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 »

T-90 - 3200 Produced (Variants in Game: T-90S, T-90MS)
There is a T-90MS in game? What ID does it have?
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

MK4 wrote:
T-90 - 3200 Produced (Variants in Game: T-90S, T-90MS)
There is a T-90MS in game? What ID does it have?
Unfortunately I think my last backup of the Game Files was well before any of the latest updates so I can't 100% Ascertain its accurate (I was playing around with the default .Unit file for scenario building and to replace some fictional units with modifications/upgrades of actual units)

But I believe T-90MS is ID 2399

The latest updates seem odd though also, I am pretty sure I remember the update before last adding a T-72B which is rather appropriate and maybe even a T-72B3 (There is now an even better T-72B3M which should number 154 by years end in its first year of introduction 2017)

But I couldn't see either last I checked... Indeed half the T-72 variants are export models, likewise T-90 Variants are export (No T-90A or say base T-90), and the T-90 upgrade Russia will be selecting will be based on T-90M 'Proryv 3' (Breakthrough 3)... But that becomes a slightly different question...

Anyway this is why I suggested we might have large 'gaps' in the current unit Models, as many of these families are not necessarily covered... I could also have included the Merkava list (which can have use for Namer also ) but that is a more unique family - unique in operators and types about roughly 2000~ (MBT + Namer etc)
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Chances of the ID of the T-90Ms having been changed would be fairly low so I think it is fairly safe to assume it is still 2399. My default.unit reference file also says that but it is also possible it is not the latest version.

As mentioned I do have a M48 model that have had some work put into it. I will not guarantee it will be part of a December release but it is not impossible. I will probably also make a M48A5K based on this model at some point. The UV map is made with this in mind so there are extra space for this or other modifications.

Image
This one is rendered with directional lights and proper shading so it is not entirely representative of what it would look like in-game. However rendering with only ambient lighting would mainly produce simple blobs of colour. Also naturally this is not nearly complete.

If there are other models you consider important other than the M48/60 let me know and I will try and give them higher priority. It does not just have to be tanks either. As mentioned though I cannot give any timeframe for completion.
Also if any of them might end up needing alternate versions (e.g. similarly to the M48A5K mentioned above) please mention this also as it will make it easier for me to make a UV map that will better allow this.
I already have the T-62, T-80, AMX-13, AMX-30 and TR-85M on my by now fairly long list of models I should do at some point.


As for what models I have considered modifying there is the M1A2 TUSK II which should be easy to change into a more conventional M1 like those used by say Saudi Arabia or Australia.
I will probably also do a ROC version despite the ROC apparently abandoning its plans to acquire surplus US M1A1.

The T-72 should be fairly easy to convert into a TOS-1.

There is the S-300 which I have already talked about rebuilding into a BM-30.

The current Type 73 Shīn light truck is configured as a basic light transport truck. I am considering making a ATGM version.

The above mentioned M48 has a texture map that has room for additional pieces such as skirts. That should allow it to be changed into say a M48A5K, M728 engineering vehicle and as a more radical change possibly also a Magach 7.

There are also a number of armoured bridge layers where I already have made the base vehicle. The Type 87 SPAAG and M1 Abrams are fairly new models so it should not be too hard to make this. The K1, Leopard 2 and T-55 also have such variants but given that they are older models chances of me using them for this is lower.

I am not saying all of these will happen or that it would be the models with the greatest utility just that at a quick glance at the existing models these are the conversions that I found to be feasible. There might definitely be more.


I have no definite list of models I want to make more regional textures but main operators without a specific regional texture would be good candidates and the AH-64D belongs to that group.
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

Looks good! Certainly something to looking forward to!

A few Questions/Points I'd put to you -

I think you made the M270 MLRS for Japan, did you also make this in varied color Schemes (Particularly say maybe Green, Desert, US Army 'Woodland') as that would obviously serve many countries OoB quite effectively...

When you make models do you build individual 'Components' first and then attach them to each other? (Not sure how modelling works exact or your own process) because some of the models you have made are vehicles that share Chasis etc, So yes TOS-1 for T-72, likewise things such as Smerch or Bereg A-222 could be made out of your S-300 PMU1 model..

Indeed using the T-54/55, T-72, M1, M60 etc Chasis there is a number of Engineering Platforms, Bridges etc that could be made...

