Default F-16C Submissions

[Urbi]

A note to lee1hy! I downloaded your last liveries in user download. These were packed with the “.rar” program. ED only supports win-zip or the packing method provided by Windows 11, so that your liveries when packed with a ".rar" file will not be displayed in the MV and in the game.

[lee1hy]

 rar pack will be converted to zip by ED team. They may delete other textures and normals for size capacity.

 official livery, the quality may be lower than user files.

and 7zip is better compression

13 hours ago, Urbi said:

A note to lee1hy! I downloaded your last liveries in user download. These were packed with the “.rar” program. ED only supports win-zip or the packing method provided by Windows 11, so that your liveries when packed with a ".rar" file will not be displayed in the MV and in the game.

 

Edited March 4 by lee1hy

[lee1hy]

On 3/4/2024 at 10:07 AM, II.JG1_Vonrd said:

With respect but my opinion...

How much did this decision to rely on just one livery maker "greatly streamline" the process? Eliminated a vote by the team? I have participated in two of the more recent skin competitions and found it more than impressive to see the quality of most of the submissions. There were certainly "personalities" in the different skins from each livery maker. Are you looking to have a more monolithic batch of skins by having them made by just one maker? If so, you would have been better off not mentioning any name, call the competition off and just hire your chosen artist. That's normal business practice and I don't think that anyone would object to that. By publicly announcing @lee1hyas the sole artist, I feel that you have done him a disservice and opened up some feelings of resentment (understandable) by other talented livery makers. His skins are very good through all of the modules that he has worked on. They may not be absolutely perfect but whose are? Mine are certainly not.

I have no dog in this race since I haven't (yet) made any F-16 skins. I refrain from making any comments about any F-16 skins.

Perhaps a lesson for the future?

I do hope that the future you will still hold skin competitions. I think that it furthers our sense of community as skin makers and I certainly have a sense of pride seeing my creations in the official game.

 

If there is a competition, I agree. Since I'm busy with real life working / project,
there's no reason to spend my time on this game. and commutiy under treat  me like this
This is a free labor and only hobby, I don't gain anything from this project
and I don't need any  game mileage 
I didn't submit since Wags open this post, Because I expected something like this

However, it is not polite refuse ED's decision.  
But now this point, It's not right to quit 

If ED changed their policy tomorrow I strongly agree

 

I hope there will be a livery contest next time

 

Edited March 6 by lee1hy

[Magic Zach]

On 2/14/2024 at 6:59 PM, Wags said:

Dear all,

After talking with lee1hy, we've decided that he'll be providing the requested skins, and quite a few more. He does fantastic work that I believe players will enjoy.

In the end, we want to provide the best possible F-16C liveries to our customers. After a careful review of the F-16C user file skins, we believe that lee1hy provides outstanding F-16C skins that meet our needs. Further, by using a single source, it greatly streamlines the process. It was my mistake creating this topic prior to carefully reviewing the F-16C user files skins before making this decision.

Kind regards,
Matt

Frankly Wags, Lee1hy doesn't make very accurate liveries particularly in regards to weathering.  This is a poor decision and it would be good to reverse it.  Of those that do make good liveries however, I personally recommend Texac, Roughmaster, and Mach3DS.  These are professionals that will spend hours over the little details to make accurate and realistic weathering and paint schemes (even redrawing different elements of the module to a higher degree of detail than by default, including redrawn normal maps), and will deliver striking photorealism for the long-run of the module.  These 3 have already spoken here in this thread at least once.  Their portfolio of liveries and artworks speaks for themselves.

Edited April 1 by Magic Zach
Respect

[lee1hy]

On 4/1/2024 at 3:42 AM, Magic Zach said:

Frankly Wags, Lee1hy doesn't make very accurate liveries particularly in regards to weathering.  This is a poor decision and it would be good to reverse it.  Of those that do make good liveries however, I personally recommend Texac, Roughmaster, and Mach3DS.  These are professionals that will spend hours over the little details to make accurate and realistic weathering and paint schemes (even redrawing different elements of the module to a higher degree of detail than by default, including redrawn normal maps), and will deliver striking photorealism for the long-run of the module.  These 3 have already spoken here in this thread at least once.  Their portfolio of liveries and artworks speaks for themselves.

 

Your   accurate f-16 livery ? or spwaning Another LAG group friend again ?

