Because its Halloween or something...

Discuss the Wing Commander Series and find the latest information on the Wing Commander Universe privateer mod as well as the standalone mod Wasteland Incident project.
Post Reply
Zeog
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 10:30 am
Location: Europe

Post by Zeog »

chuck, you did a terrific job on that model and raise the bar for the models a lot! Also, you figured out the workflow to produce all this which is much more important.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Thanks, Zeog. And you got that right, about the importance of things. Next step I really think I should take is to write a piece of software that takes a number of masks as input and produces a texture set. Two reasons: The amount of work was absolutely insane. And the precision, sampling and quantization problems associated with the fact that Gimp does not support 16-bit textures. I'm thinking of organizing this software as a virtual processing core with 3 "texture registers", each being a 4k by 4k floating point RGBA, statically allocated; and a virtual instruction set that performs register to register operations, plus "stack" operations. The stack is basically on hard disk. I think this would make for a fairly easy port to the gpu, later on. The other part of the software would implement higher level functions as sequences of register/stack operations.
So, if your target resolution is 512, you'd draw your masks at 512 (rivets mask, grooves mask, raised mask, paint mask, and so on), and the software would first line-detect and vectorize then scale up to 4k with antialiasing, and get to work: Make dirt smudges, rust, impacts, bumpmap ambient occlusion, etceteras, then pad the background, and finally reduce, apply some dithering and output 8-bit RGB(A) finals. But all computations done in floating point precision RGBA.
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Post by mkruer »

chuck_starchaser wrote:
[*]Finish the Bengal: I didn’t care the way you were going with the design, I would rather have the romantic, yet inaccurate, version then one that is trying to be realistic. I think you will also save a lot of time because the Romantic version is simpler to develop. I also think that most people would enjoy romantic version, because its reminiscent of the original game without be cartoony.
Not me. I like being able to tell the relative sizes of things, in a flying game. Thing I most hated about the current wcu version is the asteroids, which one has no idea if they are a few meters in size, or thousands of kilometers. The point of having small details in the carrier is simply that: anchor spots for the eyes, that one can assume the smallest features there are roughly the size of the smallest features in the ship you are flying. Wish I could do the same thing texture-wise...

I don’t know how you made the jump from a design change to small details, these are not mutually exclusive. I am not worried about amount of details being added, I am more worried that the type of details being added are too over the top, and fundamentally different then the other models thereby making the ship look unlike anything thing the TC has. The current path of the Bengal would be like the Star Trek Federation building Borg ship and having that become the next class of star ship, its just doesn’t fit with the rest of the ships both past, present and future. The last images of the Bengal looks like it made the same jump that the Midway Class made in the new WC game coming out. Other being told by someone that it is the same ship, there is only a vague resemblance. This is my biggest concern, and I think that it is a valid concern.


Image
ImageImageImage
Image

I would forgo the armor plates, and tying to make the launch bays fit.
Just my opinion.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

The armor plates are sacred. They are the best part of the model. They are everything the model is, in fact. MK, are you trying to piss me off?

Seriously, I'm just asking out of curiosity right now; because it seems you always pick whatever you know I feel really strongly about, and oppose, or discount the value of, that very thing.

I said a million times I had the goal of having 512 textures for the Demon, so you started saying it should be 1k or 2k or whatever.

I put, altogether, like two months of work, or more like three months, to make the armor plates for the Bengal, and now that they are done, and look great, in one sentence you express how little value you place on them.

If you're trying to demoralize me, I must warn you I don't get so easily demoralized, and that I can hit back, and hit hard... I never even tried to hurt you, before, but keep trying to make an enemy out of me and you'll see.

Perhaps the only reason I'm not taking this more personally is the fact that you did the same thing to Dual Joe, once, saying, paraphrasing, that "the only WC1 ship we don't need is the Hornet", right as he was finishing it...

It seems you always wait until someone else's project is really advance, and then throw a monkeywrench... "Oh, I think I'd do everything differently... just my opinion...". Sure. You know what you can do with it...

So, either give me a clear answer to my question above, --make that an illumining answer, --packaged with a solemn vow to change your ways for the better and for good--; or please stop talking to me, once and for all. I'm getting sick of your poorly timed opinions past the point of no return.

I don't want to hear contrarian opinions if they aren't sincere opinions in the first place, but just a desire to be contrarian for its own sake. And if you really, honestly always hold opinions that are exactly opposite of mine, then I don't want to hear about them either. You're wasting your time and mine, since, as I said repeatedly, I'm not going to change course, in any project, because of what anybody says, except perhaps Klauss.

P.S. You can forget about me making any models for Rylix, BTW. And it's not so much out of spite; but because I just have no idea how your mind works. I made a good start at a model for your Excellion, and you dismissed it because of minor (and, to me, totally, completely and utterly irrelevant; make that stupidly irrelevant) esthetic nuances.
To me, form follows function, not the other way around; and I just can't face again a situation like with the Excellion, whereby you reject my work on purely esthetic grounds, like whether it should be more round or more angular or whatever. I frankly don't give a damn. And if you do, learn Blender.
The only esthetic consideration I can accept, and even require, is a bit of greebles, as long as they are believable, of course; as, to me, nothing that is human-made would lack at least some "human sized" (meter size) features.
But when I offered to do the Vesuvius carrier/station for your Wasteland Incident, which is like a 300 polygon piece of garbage model, you didn't want me to add greebles to it, stating that "it didn't need them"... Right...

