HOME | DD
StephenHuda β Battletech Mechs
Published: 2010-12-03 02:05:36 +0000 UTC; Views: 8156; Favourites: 30; Downloads: 1809
Redirect to original
Description
Some Battletech Mechs I've been working on still need to skin them...slow process. If you can name them all, then i might just be doing my job correctly....Related content
Comments: 28
π: 0 β©: 0
Excellent work! can you share these models to print it ? 
π: 0 β©: 0
hey, sorry about not getting back to you, I haven't been on here much at all lately. check your notes
π: 0 β©: 0
Hi StephenHuda,
I'm building a Battletech Mod fΓΌr Tabletop Simulator. I'm concentrating on the map part with buildings etc., but other people are focusing on mech models. Would you be willing to let someone use your models in Tabletop Simulator mods?
Existing mods:
steamcommunity.com/workshop/brβ¦
π: 0 β©: 0
Puma/Panther, Vulture, MadCat... only know the names from MechWarrior...
the most other I cant name but I think I saw them in the books^^
great work
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm not sure about the two on either side of the Panther, but the rest are all very identifiable
π: 0 β©: 0
Its a bad thing for me to able to recognize them all?
Greaty work with this one. It seems swel
π: 0 β©: 1
The list is from left to right clockwise around: Caeser, Enforcer, Atlas, Panther, Wolfhound, Victor, Hatamato-Chi, Timber Wolf, Warhawk, Mad Dog.
π: 0 β©: 0
Oh and there's a commando in there too. I think. Looks a little large.
π: 0 β©: 1
No wait. The one behind the the Twolf is a the Victor. The one above the MadDog is the FireStarter like I thought. No Commando.
π: 0 β©: 1
Close, Panther...missing the right hand weapon...fixing that now, hehe
π: 0 β©: 0
Ceaser, Vulture (Mad Dog), Masakari (War Hawk), MadCat (TimberWolf), Hatomato Chi, FireStarter (not a Victor, right?), Panther, Wolfhound, Atlas.
π: 0 β©: 0
I think I can recognize them all, even the enforcer looks good. ^^ Good job on that.
I can see that there are a lot of polys there, but most of it is used, as you say in places where you can't see it. There are lots of flat, smooth areas- if you look at the masakari's shoulder, it is just a smooth tube.
That's why some people would call these medium poly.
There is a lot more detail that you can add, either through further adding of polys, or by using a normal mapped texture. I would advise the texturing avenue, as it gives better results, quicker.
I like the mechs, they look a lot like the orginal art. I would say that you could try to make them more dynamic, less 90 degree angles in both the modeling, and the posing. For example, if you have a boxy shin or thigh, you can rotate the faces a little to make them a little narrower towards the ankle or hip joint, or flare a little at the bottom.
The problem is in part inherited from the original BT art, which always looks a little boxy to me.
like robots produced by Volvo in the 1980s.
Also with bird legged mechs, make sure the feet are directly under the center of gravity, to avoid looking unbalanced.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks, I do intend to start playing around with these a bit more. See the reply above to Lady-Die, i think it covers most of your feedback as well.
Thanks
I always appreciate a well thought out response, and critique.
π: 0 β©: 0
I guess I'm doing OK, you guys got them all!
Let me ask you all, about how many polys would it take for an image to be considered High Res? These range from 100k-250k each, a lot of that detail is in areas not visible, and in various radii. Unfortunately the process I use does generate extra surfaces when converting them to an STL file format.
π: 0 β©: 1
It isn't really about polygon counts. Those can be largely meaningless. Especially if you use a lot of sub division and smoothing. Also try not to confuse High Resolution (the pixelation of an image) with model detail. The only time you should be concerned about polygon counts is if you're under a budget for a video game.
Pawel Czarneki did a lot of BattleTech models about...10 years or so ago. The most commonly seen model is his Catapult which comes in at 115,873 polygons. Yet his use of panels, lines and greebles gives his models more of a detailed look that can still pretty much stand up today. Especially with proper mapping and textures.
Your models do look good. But without the smaller detailing like panel lines, hatch covers, and other bits that make a machine look like a machine, they're pretty basic at this point. Now there are a couple of options for more detail at this point.
You could add in the details as physical parts. Or you could texture them on. Either way, there is a general technique called, "Three Levels of Detail," which can add greatly to any design. The trick is to make each extra bit look like it belongs there.
An example of three levels of detailing would be:
1. Main surface
2. Armor panels
3. Access hatches, mounts, bolts, etc.
Depending on the complexity, you can go even further. But then you run into Star Wars territory like the Millennium Falcon.
π: 0 β©: 1
Appreciate the feedback, I've been doing 3d work for years in the engineering field, we don't use poly-counts there, so getting a good idea of how one area translates to another is still a trial and error system...unfortunately. Skinning is still and art form I've got to get under my belt. I can work the parts in Solidworks and make them look realistic, but then I need to translate them to something the rest of the world can use (hehe) and that's where i start to loose the clarity. I manage the skinning in Solidworks with layered decals, which do not translate out when converting, they are program resident only.
In addition these files were built on commission and posed very rigid so the animators could get a clean look at it, I'll leave the posing up to them for now.
Thanks again, I really do appreciate the feedback!!!!
π: 0 β©: 1
Not a problem! I've been doing 3D work as an artist for a little over a decade now. A lot of traditional studies translate well to the digital medium.
π: 0 β©: 1
Polyscounts into the millions generally aren't friendly. Of course for your average animation software few render shots need that much complexity. For some reason I grew up on being concerned over polycounts and structure since I understand them well enough. I do like texturing some details in like panels. If they aren't meant to be removed or aren't abnormally thick I don't see much reason to UV Map them later. Of course you could always texture and then use the textures for displacement maps too. Though again I've never felt like adding more permanent geometry then I could see needing down the road.
π: 0 β©: 0
I see they've been named already so I will pass on that but.. Good job!! They look good. Cannot wait to see them skinned.
π: 0 β©: 0
Enforcer, Panther and Ceaser to finish to finish Lady-Die's list, you do good work!
π: 0 β©: 0
Not bad for medium detail models. I know what you mean on the U/V wrapping and texturing, too.
Lets see.. Atlas, Victor, Wolfhound, Mad Dog/Vulture, Warhawk/Masakari, Mad Cat/Timber Wolf, Hatamoto Chi (heavy Charger mod). The rest I can't tell.
π: 0 β©: 0
I used the same display style that Punakettu used for his best of shot [[link] ] Check it out, very talented...i am envious.
π: 0 β©: 0