Jump to content

Julhelm

+MODDER
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1,877

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Everything posted by Julhelm

  1. No idea. It works for me?

  2. US Navy Fires Off Its New Weaponized Railgun

    Julhelm replied to FastCargo's topic in CombatACE News

    Why would you need to surface? Hold at periscope depth and extend the gun barrel like a mast to broach.

  3. Ground Branch Kickstarter

    Julhelm posted a topic in The Pub

    Fancy a real tactical shooter developed by some of the original Rainbow 6, Rogue Spear and Ghost Recon devs and co-designed by real special forces operators? Well, here's your chance to get one:
  4. Convert the detail texture into a 2x2px texture and it'll give it that checkerboard quality of the good old games.

  5. US Navy Fires Off Its New Weaponized Railgun

    Julhelm replied to FastCargo's topic in CombatACE News

    Why would you place a system like this on a large, vulnerable surface ship? Turn it into a module akin to the AGS that can fit in the tubes of a Trident sub, instead.
  6. I always thought the small deck carriers didn't operate F-14 because not enough F-14's were built to replace all the F-4s. IIRC the F-111B did its carrier quals on the small deck carrier.
  7. It had a lower approach speed compared to the Tomcat.
  8. Anyone notice that Convair/GD always used VF-161 markings in their artist's impressions?

  9. Which (Non-Sims) are you playing?

    Julhelm replied to UK_Widowmaker's topic in The Pub

    Dave, where do you usually play BF3? I'm up for a game. Could be fun.