MK, I don't even hold any hope of ever understanding how you think, really.
I'm just asking you to let me do my own thing without interference, and for you to do your own thing, and to just *LEAVE ME ALONE*, already.
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Post by mkruer »

In not really sure how to respond; but before I being I would like to say I am sorry for anything I have said or about to say that my offend you. You are with out a doubt one of the greatest contributors, if not the greatest to the WCU community as a whole.

On that note,

It was not my intention to piss you off, what we have here is artistic difference on the fundamental level of Wing Commander ship, in the same context of how some people looking at the Mona Lisa and seeing the greatest painting ever made, and other people just seeing it as just a girl smiling. I think if you look back I have always had issues with the idea of accessory plate armor and geebles in general, in that it doesn’t really fit other ships that in WCU potentially causing a major continuity issue with other models. I know you plan to create your own vision of the WC unlink anything else seen before and with the idea of total realism as the premises just like the other projects you are working on. It is just in a finite resource area, modeling, most models are designed replace existing models without being radically different, and I think the reason for this is because most people that made the models, know they may never get a chance to make another, and would like to see their model used in a mod. If it breaks the continuity of the game then chances are that their model will be tossed to the wayside, regardless of how much more detail it is. I think people would rather have a lower quality model that fits stylistically then a super high quality one that looks great in a screen shot but does not fit in the context of other models in the game at all. In that respect, I know that is very unlikely, even if you were paid to do this full time, you would ever get past all the WC1, WC2, and now WC0 models. I hope you understand that. BTW I have never said anything negative about any other models not related to WC because in the context of what you are doing for those projects, it makes perfect sense.

The only resolution I feel will be splitting the WCU into multiple parts which I was trying to avoid, namely into Realistic (your models), Romantic and Cartoon. For the most part Romantic and Cartoon are near parallel with the exception of the texture. Also I would like to note that some of the Realistic models namely, Hornet and Demon would fit all classes, however this is not absolute and is subject to change.

You made me paranoid about the last Hornet so I went back and reviewed all my post in the 899 posts regarding, and I didn’t find any reference to me saying anything even remotely close to "the only WC1 ship we don't need is the Hornet" Directed at the development. You are welcome to search, I did. For the most part I was extremely positive except for the “humpâ€
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
BradMick
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:48 pm
Contact:

Post by BradMick »

the overall lines and direction of the bengal are not to terrible. The panel work is good, the shape is good...the certain things that aren't so good however lies in the competing bits and pieces competing for dominance when it comes to scale. An example would lie in the exposed cables, typically you don't see large exposed cables just dangling off things. Especially not on large ships. The next problem lies with the windows. The windows plus the exposed wires gives the impression of this ship being very, very small, and thats simply because you have two sizes of windows on the same area which are both competing for dominance. The other thing that is a might off, is the former parts on the gun pods wings. they are a very odd and out of place bit of detail. My only suggestion though about the plates would be to make them smalller, and not quite so high off the hull. Here's a phot of the USS Alabama i snapped a couple weeks back, maybe use this for inspiration on the hull. (sorry its such a large photo)

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/9463/dscf0094xe2.jpg
Last edited by BradMick on Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
LightWave nerd extrodanaire...

"Who need drugs when you got Brad? He's a trip enough already!' - stoner friend of mine...
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Brad, the problem with such large images is that they completely mess up the window.
Text lines go off the screen.
You have to scroll to the right even to find the Quote and Edit buttons.

There's a very simple solution for these problems which I've mentioned to you before:
Just don't put the image tags around the link.
Leave the link without tags, and then one just clicks on it, and it opens the image into another window.
Whenever I have an image that is more than 800-wide, I do that.
Could you please edit your post and fix that?
Please.
Otherwise it's like this whole thread is bombed.
BradMick wrote:the overall lines and direction of the bengal are not to terrible. The panel work is good, the shape is good...the certain things that aren't so good however lies in the competing bits and pieces competing for dominance when it comes to scale. An example would lie in the exposed cables, typically you don't see large exposed cables just dangling off things. Especially not on large ships.
Thing is, though; I removed them already. :D
The shot that MK showed there was not from the latest set.
The ribs on the wings are gone too.
The next problem lies with the windows. The windows plus the exposed wires gives the impression of this ship being very, very small, and thats simply because you have two sizes of windows on the same area which are both competing for dominance.
Another thing that changed since that shot. In more recent shots I have a third set of small windows, precisely trying to help small windows win the competition you mention. It hasn't worked yet. Problem is, I was following the references I could find. In that cover painting, one can see those windows, and they are HUGE, if you think about the size of the ship. So, the question becomes, how to honor that piece of canon, and yet somehow represent or communicate the fact that those windows are like two stories high. Only idea I could come up with was to have plenty of smaller ones.
The other thing that is a might off, is the former parts on the gun pods wings. they are a very odd and out of place bit of detail.
They are gone, already. I saw the same thing.
My only suggestion though about the plates would be to make them smalller, and not quite so high off the hull. Here's a phot of the USS Alabama i snapped a couple weeks back, maybe use this for inspiration on the hull. (sorry its such a large photo)
Ditto, about large pics.
Thanks for the reference; I'm already absorbing idea nutrients from it.
As for it serving as argument for or against plates, though; I'm not sure that holds any water, since a hull of a sea-going ship goes into water... :D
It has to be smooth to reduce drag. The plates are not replaceable, even at dry dock.
With the Bengal, aqueo-dynamics are not an issue, and the plates are easy to remove and replace. As for their separation from the hull and from each other, I agree with you. This was a hard descision for me; and I even disagreed with klauss and said no to his suggestion of reducing separation, which is rare; I usually listen to Klauss. But I really, really wanted for the inner hull to be visible. It will be under the gaps, that you'll be able to see tons of bumpmapped greebles. It will give a sensation that, under those plates, there's an awsome amount of hidden complexity, and trust me, it will look spectacular. And it will do so pretty cheaply: Only a small area of the texture will contain hull greebles, but the UV islands for the inner hull strips will crisscross this area, re-using it kind of randomly.

