View Full Version : Why doesn't SH4 have planes like this ?
FIREWALL
03-25-08, 04:26 PM
GWX 1.04 Developmental Sneak Peak - AIRCRAFT GALORE!!! (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=123357) < click
Ducimus
03-25-08, 04:33 PM
Cause no modder with 3d modeling knowledge has stepped up to the plate. And besides, how many aircraft type did the japs acutally use? (honest question) On top of that, most people seem to want to NOT see aircraft. :lol:
Whats really needed is japanese warships and various escorts, but again where back to lack of modders with 3d modeling know how. if i knew how, id try, but ive got enough to chew on as it is already.
FIREWALL
03-25-08, 04:49 PM
I see what you mean. I can never see them up close like in SH3 anyways.
While your here can you give me link to latest TMO & RSRD that doesn't use 1.5 ADDON ? I tried the ones I thought were right and had CTD.
I don't have addon and don't plan anytime soon to get it.
Thx for makeing the best Supermod for SH4. :up: And thx for any help to get me up and running. SH4 sucks without TMO.:yep:
GWX 1.04 Developmental Sneak Peak - AIRCRAFT GALORE!!! (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=123357) < click
While we're on the subject, let me dredge up an old thread I started: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=127608 I still would love to see this AC modded in the game. The basic model is there(B-24). :yep:
FIREWALL
03-25-08, 05:03 PM
Nice pic Fish40. :yep:
I'd like to see a Corsair. They were in the Pacific too.
Nice pic Fish40. :yep:
I'd like to see a Corsair. They were in the Pacific too.
Roger that:up: Black Sheep Squadron!:yep:
DavyJonesFootlocker
03-26-08, 08:05 AM
Hey, I'm a modeling student you know. I did a few aircraft using Lightwave and 3DS Max. Never tried naval stuff. If I can get accurate dimensions and decent three-way view blueprints I can do something.
AkbarGulag
03-26-08, 08:30 AM
A large number of the planes on that page are already in an IO theatre mod under construction.
They had not been added for two reasons (3 if you take Duci's reason also)
1. Allied Planes are irrelevant to a PTO skipper. You generally are no where near a friendly air base.
2. The Japanese have limited types of aircraft of any relevance to the pacific theatre as far as sub skippers are concerned.
The main trend in air mods for the PTO has been relevance. Even Lurker_hlb3 altered his air layer recently. If you look at RSRD you may even see a few that are at that link.
A huge number of those planes will soon be highly apparent in SH4. The Hudson, PBY's, Sunderlands, LPV1's and 2's, RAF coastal command bombers, P13's and a host of other aircraft. They are already flying around on a number of peoples rigs.
A 3D modeller would definately improve the situation. The aircraft in that link have a lot more skin work.
linerkiller
03-26-08, 08:38 AM
Nice pic Fish40. :yep:
I'd like to see a Corsair. They were in the Pacific too.A really needed jap aircraft is the "Jake". It was a slightly modified Kate provided with floats.
Widely used as scout plane by cruiser and battleship, it was also an excellent ASW.
These H8k and H6k have really bored me:down:
FIREWALL
03-26-08, 02:03 PM
Just curious but when in SH3 GWX2 or plain when WO says "plane spotted" and you click > you get to see plane.
In SH4 no matter modded or not, clicking > as above you don't get to see plane.
Anyone know why ?
Well it was me what done most of the plane models in GWX 2.0 :p
It will happen for SH4 too, give it some time....
The current US air roster in Sh4 does NO justice to the U.S.A.F or U.S.N.
Avro Lancaster - British
Brewster Buffalo - Australian
Meh!
But the Japanese planes are well represented though.
The Vaught F4U Corsair request has been noted, I love that plane too :up:
Ducimus
03-26-08, 02:12 PM
1. Allied Planes are irrelevant to a PTO skipper. You generally are no where near a friendly air base.
This is THE reason why i've never bothered with changing allied aircraft models or names in TM. I could always borrow planes from Sh3, but, what would be the point? Only time you might see an allied aircraft, is during a major battle if your lucky enough to be at the right place at the right time - which isnt very often.
FIREWALL
03-26-08, 02:19 PM
Just curious but when in SH3 GWX2 or plain when WO says "plane spotted" and you click > you get to see plane.
In SH4 no matter modded or not, clicking > as above you don't get to see plane.
Anyone know why ?
bump
The likely US planes have already been ported in, actually. B-24 (PB4Y-1), PBY, TBF, etc.
Fighters? What would be the point, they were not used as ASW platforms for the most part. I guess if you don't have radar you might see them, but I always pull the plug and crash dive the moment a plane is spotted, myself.
The key is the whole airstike paradigm.
You have an airbase, and it is given X planes of type A, Y planes of type B, and so forth. That's fine. It then has a circle for each plane based upon the range, and uses some algorythm to divide the number of planes by the area of the circle to get a chance of an aircraft interaction.
