Model Weirdness

This is the place for all questions related to modding Starshatter.
Post Reply
cirlin
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 12:11 am

Model Weirdness

Post by cirlin »

I've been having a persistent problem with modeling in Magic. Whenever I make a seperate object and add it to another one the new one shows up through the first object when I pan around in the game (for instance I have missile ports on a ship and when I pan around the outside I'll see the back side of the ports when they are on the far side of the hull).
I thought for a while that it might be because the polygons were intersecting, so I started placing them just above the hull polygons. That seems to help a little, but not much.
Here's a screen shot with the bad areas circled. Any hints would be much appreciated.

Image
Attachments
A1.jpg
A1.jpg (136.42 KiB) Viewed 306 times
se5a
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 11:15 am
Location: NewZealand
Contact:

RE: Model Weirdness

Post by se5a »

thats an interesting one...
cant think of annything other than maybe you have the surface set to transperant or something with the backs of the port faces faceing the wrong way - but if that were the case you would be able to see the starfield behind it also....

on a side note, you can leave holes in the shield.mag to simulate the defencless foward and aft. that being so, is it possable to use 2 or more layers to simulate the wedge???
Mehrunes
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 6:56 am
Contact:

RE: Model Weirdness

Post by Mehrunes »

Are you using 32bit color?
cirlin
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 12:11 am

RE: Model Weirdness

Post by cirlin »

No, I have it set to 1024x768 16 bit. (I'd have it higher, but for some reason the frame rate drops horribly when I switch to the orbit camera. Everything is real smooth in the bridge view and the third person view [F2], but the orbit view really bogs things down. 16 bit helps a lot for that). Should I try 32?

Se5a, yeah I actually have it set up like that. I took a basic oval, straightened the sides so they are vertical (the sidewalls) and then deleted the polygons in the front and back. It's not really perfect yet, since the top is still penetrable and some weapons just go right through the shields anyway (I think the missiles go through but the beams are blocked? I might be wrong. I haven't really gotten into the nitty gritty details yet).
I'm mostly working on getting a full set of ships made at this point. I have everything from a DD to a DN in a working state (I haven't done a BB yet, since only the Peeps have those. I'll probably do that last). It's pretty easy to mass produce these ships since the design is so simple. It's mostly a matter of changing the hull size and weapons placements. :)
User avatar
Pheonix Starflare
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:20 pm
Location: Boston, MA, USA

RE: Model Weirdness

Post by Pheonix Starflare »

looking nice! Far better than my single, feeble attempt at HH modding.
Have you gotten the x-ray torps to work correctly? I never could.

The 32-bit color might fix your missile port problem as it uses a better z-buffer, and that looks like it might be your problem.
"An optimist sees a glass half full, a pessimist sees a glass half empty and an engineer sees a glass thats twice as big as it has to be."

"What do you get when you cross a chicken and and elephant? Chicken elephant sine(theta)"
se5a
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 11:15 am
Location: NewZealand
Contact:

RE: Model Weirdness

Post by se5a »

I thought the hammerheads were a little more square than that. the back sides where they join onto the hull from the pictuures I have are flat, not round. check out ashes of victory, it also has the minotor design (which has even squareer hammerheads) the LACs also shows the missile pods, and ghost rider missiles.
cirlin
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 12:11 am

RE: Model Weirdness

Post by cirlin »

There's always been a kind of weird ambiguity about the shape of the hammerheads. The front cover pictures are very definite about the shape being a strong, squarish shape (when they don't look like your standard reaction-engine based sci-fi ships with no similarity whatsoever to the books descriptions :), and so it the schematic of the Minotaur, but the Hull comparison chart and harrington class schematics from Ashes of Victory looked a lot more like cylinders the same shape all around. That's how they always looked to my eye, and frankly I just liked the looked better so decided to run with it. I think it's a much more elegant shape. But I also realize it's up for debate. We'll just have to wait for a movie/mini-series to see for sure (or a game I guess). :)