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/filter/user-is-Magic Zach/apply/
(why you upload same default skin?) 

but  i have  seamless issue my old f-16 textures, im still fixing now 

Edited April 2 by lee1hy

[Awacs_bandog]

Leehy, you still refuse to learn what mipmaps are... Lets not pretend you're gods gift to skinning.

[thepod]

I dont think leeh1y has heard of the phrase "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".

I would be embarrassed to produce work like this amd get caught just using images I found on Wikipedia on my "expert official skins"

[Magic Zach]

17 hours ago, lee1hy said:

Your   accurate f-16 livery ? or spwaning Another LAG group friend again ?

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/filter/user-is-Magic Zach/apply/
(why you upload same default skin?) 

but  i have  seamless issue my old f-16 textures, im still fixing now 

 

These are, not the same default skins.  More details are in the description within.  But this is something off-topic ftom the F-16.

[lee1hy]

On 4/2/2024 at 2:31 PM, Awacs_bandog said:

Leehy, you still refuse to learn what mipmaps are... Lets not pretend you're gods gift to skinning.

I don't know what you're talking about, but the mipmap is automatically created. I use Intel DDS.
Reply here if you have any information
 

On 4/2/2024 at 5:48 PM, thepod said:

I dont think leeh1y has heard of the phrase "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".

I would be embarrassed to produce work like this amd get caught just using images I found on Wikipedia on my "expert official skins"

i think you are only download my livery, lol
thanks for feedback, i will fix it later 
 

20 hours ago, Magic Zach said:

These are, not the same default skins.  More details are in the description within.  But this is something off-topic ftom the F-16.

Thats is your problem. you doing pixel by pixel by zooming in and out crazy all day using "model viewer" on parts that are  hard to visible,
but most players in game don't even look at them.
 overall look is the same.
public don't want duplicate skins and plastic-feeling airplanes.
This is why Your download count is low , 

You guys keep moving in groups and keep and keep recommending few f-16 livey maker and hate others, but public's tastes are different.
and nothing changes this project 
people want cool livery , not like factory standard  plastic skin
 

Edited April 3 by lee1hy

[Magic Zach]

If that's all you want to see, whatever.  They aren't duplicates, they are remodeled originals to bring the textures closer to par with other PBR modules and with more manufacturing history and wartime use context in mind.  Either way most of my work isn't even on the Userfiles, as that's not local enough for my target audience and I mostly stick to making liveries for players of a particular server I frequent.  Hence my use of Google Drives most of the time.

Anyway, you've apparently made your stand here and beyond this I just can't be bothered enough to get any more into this.  I just wanted to get the best out of the F-16 and for others who fly it, and I've seen what those three (Mach3DS, Texac, Roughmaster) can do before and its nothing short of incredible and through their works have made DCS look sharply more photorealistic.  This has nothing to do, or about my own works until you started bombarding my years-old threads yesterday on a dirt-hunting search.  I'm just not interested in this squabbling 

Guh, anyway.  F-16...

Edited April 3 by Magic Zach

[Awacs_bandog]

6 hours ago, lee1hy said:

You guys keep moving in groups and keep and keep recommending few f-16 livey maker and hate others, but public's tastes are different.

Yes. because we all just sit in our groups staring at your stuff in pure, abject jealousy. I wish I could cut corners and not use any form of compression or even the correct colors and get away with it!


Can Confirm. You see Leehy, its a big club and you simply are too cool to be invited.

[Fisherman82]

42 minutes ago, Megalax said:

Actually, he was banned.

Who was banned?

Edit: Oh I get it now, he was banned from the big club not the forum. 

Edited April 3 by Fisherman82

[sinn]

On 3/31/2024 at 2:42 PM, Magic Zach said:

I personally recommend Texac, Roughmaster, and Mach3DS.  These are professionals that will spend hours over the little details to make accurate and realistic weathering and paint schemes (even redrawing different elements of the module to a higher degree of detail than by default, including redrawn normal maps)

The redrawing elements to a higher level of detail and accuracy than the default liveries and adding missing fasteners, panels, sealants, and other details is a big reason why the liveries authored by these three creators are of superior quality. Without meaning any disrespect to anyone, I agree with Magic Zach on this.

If there would have been some way or still is a way to make it possible, a collaboration between the top creators to build upon all of their individual research and knowledge if nothing else would ensure that the new liveries do not miss details they have uncovered in their studies and included in their own works.

