Destroyer (and Possibly Future Models)

[Evil4Zerggin]

This destroyer's actually been out for a while, but I thought I might as well make a post for it and any future models I might make.

You are welcome to make comments and suggestions on the destroyer, but I will most likely not implement them. This isn't because I necessarily think it's bad advice (I haven't even seen it yet), or because I think the model/texture is perfect or even really good (it's only my third .s3o ever), but:

1. I'd rather make more models than take too much time on a few.
2. IMO it's better than the majority of OTA-level ships already.
3. In any case, I don't have the tools here right now to make changes easily.

However, I will take any advice into account for future models.

And now, pictures!


Late (but not final) screenshot in Wings.


UV map.


Placeholder texture. The OTA Arm destroyer can be seen in the background.


More or less the final incarnation. Note that the depthcharges have been shrunk, and the launcher now holds five instead of three.

Model, textures, and scripts can be found at http://www.caspring.org.

[rattle]

Not bad, though you should've set up the normals in wings. The UV looks a bit messy too.

[Sleksa]

It looks like the guns cant make a full 360 degree turn because of the radar and that one blob, perhaps moving those parts on top of the tower would work better ~~

However it really does look nice, and the depthcharges add a unique touch into it

[KDR_11k]

Those things are on the turret.

[yuritch]

If this is for some OTA-based mod: it's a little too big compared to the ARM destroyer, and it looks somewhat like the ARM Cruiser. Otherwise a good model, though the guns might still be too big for a destroyer.

[MR.D]

The model itself looks great, I really can't see any fault with it except when comparing it to the OTA model its scale is a bit long.

Nice work.

[Elkvis]

OTA ships are rediclously small anyway, given relative scales. And wide, too. they would be slow as.

This is more like a ship. sleeker.

[Neddie]

Comparison with the OTA model is irrelevant. OTA models are ugly, outdated and in this case irrelevant. I love it, Zerg, and I miss you buddy. My model attempts haven't been as great, but I may shoot you some designs.

[Evil4Zerggin]

It's a bit bigger than the original overall, although not quite as much as the screenshot makes it seem--the perspective is a bit weird on that one; in reality the OTA destroyer is quite a bit wider than my model, although shorter.

Not bad, though you should've set up the normals in wings. The UV looks a bit messy too.

Forgive my ignorance, but I don't know what you mean by "setting up normals". Also, what exactly is wrong with the UV? Did I cut too many edges?

[Peet]

It's just...irregular and messy. Looks a bit like my floor.

[rattle]

Yeah, a lot of it could have been unrwapped more efficiently, especially the duplicates.
Scale -> Normalize, edge -> chart to, move to center, flatten x/y are good for cleaning up. Remember, d repeats which means less clicks.

By normals I mean the edge hardness (Edge mode -> Hardness). Hit tab for a smooth shaded preview to see it in effect.


Upspring's auto-smooth works similar to wings' auto-smooth (available in object mode) and it's pretty much useless when it comes to mixed geometry.

[Machiosabre]

bananaboat!

[Evil4Zerggin]

Re: Rattle: Ah, that makes a lot of sense. Thanks! It should make overlapping duplicate faces a lot easier in the future.

I did indeed use Upspring's auto-smooth; next time I'll do it properly in Wings and resize before importing.

[rattle]

You can set wings to export by a factor of 8, the icon next to the exporter (or RMB on it) will bring up the export options. Don't use 3DS, though, because this will unweld the model where the UV seams are. Means, the vertices aren't connected there any longer and you'll see hard edges at the seams as a result.

[Pxtl]

I think part of the problem is Spring's square blocking boxes and sphere collisions means that units that don't fill out that space look kinda silly when nudging each other and stuff.

You could make it into a triple-hull dealy to fill it out better - it would also make its shallow depth needs make sense.

[rattle]

Uh square? I think they're rectangular...

[Saktoth]

This is great and you should totally make more models.

Though it appears you have a radar dish and a radar dome there, when the destroyer doesnt have radar.

The radar done resembles the done on top of a CIWS, which the destroyer certainly doesnt have (and that clearly isnt a CIWS anyway).

I think you were just trying to add greebles, but if you're going to use a real ship as the basis for greebles you gotta remember that all that stuff actually does things.

(I also know you wanted to give the roy radar but adding functions to give an excuse to add greebles is.. yeah).

But yeah, make more models, its good.

[smoth]

I think part of the problem is Spring's square blocking boxes and sphere collisions means that units that don't fill out that space look kinda silly when nudging each other and stuff.

not for much longer :)

[Pxtl]

Smoth, does the new collision geometry apply to the nudging logic, or only projectile collisions?

[rattle]

Oh you meant unit collisions... that's still the hitsphere or footprint.