Pheonix- I tried the 32-bit setting, and it does seem to help, but the frame rate drops to the point where the F3 view is nearly unusable. And since I'll need to fight these ships almost exclusively from that view I pretty much need it. Poop. I can't think of a better catch-22 ;)
I haven't tried making any missiles yet, I'm still getting the ship thing down, but I have seen from the old forums that it's possible to create something like that. I'll hopefully get to it sometime.
Mehrunes
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 6:56 am
Contact:

RE: Model Weirdness

Post by Mehrunes »

Here's a 7 year old post by David Weber containing a brief description of the design of ships in the Honorverse. I almost couldn't find it again, so I'm copying the whole thing here to keep it from being lost to the whims of the internet. :)
Honor Harrington ship design



All right, Guys (in the best non-sexist, gender nonspecific sense, of course.)

I realize that we've been talking a lot about black holes, singularities, and event horizons here lately, but I'd like to get back to an earlier point in the thread when people were talking about hull forms and etc., for HH's universe's warships and/or freighters. Bearing in mind that my talents like in the verbal skills area, not the graphic (else I were an artist, not a writer), I will do my humble best to Reveal All (or at least a goodly portion of it) by giving you a somewhat more detailed description of HMS Nike than appeared in The Short Victorious War or Field of Dishonor (since, after all, the exact hull form of the vessel never became especially important to events in either novel).

To begin, assume a cylinder 1,630.2 meters long and 206.25 meters in diameter. Put said cylinder in a lathe, kick that puppy on, and lay a chisel to it. Beginning at a point 163 meters from either end, cut a groove 41.25 meters deep into the cylinder (that is, the cylinder diameter at the deepest point of the groove will be approximately 121 meters). This is the impeller ring, and is about 10 meters wide. (It would be narrower on a smaller ship; wider on an SD.)

Leaving the cylinder ends alone for the moment, cut a straight taper from the aft edge of the forward impeller ring (173 meters from the end of the cylinder) to a point 540 meters from the extreme forward end of the cylinder. In the course of this taper, you will go from a diameter of 121 meters to the original full diameter of 206.25 meters. Then cut precisely the same taper working forward from the forward edge of the after impeller to a point 540 meters from the extreme after end of the cylinder. Finally, go back to the "full-beam" midsection and "flatten" it into a more oval form with a maximum depth of only 185 meters but a beam of 206.25 meters, and you have the rough form of the main body of the vessel.

Next go back to the ends forward and aft of the two impeller rings. (Both of these are going to have the same form when we're done, so we'll deal only with the forward end for simplicity's sake.) Move forward approximately 81 meters from the forward edge of the forward impeller ring. The portion of the original cylinder between this point and the impeller ring will retain its full original width [which, for those of you who haven't already deduced it, is the extreme beam of the vessel ;-)]. Forward of that point, the "hammerhead" will taper vertically (uniform taper, top and bottom) in a flattened wedge shape squeezing down to a final "depth" of approximately 60 meters, where it ends in a flat, perpendicular face 60 meters deep and 60 meters wide. The sides of the hammerhead cut inward on an arc from the 81 meter point to meet the side edges of the bow's vertical face.

Nike's broadside weapons are located on two decks. Unlike Peep ships, which tend to segregate missile and energy weapons to simplify magazine, ammo handling, and power run considerations, the RMN intersperses missile tubes and energy weapons in order to keep a single lucky hit from taking out all (or at least a large percentage) of any one type of weapon. Accordingly, Nike's upper deck is armed as follows:



M-M-L-M-L-M-G-M-G-M-M-G-M-G-M-G-M-L-M-L-M-M

and her lower deck is armed:

M-M-L-M-L-M-G-M-G-M-G-M-G-M-G-M-L-M-L-M-M




where M=Missile Tube, L=Laser, and G=Graser. (The missing missile tube on the lower deck was ommitted to provide additional boat bay space for a flagship.) The chase armament (bow and stern) consists of a single laser in the center of the bow's face, flanked by a pair of grasers. The missile tubes are arranged in vertical pairs, one on each side of the bow in the curved face of the hammerhead. The forward gravitic array is located in the center of the tapered slope to the bow's face, with a pair of phased array radars located aft of it at the upper "corners" of the taper. Each radar array is accompanied by a lidar installation, and the ventral side of the hammerhead carries the same instrumentation.

