Area carrier early mesh

[Ares]

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/galle ... alNumber=1

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/galle ... temId=8993

Agesipolis Area carrier early mesh
muchos workos to be done.

[Deus Siddis]

Try to keep in mind I only mean this as constructive criticism, but your poly usage is all over the place in this model.

Those bevels at the ends of the cylinder structure and the 'wings' have far too few polys relative to the rest or for a ship this big. And all those polys going around the circumference of the cylinder structure are relatively far too numerous.

So essentially some areas are overkill, especially when you have normal map support now, while the sparser poly areas will look glaringly ugly.

It is an interesting and original design though.

[Ares]

as mentioned, this is a early version of it, i'm well aware of the poly defficiencies in the 'wings' but those are easily corrected by smoothing as i have already proven. Any criticizm on the design itself would be appreciated. and what greebles can i put on a aeran ship?

**EDIT**
Wanted to add i did come off kinda badly here. sorry.

[Deus Siddis]

Any criticizm on the design itself would be appreciated. and what greebles can i put on a aeran ship?

That is the department of jackS, though he probably won't be able to check the forum again for another few days. However he did fill out the style guide for the Aera on the wiki:

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/ ... uide:Aeran

Quoting from that page:

Frequently visible: well defined front/back of ship. unibody construction/tightly-fitting armor plates. Radiators, sometimes with retractable cover-flaps. Extensions, especially on larger vessels (where they are generally topped by turrets):

extensions are vaguely teardrop shaped in cross section, the non-pointy end thereof being somewhat flattened, rather than fully round, and generally facing forward. Extensions reduce slightly in diameters of cross section as they extend from the ship, but terminate in a flat, cross-sectional face by the time the area has been reduced by ~1/2 or so from the base of the extensions.
Rarely visible: boxy corners and subcomponents, modular design, piping, windows (even Aeran civilians aren't much for star-gazing)

. . .

Capital vs. light craft: Light craft are more heavily bilaterally symmetric than capital vessels. Capital vessels are more likely to have numerous tri- or radial symmetries. For radial symmetries, multiples of 3 are common. Light craft tend to have both front and back extensions that, although vaguely winglike in shape, are not wings, and are fairly thick in proportion to the size of the craft. The extensions are proportionately much smaller for capital vessels. Larger capital vessels tend to have forward facing spinal mounts of architecturally significant size.

[Ares]

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/galle ... alNumber=1
Slightly improved the poly layout, wings a bit better defined. the smoothed mesh is 2582poly's... i don't expect it to exceed 4-5K when done.

**EDIT**
http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/galle ... alNumber=1
basic ideal behind what the greeble wing structure will look like. the 'hammerhead' will remain devoid of any such wings

**EDIT2**
http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/galle ... alNumber=1
Engines make it move!!

got alot of work to do on the wings, they definitly dont look right yet, but unless someone seriously can find a flaw with it this will be the basic design.

COMMENTS WELCOME!

[chuck_starchaser]

Carriers don't have any use for wings, Ares; they don't land on planets. Those are radiators, if anything. The difference may be semantic, but calling them what they are helps the mind coming up with better modeling ideas.

Also, did you read the art guideline quotations that Deus Siddis posted for you? Larger Aera ships show three-fold symmetries, or multiples of 3. Two-fold (bi-lateral) symmetry is their style for fighters.

And also, it's best to keep the geometry low at the concept stage. Subdividing a mesh is something you do once you're really sure the shape is final.

[Ares]

i am referring to them as 'wings' for simplicity sake, they are NOT wings as there is no air in space and in a atmosphere this thing would likely fall like a hundred-million ton brick. Had i wanted to show something aerodynamic i would have posted one of my X-plane planes.
the hull extrusions ARE multiples of 3. which is a idea(they are far from done BTW) i pulled DIRECTLY from the description of another yet-to-be-designed ship. The bi-symmetric 'wings' are NOT that far fetched at ALL as there is a similar description
http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/Vessel:Anaxander

There are six major projections extending radially from the ship, three rear, and three front. The three rear are in a top, bottom-left, bottom-right radial symmetry, and the front three are shifted 60 degrees to a bottom, top-right, top-left radial symmetry.

