Conversion of Arabella in the HMS Mordaunt

[Armada]

There was a Mordaunt model already in the latest PotC Build Beta, but pgargon's version from the first post has added details and new textures. The new model works fine, but the new textures were not included, and were not already in the game. So all I need is for someone to provide the missing textures I mentioned above. You must have them in CoAS, right? :?

 

[Luke159]

The ships info is missing too. I will upload the texture files and ship_init info for you. and PM you with the link.

 

[Armada]

With the textures sorted, she's finally fully ported to PotC!

 

[Armada]

Oh no... she's got the reverse lighting bug! That's not good!
Was there a way to solve this? I can't remember...

 

[Pieter Boelen]

No easy way. Ask Pgargon what's up with that. Maybe he can re-export her from Maya and fix it?

This model is NOT the same as the Mordaunt1 we've already got in the PotC Build Mod, right?

Question: Why does she apparently use the same texture as PotC's "La Licorne"?
The HMS Mordaunt is supposed to be British, while La Licorne is French. :?

 

[Armada]

OK I'll PM pgargon about the reverse lighting.

This model is NOT the same as the Mordaunt1 we've already got in the PotC Build Mod, right?

Correct, it's a totally different one; far more accurate!

Question: Why does she apparently use the same texture as PotC's "La Licorne"?
The HMS Mordaunt is supposed to be British, while La Licorne is French. :?

That's the texture Luke159 gave me when I mentioned there were missing textures.
True enough, it doesn't match the images in the first post, so perhaps it was the wrong one I was given...?

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Since she's a royal navy ship, shouldn't she have some sort of black-and-yellow colour scheme?
When you're PM-ing Pgargon anyway, maybe you can ask about that too?

 

[Bava]

Since she's a royal navy ship, shouldn't she have some sort of black-and-yellow colour scheme?

Not before 1800

From 1740 till 1790, the Royal Navy had a Red and Black (or Blue on certain ships) colour scheme.

Here´s how a third rate may have looked like in the 1770s:
http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10325744&wwwflag=2&imagepos=1

 

[Armada]

At last, behold the true HMS Mordaunt in all her glory:

http://www.moddb.com/mods/new-horizons/images/hms-mordaunt#imagebox

Still got the reverse lighting bug, but I think pgargon will try to fix that.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

I just noticed that the barrels on the Mordaunt's deck in PotC use the wrong texture, but I'm not sure of the proper way to fix that.
Also, now that we've got a remodeled Mordaunt (Mordaunt11), maybe we should remove the original (Mordaunt1).
A British RN colour scheme would also be nice, though she's a good model without too.

 

[Hylie Pistof]

I can not recall getting the old Mordaunt. But I did recently get the new one. The only thing I noticed about the barrels is that there are a lot of them. I had trouble moving around the ship, mostly with getting up and down the ladders. Since I was mostly in combat and trying to hurry, that was upsetting. Also, there always seemed to be something in the way so I could not see. It is a difficult ship to fight efficiently. Lastly, when I moved my flag from a 40 gun 5th rate to the Mordaunt there was a 4-6fps drop in frame rate. All of those details come with a price tag. Still, it is a very nice ship and I enjoy just watching her sail by. Would now be a good time to start a discussion about having high and low rez ship packs to suit different computers?

 

[Armada]

I just noticed that the barrels on the Mordaunt's deck in PotC use the wrong texture, but I'm not sure of the proper way to fix that.
Also, now that we've got a remodeled Mordaunt (Mordaunt11), maybe we should remove the original (Mordaunt1).
A British RN colour scheme would also be nice, though she's a good model without too.

1) Don't worry I've sorted the texture problem, which a couple of other HSP ships had, and you'll get the fix with my latest files soon.
2) Yes I'd say that's a good idea to remove the old Mordaunt.
3) As nice as this would look, it isn't historically accurate. Nelson's Checker was adapted several years after Mordaunt's time, and would possibly make the ship look out-of-place in its correct period.

@ miklikit, I can't say I've used that ship much so can't really confirm what you're saying about things in the way, and as for a frame rate drop, I haven't noticed that personally. But of course our computer specs are different. High and low res ship packs might be achievable, but I'd guess it would be a lot of work for our modellers. That's not so say it can't be done, of course.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

1. Thanks.
2. Easily done by just replacing the old one.
3. Cancel that one then. We are getting a ridiculous number of RN paint scheme ships anyway.
Our modpack is becoming VERY England-heavy! A bit too much so, actually!
Does anyone think now that we've got so many custom RN ships, maybe we should consider removing some of the stock game RN retextures?

