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 »

Making significant structural changes to the turret is a bit more tricky as that means deforming the mesh which in turn can result in texture stretching and probably requires adjusting the UV map. The texture probably also needs to be adjusted. It is not impossible but probably takes more work. How much really comes down to the specific model and change.

Adding a bustle rack would be easier as that is just adding some tris. The only potential issue is if there is space for it on the UV map as that will limit regional textures.

With a model like the T-55 where the textures are made in individual files instead of the layer style I am using new I would probably consider making a new one instead of adjusting the old model. It might still be possible to recycle part of the old model though.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Thank you for the explanation! I was trying to asses the feasibility of a certain tank model.

On a different topic and just for the sake of discussion, are you aware of the French VBMR Griffon?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VBMR_Griffon
Until relatively recently I was oblivious to it, but this cash transport van lookalike is supposed to replace the VAB in French service and the Piranha IIIC in Belgian service. So it`s a pretty major development.
http://www.janes.com/article/69918/fran ... d-vehicles
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

I cannot say that I have seen that vehicle before. It might be worth making at some point but I cannot say when I can get around to it.

Also what exactly was it for a tank model you where considering the feasibility of?
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

I cannot say that I have seen that vehicle before. It might be worth making at some point but I cannot say when I can get around to it.
Given it is some way until actual service it can`t be considered a priority for a while anyway. I was rather publicly wondering about it. :-) You have to agree that, instinctively, replacing a Piranha III - and even the VAB :P - with that thing seems odd.
Also what exactly was it for a tank model you where considering the feasibility of?
This one:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 1_-_01.jpg
The modernized version of the TR-85 (i.e. TR-85M1).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TR-85
If you get passed the first impression you`ll realize that it`s actually a derivative of a T-55, even though it is a long way from it, especially given the modernization process that involved French, German and Israeli firms. From an external visual point, generically speaking, the wheels are different (and more numerous), the turret has that back bustle and the two attached frontal armour upgrades, a couple extra sensor boxes and those side skirts (which can be skipped if need be; plenty photos show it without them).

I personally find it looking quite cool and, unlike its predecessors (the unmodernized TR-85 and the TR-77) for which I have no problem using your generic T-55 model, this one doesn`t seem to be done justice by a T-55. It`s the most modern tank Romania can currently produce in game and, in my modded game at least, it`s getting some use given Romania`s position and the large pool of region T (iirc). Still, I realize that because of its relative small numbers (in the modernized form) it can`t be such an important project on a graphics list so I was just wondering if something decent could be achieved without much hustle starting from your T-55, but apparently that`s not the case. For which reason I apologize for the long presentation! :-)
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

The Griffon looks like a super-heavy MRAP and I suspect one of the main reasons for going with it is that it is cheap compared to many other vehicles.

It is probably also the reason for the selection of the EBRC Jaguar to replace the AMX-10 and ERC-90.

Both are supposed to be less than 1/3 the price of the VBCI which could probably fulfil either roles just as well if it was equipped with a few ATGM's. I do however wonder if going solely for ATGM's is a smart move in a world increasingly moving towards active protection systems such as the Israeli Trophy.

I also wonder if either of them have as good cross country capabilities as the VBCI given that it should have a lower ground pressure combined with greater power to weigh ratio.



Looking at the TR-85M it definitely is easier and will give a better result to make it from the ground up. It is fairly distinct from the T-55 so I would not suspect that much of it would be reusable.

The main challenge like so many of the less famous armoured vehicles is finding good reference for it.

The best I have found so far is a drawing from tank encyclopedia which is not enough to go from by itself. I might be able to use a base T-55 as reference for the base shape and make changes based on pictures which I do have some good ones to go by. That will however be more time-consuming.

I also cannot put any specific time-frame on getting this done.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

Nerei wrote: The best I have found so far is a drawing from tank encyclopedia which is not enough to go from by itself.
For my own understanding, apart from the mentioned profile what else would be necessary? A frontal view and a top view?
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

The idea is front, back top and side. If there is any significant differences between left and right having both becomes more important.

Of these top and side are probably the most important followed by front in this case especially back being the least important.

All of them should (again ideally) be sufficiently detailed to show off smaller parts such as lights, small hatches, lids of fuel tanks etc. basically parts that are large enough hat they can be added to the model should be visible.


This has to be one of my favourite vehicle references.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/83/6c/a9 ... a1985f.gif

Again this is the ideal and less definitely is possible to work with.

Pictures can still be good to have even with reference like the one above.
MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by MK4 »

I see. Well, the good news is I`ve found scale drawings for the legacy TR-85 in a magazine. They probably won`t help much when it comes to the turret which has seen quite a transformation with those front and rear additions on the M1 variant. I`ll look around some more.
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

Not sure is it just my copy but Dassault Rafale has size set to 0.009 making it ridiculously small (probably just a typo=one zero too many)...can anyone confirm this?
"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 »

Should be 0.09 according to my test.
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 05#p180205
Edit: the extra zero is present in the last picnums file provided here that mentions the Rafale (ID 1865), the one from July so I presume it was carried into the game too.
Last edited by MK4 on Nov 15 2017, edited 1 time in total.
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: 3D modelling

Post by Nerei »

Yes the scales are roughly in the 0.05-0.1 range so yes that should be a zero too much.


As for the Tr-85M1 there is not that much need to worry about the additions to the front of the turret. They are fairly simple to get roughly right. The same with rear views. The back of the turret is flat without details by default so no need for that. The rear of the chassis will largely be obscured so that is less relevant. The front part of the chassis also appears to partly be obscured by those hanging sheets of what I assume to be rubber.
The front part of the chassis as a whole appears to be fairly simple and should generally be easy enough to cover with a standard T-55 and some pictures. Likewise the objects on top of the track cover appear to be fairly similar to that of a regular T-55.

The real difference appears to be the engine and rear part of the turret though the turret appears to mainly be a stretched out cross section of the widest part of the turret with a flat rear surface. The top of it appears to be fairly simple also. The hatch openings appears to be in the usual place for a T-55 and the new rear section is fairly low on details.
The engine section appears to be fairly similar to older versions and so far is the part I think I will have the most problems with. If the reference you already have covers that it will probably go a long way towards covering what I need.
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

There was an update of SRU and all the default.picnums "reseted" all the correction (Rafale, M270, etc) :roll:
"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 would assume you should just be able to update them again and it should work.
I have sent mr. Latour the updated picnums entry for the MLRS and reported the bug with the scale of the Rafale.


On a not really related note here is the progress on the T-90

Image
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: 3D modelling

Post by number47 »

Looks great!

As for the picnums, yes, redoing the corrections obviously solved the problems but it took me couple of minutes to realise why the M270 was missing its launcher again :lol:
"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 »

There might be a few more issues than just the picnums entry. I can see the July content pack at least have not been applied properly as it included updates to a number of meshes and some of them are still from before that. Simply applying that is not perfect either as there is at least the update to the T-90MS that will be undone with that package.

I will try and have a fixpack ready but expect it to take a bit as it will probably include rolling everything and the kitchen sink into one master.
Post Reply

Return to “Modding Show & Tell”