Narrowed vertically somewhat at front to attach to hammerhead-style frontal region. Hammerhead has teardrop shaped cross section viewed from the side.

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/Vessel:Agis
(as a reference, a corvette type ship with 'wings')

As far as the smoothed geometry, it's really easy to hit a couple buttons and smooth the mesh for a pic. i guarantee you my WIP mesh looks far from this pretty.
the bi-symmetric wings are a bit over the top.... sure. but as i have just proved they ARE almost completely fitting with the description and as the wiki says this is a older ship so it's entirely possible there older ships might have used the 'wings' a bit more extensively.

WHO'S NEXT? WHO'S NEXT? Who else wants to question my reading and cannon-ness abilities?
No offense of course

[chuck_starchaser]

the hull extrusions ARE multiples of 3.

Perhaps. But the main "wings" are not.

which is a idea(they are far from done BTW) i pulled DIRECTLY from the description of another yet-to-be-designed ship. The bi-symmetric 'wings' are NOT that far fetched at ALL as there is a similar description
http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/Vessel:Anaxander

There are six major projections extending radially from the ship, three rear, and three front. The three rear are in a top, bottom-left, bottom-right radial symmetry, and the front three are shifted 60 degrees to a bottom, top-right, top-left radial symmetry.

Narrowed vertically somewhat at front to attach to hammerhead-style frontal region. Hammerhead has teardrop shaped cross section viewed from the side.

I don't see where that allows for prominent "wings" showing bi-lateral symmetry in an Aeran carrier; but maybe I'm missing something.

[Ares]

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/galle ... alNumber=1
Shortened 'hammerhead' a bit. opinions? better or worse?

@ Chuck: If you follow the second link in my last post, you will notice smaller but rather prominent wings. Otherwise, I guess we'll agree to disagree.

[Ares]

Also i should probably note that i did kinda throw the described design on the wiki out the window and kinda followed my own design for this ship. The described one was boring and that picture wasn't any descriptive help...

EDIT
http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/galle ... alNumber=1
more refinements. Really not liking the shorter nose. will probably scrap it for the longer one.

[Phlogios]

The described one was BORING???

wtf

Then this can't be an Agesipolis.

[chuck_starchaser]

Ares, there's good reasons why you get NO feedback.
First of all, it looks like crap; complete garbage.
But more importantly, people remember how you've reacted in the past to the slightest criticism of your work.
I think you're wasting time and bandwidth here; you've got a reputation already, and it's not the best.
Sorry to break it to ya.

[Ares]

Ares, there's good reasons why you get NO feedback.
First of all, it looks like crap; complete garbage.
But more importantly, people remember how you've reacted in the past to the slightest criticism of your work.
I think you're wasting time and bandwidth here; you've got a reputation already, and it's not the best.
Sorry to break it to ya.

You will have a private message shortly. I'll be more mature than to call peoples work crap publicly on the forum.

If people do have CONSTRUCTIVE criticizm i would love to hear it, i was thinking of starting another Aera ship but i would like some opinions.

[AzarWolf]

I'd recommend starting anew-
I looked at the ships in one of the few functioning artistic guidelines wiki's and they seem to prefer forward swept sharply angled appendage wing-like things (back swept is ok once in a while too)- but the model you made is very rounded- the appendages too are very rounded and they just "stick out" - there is no "forward" or "back" relation to them.

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/Vessel:Ariston

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/Vessel:Nicander

[Ares]

I had that thought. again the smoothing was more to smooth out the rough edges and make the pics look better, but i did note the subdivision mode does nearly the same thing and preserves some of the hard edges. I thought the front- back seemed defined pretty well defined but i'll see if i can improove that some. What would you suggest to define them better? Thanks

[chuck_starchaser]

You will have a private message shortly. I'll be more mature than to call peoples work crap publicly on the forum.