 

[Armada]

Our modpack is becoming VERY England-heavy! A bit too much so, actually!
Does anyone think now that we've got so many custom RN ships, maybe we should consider removing some of the stock game RN retextures?

Perhaps we could... but talking of unbalanced national ship quantities, I noticed recently when devising that nation/period dependant reward scheme that Portugal is the most lacking in nation-specific ships. I found it hard to find a decent ship for each period, and in fact found only retextured stock ships.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

I'll believe that! Who's going to make a Portuguese ship though?

 

[Pieter Boelen]

I just saw the new Mordaunt at sunset, which reveals some very obvious triangulation of her hull. See attached.
It seems somehow the "smoothing groups" were lost. Was it like that in Pgargon's original model as well?

 

[Hylie Pistof]

@ Experienced Captain: I was thinking more along the lines of taking the older but fully functional models that are being replaced and putting them together in a package for those who might want them for whatever reason. If the modelers want to make two versions of the new ships, then yes that is extra work. Would it be worth it? When I have gotten involved in fleet actions with many large ships I have sometimes seen single digit fps.


@ Pieter: I have not seen that. Or not noticed it.

 

[Armada]

I was thinking more along the lines of taking the older but fully functional models that are being replaced and putting them together in a package for those who might want them for whatever reason.

That seems logical, but obviously it's up to the individual modellers as to whether they make high and low res versions of new models.
But taking the ships to be replaced and putting them in a pack is a good idea. Who knows, they may be used again someday.

As for the Mordaunt's triangular weirdness, I think the reverse lighting bug is probably making that effect worse than it should be. For our quality control checks before Beta 2, I really think we need to wipe out this reverse lighting issue, once and for all, for all current offending models.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

That seems logical, but obviously it's up to the individual modellers as to whether they make high and low res versions of new models.
But taking the ships to be replaced and putting them in a pack is a good idea. Who knows, they may be used again someday.

I intend to put ALL ships we've got in Build 14 Beta 1 Patch 4, so we'll always keep that as a base containing all.
Then for Build 14 Beta 2, I'll do what I can to clean things up and get them more organized, etc.
Keeping different code batches compatible with the recent updates is a pain, so I don't recommend anyone to do that.

As for the Mordaunt's triangular weirdness, I think the reverse lighting bug is probably making that effect worse than it should be.

If the lighting bug were not there, the issue'd show up on the other side of the hull.
On the other hand, the reason for the bug being there could be that the hull accidentally became two-sided or something,
which could cause losing the smoothing groups as well. Alternatively, the vertexes of the faces became seperate.
Back in the days when I did modeling, I had all sorts of issues with smoothing groups.

For our quality control checks before Beta 2, I really think we need to wipe out this reverse lighting issue, once and for all, for all current offending models.

That's easier said than done though. I think that requires the models to be converted to Maya, then fully re-exported with their locators redone. Or something. :wacko:
In any case, it's a lot of work for one model. I'll be happy if all HULLS are reverse-lighting free.

 

[Armada]

I intend to put ALL ships we've got in Build 14 Beta 1 Patch 4, so we'll always keep that as a base containing all.
Then for Build 14 Beta 2, I'll do what I can to clean things up and get them more organized, etc.

Well don't forget, you don't have to do all that by yourself, you know.

If the lighting bug were not there, the issue'd show up on the other side of the hull.
On the other hand, the reason for the bug being there could be that the hull accidentally became two-sided or something,
which could cause losing the smoothing groups as well. Alternatively, the vertexes of the faces became seperate.

True about the issue appearing on the other side, but I meant that reverse lighting highlights the triangles much more, and that without the bug it would be less noticeable.
As for smoothing groups and the like, you know more than I do, so perhaps you should ask pgargon what's up with the Mordaunt.

That's easier said than done though. I think that requires the models to be converted to Maya, then fully re-exported with their locators redone. Or something. :wacko:
In any case, it's a lot of work for one model. I'll be happy if all HULLS are reverse-lighting free.

I agree, if we can get all the hulls clear of the bug, that's a huge improvement already. But admittedly I don't fully understand the whole process of eliminating it, so I don't want to sound hypocritical about this.
I think we just need to get a couple of modellers to take a serious look into the problem, and split the workload, perhaps?