DaSquade

I understand you need to respect your NDA etc but imho this is a rather lame and pointless comment. No need to take it seriously though...i'm just saying. As modeler OFP/VBS1/ARMA/VBS2 kept use bussy and we always tried to make new contence witch kept the game alive. Most modelers are becoming very bored with having to keep reinventing 'stock' weapons and weapons that only visually 'fit' in the currently one-way animations. Vertical grips/flashlight integrated grips are part of the equipement and 'make' the weapon platform imho. For some it is becomming very frustrated this hasn't been changed since the very beginning. It are small details i know, but some 'fans' who have been here those are key elements that proof this is actually a new generation game or if it just a new baked pie based on the good old grandmothers recepy.Don't want to go offtopic, but i do hope some feature of VBS2 will make it into the game version (IR/lasers/...). Welcome to the 21th century and it usefull tools, goodbye eyecandy-only items . On a possitive note; Glad to see the eotech finally again come to the battlefield,....cuh although it appears to be the old version.

No direct source, but i always loved some more damaged stuff like shot tiles, broken off corners etc...Also some US/Iraqi grafiti would be nice. Also propoganda posters make it nicer. I used this poster on my busstop, feel free to use it (can't find the original pic): http://users.pandora.be/EEChome/poster.tga

Since you like critic (good starting point as it opens doors ), your current model still has room for optimization and accuraty. See my previous post although it is roughly the same as what cl10k mentioned. But also imho i would reduce the gear-wheel to a flat plane and work with alpha layers. It will have a much better look then the 3d shape that simple can be simulated that good unless you model it fully witch will be a lot of wasted polys. As for the cables, i would reduce them to flat polys (so no 3d), or maybe hold it untill the rest is done. As for all the body cilinders. I didn't count yours, but use max 16 segment cilinders as they are very handy to work with when you need to reduce: 16->8->4->2. Anyway, for the fun i had a brief go at the PTMB. Feel free to have a look at it to understand some shapes like the wheels and cilinder use. It is a very rough WIP though...I dought i will even continue it . Patrol Tactical Mountain Bike As for the polycount. In some way you can compair it with the BIS motorbike. Overall it uses roughly the same parts, 2 wheels, cain, gearwheels, steer, brakes etc etc....so imho it can be compaired. In the end as long there isn't to much wasted poly-use and it all fits.

Nice work Opteryx. You might want to contact DJFrogstar. He is more or less a crack on those things and has loads of reference material...Not sure if you already have him as contact (he doesn't checks this forum anymore afaik), if not...i ask him to contact you if he wants (skype). I made some Iraqy stuff aswell a long time ago including a small amount of monuments and an iraqy busstop. It was made between OFP (VBS1) and the start of ArmA so it will need some adjustment in the texture department etc . If interested, you can find some old pics of it here: http://users.pandora.be/EEChome/tikrit/

Meant as a possitive critic (although it might come hard), but i agree with Orson that the model is very bad and you surely can make a much better model with the same amount of poly, if not less. Wirefrime only confirms it..... Like the wheels. There is no point in having several additional segments if you don't do anything with them. At least you could use them and scale them (one segment a time) so you have a curved wheel profile. The cain: No need for it to be round. Make it out a box shape and let it curve over the tracks (not sure how you call the cilinders with teeths on it). Just a few peices that needs tweaking, rebuilding...Well worth the small extra effort imho. Keep it up.

Maybe me, but you might want to check the edges between the glass and the missile. By the looks of it it doesn't have sharp values witch makes the front part of the tube cast bad/non-realistic lightning. See pic:

"One" of the arma-mods/addons hosters where you can find your stuff is armaholic ->armaholics files But there are a few other sites aswell.

Yeah, correct about the angle. I originally had a much bigger angle, but had to adjust it so the front small window on the driver door would become planar. Will see if it can be fixed... Maybe hard to see on the pics but the front door is going inside though. Bit strange construction imho...

