3D modelling

Post mods you have finished or are working on here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

~Edited~
To keep wall of text off your topic

So I created a list of Soviet/Russian SAMs + Shilka to help you with your question Nerei

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 77#p185476

Based on this, I would suggest a few things... If you'll forgive my somewhat convoluted answer...

#1) SA-13 Gopher...

Absolutely agree with MK4 on this one...
Why? Highly produced, Widely Exported, Uses the lower part of the MT-LB Chassis which would make your work on any potential future projects easier, Units in the game that also do this include: MT-LB, 2S1 Gozdika SPG, BMP-23, 2S24 (and probably a unit I'd suggest BG adds to a new update - Sosna-R http://bastion-opk.ru/VVT/SOSNA-R_160102_01.jpg which is like an extremely modernized SA-13...)

#2) 9K37 Buk

Why? Highly Produced, Has two in game Units virtually identical visually: SA-11 Gadfly, SA-17 Grizzly, with a different Missile 'Launcher' you can also make the Buk-M3 Unit....
With a little planning/forethought and further modification (Maybe lengthening the hull, adding a wheel and couple other tweeks) it should have similar shape also the following units: SA-15 Gauntlet, 26M Tunguska, S-2 Pantsyr GM352 Tracked and very distantly potentially 2T Stalker (which shares the wheels at least)

#3) Pantsir-S1

Why? Relatively small but ever increasing volume of Production, multiple export customers, game has numerous variants it could cover... The 'Cab' of the Kamaz Chasis could be used on a future Kamaz 'Supply Truck' Variant for Russia, or anything else they use these widely produced Kamazes for, The Turret Gun/Missile System could potentially be used on Warships Units in the future..
That said to be accurate the Pantsir would need least two different Chasis (Truck/GM352) and at least 2 different Turrets to replicate all the Pantsir units currently in game


And lucky #4 I'll suggest something rather different and I guess a comparatively simple vehicle thats probably more important than just its Missile System
#4) Gibka-S

http://defence-blog.com/wp-content/uplo ... 167255.jpg
Why? Represents a very modern Russian SAM System for use with say Paratroops... With a little planning and building the basic vehicle first one can also switch the Turrets/Missile System around to give other possible variants of the GAZ Tigr-M (Humvee Equivalent) - this could easily mean one without a gun/turret, an AT Variant with Kornet ATGMs, one with Reconnaissance Mast one with a Remote MG etc... Which might make it an easier project than many others.. It also means down the line Russian Units might have a good replacement graphic (and unit) for different categories, whether that be Air Defense, Anti Tank and Reconaisance (and there is an apparent Mortar Model too http://www.russianarms.ru/forum/index.p ... 1056;image)

As you can probably tell also I emphasize what might be the potential recycling of your efforts into more than one project rather than say the SA-8 Gecko (one of my personal favorites in reality) but which the development of won't necessarily help for other units.... That said I think a good unit in each of the 'categories' might also be nice, close attack, mid and high attacks... S-300 that you made could cover much of the upper echelons already
I would highly recommend that you look at all the variants I have listed of each type before picking it though as to make sure they can easily be made into different variants before weighing those options. I have however tried to give you different reasons why I think each might be important or good to do..

That said, I can totally understand the joy of making something completely fresh so you'll know whats right for you... SA-8 Gecko is a very unique vehicle and quite lovely really so I'm certainly not going to mind seeing it in game either :)
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

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)
From the introduction part of forums:
number47 wrote:Hi, I'm number47...because I'm not 46 nor am I 48, and no, I have no affiliations to Agent 47 from the Hitman game series. We just share a common number :P

Born in '82 in X:913 Y:185 (in-game coordinates) and been living there ever since (well, apart from my college time and military service). When I'm not hiding my identity in the vast wilderness of internet , I go by the name of Leo. I'm a lot of things, a father, a husband, an annoying SR mod tester, a failed SR modder, a failed recruiter of 3d artists, all in all an enthusiast gamer...I like all kind of games, I'm not genre specific or better said, I'm able to find great games in all genres. I adore the SR series but I was sad that CW didn't „give me“ what I was „expecting to receive“ from it :cry: . Hopefully, SR1936 will be better :-) (even though I'm tired of WWII era :roll: and Cold War had sooooo much potential :cry: ). Been lurking around the forum for a year or so before registering in Sep 2011 and...I...don't... Enough, already! :lol:
:P
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

Nerei, excellent job on the T-72!

