C2C - Units

[Hydromancerx]

here you have

What about the red robotic eyes on them all?

 

[Thunderbrd]

I found out what bugs me most:
Droids would mimic natural systems you said, since they evolve and therefore would get analoge forms, right?
The thing is: the major part of evolutions are not: "Be the most deadliest thing there" but more: "Survive long enough to have a lot of offspring". biological systems need things that allows energy intace (a mouth) or oxigen intage (Blowhole iE). Doids don't. Shark teeth would be mostly useless against "ships" or other droids. Blowholes are not needed for oxigen intake. Maybe usefull for planes from a kind of submarine carrier, but a hole on the backfin would be more usefull. A big part of the body is just for holding inner organs that aren't needed for droids. They could fill it with weapons and ammu, but then it doesn't have to have the same shape.
Eyes in particular are completely outdated. Why would stick with two eyes (a good example for evolution only comes up with good-enough rather then perfect stuff) when you can have sensors all over the body? Why would a seaturtle transport ship need a neck? It only increases transport ways.
Afaik crocodiles stay mostly on the same spot and never swim fast/long distances (could be wrong), so they are not made for this. Fins would be better for that. Legs only if it would be amphibian (not as animal but the droid), but then again: Wheels are more efficient.
Why has the Crab it's "arms"? I thought it would be a repair unit? Something like a ScrewDriver or more versatile tools would be more logical.
Attached weapons would destroy your "aquadynamic" argument. They would be mostly hidden and only exposed in battle mode.


I don't know if this is possible to change the graphics to, sparth. It is just my opinion on how those droid ships should look like. Keep in mind that the way animal evolved is suited for their style of life, not the style of operations droids have to perform (getting food, long distant swimmers/fast swimmers or more stationary, limited biological systems (eyes, no wheels, blowholes))... That's the (IMO logical) way I can imagine animal-like droid ships.

All very good points and along the lines of my thoughts as well. Better expressed than I could've.

However, the crab unit would still need its 'legs' or at least a few of them for latching onto the repair site.

 

[Faustmouse]

All very good points and along the lines of my thoughts as well. Better expressed than I could've.

However, the crab unit would still need its 'legs' or at least a few of them for latching onto the repair site.

Thank you. I felt kinda ignored the last days on the forum

I didn't say anything against the crabs "legs" (sorry for using terms like arms or legs, don't know if there are more appropiate english terms). Same goes for a tortoise's shell, crocodiles mouth (as landing bridge) or the manta's shape for rushing trough a reef. Hydro and you made a lot of valid points and I think the animals to represent a ship CC were good choices. But Hydro, you seem so enthusiastic with your "red eyes" that I'm afraid you didn't consider the points I made.

Also, I never thought about modern ships shaped as animals (makes sense though). But how BIG are they actually? I mean, smaller ships coordinated with swarm intelligence (with strong AI) would make a lot of sense and are probably highly efficient. But a carrier in shape of a whale must be HUGE (especially when you want aircraft flying trough it's blowhole). This would limit the use of smaller units since they simply don't have enough firepower...
So what#s the size of your units? Size plays a VERY important role for shape.

 

[Sparth]

What about the red robotic eyes on them all?

I can do that.


And for the rest of the changes: guys I can only add new skins for them. I can add "hatches" or similar flat "things" but adding weapons and changing parts of the body to something else is beyond my skills. I can change skin of the crab scissors to look wrench but in the end they still we be look like scissors.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Afaik crocodiles stay mostly on the same spot and never swim fast/long distances (could be wrong), so they are not made for this. Fins would be better for that. Legs only if it would be amphibian (not as animal but the droid), but then again: Wheels are more efficient.

Yea salt water crocodile range is under 500km.

 

[Sparth]

What about the red robotic eyes on them all?

Skins with red eyes

 

[Hydromancerx]

Yay! Now they look more robotic. Could you make the ray a darker color since its spouse to be the rogue pirate type unit? Thanks!

 

[Sparth]

Yay! Now they look more robotic. Could you make the ray a darker color since its spouse to be the rogue pirate type unit? Thanks!

its ok?

 

[Thunderbrd]

Thank you. I felt kinda ignored the last days on the forum

I didn't say anything against the crabs "legs" (sorry for using terms like arms or legs, don't know if there are more appropiate english terms). Same goes for a tortoise's shell, crocodiles mouth (as landing bridge) or the manta's shape for rushing trough a reef. Hydro and you made a lot of valid points and I think the animals to represent a ship CC were good choices. But Hydro, you seem so enthusiastic with your "red eyes" that I'm afraid you didn't consider the points I made.

Also, I never thought about modern ships shaped as animals (makes sense though). But how BIG are they actually? I mean, smaller ships coordinated with swarm intelligence (with strong AI) would make a lot of sense and are probably highly efficient. But a carrier in shape of a whale must be HUGE (especially when you want aircraft flying trough it's blowhole). This would limit the use of smaller units since they simply don't have enough firepower...
So what#s the size of your units? Size plays a VERY important role for shape.

I think we've all been a little edgy recently for some odd reason I haven't yet figured out... sorry to have you feeling ignored. We've disagreed on some points recently but that's going to happen on occasion - sometimes its on things where there's not really an argument to be had because nobody's right and nobody's wrong and its just subjective opinions being expressed and taken into consideration among the whole.