So you add fighters to an airbase, and you see fighters out at 1/2 their theoretical max range (nevermind that the stock planes are grossly overloaded). In RL, you would simply NEVER see them out there, and certainly not the way the game always generates them---1 plane, or 2.
That is a pet peeve of mine. Real maritime patrol planes would ONLY be seen one at a time, and other planes would be seen at the very least in appropriate flights (4 planes for all but the japanese who would have 3). Japanese fighters would not be see far away, period, because even the ones that didn't rip out the radios still had the crappy radios that didn;t work (part of the reason they ripped them out).
Overall, air is dealt with pretty poorly, so adding new planes is sort of a waste of time, IMO.
ONe more issue with air. Say you have fighters or other planes that strafe your sub. This should be A BAD THING. It isn't, however, because the crew on deck is virtually invulnerable to small arms fire, even 20 and 40mm cannon until it literally destroys the section they "live" in. I tried hard to make 20mm effective for sweeping the decks, but aside from a small % hull damage per X hits, it does absolutely nothing to the crew.
Fighting planes is just so unrealistic for so many reasons that the only way to preserve immersion is to dive.
tater
FIREWALL
03-26-08, 02:49 PM
Just curious but when in SH3 GWX2 or plain when WO says "plane spotted" and you click > you get to see plane.
In SH4 no matter modded or not, clicking > as above you don't get to see plane.
Anyone know why ?
bumpAsking third time.:p
I don't understand what you mean about the >.
There is some magical way to see a plane besides finding it with your binos?
Does it let you see what the watch sees or something?
Ducimus
03-26-08, 03:24 PM
He wants to see a closeup view of planes with the next/previous unit cam like in Sh3.
Ah, never used that. Might be useful for testing plane loadouts back when I was doing that, Instead I flew them low over my sub, lol. In play? Meh.
FIREWALL
03-26-08, 03:36 PM
He wants to see a closeup view of planes with the next/previous unit cam like in Sh3.
Bingo:up: That's all I want to know and why it's lacking in SH4.
Ducimus
03-26-08, 03:58 PM
Havent looked at it. You could see if the .cam file for any given plane type has anything to do with it. Run a file comparsion between a plane in SH3 and in Sh4 and see if you can spot a controller or node thats in one, but not the other.
Failing that, it might be in the camera.act file (?), in which case theres nothing you can do about it.
Doolittle81
03-26-08, 05:43 PM
Why doesn't SH4 have planes like this ?
Unfortunately, those SH3 aircraft and the SH4 aircraft all look like like cheap balsa wood models from the 1940's...not even up to the standard of plastic models of the 1950's...imho. Very much far behind the state-of-art computer graphics for aircraft.
Here below is an UBI/Maddox 1C IL2-ForgottenBattles-1946 Zero (essentially only the graphic quality of a 2001 game engine) compared to the SH4 (2006 game engine) version of a Zero:
http://members.cox.net/doolittle80/ZeroComparisonSH4vsIL2number2.jpg
I really woudn't want to have a convenient way to Look at the aircraft in SH4 up close...it would destroy the immersion/reality of the outstanding graphics of SH4 subs, ships, and water... And I won't even start on the subject of the laughable Flight modelling/physics displayed by SH4 aircraft: impossible, at least highly improbable, manuevers which look a lot like Arcade-machines of the 1960's...pre-computer age. Swooping Betty bombers flying like the Games Seagulls...
True, seeing that it's a single engined plane making a run is enough. They do behave pretty horribly, better to see the inside of the sub instead :D
The current US air roster in Sh4 does NO justice to the U.S.A.F or U.S.N.
Avro Lancaster - British
Brewster Buffalo - Australian
Meh!
But the Japanese planes are well represented though.
The Buffalo was also used by the Dutch and the British forces in the opening stages of the PTO war, but they were pretty quickly wiped out. In American hands they didn't last past the Battle of Midway (and even then, from the war's beginning they weren't used on carriers any more, having been relegated to the USMC).
You can blame the lack of many proper aircraft on Il-2, actually. Il-2 put the manufacturer names on the Pacific Fighters box without ©, ™, or ® (dunno what was needed where, that's what lawyers are for). They DID, however, put a © at the bottom saying everything on the box was © Ubi, etc, all rights reserved. As a result, they had to do Grumman's bidding, or recall the lot plus pay damages since they in effect claimed ownership of the Grumman name by doing that.
tater
AkbarGulag
03-26-08, 11:42 PM
In SH4 no matter modded or not, clicking > as above you don't get to see plane.
Anyone know why ?
I have my suspicions on this. And that is the stock game camera has a 'height' limit. So trying to click on 'next' target when it is a plane high in the sky, the camera would not go to it regardless. Changeing to a modified camera, like that from ROW, then trying this again may or may not reveal this.