Image

Guys, I wish you all only the best in 2018!
"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 »

DasVivo wrote: Based on this, I would suggest a few things... If you'll forgive my somewhat convoluted answer...
Ok, so the good news is that while we don`t necessarily agree on the order of importance our lists have the same 3 out of 4 units.
That said to be accurate the Pantsir would need least two different Chasis (Truck/GM352) and at least 2 different Turrets to replicate all the Pantsir units currently in game
Ok, but how many on the GM352 are actually in service? I was under the impression that was just a proposal/demonstrator. Personally I want the truck version because it looks like nothing we currently have in game. The only option currently is to use the vanilla Patriot like graphics and that would be so wrong. :-)
As you can probably tell also I emphasize what might be the potential recycling of your efforts into more than one project rather than say the SA-8 Gecko (one of my personal favorites in reality) but which the development of won't necessarily help for other units....
I think that in order to be helpful for other units such shared development has to be considered right from the start so that Nerei makes the model in the necessary modular way and leaves enough room in the texture. Otherwise I found he just prefers to start over (case in point would be the T-72).

I went with the Gecko because I can`t think of a graphical substitute that comes close to it (including any of the other three from the lists above). The SA-9 is still too different. Plus, it has quite a long list of operators so it will appear often in the early stages of the game:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K33_Osa# ... _operators
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

number47 wrote:Hi, I'm number47...because I'm not 46 nor am I 48, and no, I have no affiliations to Agent 47 from the Hitman game series. We just share a common number :P

Born in '82 in X:913 Y:185 (in-game coordinates) and been living there ever since (well, apart from my college time and military service). When I'm not hiding my identity in the vast wilderness of internet , I go by the name of Leo. I'm a lot of things, a father, a husband, an annoying SR mod tester, a failed SR modder, a failed recruiter of 3d artists, all in all an enthusiast gamer...I like all kind of games, I'm not genre specific or better said, I'm able to find great games in all genres. I adore the SR series but I was sad that CW didn't „give me“ what I was „expecting to receive“ from it :cry: . Hopefully, SR1936 will be better :-) (even though I'm tired of WWII era :roll: and Cold War had sooooo much potential :cry: ). Been lurking around the forum for a year or so before registering in Sep 2011 and...I...don't... Enough, already! :lol:
:P
Haha fair point pulling me up on that one! My Bad :), knew I should have looked again :P
MK4 wrote: Ok, so the good news is that while we don`t necessarily agree on the order of importance our lists have the same 3 out of 4 units.
And to be fair I don't oppose your 4th choice either necessarily (was even trying, to think if I could remember its chasis being used for much else of importance, alas something like the OTR-21 is still probably pushing it...) but thats okay
Ok, but how many on the GM352 are actually in service? I was under the impression that was just a proposal/demonstrator. Personally I want the truck version because it looks like nothing we currently have in game. The only option currently is to use the vanilla Patriot like graphics and that would be so wrong. :-)
Agreed on the GM352 Version not really being in use (UAE is about the only customer thus far for it as far as I can tell and any tunguska replacement in RF could be entirely new chasis who knows), the Truck Variant on KAMAZ Chasis is quite nice and unique, both the Truck (Well the Cab at least) could be used for other units and the weapon mount could potentially be used on new Ships..

But I guess I am framing my arguments somewhat around the in game units that could get upgraded - about 4 variants in game.... One of those appears to be the GM352, so it shares the weapon system as the S-1 but a different chasis, the S-2s I believe will require a different 'Janus' Two Faced Radar than the S-1... So I'm more just trying to point out that if one is going to model them, best to keep them as seperate parts that you can plug and play I guess...