I rarely make descisions based on esthetic grounds only, and here you cought me doing it. I admit readily there's no reason why the plates would be so far apart from each other.

The separation from the hull is something I struggled with. I would have loved to make it smaller. The problem is with z-buffering artifacts. As you zoom out, or move away, surfaces that are too close in z depth may be displaid in wrong order. The more you separate them, the less the chances of this happening.

Last but not least, there are many things I don't like about the current version, myself.
The power transformers I put there don't look too good, etceteras.
I've also been thinking of changing the plates on the sides, so that they bend and cover corners, rather than expose them.

When I post pics of work in progress, I do it as a form of entertainment.
A forum is a public gathering place, and the best way to attract a crowd is to put on a show.
It doesn't mean I'm 100% happy with my work so far.
As I've said many times, I'm NOT an artist; I'm an Engineer.
I don't use oil paints and brushes, I use pencil and electric eraser.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Sorry, I missed your post.
mkruer wrote:It was not my intention to piss you off, what we have here is artistic difference on the fundamental level of Wing Commander ship, in the same context of how some people looking at the Mona Lisa and seeing the greatest painting ever made, and other people just seeing it as just a girl smiling. I think if you look back I have always had issues with the idea of accessory plate armor and geebles in general, in that it doesn’t really fit other ships that in WCU potentially causing a major continuity issue with other models.
My idea has always been to remodel ALL models. Hopefully not all by myself... :D
But I think my work on the Hellcat V inspired Dual Joe to make a superb Hornet.
Hopefully this will happen many times again, and we'll some day have
a full team of modellers, recreating WC ships that are the best both in terms of canon fidelity AND looking realistic.
I know you plan to create your own vision of the WC unlink anything else seen before and with the idea of total realism as the premises just like the other projects you are working on. It is just in a finite resource area, modeling, most models are designed replace existing models without being radically different, and I think the reason for this is because most people that made the models, know they may never get a chance to make another, and would like to see their model used in a mod.
Is the Demon texture so radically different from the original?
How about my Hellcat V mesh?
How about the Bengal?
I think my Bengal is **by far** the most accurate fan-made representation of the original, anywhere to be found. (Yes, Brad, I do remember the one you pointed out to me, but I disagree.)
If you look at it from a distance, my model looks almost exactly like the original.

And you know it.
You are trying to fabricate a "problem of continuity" that doesn't exist, to try and push your 'no-greebles' agenda.

Just as you were trying earlier to fabricate a texturing problem with the Demon to push your 1K texture agenda.

Always fabricating problems, to push your agendas, --trying to pass them for "solutions", to those non-existing problems.
You should persue a career in management...
If it breaks the continuity of the game
which it doesn't
then chances are that their model will be tossed to the wayside,
By whom? You? This is really funny...
So you think you can threaten me with that YOU are going to "toss" MY model "by the wayside", unless I subject myself to your magnanimous dictatatorship, eh?
How about I toss YOU by the wayside?
regardless of how much more detail it is. I think people would rather have a lower quality model that fits stylistically then
But what I can't seem to get across to you is that I DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS what other people would rather have.
Will you get the message?
I'm doing this to please myself. And I'm sure it will please someone else,
if certainly not you.
But whether it does or doesn't, ultimately I DON'T CARE.
(Nor should I. No great work of engineering or art was ever born
from a desire to please others.)
a super high quality one that looks great in a screen shot but does not fit in the context of other models in the game at all. In that respect, I know that is very unlikely, even if you were paid to do this full time, you would ever get past all the WC1, WC2, and now WC0 models. I hope you understand that.
I hope you understand that I hope others, like Dual Joe, will join the effort.
And I hope you'll be gone, soon, and stop ruining the fun of working on this project.
BTW I have never said anything negative about any other models not related to WC because in the context of what you are doing for those projects, it makes perfect sense.
But you're mixing up what I do for my own project with what I do for WCU, which is DIFFERENT.
My models for WCU so far: Hellcat, Demon texturing and Bengal, are
HIGHLY ACCURATE representations of the originals.
If I was applying as much "realism" as you accuse me of, I'd have put as many engines on the front of
the bengal as there are at the back; there'd be no landing strip on it, no artificial gravity, no windows,
and the fuel tank would be prominent, at least as big as all the rest of the ship.

So your accusation is completely unfounded, and a piece of crap act of manufacturing a problem that
doesn't exist, in order to push your stupid agenda.

What I don't agree at all with is precisely your agenda: the idea that I should go as far as them ships NOT having any mesh details not present in the original.
That's frankly ABSURD.
What's the point of making new models, then?
Just install DosBox and play the original game again, if that's all you want.
Or if all you want is more detailed textures but with simple meshes, then, by all means, learn to use Blender and Gimp and ***go for it***.

