NEW STRUCTURE MODELS

[Olrox]

I'll make that when I've more time to learn how the actual structures works in the game. Like, I could do this animation on 3DSMax easily, but I've no idea if it would be of any good while transferring the model to the game. Would you like one just to see it spinning, anyway?

[Olrox]

On the other hand, not so sure about those expansions... makes the factory without them look unfinished, and gives the impression of trying to overclock the factory instead of expanding it, if you understand what I mean.

How many polygons is it?

I'll try then to make a model with modules more like additional floors on the place of the expansions. But Everyone agrees with the chimneys, then?

About the polygon count, the 1.2 model features about 150~200 polygons, at the full stage (the PIE files support only quadrilateral polygons, or do they support more sides per poly?)

P.S.: Some careful remodelling should allow for 100 polys or even less.

[Per]

The way animation currently works, you will want to separate the animated pieces into separate meshes. Then you need some very laborious setup to specify exactly how these meshes are to be rotated, translated and scaled. (Yes, even scaled! Not currently used anywhere, but possible.)

PIE files support any number of corners per polygon, but I recommend to only use triangles, because in the future we will tessellate the models and remove support for non-triangle polygons anyway.

[Olrox]

OK then...
About the labor, it brings self-aggrandizement only, so I like it when there's work to be done and there's people who like your work.
going to play some toribash, but expect another factory model some hours from now.

[MetalBeast]

Okay, here they are.

Ohh, Yeah they looks good now (with three expansions)

[Olrox]

New floor-based modules factory model. Reduced details on both sides of the structures (chimneys and modules too), for less polys. No windows or vents still, could be added on demand.

[Zarel]

New floor-based modules factory model. Reduced details on both sides of the structures (chimneys and modules too), for less polys. No windows or vents still, could be added on demand.

Sufficient difference between base factory and 1-module factory, but 1-module and 2-module look a bit similar.

[Olrox]

Sufficient difference between base factory and 1-module factory, but 1-module and 2-module look a bit similar.

Could correct that by adding stripes on the texture, so the player could only identify the stripes for fast reconaissance. What do you think?

[MetalBeast]

Sufficient difference between base factory and 1-module factory, but 1-module and 2-module look a bit similar.

Could correct that by adding stripes on the texture, so the player could only identify the stripes for fast reconaissance. What do you think?

Looks good, but I would make 1 stripe for level 1, 2 for level 2 and 3 stripes for level 3.

[Olrox]

Looks good, but I would make 1 stripe for level 1, 2 for level 2 and 3 stripes for level 3.

I thought three stripes were too small, but here's the model for comparison.

That's my last today, but there's more tomorrow

Thank you all for the feedback so far.

[Zarel]

Looks good, but I would make 1 stripe for level 1, 2 for level 2 and 3 stripes for level 3.

>_< COMPLETELY DEFEAT THE PURPOSE, WHY DON'T YOU?

You generally want more than one visual cue. 3 stripes may still be under the subconscious-five-limit, but it's still significantly harder to distinguish from 2 than 2 is from 1.

I'd say 0, 1, and 2 stripes. Have the 1 stripe be thin, and have the 2 stripe be one thin, one thick. Have the stripes in teamcolors.

[Olrox]

I'd say 0, 1, and 2 stripes. Have the 1 stripe be thin, and have the 2 stripe be one thin, one thick. Have the stripes in teamcolors.

Yep, that was what I thought. The version 1.3.1 had more evident stripes, making recognition easier. Although is not quite intuitivally correct that two stripes represents the third state, we could consider the following:

I-New player will get the idea of modules easier, by thinking 1 stripe = built "one time", 2 stripes = built "two times", 3 stripes = built "three times";

II-Veteran players would already know the idea of modules and how many stages are, so they just need something obvious to distinguish levels fast enough. In this case, the version 1.3.1 shows more evident stripes, and the second one is already bigger because it's length it's equal to the square root of double the square of the legth of the first, if you didn't get it, remember the hypotenuse formula on right-angled triangles. If you don't want to waste time, trust me: it's way bigger ;

III-The current factories, research modules, power plants etc show no evidence of their owner. The green player will get power plants with red stripes, and that does not make sense. Those stripes would show the player's color, so, the more evident they are, faster you will get to know which enemy (or ally) owns that structure. Then, it is again better that the stripes are more evident;

IV-taking III as an argument, I should say it's not intuitivally correct to make F1 (factory 1, no modules) with no team color, or we would still have the anonymous structure problem. However, we could put some other pattern or shape Indicating to which player the F1 in question belongs.