[NineLine]

I have hidden a few posts. Please do not hijack this thread to be your personal argument section. Thanks. 

If it continues I will need to hand out warning points.

[Urbi]

It was to be expected that the buddies from the artists' association would come together here to discredit lee1hy. I am of the opinion that the templates of all mods models provided by ED are fully sufficient to represent the general use of the paintwork for the purpose of combat missions. ED's mistake was to offer the roughmete textures for the only liveries with the markings for the F-16C. instead of a general one. When painting, you should assume that the aircraft will be used for at least 100 hours of use. The historical period as well as the variant used play a role. 70% of the F-16C liveries created do not correspond to a Block 50/52 and another percentage of them are just special liveries. The roughmetal used by ED was created when creating the model with the commonly used SubstancePainter. This group of artists should take a look at Adobe's explanations of ROUGHNESS/METALLIC so that they know what role they play on the model. I don't need lubricant paint or punched rivets on the aircraft for combat missions, as is offered here by the artists appearing here in the forum. The higher details on the F-16C mentioned here will probably not correspond to the variant offered by ED.

On February 14th, Matt Wags made a decision. The entire discussion afterwards goes against this decision. why isn't this forum closed?

[lee1hy]

14 hours ago, Fisherman82 said:

Who was banned?

Edit: Oh I get it now, he was banned from the big club not the forum. 

 

few people and I left from those livery art discord, its small club 
they no respect other's livery
 

Edited April 4 by lee1hy

[lee1hy]

11 hours ago, sinn said:

The redrawing elements to a higher level of detail and accuracy than the default liveries and adding missing fasteners, panels, sealants, and other details is a big reason why the liveries authored by these three creators are of superior quality. Without meaning any disrespect to anyone, I agree with Magic Zach on this.

If there would have been some way or still is a way to make it possible, a collaboration between the top creators to build upon all of their individual research and knowledge if nothing else would ensure that the new liveries do not miss details they have uncovered in their studies and included in their own works.

 you  and magic zach mentioned  top artists  is currently working on this project , (artists, not one)

however, livery's capacity is limited, It is not possible to upgrade the details of all textures. 

Edited April 4 by lee1hy

[Jumper77A]

Hello all, 
So, it appears a lot of us missed the initial call to submit. Not sure what the distribution for that message was initially. I never saw it until after the decision was made (I don't spend a lot of time in the forums). I did note Wags' apology for not checking the user files before the decision. The clarity of the initial message read fairly vague. I would suggest a path forward for such endeavors should include expectation management and left/right limits. Something like:

Default Template Usage Required: Yes / No
Default Textures Required. (Not creating new engines, pylons, fuel tanks or anything not included in the default template)
F-16C Block 50 c. 2007 (or listed timeframe) only: Yes / No
Dynamic bort number requirement.
Maximum zipped file size allowed. (If different from the 300mb UF restriction)
Allowed compression type. (BC7 etc)
File type required: (Zip / rar etc)
I am also of the opinion that the default liveries should be held to a higher standard.

I'm sure there is more stringent stuff there, but that would be a recommended baseline. Something I learned in the military is that instructions must be written for the absolute lowest level. Meaning, the people that need the most direction and step-by-step instructions. Just a suggestion. 

***Soap Box time***
I want to address a few things starting with the attitude of "it's just gotta be good enough because details don't matter". If I may add my 2 cents here, I think that is a dangerous attitude to have as a livery creator. If I were going to combat in these jets, I wouldn't care, because I cannot look outside of my cockpit other than stepping to the jet. In DCS however, things like screenshots, external cameras, video creation, and other things exist. In that case, details do matter. Not to make this a "yay me" post, but I have spent over 20 years in the military with the majority of those working in/around/and with all of these aircraft, with the last 7 in the fighter community, I may have a somewhat informed baseline of how things look, feel, smell, etc. I think it's awesome the level of detail some creators put into it. When I show fighter pilots DCS the ones who are into it will immediately start saying things like "Oh, they got that right/that's missing" or "They always had dirt here", "that color isn't quite right", "they were never that dirty/that's a clean jet" or other small details like that. Their external camera was walking on the flightline every day and stepping to their respective aircraft.  

