[WIP] Dutch DAF YA-4442 Logistic and Transport truck [help needed!]

[Mr.VdHeide]

mries, quite a while indeed! I had and still have a lot of stuff going on in my personal life. My study but also my Health which is still not really okay at all... However, I will keep on working on this truck and the AML-90.

[R-DEV]Mats391, I really hope you are right and that this is no problem at all. I am looking forward to hearing Rhino's opinion on this mather.





Dj.

[Mr.VdHeide]

I just want to know for sure, can I keep on working on the AML90 the way it is right now? So without having to worry about the model being useless when the exporting starts.




Dj.

[camo]

Ah well since rhino hasn't got back to you maybe hold off on committing too much time into making that AML90. There's another model in the works that looks to be finished soonish.

[Mr.VdHeide]

Yes, normally I would have done that but I have excactly the same problem with my DAF truck. So the File's unit scale for some reason being imperial.

So my question is. Can I just keep on modeling both vehicles after changing the file's unit scale, or will this cause problems later on?




Dj.

[Mats391]

If you rescale now or after you finished does not really matter.

[Mr.VdHeide]

Okay all right then, in that case I will just continue working on the truck as planned.




Dj.

[Mr.VdHeide]

Good news, the DAF truck's dimensions are totally fine and I didnt even have to scale the model after I choose to adopt the system's unit scale.

3rd person LOD_0 I declare DONE:








Dj.

[AfterDune]

Looks awesome man... just awesome .

[agus92]

Gorgeous!

[Glimmerman]

Good news, the DAF truck's dimensions are totally fine and I didnt even have to scale the model after I choose to adopt the system's unit scale.



3rd person LOD_0 I declare DONE:

















Dj.

Sweet!

[Mr.VdHeide]

Thanks!



Eventhough I might add some details to the model later on if that would be needed, I think the 1st Person model is pretty much ready to.

Here are some print screens for you guys to enjoy and comment to:





















The wire frame



And to show the seperate model. (Door handels are not attached to the main model, should they be??)

[Mr.VdHeide]

Also, a couple days back I saw this image on the Dutch Defense Ministry's website:




I would love this for the logistic truck. Just without the brown blankets but with the awesome camouflage netting. My idea was to simply close the canvas on the truck's rear. Removing the seats and the frames would save a lot of triangles which I could then use for the camouflage netting and maybe even to model a FN MAG mount on top of the cabin.

I am sure it would look great and refreshing to not have 2 pretty much identical trucks, but 2 different and good looking versions of the same vehicle.



The transport truck will not get the canvas as shown in the picture though.




Dj.

[AfterDune]

Sounds like a cool plan .

The logi-truck in Vietnam has a gunner as well. With very limited ammo I believe, so can pretty much only be used for self-defense. And could always feature a variant with and without gunner.

[Glimmerman]

A FN MAG on the roof would be cool, also the camo netting but is it doable?

[AfterDune]

Sure, should be modelled just like the camo netting you find on a FOB or vehicle depot.

[Mr.VdHeide]

Yes, that is what I was thinking of. To create a canvas top model, and pull a transparent 'sheet' over it and put a camouflage netting texture on that sheet so it will look as if the camouflage netting is lying over the truck's canvas cover. On the edges of the canvas cover I could model the transparent sheet in a way so the camouflage netting will look natural and loosely. I do not think it would cost a lot of triangles, still it would look sexy as ****.

About the FN MAG being installed on top of the logi: I am not quite sure rather if we should choose to put that thing on top of a logistic truck. Even though I am sure that it would look amazing there are more things that we should consider before making such a choice.

First of all, why would we put it on top of the logi truck rather then on top of a transport truck?
The logistic truck will only carry 3 people that are relatively save within the truck's cabin while the transport truck carries 8 men of whom at least 5 are relatively exposed in the truck's transport bay. So wouldn't it make more sense to mount the MAG on top of a transport truck?

