Messages

1

Artwork / Re: Image: Alien Origins Ufopedia

« on: June 01, 2011, 08:59:38 pm »

@Psawhn: The model looks nice, thanks for your work. I am also having troubles with the export to md2 file format, because there are md2 restrictions - all groups should have the same material. This seems to be not the case with this model, so the export fails...
I will try to integrate the model in .obj format, which is also supported by the engine. I will keep you informed. Great to see your contributions, please continue the good work, we really need the input from good modelers like you...

I changed the fuel tank to have only one material. (I thought the material information wasn't even used, actually, and that it was solely up to the textures). The files are all v6b files in the fuel tank directory. https://webdisk.ucalgary.ca/~djetowns/public_html/misc_files/UFO_AI/licensed/fueltank/

2

Artwork / Fuel Tank V2

« on: May 29, 2011, 10:19:43 pm »

btw, if you have a 512x512 pixel texture for the fueltank (models/aircraft/craft_item_fuel/fuel.png) you've made, we could use that also...

I made a 512x512 image, and a normalmap, for the fuel tank:
https://webdisk.ucalgary.ca/~djetowns/public_html/misc_files/UFO_AI/licensed/fueltank/
(Licensed under CC-BY-3.0)
I had to update the UVmap because the separate seams were running into eachother and causing some odd effects (The new images won't work with the old model). The problem is that I don't know how to export out from blender 2.57 into md2 format. I can export into a different format such as .obj, .x3d, .3ds, so someone who owns different software with a 3D exporter needs to finish the conversion. Is Destructavator able to do it? He seemed to be better at blender->ufo.
(Actually, I just went ahead and stuck everything in the /converted subdirectory linked above.)

3

Artwork / Re: Image: Alien Origins Ufopedia

« on: May 29, 2011, 01:25:14 am »

The source files for this image can be found here:
https://webdisk.ucalgary.ca/~djetowns/public_html/misc_files/UFO_AI/licensed/radar_scene.blend

It's a large file (8mb) because it includes the background image.

I also have a new version I like better:


It's released under CC-BY, mainly because the image I included is also licensed under CC-BY-3.0.

I can try to do some other models, but for 2.4, TODO/2.4 says that someone else already has the crash models as a work-in-progress. I don't know what else is up-to-date, either.

Any feedback or changes are welcome. Again, as a 3D file, it's easy to reposition the dishes, clone/delete more duplicates, etc. As the file is set up, just change something, hit F12, and there you go.

4

Feature Requests / Re: UFO information on store/sell?

« on: May 26, 2011, 09:07:02 pm »

In that window the UFO type is displayed, if you know it. So you have to research the UFO before you get the display.

If I may, I think that there should be some indicator of UFO type. It also seems inconsistent that you can see the name of an unresearched UFO in the message log after you transfer or sell it, plus when you decide to research it, but not when you decide whether to keep or sell it.

In any case, a "workaround" is to memorize the common prices for UFOs, and use that as an indicator of what type it is.

Another improvement I just thought of for the transfer screen: would it be possible to also show how many UFOs of that specific type are at each UFO yard, in addition to how many UFOs in total are at each yard?

5

Artwork / Image: Alien Origins Ufopedia

« on: May 26, 2011, 03:24:27 am »

Hi guys;

Sorry I've been away for so long. Ugh, engineering/university.

I've been playing 2.3.1 to get back into things, and I noticed that in the game there's no image for Alien Origins, nor is there one that I can find in the repositories. I was inspired by some Astronomy Photo of the Day pictures, so I have a couple candidates:


I modelled the radar telescope in blender, so I can rearrange any element of the scene. The astronomy image in the background is a NASA image so it's public domain. I've found another image that I actually like better (it's the milky way) but it's CC-attribution-noncommercial so I figure that'd be incompatible licensing. I can look further for a compatible image with milky way if that looks better. (I think I've found some on flickr that are only CC-attribution).

The telescope itself is untextured, crude, unoptimized, and ugly for anything but a sillhouette. See here:

I'll make all source files available if you guys like it.

6

Artwork / Re: Alien Wormhole Device

« on: October 08, 2009, 06:06:00 am »

Nice job on the texturing, sitters!

My sincere apologies for not finishing it myself.

If it's any consolation, I really like sitters texturing, and I think it's a much better result than what I would have ended up with.

7

Artwork / Re: Coolest things ever! - 3D Printed Models

« on: June 16, 2009, 05:39:18 am »

I'm so sorry. I've been busy with plenty of things, plus texturing really isn't my strong suit.