I would also like to address download count. Download count does not mean quality. I just looked at my own user files list and my worst-quality skins have the most downloads (Including the most downloads of a certain airframe). This was due to either it being some of the first liveries available for a module, a fortunate position on the UF page, being released for a long time, or updates pushing them to the top of the list under the old UF structure. My best, highest-quality, liveries are at the bottom of my download counts for the same reasons. We all know now that great liveries can get buried under 30 spammed "shake n' baked" out liveries in the UF pages, which is fine. There is a large element of "right place, right time".

Lastly, I'd like to remind us livery creators why we are here. It shouldn't be for personal glory or ego. We are here to let people live out their dreams of being a fighter/attack/cargo/rotary/warbird etc. pilot/aviator which they may have not been able in real life. We owe it to them to do our best job possible, fully knowing that we will not get compensated with anything more than some recognition or admiration and also fully knowing that the rivet counters of the world will call out our shortcomings. Lest we forget that many of these aircraft are gone forever, or in the case of Marine Hornets and Harriers, soon to be gone forever. Maybe I am a little sentimental, but it's nice to see some of these aircraft preserved if only digitally. They can't all go to museums. We should have the same dedication to the jets that defended and served our respective nations. (Yes, I understand this is a video game). Paint your best jet.

I hope this is viewed as an azimuth check for all of us in this thread/community and not as slinging mud or personal insults. This was intended as suggestions and some constructive criticism. Thank you for your time. 

 

Edited April 4 by Jumper77A

[lee1hy]

18 hours ago, Jumper77A said:

***Soap Box time***
I want to address a few things starting with the attitude of "it's just gotta be good enough because details don't matter". If I may add my 2 cents here, I think that is a dangerous attitude to have as a livery creator. If I were going to combat in these jets, I wouldn't care, because I cannot look outside of my cockpit other than stepping to the jet. In DCS however, things like screenshots, external cameras, video creation, and other things exist. In that case, details do matter. Not to make this a "yay me" post, but I have spent over 20 years in the military with the majority of those working in/around/and with all of these aircraft, with the last 7 in the fighter community, I may have a somewhat informed baseline of how things look, feel, smell, etc/

I would also like to address download count. Download count does not mean quality. I just looked at my own user files list and my worst-quality skins have the most downloads (Including the most downloads of a certain airframe). This was due to either it being some of the first liveries available for a module, a fortunate position on the UF page, being released for a long time, or updates pushing them to the top of the list under the old UF structure. My best, highest-quality, liveries are at the bottom of my download counts for the same reasons. We all know now that great liveries can get buried under 30 spammed "shake n' baked" out liveries in the UF pages, which is fine. There is a large element of "right place, right time".

Lastly, I'd like to remind us livery creators why we are here. It shouldn't be for personal glory or ego. We are here to let people live out their dreams of being a fighter/attack/cargo/rotary/warbird etc. pilot/aviator which they may have not been able in real life. We owe it to them to do our best job possible, fully knowing that we will not get compensated with anything more than some recognition or admiration and also fully knowing that the rivet counters of the world will call out our shortcomings. Lest we forget that many of these aircraft are gone forever, or in the case of Marine Hornets and Harriers, soon to be gone forever. Maybe I am a little sentimental, but it's nice to see some of these aircraft preserved if only digitally. They can't all go to museums. We should have the same dedication to the jets that defended and served our respective nations. (Yes, I understand this is a video game). Paint your best jet.

I hope this is viewed as an azimuth check for all of us in this thread/community and not as slinging mud or personal insults. This was intended as suggestions and some constructive criticism. Thank you for your time. 

 

 

If ED is really interested in detailing the f-16, and raising sales someone said,
 just making a F-16 V2 and selling the upgrade to make a profit? no ? 
ED They are way way better than us in every way , they are super 3D/texuter experts 
 

generic livery this is not a detail or color issue (so many limted) 
belgium and other country bort number in official work list is still not supported 
 normal map will be skipped and we can't even contact the ED artist.

you're still telling not to fight, but you're still insisting on strange logic that doesn't fit reality 
you keep say "put detail pls put detail pls, pls put detail, real usaf pilot will see " what? 
we creating the livery, we are looking at numerous photos, making numerous attempts, and trying to add details.
this is why the top artists you mentioned have high download counters and support comments 

who started the personal insults first ? who spread baseless rumor first? this is all people dreams?
 this F-16 sub is doesn't mean who is best (either me and other)


 

Edited April 5 by lee1hy

[Magic Zach]

High download count does not correlate directly to being a "top artist".  It more so means that the module in particular is popular (like F16), the timing for when your liveries are in the first few pages (like during a sale and people buy new modules to download liveries for), or just shoving a lot of content out the door in high amounts.

