3-d models , help needed. food for thought

[tealie]

I'm relatively new to Warbirds so forgive me. Two things:

I'm a Mac user trying to teach myself to create 3-d model of the Hawker Typhoon. So can I ask some questions of those more knowledgeable than myself? The .vfc files seem to be the containers for the 3-d info for each aircraft and for the texture mapping files. So how many components do I need to create for each plane and how should they be labelled? What format should I create them in (what formats does Warbirds recognise)? How do I create the flight and damage model and how are all the moveable parts animated? I've been using ac3d which is clearly the programme lemsko uses in his tutorial. There doesn't seem to be much info on the Warbird associated forums and websites about 3-d modelling except for the tutorials by Tony 'Razer' Martin and Lemsko, both of these leave an enormous number of questions unanswered.

In Warbirds there seem to be very few aircraft modelled by the players so as a result a large number of the potential 255 aircraft types are unused. There are no Italian bombers and few Italian fighters, no French fighters or bombers from 1940, the only British bomber is the Lancaster, where are the Halifax, Wellington and Stirling (or even Hampden and Whitley) or Blenheim, Beaufighter and Beaufort? The game seems very weighted towards US aircraft but what about the Marauder or more importantly the Boston or the Havoc (not to mention the Maryland or Baltimore)?

There is a lack of definitive and up to date information (particularly on the PDC site), especially with regard to the tutorials section. Why for example aren't there tga templates for download of all the aircraft types with explicit instructions on how to produce offline and online skins? Why aren't there instructions on how to set about building 3-d models and altering the maps (for example see the Targetware Developers Guide) so that people don't ask the same questions over and over again. I have never flown online and am only interested in offline scenarios, which I write myself. There is much that could be done to improve the flexibility and interest of offline scenarios, in particular if one could change the attributes of mbl files while aircraft are in flight so they could make decisions based on extant parameters. I gather from some posts that people don't like cloud. I love it, in fact I wish the cloud representations were much better and that you could add a complete (8/10-10/10ths) cloud layer without putting such a burden on the cpu that you couldn't get a decent frame rate. What about drones that can't see through cloud or drones that have a range or drones that don't have unlimited ammo? Why stop there, why not improve the clunky interface of Mission Editor, dramatically improve it and provide good and clear instructions on how to write certain attributes into offline missions? I'll stop ranting now.

I don't want to be unduly negative, I think Warbirds is a great game with a great deal to offer but it could be very much better. However, I don't have any idea of how difficult it might be to provide solutions to the problems listed above.

tealie

ps. does anyone know what the dotfile .randomizewpmo does? It isn't listed in the dotfile help txt or in Keller's Wiki guide. It appears in several of the Instant Action scenarios but I can't make out exactly what it does.

[Webs]

WarBirds does not accept third-party 3-D models. Players can contribute skins, but those must be approved and turned into game files by the PDC.

The company hired Lemsko to build models; he didn't contribute them as a player.

[iart7]

3rd-Party? Webs, do you mean player contributed 3D models?

You mean players can't do anything for the game in this area?

What is LEM doing now for Warbirds, is he doing models still and which one(s)? and if so, why don't we hear more about what he's doing, like maybe in a development blog?

LEM?

Tealie, my experience is that you can make a model, or a skin or whatever, but that doesn't mean it can be put into the game. Other coding and "stuff" has to be done and there is a priority "triage" system that can delay any player contributed stuff. I can help you understand what I know about 3D models, but I can't promise anything ... It'll be good experience for both of us if we work together.

[e-b-o-]

What Webs and iart wrote... but this shouldn't keep you away from learning 3D.

btw: the models are done with 3Dmax, not with ac3d. (and Lem isn't working for iEN anymore since about 3 or 4 years...)

[Target]

Hey guys, just FYI I've asked Tim to delete the thread over on the totalsims board. Some proprietary stuff mentioned in it that shouldn't go public involving the contents of vfc files.

Keep it over here and I'll monitor as we go. Have talked with Teal and he shouldn't need a vfc tool at all. Just needs art guidelines and help with finding a file format that will convert easily to 3d Studio Max.