The main broadside gravitic arrays (the largest arrays on the entire vessel) are located at the exact midpoint of the hull on either side, equidistant (vertically) between the two main weapons decks. The ship also mounts two energy torpedo launchers, which are located one each just aft and just forward of the gravitic array. The ship is well provided with radar and lidar on the broadside, with paired arrays located at the upper curve of the hull (that is, above and below the armed decks, respectively) and approximately 525 meters from the extreme bow to the midpoint of the radar arrays.

Boat bays are traditionally cut into the "belly" of the ship, although a few classes with dorsal boat bays have been built by the RMN in the past. Nike, however, adheres to the traditional practice and mounts most of her com lasers and a few secondary sensor arrays along the "roof" of the hull.

Anti-missile point defense laser clusters are mounted on a separate deck which is not normally considered a "weapons" deck, since its function is purely defensive. In Nike's case, this deck carries a total of 31 individual laser clusters in each broadside. Counter-missiles are launched both from from standard missile tubes and from smaller tubes (12 in each broadside) along the upper "turn of the hull" as it flattens. Counter-missiles are much smaller than ship-killer weapons, however, and those fired from a ship's main tubes are usually launched in cannisters containing from 3 to 4 missiles each (the latest capital ship missile tubes can handle 5-missile cannisters). In some lighter classes, there are no dedicated missile-defense launchers at all and all counter-missiles are fired from the main tubes.

ECM emitters and similar systems are mounted wherever function demands and space availability permits, and are extremely vulnerable to being ripped up and moved in the course of a refit. Personnel locks and small craft auxilliary docking ports are also located at intervals over the entire hull of the vessel, although RMN ships normally include far fewer such locks and ports than Peep designs do.

The major difference between ships of the wall and BCs, CAs, and lighter units is that the big boys' hull midbodies tend to have more cylindrical and less flattened cross-sections. Their design parameters emphasize filling out the maximum possible amount of hull volume, whereas the lighter combatants shave volume to save mass and achieve marginal acceleration improvements from a given impeller strength. Ships of the wall are intended to carry the maximum possible armor and weapons loads, and they accept a certain slow-footedness as the price tag for doing so. The main difference between most freighters and warships is that, since freighters have no need for chase armament, their hulls do not normally flare back out to the maximum beam ahead and astern of the impeller rings. Instead, bulk carriers tend to have blunt, flat ends with huge cargo doors, or else to use the space ahead and astern of the rings as hangar space for heavy-lift cargo shuttles.

The impeller rings of any military starship mount a total of 24 nodes: 8 alpha nodes and 16 beta nodes. The alpha nodes are mounted at 0, 45, 90, 135, 180, 225, 270, and 315 degrees. The beta nodes are mounted every 15 degrees between the alpha nodes. In terms of size, an alpha node is about three times as large and massive as a beta node; in terms of the generator support required, the difference is more like six times as great, but a beta node provides about half as much power to a standard impeller wedge as an alpha node does. Thus each alpha node provides about 6.25% of a wedge's full power and each beta node provides about 3.13%, so that the alphas and betas as groups each provide 50% of the whole. (Actually, those values are halved for the full power of the wedge, since both impeller rings combine in a full-strength wedge.) The 8 alpha nodes, however, suck up as much mass as 48 beta nodes would, which is the reason beta nodes are used. It is the alpha nodes which contain the Warshawski sail components, though, and a ship cannot generate a Warshawski sail without at least 8 of them. It is possible to run a node at greater than 100% of rated capacity under emergency conditions in order to get back some of the power lost when other nodes are knocked out by combat damage, but this is a risky procedure and not one to be undertaken lightly. Freighters may sometimes carry fewer beta nodes, or even none at all. It is extremely uncommon for a ship to mount no beta nodes, but it is not unheard of, either, since cargo carriers seldom carry the inertial compensators to permit them to make full use of a "full powered" wedge, anyway.