Afaik this isn't a recoinaise topic, but anyway... Looks like a variant of.... <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Advanced Ground Mobility Vehicle (AGMV) JLTV Tech Demonstrator General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) Tactical Vehicles division and AM General, LLC Same front grill, overall shape, but 'yours' only has 2 doors... EDIT: Also not that sure anymore . Windows don't compair etc..

This isn't the chat channel or suicide hotline. Please keep on-topic . Something i was working on a good month ago to coop with boredom: Wires: JLTV wires Don't mind the poor import in modo for wires (<90° angles gets smooth..settings?). It is just a challenge test though as i loved the car and the angles looked like a nice model challenge (after some tweaking got the angle more or less correct, i hope). Who knows one day, but since it is a prototype and i have bad expierence with making prototypes (they tend to change ). Anyway, if i remember currently at 14k but with high detailed (85% finished) interior and weapon system (50% done), all still on highest res lod etc...It also it modeled to have animated doors, so that also makes an impack on the polycount. In case 'you' don't know what the vehicle is: Some RL pics

The weapons (MK16/17) should be in good proportion, at least lenght/height ratio...and if i can trust my reference material i used. Not sure about its thickness, but shouldn't be that much off. As for the overall scale, i used the availible facts on the net and got confirmation of an airsoft build. So i dought my models are that wrong of porportions...i hope. The eclan in the pic could indeed be a bit to big (afaik Jackal once pointed out and fixed it in his use). Hm, if i open the BISsoldier sample and measure it height (without boots and helmet) it comes slightly under 1.80m, so more or less the average height of an adult human, so don't know where the problem is. Personally i think it all fits though. Keep in mind in your provided pic (bravo) the stock isn't in its shortest position and imho the hands of the operator look pretty bigger then what the arma units have. Well actually i think the hands ingame could would need to be a bit lowered (trigger finguer isn't on the lower part of the trigger), but most importantly....in rl the hands tissue will 'flatten' out around the grip witch give the impression the gamemodel grip looks longer. Just my 50cent (trying to coever my ass ). Nice bipod stock scuba, but you forgot the leggs of it? (maybe different model or pic though). And like said, if possible please include the surefire M900. Like said, it might look bad regarding the players hand position, but the more models come out with it....hopefully BIS will one day implant a fix for it (and make it usefull) .

Ah now i see where you get your confusion . Don't always believe what you read, especially on the internet . But again, keep it as minimal as possible.

I think you don't understand it bravo. You can have more then 99 components. If not mistaken OFP already was able to have 128 components. I forgot what the count was in ArmA, but if not mistaken it was 256 or even more (maybe i confuse it with VBS2). Like said (and maybe bad explained), just make the amount of geo forms it needs and runs the 'structure' -> 'topology' -> 'find components'. Your components will be reconnaised, but like said 02 uses a strange 'alphabetic (read number) arranging in the named selection list. So nothing to care about. But again, try to keep the components count as low as possible as it influences the performence. *Quick O2 components test: http://users.pandora.be/EEChome/components.png 360 boxes -> 360 reconnaised components (not tested ingame though).

Not sure if i misunderstand, but it all goes automaticly. O2 is a bit sucky on the aranging of the named selections, meaning it checks the first number...component0x,component1x,component1xx,component2x,component2xx, etc.. As long you use the 'structure' -> 'topology' -> 'find components'. As for your 2 boxes, convex and closed,.... I think it is best to avoid this geo forms. In the end, what the find components options finds should be kept as it is afaik.

Bravo, you 'forgot' or left out 'pos1'. It doesn't mather how much 'positions' or 'intrences' you add to the path lod, you just need to make sure the numbers follows each other.....pos1-pos2-pos3-in1-in2-in3 etc.... The moment you leave out a number it gets srewed up and the path isn't working. Like said you can have as much named selected vertexes, but the more the complexer the path finding and commanding it will become for AI leaders. As for your 'stairs' selection, afaik this isn't needed. I haven't tested but it is indeed best to have a connected piece where the stairs are and best use the ladder memory points for it (so the AI starts on the path itself, although if you add an 'in' selection name on the start and end of the ladder AI should find the path again). As for the path vertexes, it is best to have them +-10cm above the roadway lod. Also afaik, it isn't needed to have quad faces as AI uses the edge/line between the vertexes. So tris faces is more then enough.

