Project Reality Forums

Could this be also applied to logistics trucs, where supply crates would be "rockets", i.e. we could see if a truck is loaded or not?

-lucky

Should make a test veichle for that

and all of a sudden the dev's shed light on some awesome things they had lying around, it appears that whole LCVP/amtrack discussion had worth after all

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]AfterDune;1686006']Yes. The vehicle will be visible ammo, like rockets on jets.[/quote]

That is only one possible concept that is lying around AD.


[quote="Shovel""]And when it drops it you will be able to use it like a regular vehicle?[/quote]

Yes, very much like the "deployable boat" I made for BFP2:
[XFIRE]254b84[/XFIRE]

lucky.BOY wrote:Could this be also applied to logistics trucks, where supply crates would be "rockets", i.e. we could see if a truck is loaded or not?

-lucky

Dummy projectiles for logi trucks was looked into by the coders some time ago, can't remember the exact reasons for why it wasn't done although think it might have been something to do with the dummy projectiles not re-appearing after reload (common vbf2 bug) but you would have to ask the coders why they didn't do it exactly.

If I recall, in an older version of PR, the crates were visible in the back of the logi, and dissapeared when you droped them.
I thought it possible to have a couple of vehicles on the boat, and when you dropped them at a beach or whatnot, they dissappeared from the back of the boat.

Or, there could just be some static vehicles on the boat that didn't dissappear. But that would look silly.

Edit: Another thing, is it possible to have a funcioning ladder on a vehicle?

Edit Again:

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:What's the point of making it if you can't fit a tank, probably not even a HMMWV in it as its not wide enough?

Oh, and the insanely high tri count is from the trucks. The boat is around 1300 atm

does a small LCU even exist???
cuz the devs love having their new models being authentic and all that

Not judging the game or anything, but a fair few models and vehicles in the game are not to scale

i do think that all or most of the models that are not from vBF2 are correctly scaled

If there were a correctly sized carrier, I'd make a correctly sized LCU. Hence why i'm making a miniature one.

ZondaX15 wrote:If there were a correctly sized carrier, I'd make a correctly sized LCU. Hence why i'm making a miniature one.

As seen from the reference pics earlier in the topic, only 1 LCU could fit under the Essex. If you are to make it to scale, this same effect would occur.

Anyways, if it is not realistic (or to scale), I doubt the DEVs will want to put it in PR. So for everyone's sake, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make it to scale (or at least make a scale version).

ZondaX15 wrote:If there were a correctly sized carrier, I'd make a correctly sized LCU. Hence why i'm making a miniature one.

now your just being stubborn, the LCU is suppose to fit 3 tanks, yours cant do that, and the carrier is vBF2 so you can hardly blame the DEVs for dices derpiness and what Q2M said, also cant the scale be easily changed with the scale tool or does that cause

If by "changing the scale" you were referring to the Essex then its not possible on the grounds that its an EA model (you cant edit the models otherwise you'd be breaking the EULA)

I will make a full size one, but if it were used in the carrier, this is pretty much what it would look like.

CroCop wrote:If by "changing the scale" you were referring to the Essex then its not possible on the grounds that its an EA model (you cant edit the models otherwise you'd be breaking the EULA)

nah i meant on models you your self are making

Quick update:

I've made it 1:1 scale, attached all the planes that weren't, added a few fiddly bits, and done a wee bit of optimising.

Polys: 1099
Tris: 3127




And a quick render



Edit: oh, and could someone enlighten me on the tri limits of the BF2 engine for this type of object?

Edit again: I am not sure on what parts to be doing next... Could someone point me in the right dirrection?

First of all ZondaX15, before I get started if all your going to do is fight my and other Devs feedback and advice then you might as well stop working on this right now as your basically trying to climb a mountain in flip flops. This is already a very hard thing to make and as I said before, really beyond your skill level but you really don't need to make it harder for yourself by going against us the grain. If you have a concern by all means bring it up and if it is relevant we will by all means consider its point but if we decide the best thing is to go the other way, like in the r/l scale terms of this LCU, you should respect that and go that way. Even still today there are things in PR I would like to have seen done differently but I still support w/e decision is taken.


Anyways moving on from that point.

ZondaX15 wrote:If I recall, in an older version of PR, the crates were visible in the back of the logi, and dissapeared when you droped them.
I thought it possible to have a couple of vehicles on the boat, and when you dropped them at a beach or whatnot, they dissappeared from the back of the boat.

Or, there could just be some static vehicles on the boat that didn't dissappear. But that would look silly.

Yes as per my deployable boat video, if they are deployed via a weapon so to speak, then we can do a dummy object (although they don't reappear after being reloaded). However it is unlikely we will go down that route with this, there are a few other ideas floating around which we think will work better for an LCU but I would rather not go into them, the only point you really need to be concerned with right now is that the vehicles fit into the LCU correctly.

ZondaX15 wrote:Edit: Another thing, is it possible to have a funcioning ladder on a vehicle?

Not possible, and don't worry its not needed as well.

ZondaX15 wrote:

[R-DEV]Rhino;1685850 wrote:What's the point of making it if you can't fit a tank, probably not even a HMMWV in it as its not wide enough?