I'm NOT going to do that for you, tho; --if you get my drift.
You want that? Then DO IT!
The only resolution I feel will be splitting the WCU into multiple parts which I was trying to avoid, namely into Realistic (your models), Romantic and Cartoon.
Well, guess what: I AM WHO I AM. And I will do what my nature compels me to do.
If you want romantic style, or any style other than my style, then learn to use Blender and then implement your style, to your heart's content.

I'm not going to change who I am just to please you.

Will you get the message, once and for all?
For the most part Romantic and Cartoon are near parallel with the exception of the texture.
Amazingly clear explanation. But I don't care, if I forgot to mention it.
Also I would like to note that some of the Realistic models namely, Hornet and Demon would fit all classes, however this is not absolute and is subject to change.
Subject to change by WHO? YOU?
You made me paranoid about the last Hornet so I went back and reviewed all my post in the 899 posts regarding, and I didn’t find any reference to me saying anything even remotely close to "the only WC1 ship we don't need is the Hornet" Directed at the development. You are welcome to search, I did. For the most part I was extremely positive
It was in one of my threads, I think. I had asked what was next to model, and both you AND spiritplumber said "we need everything wc1 except the hornet". It was around the time I'd finished doing the welding of the wings on the hornet, and I think Dual was starting to work on the cockpit interior.
except for the “humpâ€
BradMick
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:48 pm
Contact:

Post by BradMick »

fixed.

and, i wasn't saying no armor plates, simply that the ones one the bengal you were working up appear to be hovering some height above the hull, and that is a bit off.

yeah, the USS Alabama is all of about 2 1/2 hours from where i'm at now, and its a pretty awesome place to visit. the sheer size of that bastard is incredible. a great tour, and a great reference for hull plating ideas in so far as texturing and moeling goes. all the layering and what not.
LightWave nerd extrodanaire...

"Who need drugs when you got Brad? He's a trip enough already!' - stoner friend of mine...
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

BradMick wrote:fixed.
Thanks ;-)
and, i wasn't saying no armor plates, simply that the ones one the bengal you were working up appear to be hovering some height above the hull, and that is a bit off.
No, I know. Yeah, some of them do look bad. Around the middle part.
I'm thinking of having them extend and turn around corners, covering them. As it seems to me what looks bad is when they are seen edge-on.
yeah, the USS Alabama is all of about 2 1/2 hours from where i'm at now, and its a pretty awesome place to visit. the sheer size of that bastard is incredible. a great tour, and a great reference for hull plating ideas in so far as texturing and moeling goes. all the layering and what not.
Very pretty picture. And I'm with you on using ship hulls as inspiration, even if the needs in space and at sea are different, if only from the POV that most WC cap ships are inspired on sea-going ships.

Anyways, I won't be working on the Bengal just yet; there's other things more urgent.
BradMick
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:48 pm
Contact:

Post by BradMick »

Well, sure the needs are different, but ultimately the construction methods are going to be about the same. plates are going to be used in the construction of the spaceships hull sections. I'd venture to say the construction would be much more likely to be like that of a submarine for a warship. different pressure hull areas and what not.
LightWave nerd extrodanaire...

"Who need drugs when you got Brad? He's a trip enough already!' - stoner friend of mine...
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

The pressures a submarine has to take are much higher, like 100 atmospheres; and go inwards. The hull of a ship only has to take a 1 atmosphere differential going outwards. But yes, it's a pressure container, officially.

That's why my inner hull is rounded; it's a pressure hull, which had better be rounded, for structural reasons; but, by the same token, expensive, and very hard to repair. Wheras the armor is flat, cheap to fabricate, easy to replace.

That's what was going through my mind, anyways.
snow_Cat
Confed Special Operative
Confed Special Operative
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:43 am
Location: /stray/
Contact:

Post by snow_Cat »

^ - -^ I keep thinking of the armor plates bolted onto tanks, large slabs of metal or ceramic under a layer of plaster frosting.

^- - ^ Or those my old boss had bolted onto the trucks and equipment run through Port of Spain, slabs of concrete.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

snow_Cat wrote:^ - -^ I keep thinking of the armor plates bolted onto tanks, large slabs of metal or ceramic under a layer of plaster frosting.

^- - ^ Or those my old boss had bolted onto the trucks and equipment run through Port of Spain, slabs of concrete.
I've no idea what you're talking about, snow cat; but you may be onto something... Many of the larger ships in WC look like they are made of portland cement and chicken wire. I've been struggling for some way to ret-con that on behalf of Origin. Can you describe your idea a little more? Maybe make a drawing of it, or find some reference pics?
snow_Cat
Confed Special Operative
Confed Special Operative
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:43 am
Location: /stray/
Contact:

Post by snow_Cat »

It's not my idea:
it's how et' done in the real world.

Most ablative armour systems are made up of many identical plates that are 'bolted' onto the frame of a vehicle or equipment. But because these frames are irregular (unlike the armour) there are gaps where the plates lift and separate. To solve this a layer of plaster (ie: cement mixed w/ spalling mud) is applied filling these gaps and providing another layer of protection.

Many private companies operating in regions where the US military has built, maintained and relinquished infrastructure (ie: all 'satellite' nations running on the US dollar-economy) use slabs of concrete suspended on plywood stretchers to protect their drivers and operators from bandits in the time it takes their gunmen to kill the intruders.