Doolittle81
03-27-08, 02:34 PM
You can blame the lack of many proper aircraft on Il-2, actually. Il-2 put the manufacturer names on the Pacific Fighters box without ©, ™, or ® (dunno what was needed where, that's what lawyers are for). They DID, however, put a © at the bottom saying everything on the box was © Ubi, etc, all rights reserved. As a result, they had to do Grumman's bidding, or recall the lot plus pay damages since they in effect claimed ownership of the Grumman name by doing that.
tater
Not really. First, the (supposed, never confirmed) copyright matter concerned only Grumman aircraft. Only one of the aircraft in the first post of this thread (the linked post) was made by Grumman. The poor modeling/skinning of all the other aircraft are simply second rate, which has nothing to do with any copyright issue...it's just a matter of 3D modeling, polygon count, all that technical stuff (which I don't understand). I mean, look at the cockpit canopies!!!! Reminiscent of balsa wood models of the 1940's, before plastic (see-thru) canopies on plastic models by Revell, etc.
I don't have SH3, but I see that the point is that some SH3 MODders (GWX??) improved those ridiculous looking Original SH3 aircraft. Those GWX (?) modded acft look much better, but definitely still not up to IL2 standards or what should be possible in 2008 graphics...in any game.
DavyJonesFootlocker
03-27-08, 02:47 PM
You have to understand that the low poly look of the SH4 planes means a decent framerate. Any high-poly count planes would mean you'll need a Super Cray II computer to run the sim. I modeled a high-poly count aircraft (a Fokker D.VII) and used it in an animated piece. It took over 4 hours to render the amount of frames.
gimpy117
03-27-08, 03:32 PM
im just mad about how they handle, H8K search planes are turning on a dime flipping sideways and pulling up faster then some fighters could.
You have to understand that the low poly look of the SH4 planes means a decent framerate. Any high-poly count planes would mean you'll need a Super Cray II computer to run the sim. I modeled a high-poly count aircraft (a Fokker D.VII) and used it in an animated piece. It took over 4 hours to render the amount of frames.
'High-poly' is a relative term. Making the wings a bit more rounded and the canopies transparent on SH4's aircraft isn't going to bring the game to its knees.
The engine can handle higher poly aircraft than whats currently on offer, the same was true of the SH3 engine too, I agree with LukeFF -you could add another 1000-2000 polys to the filght models with out any detremental effects to performance. Remember that the player subs in Sh4 are over 100,000 polys.
Personally, I think the current SH4 planes (bar the awful looking sunderland) are adaquate in terms of asthetics, this isnt a flight sim and I think its unrealistic to make those sort of comparisons.
I'm more frustrated with the lack of variety and poor choices to represent the Allied airforces, true - as a U.S skipper its not a biggie, but now that we have U-boats in the mix it makes it more of a problem (and whos to say that playable IJN boats wont be modded in further down the line.)
Like every aspect of the sim some care more about historically acurate aircraft more than others, in the case of SH3 it was really rather essential that improvemts were made, as aircraft were responsible for almost half of all Uboat losses.
You have to understand that the low poly look of the SH4 planes means a decent framerate. Any high-poly count planes would mean you'll need a Super Cray II computer to run the sim. I modeled a high-poly count aircraft (a Fokker D.VII) and used it in an animated piece. It took over 4 hours to render the amount of frames.
You cant really compare a rendered animation sequence with real time 3d, If you render your own animation using one of the SH4 aircraft models it will still take a long time compared to viewing it the game engine.
This type of rendering dosent actually involve much 3d activity, it simply takes loads of high quality 2d snap shots of the scene and plays them back at the rate of 30 or so frames per second.
Its one of the reasons that your graphics card does virtually nothing when rendering an animation from a 3d program, its mostly handelled by CPU and RAM.
Here below is an UBI/Maddox 1C IL2-ForgottenBattles-1946 Zero (essentially only the graphic quality of a 2001 game engine) compared to the SH4 (2006 game engine) version of a Zero:
Just to make it look even sadder, the engine for IL2 was well underway as early as ´98. :p
danlisa
03-28-08, 05:29 AM
You can't compare a aircraft model from a flight sim with that from a sub sim, regardless of the year the graphics engine was built. To be an accurate comparison, compare IL2's ships/u-boat with those from SH4.;) Each genre will excel in the area that defines that game.
Personally, I don't care how the aircraft look in a sub sim. They are there to be a nuisance or aid to sub operations, nothing more.
You can't compare a aircraft model from a flight sim with that from a sub sim, regardless of the year the graphics engine was built. To be an accurate comparison, compare IL2's ships/u-boat with those from SH4.;) Each genre will excel in the area that defines that game.
Personally, I don't care how the aircraft look in a sub sim. They are there to be a nuisance or aid to sub operations, nothing more.
True that... atleast until BoB:SoW is released. ;)
EDIT: Tho, I must say, by today's standards, the plane models are abit old-ish in SHIV.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.