Jump to content
daskal

Challenger 2 model question

Recommended Posts

Very nice. Be prepared to massively reduce the level of detail for the real-time application. Most hobbyists fail not in the modeling stage, but when it comes to unwrapping and texturing (especially in an efficient manner). That's where the bulk of work hides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for the positive comments guys.

Ssnake - Absolutely, these are renders of my High Res model that will be used for Ambient Occlusion and Texture Baking only and not for the real time model. I have yet to properly start the low res, real time model.

The model in those renders is in excess of 10 million polygons with 2 levels of sub division so by no means real time.

The low res model, i havnt decided yet but may be around 20k - 30k triangles, but i will just see how it goes.

Texture wise, planning on 2 atlases, 1 x 4096 for hull, turret and basically everything except the tracks, then 1 x 512 or 1024 for the tracks, so basically 2 textures in total. I will then create normal maps, spec maps and gloss maps and use when applicable in different engines. E.g. Vega Prime and Openflight will just be diffuse, Unity will use all the bells and whistles. :)

EDIT: Thought i would clarify also, while this may be a hobby project, i do 3D modelling as my profession in a Simulation and Training Team ;)

Regards

Whisky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheers for the positive comments guys.

Ssnake - Absolutely, these are renders of my High Res model that will be used for Ambient Occlusion and Texture Baking only and not for the real time model. I have yet to properly start the low res, real time model.

The model in those renders is in excess of 10 million polygons with 2 levels of sub division so by no means real time.

The low res model, i havnt decided yet but may be around 20k - 30k triangles, but i will just see how it goes.

Texture wise, planning on 2 atlases, 1 x 4096 for hull, turret and basically everything except the tracks, then 1 x 512 or 1024 for the tracks, so basically 2 textures in total. I will then create normal maps, spec maps and gloss maps and use when applicable in different engines. E.g. Vega Prime and Openflight will just be diffuse, Unity will use all the bells and whistles. :)

EDIT: Thought i would clarify also, while this may be a hobby project, i do 3D modelling as my profession in a Simulation and Training Team ;)

Regards

Whisky

Kudos for a truly stunning model

I am pushing my luck, But how about a CR-1 or a chieftain.

Either one would make a great addition.

If esim had the time to included it in the next upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is looking pretty awesome, :D

Sure but as Ssnake said:

Be prepared to massively reduce the level of detail for the real-time application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything is possible, however.........

from my perspective as a hobbyist Steel Beasts player, and the fact while i am professionally a 3D Modeller, doing tanks is again purely Hobby (my company is more air focused), so it is a case of of whether i have enough time, but also enough passion to pursue it through to the end. I do for the CR2 TES version, but i am planning on doing something different after that, say a Foxhound, MLRS or a M1A2 Tusk 2, so i shall i have to see.

From eSim (Ssnake's) perspective, correct me if i am wrong, but for a hobbyist to do the art content, there is no guarantee on quality or timely delivery and the eSim guys may need to spend extra up paid time getting the model implemented and working and that's even if the model is spot on as per their requirements. If there are problems, the time can increase exponentially.

The alternative is for a paying military customer to request the content to be modelled, which will be unlikely for the Chieftain and CR1 due to the number, or lack of countries who use them. Also bear in mind both CR1 and Chieftain have drastically different FCS's than CR2 and i imagine this is where the lion share of the eSim developers time lies when implementing a new model.

Not trying to burst your bubble, but just being honest. I was thinking from the perspective of the CR2 TES, it could just be a model swop, but ideally armour values will need to be adjusted and the functionality of the RWS implemented which i imagine is no small task.

Whisky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...i do 3D modelling as my profession in a Simulation and Training Team ;)

Out of curiosity, do the projects you complete for work run into the 20-30k polygon range and use 4096 textures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Out of curiosity, do the projects you complete for work run into the 20-30k polygon range and use 4096 textures?

