@ Gernot, I have always considered Genesia (which is the basis, my personal version of) as a MOD ( total MOD ), which let me complete freedom to put what makes me happy. You say me " come aboard " but to make what ? , i'm not a coder , not a stylist, and a poor modeler. Just a fan of the elite universe ^^. And i repeat , you're completly free to take any parts of Genesia for use in your project (it was my original project in first : maintain alive the LMR parts of Pioneer for a future usage ) No matter if since the beginin i've make some modif of the source, you're free to discard what you want on that,but i keep the original Genesia project alive (and alway in constant dev with my means or with the help of friends Occasional) because it's my point of vue of the game, like i want it will be
before i answer to anything, vuzz, you reported a problem with the "Hullcutter", in hope this model will fix this. [attachment=2653:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-10 um 17.10.09.jpg] further i made a quick "new one", formerly it has been called "Kestral" but the author of the model i can't remember, neither i find a entry here on SSC when i search for "Kestral". the model has been renamed by me to "Crecerelle*, which means "Kestrel" (the ordinal name was "Kestral"). [attachment=2652:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-10 um 17.09.26.jpg]
certainly the modeler had something like that in mind, only far smaller. a slight fix to the "Hulcutter"(added a "green glow", added position lights and fixed window transparency) edit: i found even more errors, sorry (the link in the prev. post will be updated)
this time for realboth Models will run in Genesia (both are zipped to use as MOD) Hullcutter[attachment=2656:hullcutter_lmr_14-07-10.zip] [attachment=2657:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-10 um 20.01.25.jpg]Crecerelle (Kestrel)[attachment=2655:crecerelle_lmr_14-07-10.zip] [attachment=2658:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-10 um 20.03.43.jpg] the last error was a unused .obj and a displaced gun at the hullcutter and wrong thrusts for the crecerelle.the crecerelle is untextured but the model is uv unwrapped and file contains a uv map. @geraldine, a lot of music :music:
before i answer to anything, vuzz, you reported a problem with the "Hullcutter", in hope this model will fix this. Bildschirmfoto[/url] 2014-07-10 um 17.10.09.jpg further i made a quick "new one", formerly it has been called "Kestral" but the author of the model i can't remember, neither i find a entry here on SSC when i search for "Kestral". the model has been renamed by me to "Crecerelle*, which means "Kestrel" (the ordinal name was "Kestral"). Bildschirmfoto[/url] 2014-07-10 um 17.09.26.jpg i've never reported nothing ? i've just make that on Genesia : "- Fix matvar interferences (?) of the cuttin' hull on Hullcutter" ( quote from my Changelog) with this fix my actual hullcutter model is ok . PS you take time to debug something i've already fix on Genesia . Please, as i've say you since a long time , take a little time to read Ghangelog.
however, this one is slightly different to the old model.it solves this little problemcan't see anything? that's the problem the cockpit should be visible from this angle but gets "obscured" by the transparent geometry in front now it looks like this,[attachment=2659:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-12 um 19.57.33.jpg] i guess it's better as the version in scripted gepmetry, because if you take a closer look at the old model you can even see parts of the hidden geometry. further in the highest lod the visible "machine parts" are now excavations and not just a overlay. the blinking lights (computer) i can still add to the new version, the laser can be easy positioned at the bottom of the ship again and if i remember right i used the "squad colors" for the hull, this i replaced with the colorvariable material now. i guess that's all in which it differs, the "nav. robot" is a matter of choice.
Yes , i can see what you mean on this shoot : So , i'll download your new version and after test i'll integrated this one on the next release if it rule ok .
... Great job Gernot ! Despite i've found some littles adjusts this one is really an improvement with his "true cuttin' hull" The adjusts i've make :-- Only one group of main thrusters have the true parameter, so i've activate this one for the other ^^ ( really like your logo "Gernot66" on this screen ) -- The material of the registration text was in semi transp ( 0.4) , i've put this to 1-- And finally I've slightly offset towards the rear the pilot ( he have now his hands on the joystick ) ^^ Thanks a lot Gernot , for this improved model, your'e alway the BOSS
while i added the "little computer" and found some more small issues, like the cutting out text or the lod problem it had (the chassis and other parts vanished to early), strangewisely it seems it doesn't matters what bounding radius i enter and it takes since a while now the "real bounding radius" which results in that each (sub)model has a different lod pixels now and (however) it's IMPOSSIBLE to determinate a congruent lod (while otherwise you could have said a (sub)model has a bounding radius of 10 (the whole model) even if it's maybe only 2, but the same lod pixels as for the whole model result then in the same visible distance).similar lod problems i noticed on many of my models since a while. the laser i mounted again on top, because else it covers the hatch on the bottom. edit:new collision mesh[attachment=2664:hullcutter_lmr_14-07-13.zip] to use the outer main thrusters even as lateral (linear = false) was willingly done, but feel free. besides, i neither would have changed the autopilot behave and to set a equal thrust for main and retro,i didn't think that's the idea. to have ships with different specs is more important to me as to have many.there might be a ship with good braking capabilities but then it must leak of something else, i.e. little thrust overall.further i guess the thruster models resp. size of (if there are some visible at all), i used should reflect more or less their use. i.e. for a "Eagle" this would mean you would have to fix the large nazzeles from the back even on front to get the same thrust, resp. something which looks like. at least this would be reasonable then if main and retro thrust is the same. like i said depending in the ships "layout", a fighter will usually have a very good main thrust, but to have such a thrust in all directions would result in a quite large engine, while a "maneuverable cargo unit" has nearly no thrust but therefore the same in all directions. but well, that's just what i guess. [attachment=2665:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-13 um 10.40.33.jpg] [attachment=2666:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-13 um 10.41.28.jpg] [attachment=2662:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-12 um 15.53.44.jpg] [attachment=2663:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-12 um 15.53.03.jpg]
i've adjust retro to foward value due to the fact that now in Genesia the ships don't retro facing during the decelleration phase , so now they need same power to avoid crashs , (Remember , Genesia follow his how way of dev ^^) the autopilot of Genesia is not the same of Pionner's. Please again , read carrefully the GHANGELOG GENESIA .
