Spring RTS Engine

here we go!!
just goes to show what you can put in with the right 3d Model





29792 Polygons

these draw distances need to be fixed, model disappears at certain distances

thats the 3do format there

Holy crap, this is sexy.

Wow nice, does collision work properly with this model?

zomgz0rz. Is it actually useful though?

sweet!
u can change the view distance using delete and end that should stop it disappearing.
this+indestructible features=awesome water maps con bridges

Of course I guess these models can just be used for the show right now... We need units to go on bridges, but that's gonna be a hard one to figure out I suppose.

Oh, and by the way, it looks amazing.

Very pretty... but I doubt such things will be anything but intangible graphical candy any time soon. Consider the mountain of features needed for such an actual bridge.

(1) new collision model. It is neither spherical nor landscape. A polygonal collision model would be harder than those two put together.

(2) new unit navigation model. Units can't walk on other units, only terrain.

(3) new pathfinding. This would be really, really tough. Imagine a map with dozens of floating platforms, bridges, etc. Imagine a hover deciding whether to take a bridge or go over water.

(4) new UI. Say you have a hover. Say you tell it to move to the bridge. What is the waypoint? On, or under the bridge? You'd practically need a 3D pointer a-la homeworld - although that would also be super handy for 3D aircraft waypoints, it would also be really painfully complex for users.

Pxtl wrote:...
(4) new UI. Say you have a hover. Say you tell it to move to the bridge. What is the waypoint? On, or under the bridge? You'd practically need a 3D pointer a-la homeworld - although that would also be super handy for 3D aircraft waypoints, it would also be really painfully complex for users.

What if the game automatically snaps your pointer to the ground until you press the vertical adjustment key. Homeworld used the shift key if I recall correctly, which would work okay with spring, but then you could use shift to drag and select multiple groups of units...

(4) the unit obviously would move where you cloicked, you have a 3d viewport, do you click on the bridge, or underneath the bridge.

Awesome...

(upload to Fileuniverse, you know you want it :))

(1) new collision model. It is neither spherical nor landscape. A polygonal collision model would be harder than those two put together.

As a temporary fix, you could split up the model and enable collision only for the pillars. That doesn't make it possible to have units on the bridge though.

Was goona suggest he same thing. How the hell did you have the patence to texture that? It takes forever to do big models. Do you know some strange tactic i dont (I admin im no master at modeling)

aGorm

I didn't texture every single polygon just applied colour to all faces or a range but loading the model into the 3do builder took quite a but of time, had to scale it down too.

as with collision only the centre of the model has collision atm.
was thinking of moving the model over abit to one of the foundations and create a second model to represent the second foundation

I have the the 3do model and other ones on this temporary ftp site ftp://219.89.220.77 username and password is TASpring

you can also get the model and others from this site http://www.3dcafe.com

they'll need additional editing and converted to .DXF format

also uploaded the 3do Model to fileuniverse http://www.fileuniverse.com/?p=showitem&ID=1721

Spring is rather nifty for those sorts of things. I know in the future I intend to use it to present my architectural models.

All I have to do is knock up a quick map of the site plan, and then put my building into 3do builder, and I have a building I can photograph from multiple angles!

That is a hundred feet tall of awesome.

using delete and end doesn't help at stopping the model from dissappearing

could we have bridges as neutral units which act like the deployable bridge?

and I threw another bridge in a quick map trying to connect both ends to land







"dam!, Has anyone got change for the Toll Bridge?"

this could be a good map if the bridges worked

Sydney Harbour Bridge FTW!
Or, if you dont want to pay as much toll, take the tunnel under the harbour. Cheaper I think.

Nice work with the bridges.

I know why the bridges are disappearing on me now
cos the spring engine stops rendering the object as soon as the cental point moves out of view.

we probably need a setting that sets a drawing distance for big objects so it continues rendering if the cental point is out of view

Thats powerfully awesome.

I'd ask for the auckland harbour bridge but as TArevenger probably already knows, its kinda lame.

aGorm has also had problems with large features dissapearing. He has made a topic about it some where. Go complain in his thread.