At the end of the day, If I had to have just one of the two variants in game it would definitely be the truck one so no argument there
I think that in order to be helpful for other units such shared development has to be considered right from the start so that Nerei makes the model in the necessary modular way and leaves enough room in the texture. Otherwise I found he just prefers to start over (case in point would be the T-72).

I went with the Gecko because I can`t think of a graphical substitute that comes close to it (including any of the other three from the lists above). The SA-9 is still too different. Plus, it has quite a long list of operators so it will appear often in the early stages of the game:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K33_Osa# ... _operators
I agree absolutely with what you say about it being helpful to consider it from the start... Hence my attempts to create some semblance of a list (however imperfect) of units that could relate to one another with shared components... My hope is with a quick look at it one might be able to see which units might be related to others and thus cut down on work (say using the same tracks and part of chasis from the GM352, or MT-LB based vehicles) with a 'Plug and Play' approach I guess.. I'd much rather that be possible then request the poor guy to say build a MT-LB or something then be able to to recycle considerable amounts of the same vehicle to then build say a BUK, only to find out after the he might have been able to use some of those parts also on a SA-15 Gauntlet, Tunguska, Tracked Pantsir or else and its too late..

SA-8 Gecko indeed doesn't really have an equivalent in the game graphically speaking to fit its niche, and you are correct that it is in fairly wide distribution....
That said its in a 'niche' precisely so that means it will be one unit in game that most all the components probably will be usable for... The closest in game unit to it graphically is actually probably the one currently used for the Pantsirs which has a very simple dual SAM Pack above a 6 wheeled armored chassis...

I figured the Gibka could be nice because the vehicle itself is quite simple in shape, and if one builds the Tigr seperately from the Missile Launchers, you can simply build different Missiles and add them on top to create new kit in a variety of classes(Ones that Russia will be fielding increasingly)

All said :) I have no issues with your 4 choices what so ever really and I can certainly understand your arguments put forward
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

DasVivo wrote: All said :) I have no issues with your 4 choices what so ever really and I can certainly understand your arguments put forward
There`s a saying: everyone with his idea, only I with mine. :-) Together we`ve proposed 5 units and some time ago number47 proposed an extra SA-6. Since we`re talking - a possibly very - long term for this list I`d be surprised if Nerei flatly refuses to do one or two of them, but for the sake of simplification let`s reduce it to the maximum of 4 that Nerei mentioned. Since number47 also asked for a SA-13
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... rd#p180620
I think we can agree that the SA-13 should be on such a list.

How about each of us three chooses one (1) AA system from the remaining proposals so that, together with the SA-13, we have a total of 4?

SA-6 Gainful
SA-8 Gecko
SA-11 "Gadfly" (Buk)
SA-22 Greyhound (Pantsir-S1)
Gibka-S (don`t know the NATO indicative for this one)

You`re welcome to start!
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

The main reason I am asking for suggestions is to keep the list manageable. I can add every USSR/Russian air defence system ever made to my to-do list but chances of me getting through them before 2020 even if I give it fairly high priority is not amazing. Chances are also I will end up making something less relevant first.

If the list is 3 or 4 models long is not what is a deal breaker. If there is an amazing reason to add a 5th I am also willing to consider that. I just want to avoid getting a list of 20 models with the argument that "they are probably all important for X reason". Chances naturally drops the further down they are on the list although what reference material I can find and my fickle mind also affects it. I am however unlikely to actively go hunt down something else to make unless it happens to fit well with say the PRC or something like that.


Also yes ideally I will have to take into account of I have to make variants of a unit. Just listing what it can also be turned into with a link to a wikipedia article or something is fine.

The reason to consider this is that while I certainly can just make combination vehicles (e.g. putting a S-75 SAM launcher on a T-55 chassis) they have some restrictions. Basically regional textures are unlikely to work well if at all.


Here is the complete lineup of AFV's that should make it for next model collection. Pushing for January 1st might be a bit optimistic though especially as I want to clear up as many nearly done models as possible.
Image
The tanks will probably have rotating turrets the CV9040 probably not.
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

They are looking fantastic :), I wouldn't even expect moving turrets to be honest!