If people do have CONSTRUCTIVE criticizm i would love to hear it, i was thinking of starting another Aera ship but i would like some opinions.

and

It's complete garbage.care to elaborate as to why?

Well, that's the funny part. One would assume someone who purports to be a modeler would at least have some sense of aestetics, if not knowledge or skills. You present something that would typically take less than 5 minutes to make, NO details whatsoever, overly subdivided as if that were to somehow make up for the childish simplicity of it, and expect people to take it seriously and give you thoughtful fieedback --and only of the positive kind, at that.
I did give you constructive criticism, regarding "wings" on carriers, and about symmetry; and you argued back, which is what you always do: Year after year, every few months, come here, show some garbage, then get defensive about it.
Now, may I ask, whether those stupid things on the sides be wings or radiators, why such a funny shape? Is there a reason or explanation?
Now, I remember you saying years ago you don't give a damn about science or reasons or explanations...
Fine, so you want to speak at an artistic level?
Those curvey, noodly "wings" clash, aestetically, with the straight lines of a body that's basically just a tube.
Either make a shape that is curvey throughout, or one that is predominantly straight lines and cylinders. Mixing half and half is the worst aesthetic clash imaginable. And the thing is, this is not a principle you need to go to school to learn, it's so basic that I would say if you need to be told about it, then something is wrong with you at the hardware level.

[AzarWolf]

The described one was BORING???

wtf

Then this can't be an Agesipolis.

I looked at the description page's concept art (not the description though) and it seemed very confused like a bad fusion of that shaper mining ship and the spikes on the klkk star fortress. If the description was anything like the picture, I'd try for something alternate.

Either make a shape that is curvey throughout, or one that is predominantly straight lines and cylinders. Mixing half and half is the worst aesthetic clash imaginable.

Fits quite perfectly. Except it's straight lines and blocky spikes in this case.

[Ares]

Well, that's the funny part. One would assume someone who purports to be a modeler would at least have some sense of aestetics, if not knowledge or skills. You present something that would typically take less than 5 minutes to make, NO details whatsoever, overly subdivided as if that were to somehow make up for the childish simplicity of it, and expect people to take it seriously and give you thoughtful fieedback --and only of the positive kind, at that.
I did give you constructive criticism, regarding "wings" on carriers, and about symmetry; and you argued back, which is what you always do: Year after year, every few months, come here, show some garbage, then get defensive about it.
Now, may I ask, whether those stupid things on the sides be wings or radiators, why such a funny shape? Is there a reason or explanation?
Now, I remember you saying years ago you don't give a damn about science or reasons or explanations...
Fine, so you want to speak at an artistic level?
Those curvey, noodly "wings" clash, aestetically, with the straight lines of a body that's basically just a tube.
Either make a shape that is curvey throughout, or one that is predominantly straight lines and cylinders. Mixing half and half is the worst aesthetic clash imaginable. And the thing is, this is not a principle you need to go to school to learn, it's so basic that I would say if you need to be told about it, then something is wrong with you at the hardware level.

I will give you that the main body is just a tube, yes. i should do some work on that, but based on what i've seen Aeran ships are rather simplistic in most parts. Anyone have a idea how i can fix that?