Post your agree/disagree so I may have something to make a model good enough to fit both demands.
Thank for the attention.

[Zarel]

I always get nervous when I'm just criticizing something like this, like I'm the type of person who criticizes but doesn't make anything of value himself, especially considering I've never made any 3D models myself. So keep in mind that most of what I'm saying is extrapolated from my experience in 2D design, and might not be entirely accurate. Also keep in mind that I'm sincerely trying to help improve your ideas, and not just saying they're bad or anything like that.

Yep, that was what I thought. The version 1.3.1 had more evident stripes, making recognition easier. Although is not quite intuitively correct that two stripes represents the third state, we could consider the following:

I-New player will get the idea of modules easier, by thinking 1 stripe = built "one time", 2 stripes = built "two times", 3 stripes = built "three times"

That's why I like the original design. Makes it really obvious how many modules there are. I'm sorry, but while your designs look nice, they don't make it quite as clear.

II-Veteran players would already know the idea of modules and how many stages are, so they just need something obvious to distinguish levels fast enough. In this case, the version 1.3.1 shows more evident stripes, and the second one is already bigger because it's length it's equal to the square root of double the square of the legth of the first, if you didn't get it, remember the hypotenuse formula on right-angled triangles. If you don't want to waste time, trust me: it's way bigger ;

That's not "way bigger", it's just root 2 (i.e. 1.414) times bigger. Which is not nearly enough for "glance" differentiation. When I said "thick", I meant at least twice as thick as "thin".

III-The current factories, research modules, power plants etc show no evidence of their owner. The green player will get power plants with red stripes, and that does not make sense. Those stripes would show the player's color, so, the more evident they are, faster you will get to know which enemy (or ally) owns that structure. Then, it is again better that the stripes are more evident;

I think we decided sometime ago that new structures would have teamcolors.

IV-taking III as an argument, I should say it's not intuitivally correct to make F1 (factory 1, no modules) with no team color, or we would still have the anonymous structure problem. However, we could put some other pattern or shape Indicating to which player the F1 in question belongs.

Post your agree/disagree so I may have something to make a model good enough to fit both demands.
Thank for the attention.

I'd say we have teamcolored factories.

[Per]

Ah, yes. Team colours on the factory, actually on all structures, would be really nice.

[Olrox]

I always get nervous when I'm just criticizing something like this, like I'm the type of person who criticizes but doesn't make anything of value himself, especially considering I've never made any 3D models myself. So keep in mind that most of what I'm saying is extrapolated from my experience in 2D design, and might not be entirely accurate. Also keep in mind that I'm sincerely trying to help improve your ideas, and not just saying they're bad or anything like that.

Well, I need people who criticise here, so you're absolutely welcome, don't feel censored because you don't make models yourself. Everyone has the right of expression, blah blah blah etc., and people like you use their rights the correct way.
Anyway

The text below applies as a short, off-topic comment, and any responses and quotes should be sent by e-mail if thought needed. Pretty please.
1,414 is currently the difference between a Barret M8A21's .50 caliber and a M-9 Beretta's 9mm. Which gun would you like to get shoot by, if you needed to? xD
-End of off-topic comment-

Getting to the point:

I'll make a model with F1 being represented as before (one thin stripe to represent teamcolor) , F2 with a single, thick stripe, and F3 featuring a thin stripe with a diagonal lined hatch composed of multiple thin stripes, down to the ground. Expect it to come out really soon. If you don't like it any better, I'll do one with cool patterns and some flags too .