This is what I would like to suggest, as I think it would be the best idea:

Like AD said, make 2 variants. And actually I think we should make not only 2 variants of the logi, but also 2 variants of the transport truck. So both a trans and a logi truck with, and and without a MG. Also a good thing about that is that the transport truck with a 7.62mm MG could also partially replace the place holding Land Rover the Dutch Armed Forces have, but that is something the mappers would have to decide.





Dj.

[Glimmerman]

sounds good


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

[Mr.VdHeide]

Now that both the 3rd and the 1st person model is pretty much done I will be going to the next stage of this project: making the 4 separate versions of the DAF YA-4442 that we are planning on.

But while thinking about that I started to wonder what exactly would be the best order to work in. I figured I should start by making a copy of my 3rd person model and model the FN MAG mount thing on top of the cabin and call it something like:

- DAF YA-4442 Transport FN MAG

And then name the original file:

- DAF YA-4442 Transport

Create a copy of the DAF YA-4442 Transport, and model a different cargo bay. Detach the cargo bay and make a separate model of it. After which I would make the following file by making a copy of the Transport FN MAG file and call it:

- DAF YA-4442 Logistics FN MAG

Then merge the cargo bay file with the MG Logi file and join them together. That would be the best way to make the 4 separate versions in my opinion.


I am just not quite sure how that works with the UV-mapping. Would it be good to start with what is described above or would that just be inefficient? Also, as far as I know the FN MAG mount consist of a ring rotating in a steel tube/metal sheet frame. Wouldn't it be better to simply give every single Truck version the frame, but leaving the ring on which the mag is mounted as a separate file? Since in that case there would only be 2 separate versions in terms of UV sheets since the actual MG mount would be a separate object and therefore have it's own UV sheet.





Dj.

[Mats391]

Here is how i would would dot it with your variants. Logistics and Support version use same mesh usually only the logistics gets the canvas added as a child object. You can compare with the french truck, they dont even bother removing the benches for the logistics version. So that would be one option.
The other, better version would be to do this:
- Make one mesh w/o benches or canvas for each MG and unarmed version
- Add benches to support version as child and canvas to logistics version as child.
With that you only do 2 truck meshes, 1 canvas and 1 bench.

I wouldnt have all trucks with open roof, that would look bit goofy w/o the MG then. Also think you should be fine with putting truck, bench and MG mount all on the same sheet. Would only make separate one for the canvas any maybe 1p interior.
I would also do UV now of the truck, then do modifications for MG and UV those parts as well.

[Rhino]

So basically you want to make armed (with FN MAG) and unarmed versions of the transport and logi trucks?

I would seriously advise against this. Not only is this far more work for you, the texture artists and the coders, and more mesh/texture memory for clients to load, but also an armed version of a truck, only encourages the truck to be used in ways it shouldn't be used ingame... In r/l, the MG on top is for protection which is fair enough, but ingame, its next to useless from that POV and worst of all, takes someone away from the front line to man it the whole time if you want to do this. Instead the only way to effectively use the MG would be to park the truck up behind a ridge or w/e and use it as a fire platform for the MG, something that is seriously bad for gameplay since the whole point of the trucks is to help in a non-combat role and to be protected by other assets ingame, not fighting itself...

So ye to summaries:

1. more work for you, texture artists and coders
2. more memory for clinets to load
3. MG is next to useless for defence purposes and to do so, would take a player away from the front line to man..
4. only encourages the truck to be used in a combat role, rather than a support role, as a weapons platform on the front lines...

These are the reasons why we never manned the MAN Truck, or the other trucks too, all of which have MG versions, but we decided it would only have a negative effect on gameplay, before you even consider the extra effort needed to do so.



But ye, if you really want to go to the extra effort to do this, you can, but I doubt the MG versions of the trucks will be used much, maybe a little at first until the mapper sees they are only having a negative effect on gameplay and then replaces them with unarmed ones.