TOMCATZ Posted February 7, 2010 Share Posted February 7, 2010 Hi, I have some problems to show pictures in my home-forum. So I want to trye it in here... 1 Born to fly but forced to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas_From_Hell Posted February 7, 2010 Share Posted February 7, 2010 Looking very nice, TOM! Just some quick criticism, however: canopy shape seem to be just a tiny bit off, but maybe my eyesight is just screwed up. Other thing I noticed: near the air intake, it's written "OPACNO". I'm just guessing, but you're probably looking for either "ОРАСИО" or "ОПАКНО", am I right? I have no clue about what the hell both words mean, but just in case, it's better to change it to cyrillic :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FVMAD Posted February 7, 2010 Share Posted February 7, 2010 "ОПАСНО" what's with cone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shu77 Posted February 7, 2010 Share Posted February 7, 2010 Yeah, looks fantastic but there seems to be an odd bend in the nose cone Hornet, Super Carrier, Warthog & (II), Mustang, Spitfire, Albatross, Sabre, Combined Arms, FC3, Nevada, Gulf, Normandy, Syria AH-6J i9 10900K @ 5.0GHz, Gigabyte Z490 Vision G, Cooler Master ML120L, Gigabyte RTX3080 OC Gaming 10Gb, 64GB RAM, Reverb G2 @ 2480x2428, TM Warthog, Saitek pedals & throttle, DIY collective, TrackIR4, Cougar MFDs, vx3276-2k Combat Wombat's Airfield & Enroute Maps and Planning Tools Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustang Posted February 7, 2010 Share Posted February 7, 2010 Great work TOMCATZ, but a question: do we need another Su27 model after 3GO's? how about a Su33 model, no-one's tried that :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flanker1 Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 hey tomcatz, great work. now you can go for a new su-24 and/or su-22m4 model. . . ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Cool pics+nose cone funny, go for Su-33 or 30 hi-poly model, pls ;) 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agg Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 The model looks ok, but I dont really see the point of doing another -27 when we already have a great model in 3GOs -27. A -30 or -33 would be great, but I for one dont see the point in a new -27 model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boberro Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Model OK, but as above members said, I don't see point to create next one Su-27 too. Su-33 is waiting... Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D ಠ_ಠ ツ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
czarnyolek Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Point is as with other Tomcatz models, to reduce machine stress by dropping down polycount. 3go model is nice and smooth, and eats a lot of FPS. IMO most (99,99percent) machines can easily cope with this kind of models, especially as LOD was introduced. However Tomcatz is still trying to get as good as possible look, with as low poly count as possible. And being such kind person as he is, we can only thank him as we get his models for free ;) Wont be DL thi su anyway, as im not very interested in 3go model either. This plane just does'nt do it for me ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS01_WinteR Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Olek you must buy new machine:thumbup::lol: WinteR | Virtual Smokey Bandits | Virtual Czech MiG-15UTI Solo Display Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
czarnyolek Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Olek you must buy new machine:thumbup::lol: My laptop is doing well with all stock and third party models, no worries. Its Tomcatz idea to cut down polycount. I would like to see models as smooth as Tigrous gripen all the time ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VireVolte_tigrou Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 Me too ! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 Point is as with other Tomcatz models, to reduce machine stress by dropping down polycount. 3go model is nice and smooth, and eats a lot of FPS. IMO most (99,99percent) machines can easily cope with this kind of models, especially as LOD was introduced. However Tomcatz is still trying to get as good as possible look, with as low poly count as possible. And being such kind person as he is, we can only thank him as we get his models for free ;) Wont be DL thi su anyway, as im not very interested in 3go model either. This plane just does'nt do it for me ;) 3GO Su-27 is more FPS friendly than default Su-27 model, there's at least 6 rigs I've tested this on (single core,dual, quad, NVidia and Ati, Toshiba quad laptop) and all of them had better FPS with 3GO than with default so your statement is completely out of question! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
