Page 2 of 2
Posted: 12 May 2007, 07:05
by SpikedHelmet
Erom wrote:
This post seems to have gone under peoples radar, which is a shame, because rattles trees are pretty win. If I was you, Spiked, I'd get rattle to make you some more like that.
YES IF I HAD KNOWN PEOPLE ALREADY DID LOW-POLY TREES I WOULDN'T HAVE. I ONLY DID THEM BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW. NOW I WILL FUCK RATTLE UNTIL HE LOVES ME AND MAKES ME TREES!!!!!
Posted: 12 May 2007, 07:09
by Neddie
It's all right, Spiked, it was just an offer of help.
Posted: 12 May 2007, 08:59
by smoth
spiked, I am making some trees tonight. I will be gpling them. So yah, hopefully in a few hours you will have some trees from me.
Posted: 12 May 2007, 10:07
by Warlord Zsinj
I'd still really like to see some RTW-esque large scale, low poly trees for use in forest maps where most of the units are dwarfed by the trees.
Posted: 12 May 2007, 10:56
by smoth
zsinj, not filling requests, if you want that take the trees when I release them and scale them, I have no problem. However, bear in mind that features dick up pathing and lots of them dick up fps.
Posted: 12 May 2007, 11:04
by SpikedHelmet
yeah, my piddly trees are severely expropriating my FPS.
Thanks neddie, rattle, and smoth, for the lovely trees!
Posted: 12 May 2007, 11:17
by smoth
that is crazy, your trees are eating fps? Do you have a lot of them? features tend to eat fps just by existing.
Posted: 12 May 2007, 11:35
by SpikedHelmet
Well I put like... 300 or so on the map, and yeah, it had a feast of my FPS.
Anyway I went and retried the original tree....
I think it's better. Looking sparse, though. But I think I'll keep it anyway.
<3 u Smoth
Posted: 12 May 2007, 12:21
by Warlord Zsinj
That wasn't intended to be directed at you, Smoth.
The problem with big trees is mostly aircraft pathing, and, as you said, FPS. But the size I was thinking would be maybe 2-3 times the size of current trees, so shouldn't be too bad. Especially if you still allow the heavier tanks to knock them over.
Posted: 12 May 2007, 13:20
by smoth
well, my current tree looks like shite.. but I am working on it. This whole tree thing is new to me. The main issue I find is doing a tree with volume to it that is also low poly. I am trying a few different things at the moment. My current texture failed though:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3610/treerw4.jpg
use it if you can but I am scrapping that texture and doing a new one :\
Posted: 12 May 2007, 16:18
by rattle
If I find some time I'll make some more in the range of 100-200 polygons.
Smoth: looks promising but all the detail will be gone if you make the texture any smaller than that. I'd model larger branches and clusters of leaves. That's actually what I tried to do but failed at.
use it if you can but I am scrapping that texture and doing a new one :\
Uh forget what I've said. :P
Posted: 12 May 2007, 17:20
by Quanto042
SpikedHelmet wrote:Well I put like... 300 or so on the map, and yeah, it had a feast of my FPS.
Anyway I went and retried the original tree....
I think it's better. Looking sparse, though. But I think I'll keep it anyway.
<3 u Smoth
I lieks that one too. It looks like a tree you would find in a farm or orchard or something. (I'm assuming you are making these for S44? If you are i can easily see them fitting right in with that mod.)
Posted: 22 May 2007, 03:19
by erasmus
Warlord Zsinj wrote:Rome: Total War's way of doing trees is much better, IMO, and still reasonably low poly.
They run the faces like this:
Code: Select all
/ | \
/ | \
/ | \
/ | \
[intentionally staggered]
It look good from the top and bottom, but is still only a few faces per tree; and as seen in RTW, you can have whole forests of the buggers.
(If yuo're going to be making trees
please make them life-size, so that they dwarf our infantry and most of our vehicles too, like in that image)
teehee!! rome total CLONE WARS! XD
sorry...couldnt help myself O.\\\