Obviously, the big difference(s) between LACs and hyper-capable ships is that the former do not have Warshawski sails (or alpha nodes) and hyper generators. Omitting these two items allows a tremendous savings in internal volume which can then be used for other things, like additional weapons. In addition, the usual LAC has a crew of no more than 16-25 men and women and vastly lower life support requirements than even a destroyer with a company of 300-350, much less a ship like Nike with a company of over 2,100.

For those of you who have been asking, the endurance of the average LAC is on the order of 60 days, and the primary limiting factor is reactor mass for its fusion plants. (However, that particular limiting factor is about to change due to something else Those Sneaky Graysons have been up to. <g>) Reactor mass is also the primary limiting factor on the endurance of larger ships, but they do not require their onboard plants when riding a grav wave (see the appendices to the new anthology) so they actually increase their endurance by spending more time making hyper voyages. Endurances vary widely from design to design even within a given general class (for example, Nike has a designed n-space endurance of approximately 130 days between refuellings because the RMN wants its BCs to be long-legged and have good time on station [or, conversely, good time raiding someone else's station]; the Peeps' Sultan-class has a designed n-space endurance of only 95 days between refuelings, because their designers expected their BCs to operate in conjunction with the main fleet and chose to trade fuel mass for additional magazine space. The newer Peep CA and BC classes have much longer logistical legs than the Sultans, however.)

For their sizes, DDs and CLs have the most "bunker" space of all, but the much greater mass of DNs and SDs mean that ships of the wall have much greater absolute bunkerage despite the fact that they dedicate much less of their total hull volume to providing it. In an emergency, lighter units can refuel from a capital ship "mother ship," but every task group or task force dispatched for operations outside logistical support range of a Fleet base is accompanied by a Fleet Train containing tankers and (usually) ammunition colliers and repair ships and (frequently) accompanied by a dedicated hospital ship, as well. (Under the "Rules of War" which existed prior to the Havenite Wars, these support elements were immune from attack, but that particular gentleman's agreement went out the airlock as soon as the RMN and the People's Navy realized they were fighting one another for their very survival, so it has become customary to provide powerful escorts for the Fleet Train whenever possible.)

Planets with local defense fleets built solely or almost solely around LACs also tend to build a "tender" class of LAC--indistinguishable in terms of mass, acceleration rate, speed, etc., from their warships but basically nothing but huge, mobile gas tanks which serve as tankers for their armed sisters. With such units to support it, a LAC-oriented navy can cover an amazing amount of ground for an equally amazing period of time. Of course, whether or not a LAC wants to encounter an Op Force SD is another matter entirely.

There!

Now, I ask you all to remember that it's late as I type this and that my proofreading may have come up short in a place or two. In other words, there could be Errors! In addition, I remind you (modestly, of course) that I am God in this universe, and that I may be overtaken by some wild impulse to change the laws of physics, in which case all my naval engineers are going to have to go back and design changes into their ships. But there have been enough questions out there, that I decided I would go ahead and put this additional information out there for you.

Hope you enjoy it.

Ciao,

David
User avatar
TheDeadlyShoe
Posts: 549
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 3:06 pm

RE: Model Weirdness

Post by TheDeadlyShoe »

I thought over Honor Harrington ships a while ago, mainly as to how they relate to StarShatter. I never actually did anything...Some parts are just plain impossible ( Ie, missiles that go to good attack angles), but the best way to do the shields is to make them capacitor based and invincible for all practical reasons... Then, place holes in the shield depending on the location. Broadside should have holes sprinkled liberally. top and bottom should be impenetrable. Front and Back should both be open. Te ships should have fairly slow roll, turning, etc rates, very slow, particularly roll.

They should be smaller than standard SS ships, in general.
@TheDeadlyShoe> Unless, say, you could make black holes at will.
@Razeam> I can do that but I don't want to.
Post Reply

Return to “Starshatter Modding Forum”