Most Russian units often indeed Monotone Green, Aircraft have more varied color patterns (For a while under recent reforms they were using 'Eggplant' but this has fallen back out of favor again for Aircraft)
This may make things easier or harder for you I do not know, but I don't think its necessary to have Soviet/Russian Artillery, SAMs etc in Camo Patterns.... Unless you of course want that

I might start work on a similar list of say IFVs, then next after I'll look at Artillery....
See how various classes fill out and indeed what are the most prolific pieces in each category
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Yes the M270 was made as part of my JSDF pack. I ended up not making a number of regional textures in order to get the models for that package done. Making them might have taken a few months, possibly more. Expanding regional textures will probably be a priority for the next few months once the December package is done.
For the M270 in particular there is an Israeli regional texture but it certainly could do with more such as US, British, German and generic Arab.


The new models are generally fairly modular and does allow some reconstruction. In case of the S-300 removing the vertical missile launcher is not a problem and the texture map is made so that removing these should give a single fairly large area for new parts. Turning it into a Bereg A-222 should definitely be possible.
Likewise should removing the turret from say the T-72 is easy and replacing it with a TOS-1 launcher.
Older models like the T-55 is harder to work with as I never made them with such changes in mind and if I where to really use it for a significant number of new models I would probably start out making a new T-55 model. It is the reason why I am making the T-72B from scratch instead of adapting the 1st gen ERA T-72.
Vehicles based on the T-55 might involve parts on a different texture map which means making regional textures would not be possible.

The limitation with changing models generally depends on what changes would be required. Removing turrets and the like is easy (on new models at least) while say changing the shape of the chassis is not. In those cases it might however still be possible to rip parts from the old model such as tracks and using them on a new one.

To give you an example the JSDF Type 87 SPAAG is based on the Type 74 MBT but the changes to the chassis is significant enough that the easiest thing was to simply take whatever parts was not significantly changed, scrap everything else and rebuild the vehicle from scratch. Only the tracks from the Type 74 Tank is actually reused on the Type 87 SPAAG.
The Type 87 SPAAG chassis however was used without any significant changes as basis for the Type 91 bridge layer so changing it into that should be fairly easy by comparison.

For warships though I have an entire archive of parts like CIWS, turrets, missile canisters and the textures are made so I can take parts from existing vessels and easily reuse them.
Basically the more warships I have from a nation in a given period the more likely I am to have a decent start for any new vessels.


I tend to try and use a single camouflage pattern for the vehicles of a region group. This is mainly as I like being able to identify the nationality of a vehicles based on the camouflage pattern it uses. In some cases it might result in patterns being applied to vehicles that was never painted like that. A good example of that would be the M1A2 TUSK II and Strykers being painted in 1980's summer verdant MERDC. I consider this acceptable especially among NATO countries as they tend to use fairly similar camouflage patterns.
In case of the Russian vehicles the 3 tone green, white and black
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

Thanks for the Answers, pity that it seems quite a lot of rebuilding has to be done for significant changes like the Type 87/Type 74 example though I am glad to hear at least the Ships are a little more 'Modular'.. If you are looking at the T-72/T-54/55 or well any Tanks I think as you did with the Type 91 Bridge Layer would be nice to see also (Eg: MTU-72) but I think we can be patient for that (and they are not the most common units)

What you said about camouflage patterns makes sense also, I think historical accuracy in a game like this can take a back seat to usability and it can add a certain aesthetic, especially given the options the game now has for these different schemes to give a little flavor
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

If I`m reading it correctly and you`ve both confirmed the existence of that unit then it means someone added the T-90MS to vanilla SRU. It`s absent in SR2020 and SRCW.

@Nerei I`m not sure if my question got lost in the flood of text (or your answer for that matter), but I was curious if by "a few easy conversions" you meant something like a model edit (for example producing the AT M1134 version of the Stryker so that we don`t resort to using the old LAV graphics) or just texture edits.
That and possibly a few easy conversions.
Like what?
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

MK4 wrote:If I`m reading it correctly and you`ve both confirmed the existence of that unit then it means someone added the T-90MS to vanilla SRU. It`s absent in SR2020 and SRCW.
Zuikaku added T-90MS among other units...
"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 »

DasVivo wrote:Thanks for the Answers, pity that it seems quite a lot of rebuilding has to be done for significant changes like the Type 87/Type 74 example though I am glad to hear at least the Ships are a little more 'Modular'.. If you are looking at the T-72/T-54/55 or well any Tanks I think as you did with the Type 91 Bridge Layer would be nice to see also (Eg: MTU-72) but I think we can be patient for that (and they are not the most common units)

What you said about camouflage patterns makes sense also, I think historical accuracy in a game like this can take a back seat to usability and it can add a certain aesthetic, especially given the options the game now has for these different schemes to give a little flavor
Part of the issue is also that I generally want the models to be accurate. I would rather make 5 models I consider good than 10 I am not happy with. Technically speaking though if I do not like the result I will simply not release it. I do have a few of those as some of the older models have gone through multiple versions before being released. The F-15, F-3 and Tu-16 are examples of this.

