Spring RTS Engine

Interesting.

@KDR_11K:

If I evaluate it as a depiction of a believable military design, these are my quibbles. Coolness, of course, is more important than realism, so these are just quibbles for the most part, other than the comments about the turret arc.

1. Vehicle doesn't obey first law of armored vehicles: low silhouettes mean it's harder to see you, and therefore kill you. Armored vehicles tend to be low to the ground primarily for that reason, and this doesn't look like a credible APC, or scout.

2. The gun and its mounting could be improved. Right now, it can't traverse low enough to kill things nearby, because the gun would collide with the hull, near the front, and it cannot angle up much, either, nor turn in a complete circle.

3. The wheels are really weird. I take it you're planning to use Mr. D styled cut wheels? If yeah, then by all means, just use quads, there isn't any point otherwise. Maybe that's just a rendering artifact or whatever, but the faces look like they don't actually meet the wheel geometry, or have been cut. If they're attached, lower the angle between the outer edge of the tires and the next row of vertexes just a wee bit, it will quit looking so overly rounded.

4. The armor isn't angled well, in any direction, and the design of the articulation would be easily destroyed, given that it has no real protection. Modern AFVs that make use of independently-articulated wheels like that, and a high profile, have angled armor on the bottoms, too, to better deal with anti-tank mines, etc., and also keep the main articulation within the hull armor where possible. Keep in mind, I'm just stating that from a realism perspective- the Resistance MBT, for example, has very unrealistic articulation outside of the main armor, and would be easily disabled IRL from a side hit. But that part just looks flimsy to me- if the materials aren't some magical, super-strong material, even a heavy machinegun could damage those stilt-like struts IRL.

5. I don't get a really good feeling for scale, based on what I'm seeing. Unless it's operated by robots, it'd be nice to see that there's a place for crew to enter / exit it, among other things, but you've concentrated a lot of triangles on the gun, but not elsewhere, which looks a little off.

6. The gun, with the prototypical WWII-styled armor plate, looks like a slightly oversized heavy MG, but there aren't any places for crew to operate it, etc. If that's the case, any real-world design would allow the turret the maximum arc possible- if the crew's lives depend on a single weapon system, they'll want it to be able to deal with bad guys near the vehicle, and above it, as well as farther away. It's probably not apparent just from WIP shots, but I take a lot of care to make sure that my designs can credibly perform their entire range of motion in that regard, as there are very few military applications for anything less than a tank-hunter with a severely limited firearc. The roughly pyramidal geometry of AFVs results from the need to angle the armor and provide for that arc. Maybe ditch the turret armor, and allow the gun to rise up on an articulated arm, with some sort of depiction of cameras, etc? There are lots of experimental military vehicles doing that sort of thing nowawadays. Right now, it can only aim up about 5 degrees, without the rear of the gun clipping the back of the tank, and it can only aim down about 30 degrees without clipping the front.

7. The front wheels' articulation attaches it to the middle wheels. That would cause some funky issues if this thing hit a bump, IRL, and would probably result in very large amounts of stress.

All of the design whining aside... I can see this thing bouncing along like a deranged moon rover, smiting enemies as it goes, and that's not a bad thing. It'd be a fun unit visually, even if completely impractical (like the old arcade game, Moon Rover- if you haven't played it, try it someday, it's available for MAME).

I think, from a "needs" perspective, that it has to work without the gun clipping anywhere in the primary arc of fire, and the wheels need to get fixed up. The other stuff is just aesthetic / philosophical quibbles based on me not knowing the intended role, etc.- as a practical military vehicle, it's silly, but hey, silly is fun sometimes, and I've made lots of silly that people thought looked cool, so don't take it like I hate it or whatever.

It's lightly armored, the thing is roughly equivalent of a HMMWV with a 30mm cannon on top. Or, well, a flash. The high ground clearance is to increase its ability to traverse difficult terrain (and yes, make it bouncy), the open turret is to show the player it's fragile but it's more than just a swivelling MG to show that it does have some firepower while the body looks somewhat tank-like to say that it's not a weasel or jeffy. I wanted to avoid threads since they convey a slow and heavy look.

