret. The ZTZ-85 though has a decent resemblance to the ZTZ-96 so one model will cover both of those and the ZTZ-96 is really the main MBT of the PRC today.
The ZTZ-99 however is visually different so it can do with a separate model but just one will of the ZTZ 85, 96 and 99 will go a long way towards accurately representing the modern PLAGF tank force.
Yes, the story is very much along the lines of based on, but inspired by and with additions of. Which is why I`ve always failed to grasp it holistically. :-) Good to see you seem to be in charge of this as, in my opinion, the Chinese unit roster is currently the one most in need of an upgrade, especially since Japan and to some extent Russia and Korea are reasonably well covered thanks to your work. Maybe someday you`ll be able to add to it.
I do not remember exactly but looking at it I would probably expect it to be an early version with 1st gen ERA. Considering the placement of the smoke grenade launchers it could actually be an A version but from what I remember when I made it I was mostly concerned with making a T-72 and less what version so I might have used illustrations of different vehicles for reference
So it is meant to be used as a T-72A only from now on? I`m asking because you`re considering doing quite alot of sub-versions of the T-72. It would be a pity for the old one to remain unused.
We will have to see what exactly makes it. I also got a I-15 and MCH101 that needs to be finished and ideally also a few other models that have been in a state of semi completion for some time now.
Whenever you get to finishing your wip units please consider the Mi-28 and Tu-22M3.
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

A T-72B with Kontakt 1 would really fulfil the same role as the current T-72 model does and the T-72B without ERA is probably a better representation of the other early T-72.
To some extend my plan is to make it redundant as I am honestly not all that fond of it.

One option though is simply to use it as a generic representation of some of the fictive tanks designs.


The PLA is going to be a fairly high priority in the long run. Chances of anything major for the PLAGF being made over the next few months are not amazingly high though. I do have an old ZTZ-99 model but I am not exactly happy with it so chances of it being scrapped is basically 100%.

I have some work done on the Mi-28 so it might make it assuming I get some of the other models done within the next few days. Chances of both the Mi-28 and Tu-22M3 making it though is smewhat less likely.


Also most of the basic work is now done on the M48 Patton.
Image
I still have to make a German, ROK, ROC, Israeli and generic desert version.
Also the stars would not really be historically accurate but they might end up staying anyway.
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

Looking good! I presume every unit you will be making in different - Schemes? (Well aside from say maybe Warships)
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

It is to some extend going to be like the M41 walker bulldog
Image
Just replace the Japanese regional texture with an Israeli and desert camouflage set.
This also reminds me I should do a region group Z texture set for the M41.

Warships will as a rule not get any custom regional textures in part due to the way I make the textures for them and in part due to them looking more alike. Russian or US warships in foreign service looks a lot like the US or russian versions in most cases.

The only exception I will probably make is with warships where there are some large easily visible elements that are clearly belonging to a certain nation. Case in point would be the Akagi, Kaga and Hiryū models.
For ships like the Kirov where there is a Russian regional texture set with rust red decks and a generic one without I will probably just have all use the red decks.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Nerei wrote:A T-72B with Kontakt 1 would really fulfil the same role as the current T-72 model does and the T-72B without ERA is probably a better representation of the other early T-72.
To some extend my plan is to make it redundant as I am honestly not all that fond of it.
I`ve been in and around mods for quite a few platforms where the artists really felt that by the time they reached the third roster they could do better with the first one. As a result things got caught up in a loop and the communities kept ending up with 100 legionaries, but no Parthian units, 10 series of 1939 Germans, but not one Dutch etc. Then whatever the game was called, the company making it would release the sequel and everyone would move to the "more advanced" engine starting with the Romans and the Germans again. I`m not saying that`s where you are. Just saying that, as a principle, based on several disappointing experiences, I`m opposed to redoing units unless there`s really some high imperative or we`re at that stage (that I`ve never experienced) where almost everything of what`s important is already done. Personally I`d take one of those Chinese tanks you`ve mentioned instead of a redone T-72 (that leaves the old one useless). Basically I`m just pleading that you don`t get caught in this.
The PLA is going to be a fairly high priority in the long run.
I agree. Also, as a personal opinion, it would be good if the French and Germans would eventually get a handful of specific designs to make them more able to look the part (stuff like the Boxer, Puma, VBCI). Also, I think it would be very helpful if 2 or 3 of the Russian AA systems would get their own graphics (like the SA-8 Gecko or the SA-22/Pantsir-S1). Russia (and many other states) have such a vast array of Soviet/Russian surface-to-air systems that currently share their graphics that, given how the air warfare happens in game, it`s hard to understand what you`re up against. A bit more diversity would go a long way imo.
Chances of anything major for the PLAGF being made over the next few months are not amazingly high though.
Yes, I understand, I was talking on the long term.
I have some work done on the Mi-28 so it might make it assuming I get some of the other models done within the next few days. Chances of both the Mi-28 and Tu-22M3 making it though is smewhat less likely.
Whenever you`ll find the time, of course.
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