^- - ^ Heh, put that on the tourism-brochure:
  • Visit beautiful Quazi wit it's pools of crude oil, red skys and kill a hobo before he kills you for food.
^ - - ^

Code: Select all

searching for references...
Tiger I Information Center - Late Production Tiger I's wikipedia.org
Vehicle Armor
Hillbilly armor

^ > < ^ this is fustrating, I have seen video of vehicle armour being assembled as I have described above, but I can't find it on the internet.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Post by klauss »

Re. chuck vs matt...

First of all, chuck, I do think you're overreacting.
Yep, matt did have an odd sense of timing, and you did have a reason to be pissed, but from then on I think you entered a rage feedback loop quite common on forums because of the slowness of the communication. That is, in your own post, you reply several times to a certain issue, each time more strongly, sometimes ending in direct cursing. It's clear each time you thought about the subject you got madder. A nice rule of thumb in those situations is to reply only once to one subject. I recognize your reply style, it's that of a refutation, picking each paragraph and stating why it's inaccurate or false (and it was a pretty well written refutation, for as long as it remained objective), but in this case you replied in that way to paragraphs pertaining to the same subject and hence forced you into that feedback loop I was talking about. You have to detect your rage, and then skip paragraphs you've answered that you feel make you mad.
That's the way I keep calm on those situations - maybe it's of use to you.

For the other part, Matt, I don't see your point about the panels. They look very good and match pretty well all shots of the bengal. Except the turrets in your render (which are old, chuck has changed them drastically since that render, and they may match the style much better) and, perhaps, as chuck said, the separation between the armor plates, it just makes little sense for armor plates to have such big gaps, but chuck has his reasons for that and I'll respect that. Mostly because it isn't such a big problem (to match the screenshots, the gaps would have to be merely half as big as they are now), and though I still have to see chuck's prediction confirmed, I think he may be right (that those separations could look good and add a sense of scale).
Perhaps the middle section is a bit busy with respect to the original, and though one could argue the original was under polycount limitations, it still is a significant drift in style. But I think chuck was aware of that and was working on ideas to correct that - I don't remember him saying he was happy with the middle section ever. Maybe I'm wrong. And... aside from that excess of detail towards the middle, it does fit very very well within the style.
And furthermore... some of the increased geometry detail is so noticeable because the model hasn't been textured yet. When it is, texturing detail will make the big features blend more seamlessly with the smaller ones, and probably make that problem go away.

In short: I don't agree.

Chuck - just one thing that might calm you a bit.
Matt didn't come up with the 1K standard. I did.
And I think I explained why on the wiki - if not, it's what Matt said: it relates well to screen dimensions. Remember ships won't often occupy the entire screen, and even if they did I was considering mirrored textures (so effective resolution would be close to twice that). Add detail textures and you have plenty of information to render non-redundant per-pixel detail with, say, a ship occupying half of the screen (in surface).
Only one thing may be flawed on that analysis, and it's that I considered 1024x768 as the most common resolution. As things are going, that may very well be wrong. I myself am using 1600x1200... so...
But I don't think we can increase to 2k without seriously impairing performance, so if resolution increase becomes a problem, detailing will have to be the solution.
Forget about aliasing defects, mipmap filtering takes care of that. Think about it... if aliasing hadn't been somewhat resolved, all instances of texturing would show aliasing as they never map pixels 1:n (with n natural).

About Rylix... it was a given, chuck, that your way of seeing things was highly incompatible with Matt's on that department. I obviously didn't say anything because... well... there's always hope. But it was expectable that you'd get burned (or Matt, depends on how you look at it).

Ok... I hope things cool down between you.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Post by mkruer »

Thank you Klauss for your level headedness.

I don’t know anything about the “odd sense of timingâ€
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

klauss wrote:Re. chuck vs matt...