  10. A/F-24 Shadowcat

    Julhelm posted a file in What If Hangar

    Version

    1,507 downloads

    A/F-24 Shadowcat (AFX) for Strike Fighters 2 ---------------------------------------------- Preface: After making the first attempt at modelling this concept, which ended up as the not-very-accurate F-24 Shadowcat for WOI, I decided to go back and, armed with a lot more research material and better workflow, redo the entire thing from the ground up as accurate as is possible with unbuilt concepts. It originally was to feature a new cockpit based on that of the A-12 Avenger II, but this turned out to look quite ugly ingame. I eventually found out that the real thing was to use cockpit displays from the F-22 for sakes of commonality, so I decided I might as well build a straight-down navalized F-22 cockpit for which a whole lot more reference material is available. ---------------------------------------------- Known Issues: The cockpit isn't 100% complete. I thought it was better to release something that's 99% complete and fix it later which I will as it was always part of the plan to adapt the cockpit back into a straight F-22 pit. For some reason all of your wingmen except #2 will tip over and crash on the taxiway. No idea why this happens. They all start fine from the carrier though. ---------------------------------------------- Credits: Models & textures by Julhelm FM by Fubar512 Avionics by Jat As usual, these files may not be used in payware or otherwise tampered with and reposted without my consent which you may request at NilsD at bredband dot net. This message will self destruct in five seconds.
  11. I want to know how he can afford to start a completely new productline with new tech etc when he's always been so dirt poor that he couldn't afford to implement features we've asked for for years like air to air refuelling.
  12. Those look good but you should be adding some railings to them. And while your textures now have proper shading, they still lack highlights which you have to work in. Then they'll look really good.
  13. It really is stupid, this stating of "we don't do sims". ORLY?
  14. lol Stary. Keep hoping. Judging from the latest posts TK seems more intent on further pissing on his core audience.
  15. At the very least, he should fix the damned terrain. Seriously. IcelandNA is a riot.
  16. Well said Diego. Unfortunately, I think the whole moving to tablets thing is a major miscalculation on the part of TK. He's probably looked at X-Plane and wants a piece of the pie, but X-Plane has a substantially bigger fanbase and marketing.
  17. File Name: F-22 Cockpit File Submitter: Julhelm File Submitted: 13 April 2012 File Category: SF2 Series Add On Cockpits F-22 Cockpit for Strike Fighters 2 ---------------------------------------------- Since the AFX cockpit essentially was an F-22 cockpit with changes, I decided to make a proper F-22 pit and finally got around to doing so. Also wanted to capitalize on latest developments. You'll see. ---------------------------------------------- Installation: Drop the files into your F-22 folder. ---------------------------------------------- Known Issues: The weapons display indicator is retarded and doesn't accurately count down the AAMRAM's. I tried various ways but none would work to my satisfaction. Wing stations are not supported on the weapons display. If there is sufficient demand I could add them back but it's a handful. ---------------------------------------------- Credits: Models & textures by Julhelm As usual, these files may not be used in payware or otherwise tampered with and reposted without my consent which you may request at NilsD at bredband dot net. This message will self destruct in five seconds. Click here to download this file
  18. I'm just going by what I see on that screenshot Eric posted on page 63. Maybe it looks OK in max and photoshop but it looks overall too uniformly mid/dark grey in ingame screenshots and not dark grey/light grey like the real cockpit. And if you sketchup model shows them as on the same plane, look again at the photos I just attached. You can clearly see the bottom instruments are at least 2 inches deeper compared to the front of the MFD.
  19. Also, don't know if you've noticed, but in the real cockpit, the MFD's and spin/jettison panels protrude out quite a bit further than you've modelled them. This too could be a reason why it kind of lacks the depth it should have? If you bake AO the shading won't be correct in that case. I've made the same mistake before. It's easy if you look at pilot POV photos too much :) Check how Aeyes placed them, and the pics I'm attaching below:
  20. Over 30? Damn. I have to say, one huge problem I tend to run into when working with lots of different textures on the same model is keeping levels the same. So I tend to bunch stuff together on 1024 atlases if I can. How many of those 30 are different kinds of dials and digits tho? Glass cockpits, lol... Also remember, when I say contrast I'm talking about the overall look of the complete model. It's not uncommon to have textures that look good in Photoshop but where the final model is less than the sum of its parts, know what I'm sayin'? I'll save out some of my custom actions and post them here in a bit, btw.
  21. Ok, but that means you probably still have default lighting on. Try opening up the environment menu with "8" and set ambient to full white. Then you can view your textures unlit in the viewport, which is much much better than using the renderer. My textures literally improved tenfold once I stopped using the renderer for previewing. You can also use dx shaders in the viewport to preview spec and bump as they will look ingame. But to work diffuse textures the method I described is foolproof. Yeah, make the dark grey parts like MFD boxes darker and make the light grey panels lighter. If you keep things in layers it should be a 5 second job. Ironically, most of the TW pits look better too once you do this :) I don't think I've ever used autocontrast in PS. I either use brightness/contrast in legacy mode, levels or curves. Yeah I see something but it looks like it is kinda blurry. It doesn't hurt to run the sharpen filter a few times. Also you can get some interesting effects by using the blending modes "darken", "darker color" or "lighten". Ingame you'll want to have sharp, crisp textures and there's really no need to go above 1024 res for this. I actually have another custom PS action I use to give textures that extra crispiness. Most of the time people are probably going to be looking from the default F1 view anyway so optimize your stuff for that :)
  22. Is that with skylights and stuff? You really shouldn't be taking renders to check your textures. Do it in-engine or bump the ambient lighting up to 1.0. Anyway, what's really apparent in your render if you compare to his cockpit or photos of real cockpits is that you have much less contrast in yours. The dark greys are too light and the light grey panels are too dark, so it all kind of looks washed out. Increase the overall contrast of the cockpit instead and it will have more depth ingame. And yeah, you really should use photo texture overlays instead of relying on just brushwork. Even the TW cockpits have subtle photo overlays that add variety to otherwise flat surfaces. The absolutely worst thing you can do is just have a flat color on a surface. Seriously. If you want it, I can share one of my custom photoshop actions I use to derive specular maps from the diffuse. If you increase the contrast like I said and then add spec maps on top of that it'll look really good ingame.
  23. You should bake stuff like the knobs to keep down the polycount. There is really no point in having a single knob have 24 sides. How much time do people spend zoomed in max in the cockpit anyway? I only spent like 30000 on the Convair 201 cockpit and that is roughly equivalent to an F-18 pit. The F-22 pit was only like 12000 or something. And I do think Aeyes's pit looks better than yours, especially in this shot below. Yours is really dark and kinda flat looking while his has a lot more contrast and depth. Basically he has a lot of lit surfaces while you only have some ambient occlusion on yours. So if you give the textures a workover, add some lighting, highlight edges and that it will look really good. Don't be fooled thinking that polygon resolution is everything. I can point you to several sim pits that are ridiculously highpoly yet look like crap simply because no attention was spent on the textures. A good texture can make a low-poly model look really good, but high-poly model can never make poor texture look good.
  24. I wouldn't rush the pit if I were you. It looks good but obviously a lot of polish remains. TBH you should do hipolys for the buttons and MFD frames and they'll look much better. Or you could bevel those edges but meh, polycount. Better bake normalmaps for that tbh. Don't be afraid to put in some wear, either. IMHO people obsess way too much about placing correct labels according to NATOPS and stuff like that rather than just trying to make things look real. You should try and match Aeyes's F-18 pit for FF5, which looks really good: http://www.cockpits.net/website/PRODGAL_F18CWIDE.html HAWX2 and AC6 has some nicely textured pits you can look at, too.
  25. The bottom part is because you have flat faces and a normalmap and it's basically flickering because it can't calculate the surface normal on those faces. As for the bake, I dunno, the scanline renderer doesn't handle intersecting geometry so well so I just tend to work around it. Sometimes I paint over with a black brush if I have to.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..

  I accept