Project Reality Forums

If only we had one that just needed to be UVed

Shhhh ....

FuzzySquirrel =US= wrote:Cool, Who'd you steal it from?

Anyway it looks like it needs to be UVed anyway.

I got it from a "Generalfieldmarschall (OKL)." I don't know about your poly and UV maping/skinning. Can you explain it to me?

What about this model?

USS John C. Stennis CVN-74 by WilliamT - Google 3D Warehouse

or this one?

USS Forrestal (CV 59) by Gacek - Google 3D Warehouse

or this one?

USS Saratoga CV-60 by WilliamT - Google 3D Warehouse

THERE ARE INFINITE CARRIERS AND OTHER MODELS ON THIS SITE. WE JUST NEED TO FIND THE RIGHT ONE. EXPLOIT THIS RESOURCE. OF COURSE, CONTACTING THE OWNER BEFORE INCLUDING IN GAME (although this site's privacy policy in no way states that this material cannot be shared, reused, or etc.; however, please check it yourself to be sure: Google SketchUp ).



Posts merged, use the edit button next time.
[R-MOD]Tirak

Google sketchup can't export to bf2 iirc. Or something along those lines.

we are well aware of models you can download from the internet for free and ones with a price tag on there head, if you look though our forums you will find its been suggested many times before, I think possibly even in this topic, or was it the Air vs Air maps topic... There are good reasons why we do not use these models....

does bf2 iirc import kml files?

no.... you can probaly export to .obj or some other format with google sketchup then import that into max / maya but then your most likly going to have loads of errors and many other problems...

TurboSquid: Carrier 3D Models

even thou many of thous models could be imported strait into BF2 and would work, I would not waste my money on any of them because most of them are utter sh*t, none of them are any where near the poly count to be considered to be put into a FPS game, espically one with high standards such as PR and because the way they have been made / textured, they would not work at all well with BF2....

So please, dont keep on suggesting models...

Forgive me for not reading all of the thread.

But I had a quick idea for landing/breaking.

What happens when you are flying along and you bail out? The Jet just stops in mid air, right. Same as if you are landing on Kashan or Battle for Q. You are landing and you realise that you are going to over shoot the runway. You bail out. You die. But the jets stops dead. I call this my self a combat landing for the fun value. Now can anybody see where I am going? If you was to add an extra seat/View point that still let you have control of the steering only. You would then have an Air brake. The engine would stop dead but you could still be inside and not die. This also would stop you using it as a exploit to "topGun" air brake in mid flight as your engine warm up time is still the same and so you would crash unless you are at a really REALLy silly high hight.

Just an idea

Ok. I don't know what a poly count is and everything because I'm new to all this. Can you guys point out any problems with this, please: Picasa Web Albums - Allen - PR Kuzmar Map.... I made it for bad_mojo and his Kuzmar map-in-progress. I haven't yet figured out what he wants me to do with it because I have it in Sketchup and .kmz file format, but he hasn't come on to the IRC in a while, so I haven't been able to talk to him.

There is always a middle man to be found, something that can import whatever files Google SketchUp uses and export them as something BF2 can use.
And if not that, something that can export them as something else, to be used with yet another program that can export those files as something BF2 can use.

Oddsodz wrote:Forgive me for not reading all of the thread.

But I had a quick idea for landing/breaking.

What happens when you are flying along and you bail out? The Jet just stops in mid air, right. Same as if you are landing on Kashan or Battle for Q. You are landing and you realise that you are going to over shoot the runway. You bail out. You die. But the jets stops dead. I call this my self a combat landing for the fun value. Now can anybody see where I am going? If you was to add an extra seat/View point that still let you have control of the steering only. You would then have an Air brake. The engine would stop dead but you could still be inside and not die. This also would stop you using it as a exploit to "topGun" air brake in mid flight as your engine warm up time is still the same and so you would crash unless you are at a really REALLy silly high hight.

Just an idea

That's a pretty good idea, though you don't have to be at THAT silly of a height to do it

McLuv wrote:That's a pretty good idea, though you don't have to be at THAT silly of a height to do it

I Beleave it can be done with the SU-30 and the Tornado. But that's not a big issue as they need a gunner in the jet to make it worth taking up. So you would 99% of the time have gunner and so you can't switch seats in mid flight anyway. But as this is going to be used with new aircraft. I Longer engine warm up time is not that big a deal to add I think to solve the chance of exploiting.

Well, I was going to show a video of me jumping out of the A-10, and then skydiving back into it, then starting it up and flying off, but I can't find it .

Though, in that case, you still have to be at roughly ~2000, and that's with the plane with the slowest stall speed

Correction to the Harrier's invisible gun.... It does fire, just not to the front of the aircraft unless you get one of the first to spawn in the round. If you have ever watched someone firing the cannon while taking off, you will see it comes out of the side and shoots into the air. I have not finished my bug report for the Harrier yet.. it will include the views to switch to - in order to see the bugged cannon fire. Along with some of the other things that I noticed flying with it.

Now back to the topic, I like the idea of a catapult. The average speed they work at is 165mph (at launch) according to a friend currently deploy'd on the USS steniss and also confirmed here :HowStuffWorks "Catapults and Taking Off from an Aircraft Carrier". I do not believe that is fast enough for any of our bf2 engines aircraft physics. If the jets were made that slow, they would be too easy to shoot down. I am considering that the EF2000 can almost stay up around 350 airspeed, but it is still in need of editting to correct the slow flyable speed.

I am a huge harrier fan as anyone who has read my HOW TO VTOL land the harrier would know. IMO the Harrier would be the best to put on the essex. It can VTOL land- although not very easily done by noobs. It takes a few steps and plenty of practice. If/after it has been redone- it would in my mind be the best candidate for carrier use.

YouTube - Project Reality Carrier Test 2/2 YouTube - Project Reality Carrier Test 3/2 its possible! =D

rampo93(FIN) wrote:YouTube - Project Reality Carrier Test 2/2 YouTube - Project Reality Carrier Test 3/2 its possible! =D

lol, sure it is possible with the EF2000 or th f16, but notice how he must bail to avoid overshooting? The harrier would fix that..or even the f-35b. VTOL BABY! VTOL!