First of all, chuck, I do think you're overreacting.
Yes and no. I was overreacting to his last post; not over-all.
Yep, matt did have an odd sense of timing,
More like a ***systematic*** odd sense of timing. But if the argument was that he did express his disagreements earlier; that still doesn't justify continuing to do so forever. Klauss, you are a bit of a lawyer, yourself, right? :) There's a difference between the right to free speech, and harrassment. Isn't there? If somebody keeps talking to you after you tell that person you don't want to hear any more, and he keeps following you around and talking to you, it comes to a point when you either call the cops or take justice on your own hands and punch his teeth through the back of his head. I asked mkruer to LEAVE ME ALONE, and instead he adds buttering me up in between arguments. That's not what I asked for. I asked for him to ***leave me alone***, altogether. And if he ever talks to me again, such as replying to this post, I'm going to take even more direct action against him. I'll delete Rylix from my server, and go post at the CIC; tell LOAF the whole story of what really happened. (I should do so anyhow, just to clean our name from Matt's unethical actions). But I'm sick of his arguing with me beyond sanity, at this point. I just don't want to hear any more from him. He just sent me a PM, and I told him the same thing again: just LEAVE ME ALONE. And if he continues to ignore this request I'm going to make sure he regrets it for the rest of his life.
and you did have a reason to be pissed, but from then on I think you entered a rage feedback loop quite common on forums because of the slowness of the communication. That is, in your own post, you reply several times to a certain issue, each time more strongly, sometimes ending in direct cursing. It's clear each time you thought about the subject you got madder. A nice rule of thumb in those situations is to reply only once to one subject. I recognize your reply style, it's that of a refutation, picking each paragraph and stating why it's inaccurate or false (and it was a pretty well written refutation, for as long as it remained objective), but in this case you replied in that way to paragraphs pertaining to the same subject and hence forced you into that feedback loop I was talking about. You have to detect your rage, and then skip paragraphs you've answered that you feel make you mad.
That's the way I keep calm on those situations - maybe it's of use to you.
I wasn't trying to keep calm. I don't even believe rage to be some kind of clinical condition that ought to be controlled at any cost. Sometimes yes, when it is misplaced, like the time I blew up at Dual Joe over nothing.
Not in this case.
Chuck - just one thing that might calm you a bit.
Matt didn't come up with the 1K standard. I did.
Okay, fine. It's neither here nor there. I never claimed to understand, or hoped to understand, what Matt's agenda was. His only purpose, it seems to me, is to throw monkeywrenches. Any monkeywrenches that may come along. Timed to do the most damage possible. Wait till I'm done with the panels, then say he'd get rid of them. Wait till I'm almost done texturing, then say it should be mirrored and target a different resolution... In any case, I told him repeatedly I was NOT going to listen to him, and to stop wasting my time forcing me to answer long argument posts, and he would not listen. There's only so much crap I can take from someone who does nothing but constantly criticizes what others do, and who thinks he can bully me with threats to "throw by the wayside" my work because it doesn't conform to his low-IQ standards. Matt has really nothing to be doing here at WCU. He contributes nothing, and is disruptive. I want him gone; out of my face, for good.
And I think I explained why on the wiki - if not, it's what Matt said: it relates well to screen dimensions. Remember ships won't often occupy the entire screen, and even if they did I was considering mirrored textures (so effective resolution would be close to twice that). Add detail textures and you have plenty of information to render non-redundant per-pixel detail with, say, a ship occupying half of the screen (in surface).
Only one thing may be flawed on that analysis, and it's that I considered 1024x768 as the most common resolution. As things are going, that may very well be wrong. I myself am using 1600x1200... so...
But I don't think we can increase to 2k without seriously impairing performance, so if resolution increase becomes a problem, detailing will have to be the solution.
Forget about aliasing defects, mipmap filtering takes care of that. Think about it... if aliasing hadn't been somewhat resolved, all instances of texturing would show aliasing as they never map pixels 1:n (with n natural).
Well, I knew the bit about mip-mapping. I think my argument stands, anynow, that the choice of distance as "that distance at which the thing occupies ths whole screen" is a totally arbitrary and unjustified choice. If we were to apply that rule universally, every unit would have the same texture size, whether it's a small ship or a huge space station.
And my argument still stands, also, that we'd rather have different texture sizes for small ships, large ships and stations. Otherwise there's no visual clues as to the relative sizes of things.

And my argument also stands about the amount of work involved:

Targetting 1024 resolution is A LOT more work, texturing-wise, than targeting 512. I would end up filling space with lines and rectangles, myself, probably; because there's only so much patience I can muster. So, I stand by my argument that small ships, which are the majority, should use 512. Large ships 1024. Stations 2048. Or something along the lines.
And, by the way, I targeted 512 for the Demon.
What this means is that all my lines use fuzzy brushes that antialias properly at 512, but would look fuzzy at 1024.
If you're thinking about packaging 1024 textures with it, against my wishes, I'm telling you, you won't gain much detail at all.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Matt, I just noticed you posted in this thread AGAIN. I won't even read your post, and I'll let this pass one last time because you posted before me. But my warning stands, and you'd better heed it. GO AWAY!
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

snow_Cat wrote:It's not my idea:
it's how et' done in the real world.

Most ablative armour systems are made up of many identical plates that are 'bolted' onto the frame of a vehicle or equipment. But because these frames are irregular (unlike the armour) there are gaps where the plates lift and separate. To solve this a layer of plaster (ie: cement mixed w/ spalling mud) is applied filling these gaps and providing another layer of protection.

Many private companies operating in regions where the US military has built, maintained and relinquished infrastructure (ie: all 'satellite' nations running on the US dollar-economy) use slabs of concrete suspended on plywood stretchers to protect their drivers and operators from bandits in the time it takes their gunmen to kill the intruders.

^- - ^ Heh, put that on the tourism-brochure:
  • Visit beautiful Quazi wit it's pools of crude oil, red skys and kill a hobo before he kills you for food.
^ - - ^

Code: Select all

searching for references...
Tiger I Information Center - Late Production Tiger I's wikipedia.org
Vehicle Armor
Hillbilly armor

^ > < ^ this is fustrating, I have seen video of vehicle armour being assembled as I have described above, but I can't find it on the internet.
Thanks, snow cat. Good post, good links. What I was hoping against hope for was something that would justify the "made of concrete" look of many WC ships, such as frigates and destroyers from the original games that look matte grey with like a square grid of dark lines. This is certainly not it. But it doesn't hurt to learn more about how armoring works in real life.
Thanks again.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Post by klauss »