I think the wheels look so bad because of the specularity Blender adds by default though I think I'll kick the center edge, as I said already.

If I were doing a real life design I'd probably slap an ATGM launcher on that thing instead of a cannon. It's designed mostly to be intuitive, not make sense.

BTW, the arms the front wheels are on attach to the chassis, not the middle wheels. Originally I wanted them to reach even further forward but then I couldn't get an even spacing on the wheels.

Argh wrote:@KDR_11K: bunch of wall text nonsense

DAHAHAA.. this from the guy whos like HEY lets put ERA on Airplanes..

shut up with the whole from a realistic blah blah blah blah...

It looks cool.. goes with a sorta Mars probe exlporer with a turret..

I love how you didn't even really read what I wrote, Fanger

Look, instead of flaming me... tell us why KDR's piece rocked, for you, instead of tearing me down. Criitique should never be entirely negative, imo- there are always merits in everything people do with art.

I noted the whole Moon Rover feel, for example, which I liked quite a bit- it gives the piece a nice, retro charm.

So tell us why the design is great. It's a lot more effective than trying to keep me from expressing myself, and a lot more useful to readers of this thread.

Looks like a cool unit.
Something about it just makes it look capable of being an amphibious unit though.
Not submersible amphibious, but more like Car-boat (Pelican) amphibious.

Body looks buoyant like some of those car conversions from the 50's or some of the Vietnam Era Patrol boats, or maybe its just the side extrusions that resemble fins that is giving it that look, even the wheels could fold up/out to meet the water surface for extra flotation.

Not submersible amphibious, but more like Car-boat (Pelican) amphibious.

That'd be fun, especially if the wheels "inflated" a bit, with a sound effect and swapping out some pieces, then "deflated" to let it drive on land again.

I think it would look a lot A) more believable, B) cooler, if it "crouched", that is, lowered down on the wheels a good bit. Right now it has a sort of comical monster truck super-high-off-the-ground look too it- a real humvee is a lot lower.

Looks a wee bit like Nod's emissary

Argh wrote:I love how you didn't even really read what I wrote, Fanger

I didnt have to.. you started off the post with a Preface indicating what you would talk about, which was how said unit was not "realistic".. Why that was even relevent to this unit design is beyond me. No where did KDR state it was meant to be realistic, no one seemed to even be discussing the neccessary realism of vehicles.

KDR's vehicle does not have to be realistic, it looks different and interesting to me, and since its not apparently meant to fit in something with lots of realism I dont care what it looks like. The design is cohesive and sensible and not screwball. It looks neat, Id look forward to seeing it textured and bobbing around in game.

I really dont know why you feel a need to critique it from a realism perspective, especially comeing from you making a mod like PURE, which has bipedal robots, and a bunch of other vehicles that are no more "realistic" than what KDR has posted. So please go spew your arrogant condesending tone somewhere else..

Oh and just a side note, I dont like you argh so stopping your opinion or ideas from being properly expressed makes me a little happier inside..

Oh and just a side note, I dont like you argh so stopping your opinion or ideas from being properly expressed makes me a little happier inside..

Well, good luck with that, I guess. I don't predict success any time soon, though.

That said, if KDR wishes me to not offer him any critiques ever again, I will happily honor that. I don't see any point in offering critique to somebody, if they don't want to hear it.

Lastly, what you take for condescension is usually me being hopeful that it'll be awesome, and worrying about it verbally, when I don't feel like it's quite as cool as it could be. Most of that post consisted of me exploring why it just didn't feel right for me, which is, imo, what critique should be like. Except for the statements about turret clipping, none of it was expressed as "this needs to be changed" but was mainly "I'm not sure this worked for me, this might help". But obviously it's up to the artist to do whatever they think is right in the end, and I certainly don't pretend to represent the majority opinion or whatever.

don't act like a wounded dove argh.

