Greetings!

Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

Greetings!
This is the fancy new sidebar. It offers quick access to your profile, messages, threads and so on.
Hit the X in the top right corner to dismiss this message.
Greetings!

Welcome to the fancy new Scifi-Meshes.com! You old username and password should work. If not, get in touch with staff either here, on Facebook or on Discord.

For a quick summary on what's new, check out this thread.
You should also check out the Community Guidelines here.
You can check out most recent posts here or by clicking the handy links on the top menu or the sidebar.

You can dismiss this message by clicking the little X in the top right corner.

W40K Black Templars Battlebarge

168101112

Posts

  • MephMeph171 Posts: 0Member
    Indeed, and that trick is very simple, just add the
    /3GB line to your boot.ini and that 'unlocks' the remaining ram for a 32-bit windows.

    In any case, a 64-bit system is miles better than a 32 bit system...
  • ScathaScatha0 Posts: 0Member
    Have to agree, Meph. Much more power at the tip of one's finger.

    Then again, if I could model as Andrea here does, I'd be in serious trouble for trying to push the envelope. ;)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    Scatha and Meph thank you very much for the suggestion :).
    I've already triggered on the additional 4 addressing bits yesterday and it seems to work (even if the "resource manager" continues to "see" 3 GB ... I think this is not for nothing a problem)
  • MephMeph171 Posts: 0Member
    Ah, that's because it works a bit differently than 'normal' RAM. Inherently, win xp 32 can only handle 3GB of physical RAM but the /3GB switch allows the remaining 1GB phys. RAM to be accessed as some sort of high-priority virtual memory.
    You'll not see it in the system or resource manager but it is being used, although it's not a quantum leap in performance like a 64-bit system is. A 64-bit system uses all physical RAM as intended up unto 128GB of RAM
  • ScathaScatha0 Posts: 0Member
    You're welcome, Andrea. :) I just hope it helps.
  • liam887liam887210 ViperPosts: 547Member
    Meph wrote: »
    as intended up unto 128GB of RAM
    :lol: if only
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    Well, I'm still working on low-poly version of the central structures. Meantime, I've decided to add torpedo launcher pod under each wing.
    Here is a preliminary version of the new weapon system.

    34q6wk6.jpg
  • MephMeph171 Posts: 0Member
    *nods approvingly*
  • ArmondikovArmondikov0 Posts: 0Member
    Meph wrote: »
    In any case, a 64-bit system is miles better than a 32 bit system...

    That's strange because since getting 64 bit Windows 7 my graphics stuff has lagged quite badly. Lightwave is painfully slow, which is why I'm not working on models at the moment as it's just painful. Though it's still the release candidate version so there's likely to be a lot of driver issues (particularly with the my tablet as Photoshop doesn't lag with a mouse as much) or clashes between 32 bit programs and the 64 bit OS. It should hopefully disappear when getting the final one in a few weeks and reinstalling everything from scratch back on to the decent hard-disk... anyway I'm lucky to actually have a working machine at the moment so I might take another few days to nerd-out over it in a week or so.


    *nods approvingly*

    Ditto. The torpedo launchers look good. Nice and powerful stuff.


    Interestingly, here's a short discussion on "boarding torpedoes", which I think suits Marines quite nicely!

    DakkaDakka - Warhammer 40K Forums - What would a boarding torpedo look like?
  • MephMeph171 Posts: 0Member
    's weird that your performance is down though, what were you running before? It could be a driver issue or directx-related. Probably obvious stuff, but best to install the newest graphics driver and directx. What kind of graph. card do you have?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    @ Meph: :)

    @ Armondikov: thank you :) and regarding your OS problems, they should disappear in the final version anyway, I agree with Meph
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    Armondikov wrote: »
    That's strange because since getting 64 bit Windows 7 my graphics stuff has lagged quite badly. Lightwave is painfully slow, which is why I'm not working on models at the moment as it's just painful. Though it's still the release candidate version so there's likely to be a lot of driver issues (particularly with the my tablet as Photoshop doesn't lag with a mouse as much) or clashes between 32 bit programs and the 64 bit OS. It should hopefully disappear when getting the final one in a few weeks and reinstalling everything from scratch back on to the decent hard-disk... anyway I'm lucky to actually have a working machine at the moment so I might take another few days to nerd-out over it in a week or so.