Alright. I was courteous enough to attempt to contain this discussion to PM's but since you don't seem to want to sure why not?
The stupid things as you put it, stupid, serve no main purpose except to follow the general style of aeran ships, if you go click that little link that actually STARTS the game, you would note while i have taken a bit more creative interpretation can YOU give me a technical reason why the original aeran ships, (which i did not design mind you) have.... wings? No?
thats what i thought, as this IS a game you need to put a bit of uniqueness and interest value in, go play 'space combat' by x-plane if you can't show a little leeway here and you can get your fix of 100% accurate but absurdly boring physics. than you can come back here and tell us all this FTL travel we use in the game is entirely conceptual and likely not even possible in real life. and wrong with me at the hardwere level? Firstly with that, maybe you should go back to your elementary school reading classes, your the IDIOT shamelessly bashing a design i have said SINCE MY FIRST POST IS NOWERE NEAR DONE, i have only laid out the general theme of what i feel it should look like. As far as what i might have said OVER 3 YEARS AGO, wich is the last time i was regularly here, and i come back attempting to freaking help out as i noticed VS seemed to have a good direction and a purpose as to were it's going now. So go back to nitpicking other peoples posts and your fashon classes. I'll listen to people who have better things to do than pick on it's WINGS. Have a nice day.

I looked at the description page's concept art (not the description though) and it seemed very confused like a bad fusion of that shaper mining ship and the spikes on the klkk star fortress. If the description was anything like the picture, I'd try for something alternate.

Fits quite perfectly. Except it's straight lines and blocky spikes in this case.

Ya, that was my general interpretation, and the drawing was vague at best. the blocky spikes are far from finished as is the rest of the ship... Thank you though...

This post will probably be edited. The only thing i ask if you edit my post is his should be edited too since he started the name calling and i at least tried to contain this to a PM. so without further adu, LET THE FLAME WAR BEGIN! *clicks submit button*

[chuck_starchaser]

Well, that's the funny part. One would assume someone who purports to be a modeler would at least have some sense of aestetics, if not knowledge or skills. You present something that would typically take less than 5 minutes to make, NO details whatsoever, overly subdivided as if that were to somehow make up for the childish simplicity of it, and expect people to take it seriously and give you thoughtful fieedback --and only of the positive kind, at that.
I did give you constructive criticism, regarding "wings" on carriers, and about symmetry; and you argued back, which is what you always do: Year after year, every few months, come here, show some garbage, then get defensive about it.
Now, may I ask, whether those stupid things on the sides be wings or radiators, why such a funny shape? Is there a reason or explanation?
Now, I remember you saying years ago you don't give a damn about science or reasons or explanations...
Fine, so you want to speak at an artistic level?
Those curvey, noodly "wings" clash, aestetically, with the straight lines of a body that's basically just a tube.
Either make a shape that is curvey throughout, or one that is predominantly straight lines and cylinders. Mixing half and half is the worst aesthetic clash imaginable. And the thing is, this is not a principle you need to go to school to learn, it's so basic that I would say if you need to be told about it, then something is wrong with you at the hardware level.

I will give you that the main body is just a tube, yes. i should do some work on that, but based on what i've seen Aeran ships are rather simplistic in most parts. Anyone have a idea how i can fix that?

Alright. I was courteous enough to attempt to contain this discussion to PM's but since you don't seem to want to sure why not?
The stupid things as you put it, stupid, serve no main purpose except to follow the general style of aeran ships, if you go click that little link that actually STARTS the game, you would note while i have taken a bit more creative interpretation can YOU give me a technical reason why the original aeran ships, (which i did not design mind you) have.... wings? No?
thats what i thought, as this IS a game you need to put a bit of uniqueness and interest value in, go play 'space combat' by x-plane if you can't show a little leeway here and you can get your fix of 100% accurate but absurdly boring physics. than you can come back here and tell us all this FTL travel we use in the game is entirely conceptual and likely not even possible in real life. and wrong with me at the hardwere level? Firstly with that, maybe you should go back to your elementary school reading classes, your the IDIOT shamelessly bashing a design i have said SINCE MY FIRST POST IS NOWERE NEAR DONE, i have only laid out the general theme of what i feel it should look like. As far as what i might have said OVER 3 YEARS AGO, wich is the last time i was regularly here, and i come back attempting to freaking help out as i noticed VS seemed to have a good direction and a purpose as to were it's going now. So go back to nitpicking other peoples posts and your fashon classes. I'll listen to people who have better things to do than pick on it's WINGS. Have a nice day.