Depends...when developing content for Unity or VBS2 which are quite up to date engines then yes. If that said model is one of the focal points of the simulation/ visualisation.

if however the model is for more legacy systems or software that uses Openflight, or the model is more clutter than the focal point, then it would most likely be less in polygons and texture res.

now a days polygon count and texture resolution is just pub talk numbers. Its more important to structure your models and textures to reduce the number of draw calls or state changes as modern gpu's can compute 10s of millioms of triangles per frame and many hundreds of megs of textures. However a scene/ model of just a few thousands could bring fps crashing down if model and texture design is not thoight out. Such as it can be more beneficial in some cases to have a higher res texture and have one than have multiple lower res textures etc Also its worth noting the polycount of the model is not the "on card" polycount of the model when it is rendered. This is because hard or smooth edges as well as uv splits also affect the end result of the models performance at run time, but rhis is a whole other discussion :)

End of the day it is down to the specific application and target hardware/ software the model is intended for and it needs to be designed appropriately. For my "hobby" CR2 I chose roughly those design targets, for a SB Pro model I imagine it would be different hut that would be why I would liase with the eSim developers as I have no experience with the SB Pro core software.

Hope this answers your question

Whisky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Depends...when developing content for Unity or VBS2 which are quite up to date engines then yes. If that said model is one of the focal points of the simulation/ visualisation.

if however the model is for more legacy systems or software that uses Openflight, or the model is more clutter than the focal point, then it would most likely be less in polygons and texture res.

now a days polygon count and texture resolution is just pub talk numbers. Its more important to structure your models and textures to reduce the number of draw calls or state changes as modern gpu's can compute 10s of millioms of triangles per frame and many hundreds of megs of textures. However a scene/ model of just a few thousands could bring fps crashing down if model and texture design is not thoight out. Such as it can be more beneficial in some cases to have a higher res texture and have one than have multiple lower res textures etc Also its worth noting the polycount of the model is not the "on card" polycount of the model when it is rendered. This is because hard or smooth edges as well as uv splits also affect the end result of the models performance at run time, but rhis is a whole other discussion :)

End of the day it is down to the specific application and target hardware/ software the model is intended for and it needs to be designed appropriately. For my "hobby" CR2 I chose roughly those design targets, for a SB Pro model I imagine it would be different hut that would be why I would liase with the eSim developers as I have no experience with the SB Pro core software.

Hope this answers your question

Whisky

we're currently working with 1 1024 textures and 1 256 track texture and 15 000 polygons for a tank model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I look forward to the day, Computer graphic cards and game engines match the Ambitions and skills of The 3D Artists.

I'm sure top end machines and the latest game engines probably could ,

but only a small percentage can afford the top end spec machines to run them.

But what will the future hold. I suppose that what keeps the industry going people need to Upgrade every couple of years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great 3D model Whisky-Delta! However, I can only imagine how slow the CR2 is in TES configuration. All that add-on armour and still only 1200hp to move it around...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great 3D model Whisky-Delta! However, I can only imagine how slow the CR2 is in TES configuration. All that add-on armour and still only 1200hp to move it around...

BTW, The Challenger 2 TES weighs 74,84 metric tons.:gun:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great 3D model Whisky-Delta! However, I can only imagine how slow the CR2 is in TES configuration. All that add-on armour and still only 1200hp to move it around...

well just fit another elastic band in the motor, or always try to move dowhill :clin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW, The Challenger 2 TES weighs 74,84 metric tons.:gun:

I think that is the same weight as the current version of the CR2 in SB Pro is it not? I'm sure I read that in the "challenger 2 any good thread" but I could be wrong

I don't think we are far off Mark with current game engine technology. That's why I love Unity, it's so cheap and easy to design content for and with the correct shades like "hard surface" shades or marmoset content can look really good. I personally love making a 3d model which is actually a really low polycount but through the use of normal, spec, gloss and reflection maps, it looks very high poly.

Off topic has anyone tried the the "Spin Tyres" demo? I advise you all too if you have not. While the graphics are good the terrain deformation and physics is just like nothing else. I am not often "blown away" by games any more as most just focus on amazing graphics which is impressive up to a point.....This on the other hand....:)

http://spintires.com/#!/demo

Dare I say "imagine that in SB Pro!!"

Whisky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

62.5t is unladen weight. 64t with ammo fuel etc and full up weight with add on armour etc is a bit more!

Ref the CV12. That 1200bhp was when the engine control unit was the old DASCU. Its been upgraded the last few years to a new unit.

Believe it or not the CR2 has been trialled with a 1500bhp MTU. The CV12 CR2 was asked to slow down when doing X country comparisons.

Edit to add. I think the TN Brown gearbox had more to do with it than the engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...