Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[just champi]

Hi,  with all respect to Kawaii Killer, I don't see anything wrong with the mapping.
To support markings feature in stock game, some sections of a model are cloned and layered one in top of another, also they are separated as different elements in the 3D model and different materials are assigned to them.
Later in game, Java code controls the building of the mat files that in turn controls what textures are assigned to each layer so it shows the right codes for squadrons, individual aircrafts and different countries.
Textures for markings are tga's with alpha layer for masking the letters and numbers for the codes.
As these parts of the model have no texture assigned to them in the picture, they are seen in black color (in fact there are two cloned layers one in top of another for each side plus one more in the nose left side for the squadron badge)
I think the black effect is the combination of what is called Z-fighting when two or more faces of a mesh are placed at the same plane or very close together so they interfere with each other at rendering, and the fact that there are missing textures for those parts of the model.

Markings and squadron badge parts are mapped to a different texture than standard skin and they use different mapping scale, (they look waay much larger than the other parts) that's why if you see their UV's together they look like a mess.

I have not looked into it in all detail, but for what I've seen so far,
 -Material assigned to test model uses Phong shader with very high values for specular level (400, 999, waaay too much, I think?)
 -orientation of the model is vertical in viewports when imported, (like nose of airplane pointing down through the construction grid) will be better if model is aligned to horizontal grid, (preferible with nose pointing X+ world axe, but even stock models doesn't follow that convention...)
 -Also scale of the model is exported way too small, the model is minuscule, local scale shows 1 in all axes when should be 100.
That been said, I'd like to take the opportunity to give you a big thank you for all the work you have been doing so far, Stainless, my hat's off in admiration.

[Dreamk]

Stainless Hi, I converted the CF_D0.fbx to an OBj file using Autodesk FBX Converter 2013, and imported it in 3dmax. On At first look, the mesh is generally OK (although the smoothing was lost in the process but it's not a problem), without the  phenomenon shown on your post. However by looking element after element, it appears that  you have 2 supplementary overlapping elements on the left side, and one overlapping element (as a matter of fact this element is repeated on itself not one but twice)  that cause the glitch you see - if you remove them the mesh is fine. I re-exported the corrected mesh to obj and converted it to FBX (2013) and also to FBX (2009) formats. Here's the link of these files https://www.mediafire.com/download/9m94kka9ba4ez5x/test.7z

It's true that it is the principle used by the game for overlays but these are first mapped individually then generally slightly moved outside or inside the original element so as not to strictly overlap.



How is the effects viewer progressing? you solved the smoke trail problem?

[Stainless]

How is the effects viewer progressing? you solved the smoke trail problem?

No, I tried a simple system that just created a scaled axis aligned quad and it looks awful. So I am in the process of adding a new type of particle system that uses simple 3D meshes as particles instead of axis aligned quads.

With the FBX issue, I want to be able to export the overlays in the FBX file. I don't want you lot to have to do any work at all to get mods you have already created into my sim, or indeed into Unreal.

Material assigned to test model uses Phong shader with very high values for specular level (400, 999, waaay too much, I think?)

Yes I haven't attempted to re-scale the specular stuff yet. I will need to at some stage.

orientation of the model is vertical in viewports when imported

That's the IL2 coordinate system, it uses a left handed (OpenGL style ) coordinate system whilst most modern editors use the more common right handed coordinate system. I personally hate this, Z forward is the CORRECT way for me 

Also scale of the model is exported way too small, the model is minuscule, local scale shows 1 in all axes when should be 100

Again it comes back to IL2, it uses 1 == 1 meter while most editors use 1 == 1 centimeter

I am sure now that the problem is with textures, but as far as I can see I am creating them correctly.

Within the MSH file we have mesh parts. Mostly these are the main mesh, and any overlays. These use the same vertex pool through out, but use different index lists and UV pools. I have tried to re-create this in the FBX file, and failed by the look of it.

[just champi]

Regarding scale issues, in the info tab within FBX plugin parameters, (the one that opens in 3dsmax when importing a .FBX file), I've seen that file units are set to centimeters (just as you say) while system units are set to meters.
So it's no issue in the end, in the advanced options tab, inside Units parameters, "automatic" can be unchecked and choose the option "File units converted to... centimeters". That fixes and imports the file with the right scale.

There is also a tab called "Geometry" where you can check "smoothing groups" so they are preserved.
Also I'm not sure if it is really needed to offset the markings from the model, as markings mats have an offset property for them to render "on top" of skin texture. But it is sometimes annoying while editing them in 3dsMax because they fight with each other and doesn't look right in the viewports 

Within the MSH file we have mesh parts. Mostly these are the main mesh, and any overlays. These use the same vertex pool through out, but use different index lists and UV pools. I have tried to re-create this in the FBX file, and failed by the look of it.

What I find interesting (I'm using CF_D0 part for the test as in your picture ) is that the model materials are recognized and have its own slot correctly assigned with unique ID, but last material (Overlay7 with ID 8 ) is missing.

ID    original:     test model:   

1    Glass2          Glass2
2    Gloss1D0o   Gloss1D0o
3    Gloss2D0o   Gloss2D0o
4    Matt1D0o   Matt1D0o
5    Overlay1   Overlay1
6    Overlay4   Overlay4
7    Overlay5   Overlay5
8   Overlay7

and even though the test model has the needed group of faces separated as elements, these separated elements themselves doesn't preserve ID's, their original ID are lost and all are assigned to ID 1, so only the first material (and his associated texture) is aplied to the whole model, the others materials and textures are unused.
It can be edited though inside 3dsMax, but seems like this last material and the ID assignaments for elements are missing during the exporting?

orientation of the model is not an issue "per se", can be any, but it makes very time consuming and a bit annoying if you have to rotate all the parts of the model to put them together right, and makes navigate through viewports a nightmare because labelling of viewports doesn't match anymore with orientation of the object (bottom view can be looking at the model from front, and front view is top o the model or whatever) ...and working with local and world coordinates is even more funny...
Anyway, that's a minor issue in the end, preserving original materials ID's seems maybe more important.

[SAS~Ghost129er]

Just wanted to give a shoutout thanks to 'just champi' and 'Dreamk' for their information and in sight into the problem. Never knew about that and also gave me a lot more of an understanding of what that exactly was... Much appreciated. But glad to see the problem's resolved and so (at least I hope so)

[Stainless]

It can be edited though inside 3dsMax, but seems like this last material and the ID assignaments for elements are missing during the exporting?

If you can edit it in 3dsmax and re-export as FBX I can diff the two files and fix the problem.

That would be really useful please.

[just champi]

Not sure if it will be right, it seems so, I've only have touched facegroup assignaments but I haven't worked with FBX format before...
Tell me if something is wrong and I'll try to lok into it.
http://www.filedropper.com/cfd0test1

[Stainless]

Sorry man that was a binary mode FBX, I can't read that.

I'm good, I can read hex for many CPU's, but not for 3d meshes.

[just champi]

ups... 
I hope this one works
http://www.filedropper.com/cfd0test2

[Stainless]

Effect editor

Normal effects look fine ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOjO3QQrHpU

But smoke trail effects look shit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwLhAkxXqEI

By the way, how do you attach videos correctly?

[Cloyd]

Just copy the link, and paste it in directly. No need to use the "insert hyperlink" button.

[Stainless]

Thanks man, now people can easily see how shit the smoke trail is.....