    This can be problem with driver for graphic card and maybe driver for tablet. Windows 7 are too new for third parties to have optimalized drivers. Check for actual updated versions of them. Complete reinstall of system can help too. :)

    andcar1969: See I found you here too. :)
  • FlankerFlanker0 Posts: 0Member
    Great work the torpedo launcher looks like a nice addition to the powerfull weaponspower of the ship.
  • ParkerParker0 Posts: 0Member
    Flanker wrote: »
    Great work the torpedo launcher looks like a nice addition to the powerfull weaponspower of the ship.

    Compared the ships of the Imperial Navy, the ships of the Adeptus Astartes are quite weak.
    After the Horus Heresy, the Space Marines only got ships with a focus on troop transport, after many imperial official demanded, that the Astartes shall get no fleet. Corax, the primarch of the Raven Guard protested and stated, the a weak fleet would lead to events like Istvaan IV.

    So the Astartes got ships with focus on troop deployment and ground support, although they are still a thread to other capital ships. But a battleship of the imperial navy will probably win such a fight.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    @ Tom Grays: yes, nice to see you here too :)

    @ Flanker: thanks for comment, I'll add some launch bays for boarding vehicles and more weapons when I'll work on central hull detailing

    @ Parker: here we have a loyal fan of the Imperium :) ... seriously, really thanks for the clarification :)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    Low-poly model update and assemblage renderings

    23ldwtf.jpg

    51tv6g.jpg

    b3opkw.jpg
  • UK-BladeUK-Blade0 Posts: 0Member
    Just keeps looking better and better......:thumb::thumb:

    Keep up the good work.
  • MephMeph171 Posts: 0Member
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    @ UK-Blade: many thanks mate :)

    @ Meph: dead sure you cannot use this stuff in a game :D but less than 700 Kpolys for this level of detail is not too bad
  • BinkermanBinkerman0 Posts: 0Member
    Turning out real nice Andrea :thumb: ...

    Jas
  • fractalspongefractalsponge251 Posts: 1,087Member
    Looks good - in fact, what's the difference with the high poly version? Doesn't look like you dropped any objects per se, were the savings mostly in reducing the insane number of bevels? :)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    @ Binkerman: many thanks mate and glad to see you've updated your fantastic thread :)

    @ FS: you're right :), details are all there (on the contrary, this model contains more details than the other one :)) so, the smoothing segments number reduction on the whole mesh allowed me to save more than 60% of polygons (besides, all new added detail is "low-cost" geometry).
  • SyklonSyklon0 Posts: 0Member
    I'm with fractal, unless there's some difference we're missing at the current render size it looks pretty much identical quality-wise with the high-poly version.
  • fractalspongefractalsponge251 Posts: 1,087Member
    Yeah, I'd say the extra smoothing isn't really doing much for it; keep it at the lower level and use the headroom for more detail.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    Yeah, I'd say the extra smoothing isn't really doing much for it; keep it at the lower level and use the headroom for more detail.

    I'm on this path for good :)
  • ArmondikovArmondikov0 Posts: 0Member
    I'm sure you'll be able to see the difference up close, but I think now this is a more complete model and even zoomed in, everything will just come together and you won't notice the lack of smoothing so much.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    @ Armondikov: yes, close-up renderings would show the difference between the two version especially on larger blocks anyway now, the work on smaller details goes in parallel on the two versions.

    I've started to work on boarding bays and short-range weapons on the central part of the ship so here is a wip rendering

    1jp76f.jpg
  • KadaeuxKadaeux0 Posts: 0Member
    Nice, but i'd change the smaller ones for a Casement mount, as is it looks like it has ZERO traverse and elevation capacity.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]0 Posts: 3Member
    Kadaeux wrote: »
    Nice, but i'd change the smaller ones for a Casement mount, as is it looks like it has ZERO traverse and elevation capacity.

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean :) but if you refer to the weapon system, there is only a sort of "micro-cannon" (I wanted it fixed from the beginning) and the structures above it are windows.
    Anyway I have a new design for it I'll show here shortly.
  • KadaeuxKadaeux0 Posts: 0Member
    andcar1969 wrote: »
    Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean :) but if you refer to the weapon system, there is only a sort of "micro-cannon" (I wanted it fixed from the beginning) and the structures above it are windows.
    Anyway I have a new design for it I'll show here shortly.

    Instead of a fixed mount go with something like this

    WNAust_75-42_Skoda_Erzherzog_Karl_pic.jpg

    See the guns embedded in the sides? That sort of mount. A fixed weapon just does not work. Especially in space.
Sign In or Register to comment.