I'll upload what I do have to this post, that way if anyone does want to work on things, they can. I'll still see if I can become more inspired and work on the texturing more, but I shouldn't keep hogging the thing, considering I've been sitting on it for over a year .

[attachment deleted by admin]

8

Artwork / Coolest things ever! - 3D Printed Models

« on: June 13, 2009, 02:30:23 am »

I have, in my hand, the coolest ever UFO:AI related things!



The engines in the Stingray actually snap in, and they rotate as far as they're supposed to!

Unfortunately the plasma gun that was supposed to snap into the underside of the hoverbot didn't come. I think, because of the way I uploaded the model, they didn't even realize it was supposed to be attached to my order.

The service I used was called Shapeways. http://www.shapeways.com . They're based in the Netherlands. You just upload a model to their website, and they'll print it out and send it to you. They charge based off of volume of material used, so the Stingray cost $13 USD and the hoverbot cost $17 USD.

I'm not quite happy enough with the models at the moment to open them up for other people to buy, but that's one thing I might try to get done over this summer. Once I allow it, I can allow anyone to go to the website and buy their own. In the spirit of GPL I don't think I'd charge any markup for these, even though I'll have the option.

I think this opens up great potential. UFO:AI figurines? Tabletop games?

9

Artwork / Re: Animation for character models

« on: February 22, 2009, 09:39:40 pm »

There's an 'x-ray' visual mode for armatures that lets you see them through the mesh even when it's not in wireframe. In that screenshot you posted, it's in the bottom-left corner in the Armature tab, under Editing Options.

You can parent one bone to another in edit mode. Under the Armature Bones tab, there will be a dropbox labeled child of [--]. The [--] is a dropbox and you can pick the bone you want to parent to.

10

Artwork / Re: UAV Model

« on: February 21, 2009, 08:14:35 pm »

In addition, modern prototype UCAVs have a different visual style than recon UAVs in service, which is what this model was based off of. (It was originally a very crappy Globalhawk clone before I added swing-wings and moved the engine inside)
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=UCAV&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi
Most of those models and prototypes use more of a flying wing design and take advantage of the lack of a cockpit to enhance their stealth characteristics. They definitely have a distinctive visual feel from any other aircraft models in the game, and I think an art style that borrows from that would be good for the human UCAV.
(Although, personally, I don't like the shape of Boeing's X-45)

11

Artwork / Re: UAV Model

« on: February 20, 2009, 06:41:20 am »

You're right that there's not enough meat on its bones for any payload except the cameras package.

You're certainly allowed to tinker with it if you want!

12

Design / Re: about the aircrafts.

« on: January 20, 2009, 08:23:28 pm »

A stall occurs when the airflow over a wing is interrupted and cannot produce lift. Most often this happens because the angle of attack is too steep - typically this happens because the aircraft is flying too slowly and a high angle of attack is needed just to keep in level flight. It is possible, though, to stall at any speed if the angle of attack becomes too high - performing a very aggressive pitch-up maneuver, for example.
In the transonic region, because parts of the airflow are supersonic and some are not, the air may not flow over the wings as wanted. (Shock waves, turbulence, etc.) An improperly designed aircraft can literally stall in level flight at mach 1.

13

Artwork / Re: UFO Battleship

« on: January 19, 2009, 07:23:43 pm »

How about a slightly different approach: Battleship is a description of its role and firepower, not its size.

14

Artwork / Re: Hyperion

« on: January 19, 2009, 07:21:29 pm »

I don't know what happened to the first link, but I fixed it.

The second link always worked. It is a pure white texture but with alpha applied - it should show up properly if imported. (I forgot that the info was in the alpha channel.)

15

Design / Re: about the aircrafts.

« on: January 19, 2009, 07:16:34 pm »

Proof or it didn't happen. In no source I know did I see that they offer better manuverabiltiy at all speeds.

I haven't seen anything that specifically states "forward wings give poorer performance than conventional wings in speeds ranging from..." which would be important for an article to state. But I was using that they delayed stalls to read that they were better at low speeds. Some more reading and I can see that my assumption was wrong- they do not give any particular aerodynamic advantages except in near-stall conditions (wingtips remain unstalled longer than the rest of the wing), and the transonic region (which is, technically, a near-stall condition.)

The structural concerns is that such a wing bends in the direction of increased angle of attack - which generates more lift, which introduces a stronger bending moment, et cetera. If the materials are not enough to take the strain, obviously the wing falls apart.

One structural advantage that hasn't been discussed is the wing mountings - forward swept wings allow the wing to be mounted farther aft than conventional or aft-swept wings. For the Dragon, which also utilizes those alien 'prongs,' this is almost a requirement - that or lengthening the fuselage.