17 replies to this topic

[IBtheSarge]

Owing to some of the newer features of FSDS3, I have been going through my original API/SCA objects (military and civilian) and -- where possible -- converting them to the MDL format.  Also, switching from SCASM to the bglcomp_SDK for placement via XML call-out, I needed someplace to test this process as well.  So, I created a private (fictional) airbase with nearly everything on it/in it, that I could think of (and then some ).  As the process has gotten simpler, I even started on some new objects (primarily, revetments).  Here's the initial results of the first placements:

KHSX (Hidden Springs AB, Nevada)

[PiP]

Looks good. But is it any better than Doing it all yourself?

I've found now that I quite like freedom from these programs. Except AFCAD of course. What would we do without our beloved AFCAD

[IBtheSarge]

PiP, on Feb 3 2006, 04:34 PM, said:

Looks good. But is it any better than Doing it all yourself?
I've found now that I quite like freedom from these programs. Except AFCAD of course. What would we do without our beloved AFCAD

I'm still writing my own XML.  Except, with FSDS3 dropping the option to export as API/SCA (SCASM based) and going strictly MDL/BGL format for objects, there's no other option but compiling the LibaryObject XML and placement XML files with bglcomp_SDK.  The flattens and excludes that I write (again, my own XML) of necessity have to be compiled with bglcomp.exe as well, since that is the only convention FS9 recognizes for Flat and Exclude statements.  AFCAD (of course) is still in use to create the airdrome; Lee utilized the bglcomp_SDK conventions for AFCAD to create the BGL file.  And, since creating and keeping track of all the GUIDs for my objects is a pain the , I have gone to Arno Gerretsen's Library Object Creator program; instead of an hour to create a LibraryObject file for 100+ objects, and create different GUIDs for each, Arno's program does the job in less than 2 minutes.  (BTW:  the LibraryObject file for both civilian and military objects I use will be out the end of the month.  There will be a LibObj BGL and XML for those who want to write their own XML code to place them, and also a PDF/BGL LibObj set in Runway 12 and EZ-Scenery formats.)

You SURELY weren't talking about not using FSDS3 to make the objects?    (joking)  I'm pretty good with XML, but not good enough to write the code to make an object and apply the textures.  

[IBtheSarge]

1 revetment object, 90 ft wide x 12 ft high x 4 ft deep, 39 polygons.

From the air, revetments and HAS in-place on the alert ramp:


Big Ugly Fat in the chocks:


Revetments along the west apron edge to protect nearby structures:


(See opening statement above)  41 iterations of that single object, but FS9 only uses resources for ONE set of 39 polygons to display all 41.    

[TechnicolorYawn]

How come they're 39 polys? They just look like a standard box of 12 polys.

Edited by TechnicolorYawn, 04 February 2006 - 05:03 AM.

[IBtheSarge]

TechnicolorYawn, on Feb 4 2006, 06:02 AM, said:

How come they're 39 polys? They just look like a standard box of 12 polys.

Gotta get up close (from the cockpit) to see the vertical reinforcing supports every 10 feet and on the four corners.  A 90-foot run of ARMCO is pretty strong, but there's a few tonnes of dirt and other fill material inside pressing outward against 10-foot runs of rolled steel, bolted together, 12 runs high.  A bit of realism in the construction, I guess.     For FS9 purposes, I probably could get away with a 5-polygon box (bottom deleted); but the RED HORSE in me says that just ain't right.  

[IBtheSarge]

@ TCY -- Man, you are sharp!!!!  Your reply got me thinking; and on closer examination of those revetments, I realized that -- indeed! -- something was wrong.  After wracking my old brain around the door jamb several times, it finally dawned on me -- I had exported the PARTIALLY CONSTRUCTED revetment to MDL; the vertical steel posts had not been added at that stage of construction.  Here's what they're SUPPOSED to look like:









Now, can you imagine what that ramp is going to look like with military AI set up for it?  

[TechnicolorYawn]

Ah!

That looks a lot better

One thing, about halfway down each side, the texture goes from light to dark very suddenly, where it looks like you have the texture tiles twice. It should fix this if you try and get the texture to mirror as it tiles. (I have no idea how you'd go about doing this in FSDS..)

Edited by TechnicolorYawn, 04 February 2006 - 04:57 PM.

[IBtheSarge]

TechnicolorYawn, on Feb 4 2006, 05:53 PM, said:

Ah!

That looks a lot better

One thing, about halfway down each side, the texture goes from light to dark very suddenly, where it looks like you have the texture tiles twice. It should fix this if you try and get the texture to mirror as it tiles. (I have no idea how you'd go about doing this in FSDS..)