And well yes - I think we MK4 and myself at least have an idea of which 4 might be best..... I am happy in this case to go with a small compromise and take the SA-8 Gecko, but of course your decision.

I assume with model making though, you could for example start with say the lower wheels of a vehicle, save that in a incomplete form then just edit that to make differences (say stretch it out to add a road wheel, or building the vehicle superstructure different in each 'saved version')? (Even if you can't say text the guns/Missiles, which might not be such a big issue in some cases at least)?

Anyway Happy New Year everyone! Speak soon :)
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Revolving turrets are just controlled by a few values in the default.picnums file. It is fairly easy to do. The problem is that it has some restrictions. All models rotate around the scene origin which is a bit problematic if a turret is off-center.
The CV9040 turret is going to be rotating around a point off centre which is going to look bad. Tanks tend to have a heavy turret located near the vehicles centre of mass which is usually at the centre of the vehicle and by extension also the scene.
If I could do it properly I would do it for all vehicles with turrets but as I cannot I would rather not have it than have it but be broken.

It is possible to have vehicles off-center but given that they also rotate around the scene origin it will just look even worse.


I actually do recycle wheels and tank tracks when possible. Most large wheels originate from the Type 96 APC from what I remember and I think the T-72 uses tank tracks copied over from the T-90 texture. Going much further is problematic. All the wheels on say the T-72 are just texture objects on a single plane cut in the right shape.
I can copy and stretch the entire assembly but it is going to result it texture stretching which looks bad. Taking individual texture elements like say the one road wheel and copying it into a new texture is possible and if they are identical I might do it.
Problem is if the scale is different which is bad if it has to be scaled up.
For more complex objects such as say the top of a turret most are just texture elements and these are too specialised to reuse in almost all cases. Due to the low tris count almost all is such specialised textures which is the real limiting factor. Chances are a 15 year old FPS game has more detailed models than these ^_-
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 2544
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: 3D modelling

Post by SGTscuba »

I'm really liking the Cv90!
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
DasVivo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: Dec 11 2017
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by DasVivo »

MK4 wrote:
How about each of us three chooses one (1) AA system from the remaining proposals so that, together with the SA-13, we have a total of 4?

SA-6 Gainful
SA-8 Gecko
SA-11 "Gadfly" (Buk)
SA-22 Greyhound (Pantsir-S1)
Gibka-S (don`t know the NATO indicative for this one)

You`re welcome to start!
SA-11 Gadfly (Again reminder there is another new BUK-M3 unit with increased capacity which shares the chasis but differs in its missile pack arrangement)

Next Person :)
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

I am definitely not going to have this completed for the 1st. My new aim is to have something for around the 7th which should give me some days and with a bit of luck it might mean I can get at least the Mi-28 done also.
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Most of the details on the MCH/AW101 are done. Naturally hard to guess the nationality of the helicopter with the Hinomaru and Kanji saying "Maritime Self Defence Force" I hope to also have a British version ready for release.
Image
Keep in mind the rotors will be more pronounced on a white background. The rotors themselves are taken from the AH-1S.
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

DasVivo wrote:
MK4 wrote:
How about each of us three chooses one (1) AA system from the remaining proposals so that, together with the SA-13, we have a total of 4?

SA-6 Gainful
SA-8 Gecko
SA-11 "Gadfly" (Buk)
SA-22 Greyhound (Pantsir-S1)
Gibka-S (don`t know the NATO indicative for this one)

You`re welcome to start!
SA-11 Gadfly (Again reminder there is another new BUK-M3 unit with increased capacity which shares the chasis but differs in its missile pack arrangement)

Next Person :)
SA-6 Gainful 8)
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

Nerei wrote:I am definitely not going to have this completed for the 1st. My new aim is to have something for around the 7th which should give me some days and with a bit of luck it might mean I can get at least the Mi-28 done also.
Take your time...no pressure! :wink:
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
Post Reply

Return to “Modding Show & Tell”