Norwegian Forces

[p2vollan]

Why's the EOTech bothering you?

The rail covers are to keep the poly count down, like what was done with the PR M4 and M16. Those rails take up a hack of a lot of polies. And yes, it makes them look fugly, but so do the rails.

Because Norway issues Aimpoint CompM4 for their Hk416s and not eotechs. Yeah sure, few units might be allowed to use whatever sight they want. Anyway, most of them will have aimpoints, so for the sake of accuracy it should have a that.
I doubt the heatshields are saving a significant amount of pollies. Also, deleting unseen pollies after you're done with everything else should be enough.

Also, in my PERSONAL opinion, rails look just fine/cool. Actually, I prefer rifles having rails all over the place(416, scar and likes), that's what todays modern rifles have, and should have for the sake of modularity.

About the models tho, the main thing about the heatshields are that there's to many of them, especially those on the top rail. Its just too much of them.. Remove those on the top would greatly improve the looks, imo.

[Z-trooper]

I'm starting to wonder if we shouldnt give normal mapping a go at this problem. I could probably bake some normal maps of a "high poly" rail onto more or less a box. Games like GRAW seemed to pull it off without it bothering me that its only normal mapped, but then again GRAW handles normal mapping far better than bf2 and we should also consider low/medium settings user.

I'll post some trials of how it looks in a bit - we have to find out at some point

EDIT: oh and p2vollan, I dont think we are going to delete the backfaces since the animators are having lots of fun with the models - and missing bits like cocking handles on the right side of the weapon have been a problem here before. good suggestion though.

[KP]

What Z said. If it can be sorted out by normal maps, that'd be perfect. The rail covers aren't my choice out of preference, but because when I made the weapon, it was either that or a weapon that was way too high-poly compared to the PR weapons. There is a reason there are lots of covers on the PR M4 and M16. By deleting the rails underneath the covers, I saved (IIRC) about 1500 polies. That's quite a lot.

As for the EOTech, the FSK/MJK operatives use pretty much whatever they like on their weapons. AN/PEQ-2s, SureFires, all that gear plus the stuff they wear - it's not exactly standard issue. I've seen pics of TMBN lads with EOTechs, and they're not Special Forces, so I have no doubt that FSK/MJK would be able to get them and use them. Plus, the Spec Ops is geared for recce/CQB missions, so I want to have them using a sight better suited for that role.

[Z-trooper]

Well, I wont have to make the call on this, but here are my results of my little test rail:



In a mock up test:


I havent tried it in bf2 yet. I'll probably try exporting it along with a decent specular map and a test diffuse, but I dont have time for it right now.

[KP]

Doesn't look all that good, IMO.

[Rhino]

it looks good for a bump map tbh.

But bump maps can't do anything THAT deep.

personally what I would do is have the 1p as a high poly rail, and 3p use the bump map on a low poly rail

[J.F.Leusch69]

i was thinking, that i have no idea what are you talking about

[Rhino]

i was thinking, that i have no idea what are you talking about

Normal mapping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Z-trooper]

Well I'll try texturing it and spending some time on the specular map as well as throw it ingame and lets judge it from there.

[DeltaFart]

I dont like the bolt on the normal, looks like the center is popping out

[Rhino]

if the center was popping out, the light would be reflecting on the oppsite side

[Z-trooper]

A normal map is really an optical illusion, and that bolt is going in from my point of view.. however these "problems" with direction wont happen that much when its affected by movement and lights (ingame...) then the illusion works at its best.

On another note: I dont think that the 416 has such a bolt at all, I just wanted to test out the method for this project by making a quick little imaginary rail.

I'll try to reinforce the optical illusion with the specular map as well as being able to differentiate between highs and lows with the diffuse map. I guess I'll get started now.

[FastWinston]

Small update. I'm still missing the source material i need (google aint giving me the quality pics i need ) Most of the objects will probably be redone at some point, but tips to improvements are apriciated!

[halvor1]

Small update. I'm still missing the source material i need (google aint giving me the quality pics i need ) Most of the objects will probably be redone at some point, but tips to improvements are apriciated!

holy moly sweet

[KP]

I'll see if I can dig up some references for you.

[FastWinston]

I have a bunch of images, but only a few are high rez, and no one from the top (showing the rear cupola) but any new reference photos are great (a specialy of the rear cupola, the undercarrige (and shock absorbers) and the turret)

[Pride]

Some of these may help:

CV90 ARV Walk Around Page 1
CV9035 Mk.III Walk Around Page 1
CV9040 Walk Around Page 1
Stridsfordon 9040C (CV9040C) Photos
Norwegian CV90 Photos
Norwegian CV9030 Photos
More Norwegian CV90 Photos

[p2vollan]

Finding out that the M16/ACOG in PR got around 5000 triangles, there should hardly any problem with using fully modelled rails. Also, the anims for the M16/M4 never show the right side or got any quick twists and turns, so using those anims lets you delete most of the backfaces.
Though, since the Hk416 normally comes with a vertical grip in the norwegian army, the anims from the C8SWF(british Special ops kit) would fit better, but do have a short twist(less than a second) in the draw sequence, making it not so necessary with small details for the right side.

The Hk416 model I made for Northen Conlict BF2 mod have 4000 triangles with the aimpoint sight. That's after I deleted all pollies that would'nt be seen ingame with default BF2 M4A1 anims, that includes the stock. Though, that models lacks the twist mount for the 3x magnifier and vertical grip. But still having 1000 triangles left, matching PR's M16/acog tricount should'nt be much of a problem.


BTW, what is the tri count for your Hk416 model?


Another nitpick; It looks like from the renders that your model have a 14.5 inch barrel, which would be incorrect as the Norwegian configuration have 16.5 inch.

If I'm wrong about that, and PR's M16 tricount then I apologize and please correct me.. ;P

[KP]

It's a 16,5-inch version.

My 416 is about 6400 tris. Remember that we're using the PR M4 as a basis and adding stuff to it, so it's a bit higher. And that's with the covered rails.

[p2vollan]

Hm, if you says so, looks a tad short but then again I haven't seen it from many angles.

Yet again, delete backsides, atleast deleting the frontsides of each bit in the rails do alot too, so does deleting most of the stock. If you know what anims there gonna be used it even easier to delete backfaces, if not, well, do it after its animated..


Then the aimpoint/eotech thing, I've seen you guys have a AG3 with both the aimpoint and the 3x magnifier, so it wouldn't be a big deal to just add those to the Hk416. And you could use the eotech for the Special ops kit for example. And have aimpoints and magnifier(for some) for the default classes. Like in some maps in PR one rifleman kit have a reddot and the other one Acog. The Norwegian counterpart could have the magnifier added instead of using a Acog.

Must add that I really dont have a clue on what you guys are planing, I'm just thinking out loud here..