chuck_starchaser wrote: More like a ***systematic*** odd sense of timing. But if the argument was that he did express his disagreements earlier; that still doesn't justify continuing to do so forever. Klauss, you are a bit of a lawyer, yourself, right? :) There's a difference between the right to free speech, and harrassment. Isn't there? If somebody keeps talking to you after you tell that person you don't want to hear any more, and he keeps following you around and talking to you, it comes to a point when you either call the cops or take justice on your own hands and punch his teeth through the back of his head. I asked mkruer to LEAVE ME ALONE, and instead he adds buttering me up in between arguments. That's not what I asked for. I asked for him to ***leave me alone***, altogether. And if he ever talks to me again, such as replying to this post, I'm going to take even more direct action against him. I'll delete Rylix from my server, and go post at the CIC; tell LOAF the whole story of what really happened. (I should do so anyhow, just to clean our name from Matt's unethical actions). But I'm sick of his arguing with me beyond sanity, at this point. I just don't want to hear any more from him. He just sent me a PM, and I told him the same thing again: just LEAVE ME ALONE. And if he continues to ignore this request I'm going to make sure he regrets it for the rest of his life.
Hm...
I think it's possible to push harassment charges over someone constantly calling you over the phone, but I've never heared of such one case. But I'm not a lawyer, I'm only a bit too close to lawyers (my dad being one).
In any case you can't have harassment over the internet. There you have ultimate control about the content - you just ignore what you don't want to read.
So... I suggest that: ignore Matt's posts if you feel like so.
I'll say a bit more down the post.
chuck_starchaser wrote:I wasn't trying to keep calm. I don't even believe rage to be some kind of clinical condition that ought to be controlled at any cost. Sometimes yes, when it is misplaced, like the time I blew up at Dual Joe over nothing.
Not in this case.
I do believe this is such a case. I've seen Matt's posts over here and didn't see anything that would justify such a blow.
I'd appreciate if you explained the background privately. I'm a bit baffled by how serious you're taking this, there must be something else behind it, I just can't believe it's just the comment about the panels.

BTW, Matt, the odd sense of timing is that comment about the panels after so much work behind them. If you had anything to say about them, it should have been earlier and, if chuck didn't agree, so be it. It's his model. If somehow it doesn't end up right, he'll be the first to notice and scrap it. You've seen how many times he redid the Demon, chuck goes for perfection, he won't take an inaccurate model. If the panels aren't right and he sets his mind to it, chances are that the bengal will simply never be finished - or that he'll finally scrap the panels. I don't see that happening, the panels are easily fixable, should chuck's predictions be off, by reducing the gap between them.
chuck_starchaser wrote:...and to stop wasting my time forcing me to answer long argument posts, and he would not listen.
Don't then. You're not forced to.
chuck_starchaser wrote:There's only so much crap I can take from someone who does nothing but constantly criticizes what others do, and who thinks he can bully me with threats to "throw by the wayside" my work because it doesn't conform to his low-IQ standards. Matt has really nothing to be doing here at WCU. He contributes nothing, and is disruptive. I want him gone; out of my face, for good.
This is a public forum and he's been level-headed in my eyes. He's not going to go away if he doesn't want to, because he won't be banned just because you got pissed over nothing.
Sorry if it sounds harsh and moderator-like. It is. But I somehow recognize this as one of your periodic episodes (when you feel someone's personally attacking you and he's not), so I'm just trying hard to make you realize. If you indeed have reasons to be like this, if you want, just explain it to me privately.
And he will and should probably reply to other posts than yours. I don't see it reasonable that you'd take that as harassment, and banning and/or deleting things from your forum because he replies... say... to my posts sounds too LOAF-like. Just a heads up... you're moving in that direction, and I know you wouldn't want to.
Have in mind that when he said things like that your model, if it went a specific way, would be tossed aside, it did not feel like a threat at all from here. Indeed it's a fact that if you don't get the WCish look right it will. What I know and Matt seems not to is that you'll notice yourself and you yourself will toss it aside, so there's no need to point that out and that's probably why you got pissed (I'm conjecturing you took it hard because it was a big lack of confidence in your ability to be self-critic).
If you feel like trying to fix things, which you might not and I wouldn't think any less of you (you're entitled to irrationality from time to time as much as everyone else), you should try to read Matt's posts with that in mind - try to find the "friendly" meaning of things, you'll notice that almost everything that pissed you off has some rather un-hidden friendly meaning there.
As a last line, in case this section turns out too harsh... let me say I'm just trying to cool things down between you two, I'm not trying to attack you in any way, even if words may come out harsh, so don't feel bad because I don't agree with your view of Matt's motives... just think it over.
chuck_starchaser wrote:Well, I knew the bit about mip-mapping. I think my argument stands, anynow, that the choice of distance as "that distance at which the thing occupies ths whole screen" is a totally arbitrary and unjustified choice. If we were to apply that rule universally, every unit would have the same texture size, whether it's a small ship or a huge space station.
Did you read the wiki?
Do please.
I basically wrote everything you said.
Matt was pointing to that standard - perhaps he misunderstood some bits... or didn't realize (until now) that you were actually following it without even knowing.
chuck_starchaser wrote:And my argument also stands about the amount of work involved:

Targetting 1024 resolution is A LOT more work, texturing-wise, than targeting 512. I would end up filling space with lines and rectangles, myself, probably; because there's only so much patience I can muster.
Hm... maybe to your quality standards, you want each pixel to be unique.
Not everyone works like that so... don't you think 1024 would give some room for those who work a bit sloppier?
chuck_starchaser wrote:So, I stand by my argument that small ships, which are the majority, should use 512. Large ships 1024. Stations 2048.
Wiki says twice those numbers, but it should look good with your numbers. Seems like "Something along the lines"... doesn't it?
chuck_starchaser wrote:And, by the way, I targeted 512 for the Demon.
What this means is that all my lines use fuzzy brushes that antialias properly at 512, but would look fuzzy at 1024.
Chuck... the standard is just a guideline. It tries to get good quality textures. Yours are with a lower resolution... what makes you think that I'd complain? It's better!
I'll surely try to see them at 1024 and 2048, just to see if they look better (from what you say they won't... bummer...), but I'm ok with them being 512, seriously.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Okay, I just re-read the wiki. I read it about a year ago or so, and I don't remember seeing the three recommended texture sizes, back then; I seem to remember it saying 2048, period.