Hence why I said "Probably not" in the bit your quoting, the important thing is it still can't take a tank, nor many other vehicles which it realistically can take when in 1/2 scale...

karambaitos wrote:does a small LCU even exist???

No, all LCUs even back from WW2 when they where first used are huge, although some slightly larger than others

ZondaX15 wrote:Not judging the game or anything, but a fair few models and vehicles in the game are not to scale

Thous are mostly vBF2 models or models we haven't made. Pretty much all of PR's models are to r/l scale with an the exception of a few. The main thing here is pretty much all our new models are to scale, and especially something which needs to take vehicles needs to be to scale as otherwise its not going to be able to fit vehicles in it which are to scale and none of them are 1/2 the size they are in r/l either

ZondaX15 wrote:If there were a correctly sized carrier, I'd make a correctly sized LCU. Hence why i'm making a miniature one.

ZondaX15 wrote:I will make a full size one, but if it were used in the carrier, this is pretty much what it would look like.

I understood what you meant the first time you said it. What I asked for was this:

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Rhino;1685871']Can you give me a picture of its r/l scale in the well dock of the USS Essex? Two side by side in the well dock and both a perspective looking in and top down wire + any others you think show it well plz [/quote]

Not an edited screenshot...

As such you have forced me to waste some more of my own time on this checking its r/l dimensions and importing the carrier and checking for you...

The funny thing is, it dose actually just fit in with its r/l scale (Length: 41.12m, Width: 8.8m), you can even just fit two in side by side although its a very tight squeeze, although looking at the ref pic it looks like it would be a really tight squeeze for two anyways.







Next time, please measure up the back before making such a claim, or if you do make it at least don't present it as fact if you don't know, ie say you don't think it will fit in...

As such for multiple reasons (not going to say some of the reasons I have in my head as I want to keep them under wraps for now and at this point in time, you don't need to know them either) this should be made to 1:1 scale, as there simply isn't any reason to make it smaller, other than some vehicles which are not to scale may seam a little small in it which tbh, no one is going to notice unless they have been on a LCU filled with vehicles in r/l.



[quote="ZondaX15""]I've made it 1:1 scale, attached all the planes that weren't, added a few fiddly bits, and done a wee bit of optimising.

Polys: 1099
Tris: 3127[/quote]

good good, although its only worth quoting the tri count, polys are irrelevant and may just confuse someone

ZondaX15 wrote:http://i1033.photobucket.com/albums/a41 ... 5/LCU8.jpg
http://i1033.photobucket.com/albums/a41 ... 5/LCU7.jpg

And a quick render

http://i1033.photobucket.com/albums/a41 ... ender1.jpg

Right a couple of points on the model itself.

First of all this is a "roll on, roll off" LCU, which means that it has both back and front loading/unloading ramps to make it easier to load in the well dock. Right now you don't have the rear ramp, its just a wall. Although 98% chance it won't be functional ingame, you should still make it so it can be functional as you never know what might pop up in the future and possibly the PR:ARMA2 devs might want to use it too where they could possibly make a functional rear ramp in there etc.

The next point is that it looks like a few parts of your model which should be strait, are not strait as you can see by the smoothing errors in your render in theres spots here:


You should make sure they are perfectly flat where they are meant to be and add in control edges in too to make sure the shape is how you want it, as per the "Geometry" part of this tut here: https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f189-m ... heavy.html

The next thing is can you get me a close up, in edged frame mode of your bumps before the front ramp? Can't see them very well in your SSs.

ZondaX15 wrote:[Edit: oh, and could someone enlighten me on the tri limits of the BF2 engine for this type of object?

We are probably talking between 8k and 10k tris, although if you really need to go over 10k you can, but try to keep it as low as possible with keeping most of the details on the normal map (hence why this really needs the details baked off a high poly model).

ZondaX15 wrote:[Edit again: I am not sure on what parts to be doing next... Could someone point me in the right dirrection?

You've got a few things to be getting on with above although there are quite a few other core elements you still need before you focus on the details.

Thanks rhino

The reason I thought it was too large for the boat bay is because the actual LHD-2 is 257m long, and from memory (forgive me for that) in vBF2 and PR, its roughly 150m. Sorry for wasting your time mate.

Ok, I'll get that ss done on the ramp, and work on the basic parts more

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Lets see, Muttrah, Jabal, Op Barra, basically any amphibious assault map can realistically use them...

I'm just having a hard time imagining how will this translate into gameplay as there are many pertinent questions that will arise with the entry of this LCU. More on the curious side though...if maps will have to be redesigned, asset layout, etc.

But I will leave it at that until I see some more development.

ZondaX15 wrote:Thanks rhino

The reason I thought it was too large for the boat bay is because the actual LHD-2 is 257m long, and from memory (forgive me for that) in vBF2 and PR, its roughly 150m. Sorry for wasting your time mate.

Ok, I'll get that ss done on the ramp, and work on the basic parts more

Good good

Arcturus_Shielder wrote:I'm just having a hard time imagining how will this translate into gameplay as there are many pertinent questions that will arise with the entry of this LCU. More on the curious side though...if maps will have to be redesigned, asset layout, etc.

But I will leave it at that until I see some more development.

I wouldn't worry about that

There ya go mate.
I made it triangles as apposed to actual steps (like I've seen in the referance), to save tri's. If I can spare it at the end i'll make it higher poly