I have no idea what I might do with the T-72B once it is done. It might be turned into a bridgelayer, it could also end up as a BMPT or TOS-1 or all of them I really have not planned anything yet. However if I do a T-72 B3M I will probably use the T-90 as a base instead (large parts of the turret will have to be replaced but the chassis might be possible to adapt).

I think any adaptations of the T-55 will be some time into the future as I really am not happy enough with my current T-55 to use it for anything significant. I might salvage parts of it for a new model but anything T-55 related will have a new model as a prerequisite. There are some interesting T-55 adaptations though so it is not something I consider impossible.


For camouflage patterns making an optional olive green if anyone has some interest in that is quite easy. The details and colouring are separate layers in photoshop which means it might not be much more complex than creating a green background and turning some layers off. That is a difference between old models like the T-55 and new ones like the T-90A.
I might also make it a priority to make region group Z textures for some more models as having say Germany, France, Russia or the US use green vehicles is far more acceptable than say Syria or Saudi Arabia. Israel is also a candidate for regional textures for that reason.
MK4 wrote: @Nerei I`m not sure if my question got lost in the flood of text (or your answer for that matter), but I was curious if by "a few easy conversions" you meant something like a model edit (for example producing the AT M1134 version of the Stryker so that we don`t resort to using the old LAV graphics) or just texture edits.
That would be one option yes. Others might be the Type 91 bridge layer or the TOS-1. I will probably also do some regional texture sets for models that say where part of the JSDF pack. Yes that might include a US Army AH-64D regional texture. Also yes removing national markings will be easy ^_-
Feel free to remind me again about it in January or February should I forget.


Also with navy vessels brought up here are some I have been working on. These should all hopefully make it. Also these are rendered only with ambient lighting.
Image
The first one is a Type 214 submarine. Technically it is based on drawings I have of the ROK Navy Son Won-Il class but it is basically the same.
Image
Surprise surprise both of these are JMSDF vessels. The small one is a Hayabusa FAC and the large oiler is a Mashu class fleet replenishment ship.
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

Nothing wrong with quality control in your work, Personally I would always definitely be down for a generic Olive/Green/Desert Tan varieties of vehicles for simple reason that they are flexible enough to be applied to any nations really.. But of course you have to balance what you can do and what you want to do

Ships are looking good too, I think I can see where you are adding the 'modules' in building them..
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

The Hayabusa has the potential to be used by quite a large number of patrol boats. We`ve had such a discussion as I remember. Nice job on the Type 214 too!
number47 wrote: Zuikaku added T-90MS among other units...
Thank you! Are these (the unit stats) available somewhere on the forums too?
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

MK4 wrote:Thank you! Are these (the unit stats) available somewhere on the forums too?
I believe you will find them in his mod files...his unit database or better said, changes to original database were implemented in SRU
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2394
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Zuikaku »

number47 wrote:
MK4 wrote:Thank you! Are these (the unit stats) available somewhere on the forums too?
I believe you will find them in his mod files...his unit database or better said, changes to original database were implemented in SRU
T-90MS is now part of original unit database.
Please teach AI everything!
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

number47 wrote: I believe you will find them in his mod files...his unit database or better said, changes to original database were implemented in SRU
Thank you!
Zuikaku wrote: T-90MS is now part of original unit database.
Yes, but only for SRU and up and I do not have access to those. Remember when SR released on steam only and many of you were debating whether to make the step or not, but in the end did? I didn`t! And won`t! :-) So, unfortunately I`m cut off from what are basically patches to the games I own (SR2020 and SRCW). That said, thank you for stepping up and adding to the old SR unit data base.
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

I still need to do a bit of shading and there is still the camouflage and dirt but other than that the T-72B is mostly done
Image
Post Reply

Return to “Modding Show & Tell”