In o2 if you go to the bulldozer menu (the red icon), check the option list. The is stuff like 'disable model config'. By default it is off i think, maybe turn it on. Maybe play around with some of the other option..never know. Does your Roadway lod has any 'Property names and values'? See the Window-Named Properties (ctrl+1).

Maybe me but the distance between the two RIS bars looks very small, but maybe it is the angle of the picture. Beside that, looking good. Polycount and any change of a wire?

First of all, thanks NZX for the M134 implantation. I have a question though (not that i care that much), but is it possible to increase accuraty - lower dispertion please? Sadly i can't find the youtube movie anymore but they did a comparisation test betweent he minigun and 50cal (if not mistaken) and it turned out the minigun was pretty accurate, dispate it ROF. Could be wrong, but i thought it was more accurate then what it is now. Just my 50cent.... As for the textures of the hmmvw. Well true, i agree it currently lacks wear and tear. But keep in mind they decided (for the good) not to use original textures... It makes a real artist to 'correctly' make some decent and believeble textures, especially if the texture has to do it with wear and tear (one camo paint, not much other detail). Welds, wear and tear and other elements indeed make or break a model. But only a handfull are good at it (i suck at it i admite). The pack indeed has potential i think, so hopefully the textures will get pimped. but keep in mind this project is afaik for all its makers a side project and they don't get payed. Keep it up.

Don't want to be a smart-ass, but lets check... So i follow one of your 'really great sites' -> http://i191.photobucket.com/albums....012.jpg Ok, ok...under Belgium (FN) is has the SCAR, witch if the internet is correct be called CAR now...but what i see...a pic of the good old generation 1 and 2 if not mistaken. Uh, they already on the 4th generation afaik. ->So what is the point? Not the best website imho. Ohwell, the 'bibble' appears to contain a lot of fals facts anyway.

Are you running some kind of scripts/cfgs. No experience here with that, just wondering. Might want to try to reinstall (and make sure there isn't any left-overs in the old folders) in case you haven't tried.

@Bravo 6: Hm sounds fishy...arf. Maybe make the roadway stuff in a res LOD and on last moment check the res lod to roadway lod property. That way you can visually check your roadway stuff in bulldozer...no need to check it after that. Don't have a clue why it happens though, never experienced that error. *In case you didn't knew, always remove any texture paths of the roadway structures and best to give it sharp values (last not really needed). Not that is should help your error.

*Just finshed one of the props of it.....you help me finish the rest, should be that hard i think...? Hm, what is this?

Nice work Eddy. on one of the few things we belgian can be proud of....(MLU). For the moment beeing we will have to do it with a mockup F35 . Would you consider to make some nice tigermeet tail art peices one day? Made some in the past on Footmunch OFP F16s, was a fun thing to do imho.

@Olemissrebel: I'm not speaking in name of Aimpoint, but as Aimpoint more or less knows your kit could be made as i have the Surefire M951 and Insight Peq15 modeled and he is free to use it, same for some other stuff (surefire M900, TangoDown bipod....). But sadly for ArmA it is all eyecandy. PS: Check your PMs regarding the request of reference picture of the ATPIAL (using DEMO reference pictures atm ). @Aimpoint: Any change of giving the RIS cover panels a heavy wear-tear camo job? Imho they break the model a bit. Also, correct me if wrong, but i miss an Eotech/M203 and/or SD version. Beside that, my dream weapon pack as you know .

Just to say " " on the release John. As you probebly know, i have much respect for your work, be it the way you always looking to represent realisme and on the other hand you always seam to find a golden way between eyecandy and optimization. Glad you kept finding the motivation to carry on... As for the nitpickers.... . Some really don't understand how hard there words come over and how demotivating it can be.