          That's the polygon smoothing option .... I thought I turned that off on that object!  Good catch ... just have to reload the object in FSDS3, untic that box, and export again.  (Gotta get my other glasses ..... )

[SargeJr3]

sarge, on Feb 4 2006, 03:01 PM, said:

TechnicolorYawn, on Feb 4 2006, 05:53 PM, said:

Ah!

That looks a lot better

One thing, about halfway down each side, the texture goes from light to dark very suddenly, where it looks like you have the texture tiles twice. It should fix this if you try and get the texture to mirror as it tiles. (I have no idea how you'd go about doing this in FSDS..)

          That's the polygon smoothing option .... I thought I turned that off on that object!  Good catch ... just have to reload the object in FSDS3, untic that box, and export again.  (Gotta get my other glasses ..... )

Which ones, the ones that allow you to see or the ones that keep your mouth full while it exports?

[PiP]

Is there any difference From Scenery MDL's made in GMAX and placed by XML? Is it any easyer to make things?

[IBtheSarge]

scavers, on Feb 4 2006, 06:04 PM, said:

sarge, on Feb 4 2006, 03:01 PM, said:

(Gotta get my other glasses ..... )

Which ones, the ones that allow you to see or the ones that keep your mouth full while it exports?

Second one .... obviously my thought process isn't the same when sober.    

[IBtheSarge]

PiP, on Feb 4 2006, 07:39 PM, said:

Is there any difference From Scenery MDL's made in GMAX and placed by XML? Is it any easyer to make things?

Not from what I've found, PiP .... FSDS3 appears to have adapted itself fully to the _SDK requirements.  In other words, except for some quirks by the FSDS3 authors, it's now the payware equivalent of GMAX.  It does treat polygons differently than GMAX (see previous discussion, another thread, between me and TCY on how each program counts polygons).  But in essence, if you're proficient with GMAX, stay with it unless you absolutely feel the need to spend money to do (basically) the same thing with FSDS3.

(In my opinion) FSDS3 would be okay for anyone NOT proficient with GMAX.  There are no plug-ins required for FSDS3; everything is self-contained inside the program.  You go from nothing to FS-usable export without exiting the program.  If you choose to export as BGL, you can (like GMAX) specify the lat/lon/hdg where the object will appear and just put it in the correct scenery folder.  An MDL is an MDL is an MDL, if it was designed for FS9.  It has to meet the makeMDL_SDK criteria for FS9 to use it, regardless which program made it.

Edited by sarge, 04 February 2006 - 06:57 PM.

[IBtheSarge]

Using Henry Tomkiewicz's made-for-AI C-141B (even managed to get the "SX" tail designator on there, for KHSX), starting to load up AI for the test base:







Working the "trash haulers" for the military cargo ramp, then the "gas passers" for the tanker ramp.  That will take care of the north ramp area, then will work the main and transient ramps, alert ramp, civilian cargo ramp, civilian main ramp, and civilian GA ramp.

Framerate hit holding at minus 0.2 except for some severe real-time weather download.  Six of the C-141B's on the ramp, the Aardvark in view, one C-141B on take-off, and the extensive thunderstorm over the mountains (out of the shot to the left) still gave 17.0 fps ... not bad considering what FS9 was having to display.

[Skydvdan]

Augh, there's no fps in the second shot.  I was hoping to see what kind of hit you get with (8) 141's in the shot, plus buildings and the aardvark.

Edited by Skydvdan, 07 February 2006 - 12:25 PM.

[IBtheSarge]

Skydvdan, on Feb 7 2006, 01:22 PM, said:

Augh, there's no fps in the second shot.  I was hoping to see what kind of hit you get with (8) 141's in the shot, plus buildings and the aardvark.

Just for you, mi amigo!  

And yes, that's 7 of Henry Tomkiewicz's C-141B "trash haulers" plus two of the 10 military warehouses, plus the top of Base Operations and the Control Tower, plus the MAC Terminal, plus the ARRSq hangar, plus the fenceline around the alert ramp (minus the opening at the throat to the taxiway/runway 36L), plus 7 HAS for the fighters at the alert ramp, plus the revetments for the bombers on the alert ramp.  Oh, did I forget to mention the 70,000+ polygon FB-111A?  

System locked at 30 fps, framerate of 22.6 with all of that in view.  

[Skydvdan]

That is awesome!!!

[IBtheSarge]

Then you should like these as well .....

Six of Henry's C-141B's and 4 of his C-130's (FPS = 29.8):


How about half a squadron of Henry's F-16C's? (FPS = 29.8)


With the C-141B's in the background? (FPS = 29.9)

Edited by sarge, 10 February 2006 - 01:04 PM.