• New Horizons on Maelstrom
    Maelstrom New Horizons


    Visit our website www.piratehorizons.com to quickly find download links for the newest versions of our New Horizons mods Beyond New Horizons and Maelstrom New Horizons!

Released NL_pinnace

What you do have working actually looks perfect. I think that you've discovered something of similar importance to the spanker fix.
 
It works for one ship at least, but still has the rope issue. The ultimate solution will probably be adding an invisible spar as you have said. That is a long term project for someone who knows Maya, so will probably never happen as there are many different lateens out there.
 
There must be a way of getting it to work without the need for any modelling. Can you upload the files so I can have a look myself?
 
I hate to say "I told you so", but I have now got the extra rope working with the correct sail behaviour, without adding an invisible boom. :wp
The effect is exactly the same as you would get if you used an invisible boom, just without all the hassle.
What I did was kept one end of rope888 in the sail locator group, and changed the other to the 'rey_a4' group.
Then, I had to make the rope longer, as it seems it was too short to actually exist before. o_O

Anyway, the important question now is does it look reasonable enough to implement on all lateens?
The following screenshot shows the sails in mid-furl to demonstrate the ropes' orientation (excuse the lack of anti-aliasing):

Carrack_lateen.jpg


We'd have to put up with this sharp angle between the two ropes, unless a better solution presents itself. One way we could 'hide' this effect slightly would be to keep the lateen set while in the Battles Sails state. That way, the player would see the weird angle less often. Anyone know if that would be more realistic?

While we're at it, do the climbable shrouds really need to be be there on the fore and mizzen masts? The lateen quite visibly cuts through the mizzen shrouds, so I'd say it might be better just to use one or two individual ropes either side, especially since there's no crow's nest on the fore and mizzen masts. (Ignore me if that's not accurate, though)
 
Wouldn't all masts require shrouds in case the crew needs to climb up there to hoist/lower the sails or in the worst case perform maintenance?
 
Well, let's see what others think of it. I'm finding that the single line is hardly visible, and I don't spend much time just sitting in port with all sails furled. Would two ropes with that sharp angle be more noticeable?

I have a rendering of the nao Santa Maria on my wall and it shows lines going to all three masts. The vants is all we have to use here, unless I wanted to replace them with 20-30 lines.
 
Regarding the climbable shrouds: have a look at Pgargon's Caravela Redonda (PO_CaravelR). That only allows access to the crow's nest on the foremast, and the three masts aft only have a couple of lines either side. What's more, the climbable shrouds only exist where there are channels on the sides of the hull, whereas the Carrack has them in areas without channels, which looks slightly odd.

Speaking of the Caravela Redonda, it seems there is an error in the Beta 2.1 version, where 'part1' uses desk.tga for the masts instead of dekR.tga, resulting in the masts looking inconsistent on their port- and starboard-facing sides. I've also noticed a couple of other texture errors in some other models, so it looks like we'll need to have another check through all the ships before Beta 2.2.
 
Caravela Redonda is fixed now as per your instructions. What other errors did you notice?
 
Armada said:
Carrack_lateen.jpg


We'd have to put up with this sharp angle between the two ropes, unless a better solution presents itself. One way we could 'hide' this effect slightly would be to keep the lateen set while in the Battles Sails state. That way, the player would see the weird angle less often. Anyone know if that would be more realistic?
Click to expand...

My area of expertise lies with vessels with tris'ls and not lateen sails, but I can say that the viability of having the lateens set during battle depends on the vessel. For his particular vessel, I 'm fairly certain that everything would remain set except for the tops'l. On more modern vessels like Greyhound, however, the mizzen sail and courses would have likely been doused. I think the advantages of this system far outweigh the visual disadvantages, however.

Edit: If I understand the problem correctly, I think you could just place another line running forward at the junction of the two offending lines. It wouldn't be entirely realistic, but it wouldn't look as strange. Would that work?
 
Ok, those vants are easily deleted. I made some minor changes to the sails as well that should be kept. Overall I'm getting much less anal about sails fouling rigging since most ships do it to varying degrees.
 
Pieter: I noticed the NL_LightPinnace hull should probably use woodGrainU3 (dark brown) instead of woodGrainU1 (black). Same with PO_ and SP_LightPinnace.
I suspect that's just a compatibility error from the CoAS version. That's all I can think of for now, but let's all keep our eyes peeled for similar mistakes (particularly deck/desk ones).

Post Captain said:
Edit: If I understand the problem correctly, I think you could just place another line running forward at the junction of the two offending lines. It wouldn't be entirely realistic, but it wouldn't look as strange. Would that work?
Click to expand...
That might just work, actually! At least it would make it look more plausible. :onya

Hylie: do you think you could change the yard/locator names so that only the tops'l is furled under Battle Sails, as Post Captain suggested?
 
Armada said:
Pieter: I noticed the NL_LightPinnace hull should probably use woodGrainU3 (dark brown) instead of woodGrainU1 (black). Same with PO_ and SP_LightPinnace.
I suspect that's just a compatibility error from the CoAS version. That's all I can think of for now, but let's all keep our eyes peeled for similar mistakes (particularly deck/desk ones).


That might just work, actually! At least it would make it look more plausible. :onya

Hylie: do you think you could change the yard/locator names so that only the tops'l is furled under Battle Sails, as Post Captain suggested?
Click to expand...


Sure I could, if I had any idea what you are talking about. o_O I've wanted to furl the sprits'l for battle sails for some time.
 
I thought I had explained the Battle Sails naming before... never mind, I lose track of who knows what. Really must get some serious tutorials done this summer! :facepalm

All sails on yards named 'rey_a#' are the ones that furl under Battle Sails. It's quite simple really, you just need to rename the yards and their respective geometry locators so that the sails which remain set are named to use any letter other than 'a'.
 
Hoo boy! That is a recipe for disaster. Renaming yards and locators can cause all sorts of stuff like sails twisted around and disappearing. It might work on the carrack with its simple sail plan, but there are several ships that already have strange things going on.
 
Well, I finally got around to knocking the jib off, and the lateen sail fell off too. Not the lateen yard, just the sail. o_O So I set about renaming locators and TOOL corrupted them. :facepalm
 
How strange. You must've done something pretty odd to achieve that!
I guessing you mean TOOL corrupted the masts, right? All the more reason to put them through Maya, it seems. I'll see if I can sort 'em out in a bit.
 
I managed to rename the locators in the lateen ok, but have been unable to knock the jib off. I rammed ships and cliffs but nothing falls off. :rumgone If this works I will move to a more conventional ship to continue.
It is not the mast locators that are the problem but the yard locators.
Anyway, to get the sprits'l to furl for battle sails the masts need to be renamed. Mast 1 will never furl for battle sails, so I swapped mast1 and mast4. From now on all ships should have their masts named starting from the stern instead of the bow so that the sprits'l will furl and the lateen or spanker will not.
Here are a pinnace and fluyt with the new lateens. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/76702168/POTC screenies/to the attack!.jpg
The lateens are mounted on opposite sides of their masts and they still work well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top