czarnyolek Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 3GO Su-27 is more FPS friendly than default Su-27 model, there's at least 6 rigs I've tested this on (single core,dual, quad, NVidia and Ati, Toshiba quad laptop) and all of them had better FPS with 3GO than with default so your statement is completely out of question! Out of what? See if Tomcatz model is more FPS friendly than 3go, as i never stated anything about stock model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golfsierra2 Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 Is it ? kind regards, Raven.... [sigpic]http://www.crc-mindreader.de/CRT/images/Birds2011.gif[/sigpic] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikoyan Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 he should turn this model into a su-33, that is my hones opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMCATZ Posted February 11, 2010 Author Share Posted February 11, 2010 Hi, thanks a lot. Well - Su30 was my primary target and I modeled. Su33 isn`t easy course I have a big problem: Everytime I retract/re-retract the wings, the missiles didn`t follow the pylons and stay in there old position. That means- I can`t use "Ctrl+P" argument. Best wishes, TOM Born to fly but forced to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 But Su-30 is possible, right? Great, cause there's this mod I use which places a Su-30 model in a Su-33 slot so you can fly Sparka with IFR capability. There's just 20 something Su-33 ever produced (24 IIRC) of which only a handful are flyable these days. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustang Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Everytime I retract/re-retract the wings, the missiles didn`t follow the pylons and stay in there old position. That means- I can`t use "Ctrl+P" argument. Best wishes, TOM Maybe you could PM some ED programmers for help with the wings anim? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfa Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 Hi, thanks a lot. Well - Su30 was my primary target and I modeled. Su33 isn`t easy course I have a big problem: Everytime I retract/re-retract the wings, the missiles didn`t follow the pylons and stay in there old position. That means- I can`t use "Ctrl+P" argument. Best wishes, TOM Hmm thats actually an interesting observation. I always thought that the Su-33's ordinance displacement during wingfold was hardcoded with a pre-determined "travel", but if this was the case then the ordinance should displace regardless of 3D model/wing animation. If you say that it doesn't move with your custom-made model, then I suspect the original model has "dummy" objects(rigged to the outer wing panels) that controls displacement of ordinance - i.e. that ordinance simply follows the position of the dummies. JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMCATZ Posted February 13, 2010 Author Share Posted February 13, 2010 Hi, well thank you much. It wasn`t my intention to start a contest against 3Go- They did an outstanding job and I wouldn`t use sooooo many polygons for model only. My primary taget was the Su-30 `cause so we can fly a Flanker with R-77 and a relative realistcally cockpit, a strong radar and much fuel. In my opinion the stock models arent bad- If somebody some day will trye to build so exactly models with less polycounts he will realize what ED formers did for an outstanding job in past. I like smooth looking models too but it costs too much performance. We don`t speak about one model in view- we speak about 10 aircrafts while taxiing to the runway, for examble. You can make a test with all available models- tell me your experiences. Born to fly but forced to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMCATZ Posted February 13, 2010 Author Share Posted February 13, 2010 (edited) As I sad: My intention is to give LockOn that look I wanna see and I don`t want to refresh textures only allthough that could be the much easyer way. I did reading somewere that FlamingCliffs2.0 will work much faster as like as LOMAC1.12. I`m not pretty sure how they made it´real- if they work with LOD`s hardly or made the program much faster. But if it real I`ll go to "high polycount" Now my Su30 have arround 5.000 polygons including lights and damages. I had to make the textures four times smaller them it was. I worked with 3times 2048x2048textures for one Flanker. So for overall with different coulour-shemes I had a load of 200MB`s textures for Flanker family only. That was to heavy for my RAM - I use 1.5GB and my FSB was not fast enough to load new textures while flying. In the result I had 20 seconds frozen display while I flew against other fighters. So I had to made it smaller... Edited February 13, 2010 by TOMCATZ Born to fly but forced to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMCATZ Posted February 13, 2010 Author Share Posted February 13, 2010 (edited) For overall you can model "high poly" or "low poly" - in the result sometimes you can`t see much differences by first look. Sometimes I load a 200k poly model and I only can say: " hm ... looks.... smoother" It´s very hard to find the right balance about good looking and performance. So well, FlamingCliffs2.0 will show us the way into the next level and give some answers. I`ll wait for it and make a rest. My very best wishes, TOM Download available at: http://www.lockonfiles.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownloaddetails&cid=245&lid=1677&title=Tom's JETPACK v2.5#dldetails Edited February 13, 2010 by TOMCATZ Born to fly but forced to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMCATZ Posted February 18, 2010 Author Share Posted February 18, 2010 (edited) Edited February 18, 2010 by TOMCATZ Born to fly but forced to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts