I mean my question from 21. site was ignored AGAIN

...


I guess so ! Great job anyway Foo'bar. 8-)




JV, Thanks for the details about the E5 Eisenbahngeschutze.



The turntable;
Vögele Drehscheibe in modell.

http://www.joefix-studio.be/voorbeelden/301.jpg


http://www.jadar.com.pl/5star/72009/...rntable_06.jpg


And the Dombunker.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ch%C3%BCtz.jpg

...

If you mean the question you asked about 'metal bending', no Oleg Maddox hasn't answered it. There have been many questions asked about SoW:BoB. Some he chooses to answer, some he doesn't. Most games developers don't disclose anything like the amount of detail about projects they are working on as he does. Personally I'm grateful to see what he does tell us.

Nice models!

For your curiosity, Rodolphe, have a look there: 50.945894 N 1.795834 E

This is the last one still identifiable...

JV

I think it is an impossible question to answer, that is why he didn't answer it.

If you want a piece of metal to bend, then I think it has to be modelled as bent
(or if you wanted to see it gradually bend - you would have to model each individual degree of the bend).

The propellers are bent in damage WiPs, but they are modelled that way.

I think it is impossible to make a 3D model that will bend, but I'm not an expert, nor even an amateur 3D modeller;
just an amateur forum contributor.
Maybe someone who does 3D modelling can tell you - Foo'bar? Saxon?

Bent propellers and flaps:

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/Vel...n_damage06.jpg

Never seen any software that did actual real time object deformation in that way. Virtually all games use tricks to change out one object for another that shows damage.

It is possible to bent objects visually in real time, no problem. One would need to create so called "bones", each bone - is unbendable virtual object, to which vertexes from visual 3D object are assigned. Each vertex may be assigned to several different bones. While bones may be connected to each other under certain law. Move a bone - and attached to that bone vertexes will shift, visually bending the surface. Theoretically, one may create a set of bones for each structural element of airframe and bent it in any way he wants. The more bones - the more resources they eat, offcourse.

But from physical point of view (i.e. FM-wise), it hardly would have any sense. Or, to make it have sense, one would split physical model to the same number of fragments, as the number of bones in visual model and calculate all physics (aerodynamics, strength, etc.) for each of them. Which again quickly consumes calculation power of the computer. So, basically, such fidelity is far more then redundant for a game.

It is enough to have physical model split to a several dozens of fragments, for which the DM/FM calculated and respective to them visual parts with several state of "pre-modeled" damage, like you see on screenshot.

In any case the propeller will bend only on contact with ground/water, and it happens very fast (I saw it myself, more than once in real time), so fast that a two state modelling will simulate it well enough.
Fine tuning would be to add a model with only one blade bent, and a model with two blades bent (if 3 blades or more) to account for landings with a stopped engine.
Also the bent shape will not be the same for a fully solid propeller and a hollow core propeller; to finish wooden blade propeller and plastic propeller blades disintegrate but do not bend (no surprise there!)...

JV

This is true for an explossion, or brake apart damage.

What for? It is enough to make each blade a separate damageable object and change state for only damaged blades (damaged in physical model), leaving the other ones intact.

Since visual damage is pre-modeled by designers, it's up to them, to learn what the blades (or any other AC parts) were made of and model damage according to the material and damage conditions.

You should understand, that visual damage and physical damage are like two different worlds, with the later being actually invisible to a player, while the first one serves as visual representation of it.

Oh, I understand...but visibly some modellers were not completely aware of the finer details of the structure of what they were modelling...and Damage Modelling is an art which goes far beyond 3D modelling...a bit closer to aeronautical engineer, maybe?