that was just what i ment i never would have changed this, but it's your decision. the fact that the autopilot will turn the ship to "brake" is based on the principal design of a spaceship resp. rocket in the extreme case.for a "rocket" (or even the odd space shuttle) you will have only vertical thrust in one direction, no retro thrust (or only to maneuver, but this won't be much, for the spaceshuttle it's the power the expansion of boiling water produces, that's already enough to maneuver), to maneuver a "rocket" only little thrust is (would be) needed.ok, maneuvering with steam isn't very agil neither you could lift a ship from the ground.but obviously this principal design will stay, except all thrusters, or in your case retro thrusters must be sized the same, however if there would be a difference in the size of the nazzel or not, but at least of the whole engine.of course a ship can be designed under this aspect (e.g. a sphere, or we simply assume some "magical device" instead of thrusters), but what about the other extreme, the rocket and everything between them? therefore i guess this ordinal behave of the autopilot should stay. apart from this "technical" aspect, in my opinion you loose 30% of the character of a ship (maybe more?), because the character is it's agility and this is given by main thrust, retro thrust and lateral thrust.which is again for the extreme if a rocket a clumsy ship (no or weak retro & lateral), for a airfighter like type a very fast but less agil (deceleration is important here as difference in other terms "character", for a let's say "saucer type" something balanced (very good lateral) but not very fast (for a cobra i.e. i imagine something between "saucer" & "fighter") and for a transporter something strong enough to lift off but overall slow. if that is reasonable from the technical aspect is to me only secondary, important is the character. at least it's worth to think about? http://www.jades.org/shiprevs/eagle2.htm[/url] yes, probably they had a "day off"... however.
in Genesia there is lot of ships with a cap > 100tons, i prefere see a millfalc or or a lanner , or best, a ncc1701 enterprise decelerate without retro facing despite i loose 30% of ship's character , afterall i have in rest 70% of character ^^ , that make enought difference bettwen ships . Yeah i prefer that instead see the enterprise make decel like a lunar module,In the game we are after 3000 year and i hightly doutb that ships move like in the 20th century. To resume , i think this compromise is a honnest solution for a futurist SciFI game. ps, I have long hesitated before doing this, but after many driving tests (manual) I think it does is not so bad as that.
matter of choice, i was just suggesting.
[attachment=2672:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-14 um 15.48.12.jpg] [attachment=2673:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-14 um 15.48.38.jpg] [attachment=2669:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-14 um 15.45.35.jpg] [attachment=2677:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-14 um 15.47.29.jpg] [attachment=2676:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-14 um 15.46.39.jpg] [attachment=2674:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-14 um 15.49.09.jpg] [attachment=2675:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-14 um 15.49.59.jpg]
Ok, that's just plain awful.Please, you must say " i think it's awful". thanks to put the name of the member on your quotes ! And nothing is fixed , i've just discover that the autopilot have some problems to reach orbits with theses news parameters ...
matter of choice, i was just suggesting.I can't really agree. If all ships were designed (like you said) with comparable thrusters sticking out in all direction, then yeah, it would work, but otherwise it just cripples aesthetic-mechanical integrity of the project. And if all ships were designed this way it would still rob the project of one important way to make ships handle differently and have different strengths and weaknesses.
Rien compris a ton charabia DraQ Alors avant de commencer a polemiquer stp lis le texte "about genesia" , il y est clairement explique que c'est Ma version Personelle ( que je met a la dispo de ceux que ca interresse) Si ca te plait pas et ben continue a jouer a Pionner et lache l'affaire mon gars ( tu commence a me saouler, apres tout avec ton cursus ca dois pas etre bien complique pour toi de modifier les valeurs qui te genent , je suis chauffeur poids lourd et j'y arrive bien) Geneisia est open source tu peut y bricoler comme bon te semble. Trop fatigue pour tapper en anglais , apres tout y'as Google traduction. PS pour ta gouverne Paragon fonctionne aussi sans retrofacing et avec des valeurs egales en acceleration et decceleration et jusqu'a aujourdh'ui ca n'a gene personne. j'ai choisi cette voie pour MON Genesia et ca ME convient. ( et en plus je pense que bon nombre de supporters trouverons ca chouette )
) No matter if since the beginin i've make some modif of the source, you're free to discard what you want on that,but i keep the original Genesia project alive (and alway in constant dev with my means or with the help of friends Occasional) because it's my point of vue of the game, like i want it will be 
the cockpit should be visible from this angle but gets "obscured" by the transparent geometry in front now it looks like this,[attachment=2659:Bildschirmfoto 2014-07-12 um 19.57.33.jpg] i guess it's better as the version in scripted gepmetry, because if you take a closer look at the old model you can even see parts of the hidden geometry. further in the highest lod the visible "machine parts" are now excavations and not just a overlay. the blinking lights (computer) i can still add to the new version, the laser can be easy positioned at the bottom of the ship again and if i remember right i used the "squad colors" for the hull, this i replaced with the colorvariable material now. i guess that's all in which it differs, the "nav. robot" is a matter of choice. 