I'm not acting like a wounded anything.

I really have zero interest in offering critique to people who don't want it and have told me so.

I know my critiques are perceived as being somehow harsher than a lot of people's, so why give them if they're worthless to the artist, or are just seen as a hostile act, meant to offend? Seems like a waste of time to me, and just causes hurt feelings, so meh, anybody who doesn't want my opinion can just tell me so, it's all right and won't cause offense to me or whatever.

not so much that it is harsher it is just sometimes you give unwanted/unsolicited critiques. You also do have a propensity to come a cross as egotistical, condescending or patronizing. Not sure if that is really your intent but it happens a lot in the way you write things.

Good Argh, then maybe you will shut up entirely from now on, since I dont think anyone ever asked for your input ever.. and rarely has your input been helpful ore even sensible..

Good Argh, then maybe you will shut up entirely from now on, since I dont think anyone ever asked for your input ever.. and rarely has your input been helpful ore even sensible..

I said that I'd quit submitting critiques to KDR if he asked me not to, not that I would not submit critiques unless asked for. At any rate, since you never ask for critique or show your work here, I dunno why you're even concerned about this issue. It's not like people here don't know I may <gasp> comment on stuff.

sometimes you give unwanted/unsolicited critiques

Well, sure, but so do most people around here, including yourself. Mr. D's posts are full of 'em

Seriously though, this is the WIP Thread, and reactions are what I think most artists are after here- wanting to know if people liked what they saw or not, and why. But I would not comment at all on an artist's work, if they did not want me to, that'd just be trolling, imo.

You also do have a propensity to come a cross as egotistical, condescending or patronizing. Not sure if that is really your intent but it happens a lot in the way you write things.

No, that's really not the intent That said, meh, I'm sure it comes across that way sometimes. It's just meant to just be my perspective on what I like to see and why I like it, not some pronouncement from On High, which is why I always stress that "this is just my opinion" etc., not that that ever seems to help much

I explore my own preferences in design frequently, and do a lot of research, looking for new ideas, so I'm always interested in this concept of what makes things work, and why. When I see something that just doesn't feel right, I tend to break it up and analyze it by parts, so it tends to feel like some giant laundry list, because I try to organize it and figure out what's not working to the best of my ability. Whenever I fail to make a good design that looked good on paper, I go through it all, trying to see what went wrong, etc.

I figure that most artists are doing the same thing, albeit with a different focus, so that's how I deliver what I say. Probably reads terribly formally, but meh, it's how I think.

Meh, at any rate, KDR can let me know how he feels about this, either here or via PM. Neither of you speak for him, so please, quit acting like attack-dogs, I don't really have a personal issue with him and I am not trying to undermine him, but if he doesn't think my critique's worth reading, then I shall quit giving it out.

Argh wrote: At any rate, since you never ask for critique or show your work here, I dunno why you're even concerned about this issue. It's not like people here don't know I may <gasp> comment on stuff.

Yeah thats cause I dont feel a need to "pimp" my work, nor do I feel insecure unless the peanut gallery (such as yourself) are satisfied with my artistic vision and or some other such shit..

Im not really concerned beyond the fact that I find it annoying to have to scroll through your stupid comments when viewing other peoples pretty model pics..

Im not really concerned beyond the fact that I find it annoying to have to scroll through your stupid comments when viewing other peoples pretty model pics..

Well, you can just put me on Ignore, and then you won't see my comments. Seriously, if that's your real issue, solve it and be done with it.

This is the second time you've derailed the thread, though, in response to critique that wasn't about your work, so please, find a solution to your problems. If you flame my critiques in the future, the flames will just get ignored, because responding to your attacks is obviously a complete waste of my time.

don't say attack dogs, I was pretty civil in that post.

I'm pretty sure almost every post I make on these forums could classify as unsolicited critique >_>