There's no reason if ED is delegating artwork to the community, that it can't be from people who know what they're doing and can deliver the best results.

And to be honest ED artists aren't putting in their best, or at least haven't put the most potential in some of the artwork.  Though I feel like this is in large part because they have a deadline that community artists don't have, which is why artists like Roughmaster, Mach3DS and Texac can take it much further than ED's textures...they don't have a strict deadline.  This is something that ED could use to it's advantage by incorporating works from them, to help improve the artwork of the module.

[Kerbo 416]

On 4/4/2024 at 5:40 PM, Jumper77A said:

Hello all, 
So, it appears a lot of us missed the initial call to submit. Not sure what the distribution for that message was initially. I never saw it until after the decision was made (I don't spend a lot of time in the forums). I did note Wags' apology for not checking the user files before the decision. The clarity of the initial message read fairly vague. I would suggest a path forward for such endeavors should include expectation management and left/right limits. Something like:

Default Template Usage Required: Yes / No
Default Textures Required. (Not creating new engines, pylons, fuel tanks or anything not included in the default template)
F-16C Block 50 c. 2007 (or listed timeframe) only: Yes / No
Dynamic bort number requirement.
Maximum zipped file size allowed. (If different from the 300mb UF restriction)
Allowed compression type. (BC7 etc)
File type required: (Zip / rar etc)
I am also of the opinion that the default liveries should be held to a higher standard.

I'm sure there is more stringent stuff there, but that would be a recommended baseline. Something I learned in the military is that instructions must be written for the absolute lowest level. Meaning, the people that need the most direction and step-by-step instructions. Just a suggestion. 

***Soap Box time***
I want to address a few things starting with the attitude of "it's just gotta be good enough because details don't matter". If I may add my 2 cents here, I think that is a dangerous attitude to have as a livery creator. If I were going to combat in these jets, I wouldn't care, because I cannot look outside of my cockpit other than stepping to the jet. In DCS however, things like screenshots, external cameras, video creation, and other things exist. In that case, details do matter. Not to make this a "yay me" post, but I have spent over 20 years in the military with the majority of those working in/around/and with all of these aircraft, with the last 7 in the fighter community, I may have a somewhat informed baseline of how things look, feel, smell, etc. I think it's awesome the level of detail some creators put into it. When I show fighter pilots DCS the ones who are into it will immediately start saying things like "Oh, they got that right/that's missing" or "They always had dirt here", "that color isn't quite right", "they were never that dirty/that's a clean jet" or other small details like that. Their external camera was walking on the flightline every day and stepping to their respective aircraft.  

I would also like to address download count. Download count does not mean quality. I just looked at my own user files list and my worst-quality skins have the most downloads (Including the most downloads of a certain airframe). This was due to either it being some of the first liveries available for a module, a fortunate position on the UF page, being released for a long time, or updates pushing them to the top of the list under the old UF structure. My best, highest-quality, liveries are at the bottom of my download counts for the same reasons. We all know now that great liveries can get buried under 30 spammed "shake n' baked" out liveries in the UF pages, which is fine. There is a large element of "right place, right time".

Lastly, I'd like to remind us livery creators why we are here. It shouldn't be for personal glory or ego. We are here to let people live out their dreams of being a fighter/attack/cargo/rotary/warbird etc. pilot/aviator which they may have not been able in real life. We owe it to them to do our best job possible, fully knowing that we will not get compensated with anything more than some recognition or admiration and also fully knowing that the rivet counters of the world will call out our shortcomings. Lest we forget that many of these aircraft are gone forever, or in the case of Marine Hornets and Harriers, soon to be gone forever. Maybe I am a little sentimental, but it's nice to see some of these aircraft preserved if only digitally. They can't all go to museums. We should have the same dedication to the jets that defended and served our respective nations. (Yes, I understand this is a video game). Paint your best jet.

I hope this is viewed as an azimuth check for all of us in this thread/community and not as slinging mud or personal insults. This was intended as suggestions and some constructive criticism. Thank you for your time. 

 

 

Incredibly well said.