While I will admit that I consider the old T-72 to be one of my worst models the main reason for wanting to redo it and the T-55 is down to photoshop related issues with the texturing and the layout of the UV map.
I have no plans to say redo say the Il-76 despite it far from being a perfect model and and a rework certainly would result in a better model.

Neither the T-55 nor the T-72 have texture maps that support new regional textures very well and their UV maps are not really made to support removing the turret. I can probably rebuild the texture for the T-72 to support this but it is probably as much work as adding ERA to the T-72B. The turret is as mentioned is also a problem as removing it will leave several small holes around on the texture map which really limits what I can do with it. Solving both of these issues will be more work than just adding ERA to the T-72B. Also even if I do all of this I will still be suck with a model I do not consider very good.

The T-55 is more tricky as it is using a completely separate texture map for each regional texture meaning anything I do will have to be done to several texture maps. I actually do not have any significant issues with the model itself or a good deal of the texture map. Chances areI will probably start out with the original model and try to salvage usable parts of the texture.

If I where to do any significant number of T-55 conversions or Kontakt 1 T-72 regional texture sets chances are this is actually the faster way to do it and the result is also likely to be better.


Currently I am aiming for a release around January 1st. I can push it back a few days which should increase the chance of including both the Mi-28 and Tu-22M3. Naturally that is assuming I can keep that deadline at all for which there is no guarantees.


As for soviet era anti-aircraft systems I do not have much of an idea what would be the best choices but if you and/or DasVivo (or someone else for that matter) can come up with say a top 3 or 4 most needed systems (in order of importance preferably) that would be practical as it means I do not have to do that research and chances are I would miss something anyway.
The same is true for Germany and France. Feel free to make a 3-4 unit priority list for them. Only thing I will say for Germany is that the Marder is nr. 1 as I have one that is already UV mapped. I would also like if the AMX-13 and 30 are on the list somewhere. If that means increasing France to 5 then that is okay.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Regarding the lists, my suggestions are as follow, in order of how important I think they are:

Germany and France (number 1 left open for your Marder :-) ):

1.
2. Puma
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puma_(IFV)
3. Boxer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(ar ... g_vehicle)
4. VBCI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A9hi ... infanterie
5. GCT 155mm - here you`ll have to decide if it`s worth doing the AMX-30 in conjunction since the GCT 155mm uses its chassis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GCT_155mm

Russian AA systems - there are a total of 6 important systems that lack their own graphics. I chose the following based mainly on how different from other graphics they are:

1. SA-8 Gecko
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K33_Osa
2. SA-22 Greyhound (Pantsir-S1)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1
3. SA-11 "Gadfly" - or the SA-17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system

You might consider this one too:
4. SA-13 "Gopher - it is based on the MT-LB chassis so it might be worth planing to make both in case you decide that either of them is important enough;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K35_Strela-10
The MT-LB is still used in large numbers and it`s pretty much a Cold War symbol.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MT-LB
Post Reply

Return to “Modding Show & Tell”