Cheers,

[e-b-o-]

*.obj works fine for exporting out of ac3d. You'll probably have to adjust the smoothing groups again (after importing in max), but at all you don't loose the mapping, groups and pivot points.

You can't apply multi/subobject materials in ac3d, so you have to redo the material ID's as well.

[tealie]

Thanks for the information. I can quite understand that IENT would want to keep a firm hand on player-contributed material. This is going to be a bit of a hill to climb. Even if I mange to produce a passable Typhoon will anyone be interested in adding it to the game?

I'll have to find out what multi/subobject materials are, or indeed smoothing groups. The only guide I have is the Targetware developer's guide if I use that as my routemap will I be heading in the right direction?

Many thanks

[Webs]

Tealie,

I hate to be a drag, but you're setting yourself up for disappointment. the 3-D models are not the limiting factor in getting the aircraft into WB. It's the flight-model work that's the bottleneck.

You could make the greatest model in the world, but without someone who has the time to code how it flies, it will never get into the game. And if someone does have the time to work on flight models, there are 50 other aircraft already standing in line for renovation.

Omar's AFVs are an exception because getting them to move, fire, and damage in the correct fashion is easy and requires no work in the complexity of aerodynamics.

I'd love to be wrong, but consider how much easier the tanks are to code than aircraft - and how long have those 3-D models been waiting to go into the game?

[iart7]

Folks (not Tealie) don't throw shoes and sticks at me about this:

One of the things I wish would be possible is that someone like Tealie could model a plane like the Typhoon or Tempest. Then the Flight Model of a generic plane (maybe P51) could be used during a "beta phase" until someone can get all the authentic FM data in the game. Bits and parts that blow up can wait. Number of gun ports, bullet blasts, etc would come out of generic locations and could wait. Generic cockpit model. People would complain about the details, but at least the plane would fly. There could be a separate category of such aircraft or vehicles labeled "beta craft", but you could fly them! Hopefully complaints would not roll in by the thousands, but at least one person would be happy. ??? For a while!

Just rambling ideas, 'cuz I don't have a magic wand and I can't wait to see a Fokker DXXI, ME163, AT6 Texan, A7V tank, Typhoon, etc. someday soon in WB.

Tealie, I think a FM "tool" is being worked on.

But as was said above there is a waiting line. There are lots of people who might be pissed off if a new FM and plane are made before needed "fixes" are done on planes that are in the game now.

art

PS: just to remind you about something else, it took me about 3 months to do my first skin good enough to be accepted and another month before it was available.

[tealie]

Thanks for breaking it to me gently. I'm going to have a go at completing the second model Typhoon and creating a damage model.

I hope that any work in progress on the game does eventually get done although it does seem like it's never going to happen judging by how long you've already been waiting.

If you are armed with the correct aeronautical detail you can create your own aircraft in x-plane, why is it so much more complex in Warbirds? x-plane is reputedly one of the most accurate sims available.

I'll now duck!

[Black wolf]

Thanks for breaking it to me gently. I'm going to have a go at completing the second model Typhoon and creating a damage model.

I hope that any work in progress on the game does eventually get done although it does seem like it's never going to happen judging by how long you've already been waiting.

If you are armed with the correct aeronautical detail you can create your own aircraft in x-plane, why is it so much more complex in Warbirds? x-plane is reputedly one of the most accurate sims available.

I'll now duck!
:D Player created stuff (like TW)would be cool but IEN has to keep a grip on things so we dont end up with a zeake 30mm cannons and 190 armor!Plus skins on your FE or just that.If you made a white skin for a 109 for the BOB when you flew allied youd see the white 109.Let just say IEN has alot of stuff to work on as it is..but someday...<stares of into space and daydreams>:cool:

[omarsr]

Don't get me started tealie. :rolleyes:

Wing's3D is a good program to play with and it's free.

One of the problems with getting models into WB's is the conversion to a 3DSmax compatible format. I think that WB's is still using 3DS Max v5 which only adds to the diffuculties as you have to more or less work backwards to a format that the older version can use.


keep working at it though. Learning something new is always a good thing.