I looked at the description page's concept art (not the description though) and it seemed very confused like a bad fusion of that shaper mining ship and the spikes on the klkk star fortress. If the description was anything like the picture, I'd try for something alternate.

Fits quite perfectly. Except it's straight lines and blocky spikes in this case.

Ya, that was my general interpretation, and the drawing was vague at best. the blocky spikes are far from finished as is the rest of the ship... Thank you though...

This post will probably be edited. The only thing i ask if you edit my post is his should be edited too since he started the name calling and i at least tried to contain this to a PM. so without further adu, LET THE FLAME WAR BEGIN! *clicks submit button*

Just thought I'd make a record of it, in case you edit it.
All you say is very nice, but it doesn't change the fact one iota that you made a tube, put a few fins and some really weird hoses on the sides; --a piece of crap that probably took you five minute to do, if that--, and repeatedly ask for feedback. So I gave you some. You too have a nice day.

[Ares]

Just thought I'd make a record of it, in case you edit it.
All you say is very nice, but it doesn't change the fact one iota that you made a tube, put a few fins and some really weird hoses on the sides; --a piece of crap that probably took you five minute to do, if that--, and repeatedly ask for feedback. So I gave you some. You too have a nice day.

not ME editing it. a mod. should i be ashamed i stick up for myself? i think not.
And actually i did alot more and this has taken me far more than 5 mins. Been working for this on and off for 3+ days. Before you open your mouth again lets see your amazing meshes. k?

This is getting off topic though so if anyone has anything else they'd like to see on it or that it might need give me some ideas.

[Phlogios]

Before you open your mouth again lets see your amazing meshes. k?

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
That's hilarious! Chuck_starchaser is no doubt one of the top 3 artists EVER to contribute to any VS data set.

http://wcpedia.com/dw/lib/exe/fetch.php ... er%3Ademon
That's one of his amazing meshes.

EDIT: Here's another: http://wcpedia.com/dw/doku.php/wc_info/ ... tte/cutter

[Phlogios]

Chuck is free to open his mouth again.

[chuck_starchaser]

Well, I've been working on a model, ironically, for 3+ days; and it's not a ship for vegastrike; it's a Harley motorcycle, but just for comparing metrics, this is the current status:
http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/forum ... 305#102305
That's about 20,000 polygons so far, so that works out to about 6,000 polygons per day... Not that the metric says anything about artistic input.

But let's stop talking about myself... In a more general sense, when people come here to show something and ask for feedback on it, there should be something to give feedback on; --more than just two sticks and a hose. Look at, for instance, this model proposal by Oblivion:
http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/forum ... 27&start=0
He EARNED applause --and a standing ovation-- for that.
(And that took him two days, by the way.)

If you want nothing but "positive" feedback, then you'd better find some sense of aesthetics, somewhere, and install it; then learn some modeling basics, put in some hard work, and be sure to deserve applause; rather than come around like you always have, --showing off ZERO taste, ZERO skills, and 100+ attitude.

(PS: As a matter of policy, moderators don't edit posts in this forum.)

[loki1950]

(PS: As a matter of policy, moderators don't edit posts in this forum.)

Not ever as these forums constitute the project's collective memory and systemic amnesia is not an option in my opinion.

Enjoy the Choice

[Ares]

Recreating something is a bit diffrent from doing something from complete scratch, it really isn't the same thing, As you should be aware chuck.

alright, so he's not bad. it HAS BEEN 3 YEARS since i was regularly here, so as i have already said i AM a bit out of the loop. If i had a copy of 3dS max on this PC or had the time or patience to learn Blender I'd like to think i could do something at least as good but my time is limited, usually, i have work and school... Everyone else has so far been able to give criticism be it good or bad without being insulting of me or my work, i don't care how good you are, there no excuse for that crap.

Lets try to stay on topic from this point on though. lol

*EDIT due to did not fully read chucks post.*