As for ignoring posts, I wish there was an "ignore" function in PHPBB. I've managed so far not to read that last post; but it takes a lot of discipline NOT to read a post which I fear is still trying to argue points I've already refuted. Possibly with newly phrased and good sounding arguments.

NOT to read (and answer) someone's post could be interpreted by others reading the thread as that one has read the post, and had nothing to say about it, which is not the case.

My legal argument was not in any way related to whether there'd be grounds for pressing charges. I was merely trying to make you understand my point of view, that if I say to someone, repeatedly, to stop talking to me, to stop bothering me, and he won't stop; it's not a question of free-speech any more. The argument was finished when I said I would not listen to any more argument. Whoever is right, it doesn't matter any more. If I won't listen, it means that if I'm wrong I'll have to find out from experience. But the argument ENDS. Any argument beyond that, even if I were wrong, becomes *harrassment*.

As for the "personal attacks" bit.
Perhaps my definition of what constitutes a "personal attack" is a bit broader than yours. I don't think so much as someone calling names. When LOAF came into our forum last year (under a disguised name) and called me "fucktard", I just laughed at it.
But when someone says "pick a texture size and stick to it", there's a whole bunch of insulting innuendos that come with that. Namely, there's a suggestion that I have been flip-flopping --which I wasn't. There's a suggestion that I'm sloppy, which I'm not. There's a suggestion I'm unruly (which I certainly am, and proudly so), AND that he's the authority I'm being unruly against (which is NOT the case, since he has no authority here and never will); which is typical managerial technique for maneuvering themselves into power. And this is not the first time he tries to maneuver himself into a managerial position in WCU. He knows that I will oppose him, and so his innuendos in that phrase are designed to cut me down and bring me under.
He continued that with "we have a standard for a reason", for all the same reasons.

THAT is what I refer to as a "personal attack".
His whole post sounded like an order; putting me in a particularly difficult situation: Do I answer to the falsehoods it insinuates? Or do I answer to the fact that he has no authority to order me around? Whichever aspect I answer to, my answer is incomplete; and if I answer both aspects, each part of the answer is diluted in strenght to 50%.
It's a typical gambit.
A gambit IS an attack.
Perhaps not a "personal attack", but an attack non-the-less. An attempt to assert authority over me.

I couldn't care less if he called me names, frankly. It's his trying to maneuver himself into a position of authority (for like the third time), and the feeling that he will never give up trying to do so, that really bothers me; and the main reason why I want to see him gone for good. (NOT that his cheating during that CIC ballot, and what it has done to us, is any less important: I posted something at wcplanet about our bad experience at the CIC, a while ago; and someone registered there with the only purpose of answering to my post, citing something about us "breaking the rules". I did not understand what it meant until someone explained it to me. Our reputation IS tarnished, and as far as I know there was only one cheater. Guess who.... And it's ironic to the point of absurdity that someone so callous, unprincipled and immoral --to do that in the first place; but more importantly, to allow this shadow to hang over the rest of us indefinitely, without ever voluntarily coming clean on it--, would have the audacity to try and maneuver himself into a management position; --not to mention what disaster someone so slimy and bossy would do, as "leader", to an open source project...)

So, I guess you were right in suspecting there was "something else" to my rage...

But you're always right. :D
snow_Cat
Confed Special Operative
Confed Special Operative
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:43 am
Location: /stray/
Contact:

Post by snow_Cat »

^ - -^ I've always accepted those lines as the joints between armour segments. While integrated armour does offer advantages in cost and the obvious 'no gaps' they are simply impractical as a primary system.

^- - ^ If armour could not be replaced then units would be forced to leave the combat areas to return to drydock. Critically crippling the range at which a unit may be fielded and bringing engagements dangerously within range of the critical drydock facilities.

^ - -^ With a modular system field repairs would only require a supply/support unit meeting with a combat unit to exchange worn/compromised modules for a new one. This also would facilitate easy armour upgrades by installing 'improved' modules as they become available. And generate a ready 'field supply' of armour modules taken from nearby units as they... are disabled.

^ - -^ In situations where dock facilities are mobile (ie fighters on a carrier) an integrated system may be elected for. Similarly a cache of integrated units could be maintained by a stationary dock.

More over. An integrated system does is not mutually exclusive to a modular one. Modules can be installed over an integrated unit providing the best of both. The integrated layer provides complete coverage when the modular layer is penetrated. And the modular layer is easily replaced guaranteeing a minimum level of protection even when a drydock is unavailable.
ease of repair, complete coverage.

^ - - ^ In conclusion: While integrated systems do offer some advantages like durability, against the economy of modular systems they lose.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Hahaha... I agree with every word you're saying, snow cat.
My problem is more with the texture style of the old models; dirty grey; concrete-like. Perhaps it might be interpretable as being some energy weapon resistant coating that is spayed over the armor plates...
Post Reply