[Model] M2 Flamethrower [WIP]

[lucky.BOY]

Hello,

I have started modelling the M2 Flamethrower for WWII and Vietnam era american factions. The flamethrower was developed during Second World War, with its variants being used through Korean and Vietnam wars.







Now to the model itself, at the moment i think it is going to be two separate models, the tank group will be part of kit geometry, while the wand with hose will be the weapon itself.

So far i have the dimensions laid out, when Im sure everything is sized and laid out correctly, i will proceed to weld it together and optimize it.

Note that at this point I am looking basically for feedback on dimensions and overall accuracy of the model, comments on z-fighting or smoothing etc. wont help me at all

p3d:
tanks alone: p3d.in - m2 backpack01
fitted on a soldier model: p3d.in - m2 soldier


I have some questions considering modelling kit geometry, as I didnt do this before:
How many tris should I aim for with the tank group?
Do I need to do any special as modeller, for the canvas to be able to deform and animate with the soldier?
Can kit geometry use transparent materials? I could avoid modelling some complex parts of the canvas by having it on texture with transparent parts (looking for a 1/0 transparency here, not something like glass transparency, if you understand). But if it is possible, is it worth spending memory on extra texture?

-lucky

Update (10.12.), I got the lowpoly of the wand done.

p3d.in - m2 wand lowpoly




Update 4.1. 2013, Got the tank group nearly done, if it will work like i think that is

p3d.in - m2 backpack lowpoly

And a little render here (i have made the hose using spline tool rather than what i have in the p3d above):



Tank group with hose is 3214 tris.

25.2., everything is UVW Unwrapped, CTRifle is working on textures:

nother' little update, still working on that spec map

Dirtied it up

[rodrigoma]

Lucky how could you be more awesome?
cant wait too see this finished and play with it, I think your works really make us want to start modelling awesome things.
I have to start learning arghhh

[LITOralis.nMd]

Before you get further into this you need to verify that the PR Dev team is willing to reintroduce flame weapons.

The molotov cocktails, while my favorite weapon for insurgents, was seriously buggy, and the Dev team removed them because of it.

The model looks great and I'd love a flame weapon to use again. Storming beache of DDay with flamethrower in PR? WIN!!

[sweedensniiperr]

Before you get further into this you need to verify that the PR Dev team is willing to reintroduce flame weapons.

Well the first step would be to actually have the model..

[Arc_Shielder]

The model is going to be used for a new PN map (which info will be revealed sometime in the future) and maybe to something more. This is to avoid any further questions regarding its use (although I understand the curiosity).

What's really important is for the OP to have his questions answered.

[Rhino]

Well the first step would be to actually have the model..

No point spending time making a model if your not going to be used (unless your making it for fun/learning/etc).


The biggest issue I see with this isn't the flame code itself however (although that would require some work but think its doable) but more the pipe between the back pack and the "hose" (for a lack of a better word, dunno if its correct). While yes, player models can stretch within the limits of their bone structure etc, I don't see how you could apply that to a weapon and/or a kit geom (afaik kit geoms don't bend but I'm not an expert on kit geoms).

TBH this isn't really my area since I don't really deal with kit geoms or player models, only thing I've made stretch/bend was the extension on the mortar as it raises and lowers and the same on the SPG-9 but can't remember how I did that now, Guedoe helped me out back then on that but not sure if you could apply the same to a handheld weapon.

Even so, doing the pipe work as part of the kit geom would be really odd since when not using the flame-thrower, you would still have the pipe leading up to where it should be?

Have you talked to anyone about how this is going to work ingame? I would get a solid idea of how it is going to work before you go any further tbh.


As for kit geoms having a transparent texture, iirc its either 100% or 0% opacity, nothing inbetween.

[Adriaan]

Nice work on the model.
I see room for quite a bit of optimization on the top and bottom of the tanks though, especially the large ones. You can collapse more edges there without losing smoothness or significant silhouette changes, like you already did a bit.

[ExeTick]

it would be really cool to see this in PR:N

[AfterDune]

The flame code is doable, shouldn't be a problem. I just wonder how to "connect" the tanks with the handheld part. How did FH2 do it btw?

[Tim270]

You just separate out the wand and tank for the 1p (so you only see the 1p,) then just have the pipe looking like it is deformed and long enough it wont need to deform in the 3p... if that makes any sense.

[Rhino]

Dose FH2 have a flamethrower?

You just separate out the wand and tank for the 1p (so you only see the 1p,) then just have the pipe looking like it is deformed and long enough it wont need to deform in the 3p... if that makes any sense.

1p is easy, 3p is the hard bit. If done like that, without the pipe being able to bend, when you look down the pipe will rotate from the where the hands are, and will end up disconnected, high in the sky, possibly going into the players head, and when you look up it will end up it will also end up disconnected, just well under the tank, possibly going into the legs. Looking left and right would also be problematic too but isn't so much movement there but enough to be a problem.

Think of how a long AT weapon works when you look up and down etc and where it rotates etc.

[sweedensniiperr]

Dose FH2 have a flamethrower?

yeah the m1a1 though, according to their website.

Spoiler for video:

[ExeTick]

if flamethrower is implemented I would hope you can make it look like its one stream of fire not small balls flying around.

[lucky.BOY]

A shitty video of the FH2 flamethrower from 3p I found earlier:

[XFIRE]14e857[/XFIRE]

Dont know about the bending bit, agree it would look odd as part of the kit geom.

And the weapon is in their main build, you can find the gun under objects/weapons/Handheld/FlamethrowerM1A1 and the kit geometry under objects/kits/kitmeshes/kitmesh_flamethorwerm1a1 if anyone want to check them out in bfmeshview

[Rhino]

In that vid it looks like the backpack tanks are part of the handheld weapon, note how when the guy looks left the tank goes way onto his left shoulder, and when he looks right onto his left etc, hardly ever being central. Can't imagine how bad it would be if he looked up or down

[ExeTick]

looking up tubes around his knees, looking down tubes on his head^^

[lucky.BOY]

Well you are again right Rhino, just checked the weapon again in bfmeshview and it indeed has the tank group as part of its 3p mesh. Well the worst thing we could do is have the hose that connects tank group with the wand rigid, so it would flail around with every mouse move. Wouldnt look so good, but honestly still better then the whole thing floating around lol.

Either that or someone figures out how to make it bend and stay "connected" with the tank group.

[40mmrain]

rifleman AP class.

[Kevokpo]

and give it no rifle, just a pistol or nothing at all

[Arc_Shielder]

Hm, I'm sure it's going to sound stupid, but isn't it possible to use the mechanics of the Specialist rope to "tie" one end to the other?