[flying_ducks]

On 4/5/2024 at 12:40 AM, Jumper77A said:

Hello all, 
So, it appears a lot of us missed the initial call to submit. Not sure what the distribution for that message was initially. I never saw it until after the decision was made (I don't spend a lot of time in the forums). I did note Wags' apology for not checking the user files before the decision. The clarity of the initial message read fairly vague. I would suggest a path forward for such endeavors should include expectation management and left/right limits. Something like:

Default Template Usage Required: Yes / No
Default Textures Required. (Not creating new engines, pylons, fuel tanks or anything not included in the default template)
F-16C Block 50 c. 2007 (or listed timeframe) only: Yes / No
Dynamic bort number requirement.
Maximum zipped file size allowed. (If different from the 300mb UF restriction)
Allowed compression type. (BC7 etc)
File type required: (Zip / rar etc)
I am also of the opinion that the default liveries should be held to a higher standard.

I'm sure there is more stringent stuff there, but that would be a recommended baseline. Something I learned in the military is that instructions must be written for the absolute lowest level. Meaning, the people that need the most direction and step-by-step instructions. Just a suggestion. 

***Soap Box time***
I want to address a few things starting with the attitude of "it's just gotta be good enough because details don't matter". If I may add my 2 cents here, I think that is a dangerous attitude to have as a livery creator. If I were going to combat in these jets, I wouldn't care, because I cannot look outside of my cockpit other than stepping to the jet. In DCS however, things like screenshots, external cameras, video creation, and other things exist. In that case, details do matter. Not to make this a "yay me" post, but I have spent over 20 years in the military with the majority of those working in/around/and with all of these aircraft, with the last 7 in the fighter community, I may have a somewhat informed baseline of how things look, feel, smell, etc. I think it's awesome the level of detail some creators put into it. When I show fighter pilots DCS the ones who are into it will immediately start saying things like "Oh, they got that right/that's missing" or "They always had dirt here", "that color isn't quite right", "they were never that dirty/that's a clean jet" or other small details like that. Their external camera was walking on the flightline every day and stepping to their respective aircraft.  

I would also like to address download count. Download count does not mean quality. I just looked at my own user files list and my worst-quality skins have the most downloads (Including the most downloads of a certain airframe). This was due to either it being some of the first liveries available for a module, a fortunate position on the UF page, being released for a long time, or updates pushing them to the top of the list under the old UF structure. My best, highest-quality, liveries are at the bottom of my download counts for the same reasons. We all know now that great liveries can get buried under 30 spammed "shake n' baked" out liveries in the UF pages, which is fine. There is a large element of "right place, right time".

Lastly, I'd like to remind us livery creators why we are here. It shouldn't be for personal glory or ego. We are here to let people live out their dreams of being a fighter/attack/cargo/rotary/warbird etc. pilot/aviator which they may have not been able in real life. We owe it to them to do our best job possible, fully knowing that we will not get compensated with anything more than some recognition or admiration and also fully knowing that the rivet counters of the world will call out our shortcomings. Lest we forget that many of these aircraft are gone forever, or in the case of Marine Hornets and Harriers, soon to be gone forever. Maybe I am a little sentimental, but it's nice to see some of these aircraft preserved if only digitally. They can't all go to museums. We should have the same dedication to the jets that defended and served our respective nations. (Yes, I understand this is a video game). Paint your best jet.

I hope this is viewed as an azimuth check for all of us in this thread/community and not as slinging mud or personal insults. This was intended as suggestions and some constructive criticism. Thank you for your time. 

 

 

I agree with these constructive comments.
In my personal opinion, the decision was too hasty and it doesn't look good for the community. (This is not a criticism of anyone)  Creators should share constructive opinions and collaborate rather than say like “This guy wrong, Oh this guy perfect” . We must talking about and compare portfolios created by great artists. In fact, IMHO we should be able to see a variety of artists' work through a wider range of competitions.

[Awacs_bandog]

Having another skin competition might be fun tbh, open it up for other squadrons to potentially get added to the game, and a showcase of a greater variety of work.

[Mach3DS]

On 4/4/2024 at 2:08 AM, lee1hy said:

 you  and magic zach mentioned  top artists  is currently working on this project , (artists, not one)

however, livery's capacity is limited, It is not possible to upgrade the details of all textures. 

 

It's very possible to upgrade all the details without having them in every single livery folder.  You just need to create a common folder.   Sharing in the spirit of helping you make the stock F-16 better.

[lee1hy]

I will ask "again" about the folder structure and whether duplicate(originnal textuer and livery) normal maps are possible
currently, european skins must require a normal map

Edited April 6 by lee1hy