As for the sizes... probably pronounced for its function is about the best way to express it. These wouldn't all be in perfect size ratio to one another of course. The Crabs would be Small (roughly the size of a dog) but very plentiful. The Whale would be about 10 times the size of the largest real whale or larger. Then there'd be all manner of in-between. Ratio of sizes would adhere more towards the ratios between the normal ships of those lines unless, like the crab example, the mechanism is drastically differing.

 

[Hydromancerx]

its ok?

Look great!

TB or Faustmouse you have anything you want hi to chnage on them? Remember they have to be skin changes not mesh changes. So he cannot chnage the shape or add on new parts. Just the color and texture.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Size balancing of units is done in the art XML not so much in the art. We have units where we change the scale to make the unit 30x bigger others are 0.3x the size just to make them correct with all the other units in game. Remember the Haast's Eagle, Eagle and Hawk are the same art just at different sizes.

 

[Faustmouse]

@Hydro: I'm not happy with these models for the above reasons, but if we have to stick to skin changes, they look ok I guess (not critizing your work here sparth, more the whole concept )

@DH: I wasn't asking because of the size of the game model, but more from an understanding point of view. I mean, a Pidgeon next to a Battleship looks also weird.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Look great!

TB or Faustmouse you have anything you want hi to chnage on them? Remember they have to be skin changes not mesh changes. So he cannot chnage the shape or add on new parts. Just the color and texture.

Couldn't YOU manipulate the meshes a little? With the work you did on the davinci tank and the fact that small tweaks to the mesh shouldn't cause major problems with the animation I would've thought you'd find this possible to make some minor adjustments. That said, it's probably not terribly necessary. I don't feel too compelled to be terribly picky on these at the moment - just happy they look as good as they already do tbh.

@faust: for someone who 'gets' the concept as well as you do I'm surprised you're so against it. Though I suppose we disagree on one major thing - you feel that biological evolution is a process of ONLY getting rid of the worst elements that lead to a lack of survival and in this only see the darwinian logic of natural selection. I see something more, something intelligent behind the design. I'm not going to take this into a religious 'god' sense but I believe there IS an intelligence guiding each species. I cannot fathomably rationalize so many things nature has accomplished via evolution otherwise. Flight, interspecies synergies, there are really a number of issues with elminating intelligent design from the picture. But I don't think it was all the guidance of one intelligence nor am I convinced it's a species-wide intelligence. I think it's quite possible it may be that there is a strategic thought process that goes into each next new individual and an actively intelligent effort to improve the form. In my view, nature IS an AI already. The overlording AI of the droids hivemind would recognize this, connect with it, learn from it, and try to pick up in many ways where it has left off. On land, the combat form of a droid is generally human or bipedal... surprisingly, can you think of a single form that would be much superior to ours for agility, accuracy, alertness, and well... the use of weaponry?

Perhaps the Droid armies on land COULD have some more animalistic forms as well... and certainly some of the air ones though the 'natural' motility would not be so effective in the air in light of the propulsion methods in use at that point beginning to have little to do with aerial dynamics and more to do with subatomic physics.

I think of the Droid forms as somewhat Transformer like without the ability to transform so drastically (though later with more nano-tech developments they could certainly become far more capable of adopting whatever forms they would wish to... possibly even to the extent they become much more like the T-2, made of raw liquid reshapable nanotech.) These naval units as planned represent a stage of their emerging development and a rational one I think.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Couldn't YOU manipulate the meshes a little? With the work you did on the davinci tank and the fact that small tweaks to the mesh shouldn't cause major problems with the animation I would've thought you'd find this possible to make some minor adjustments. That said, it's probably not terribly necessary. I don't feel too compelled to be terribly picky on these at the moment - just happy they look as good as they already do tbh.

Not anymore. Since upgrading from Windows XP to Windows 7 last summer my 3D Studio Max 6 will not work anymore. From what I can tell is that its totally incompatible with Windows 7 and only like 3D Studio Max 10 or later (I think) works with Windows 7. I also tried a month trial demo of the latest version of 3D studio max (now called Autodesk 3ds Max) but it has long since expired in which I removed it from my computer since it was taking up space.

I have tried to use the free program called Blender but I can't seem to get anything to work even with following tutorials. Which leaves me with Gmax a VERY old free demo program from 3D Studio max that was made in the early 2000's. It can edit stuff, but seems to have trouble exporting it.

Sorry.

 

[Faustmouse]

Yeah we definetly disagree on our view I don't see any intelligence behind evolution. It is basically just luck and chance for me. By chance, mutations happen that are benefit, and with luck an individual with a beneficial gene survives and has a lot offspring. You can have the best genes ever, but still don't find a female or get eaten/sick before you reach adulthood. Happens. On the other hand, the worst genes (as long as they are not lethal) can life long and have offspring with luck. But over all, those with better genes have a slightly better chance of survival. The chances might be small, but keep in mind that we look back to 3 billion years of evolution - or longer. And the first billion years were really simple creatures that had "offspring" not in years but in days, hours or even minutes. And there were MANY. Under perfect conditions, for example, e. Coli can reach cell densities from over 10^8 cells per mL and dublicate every 17 (!!!) minutes. And they are quite complex compared to their early ancestors. These numbers are incredible big and it's hard to imagine that something so complex like our brain could develope out of basically nothing.
But then look back how much corn changed since we started to grow it. Or Cows. Or a chihuaha/wolf. These were non-natural selections of course, but it's the same principle - and happened in just 10.000-20.000 years.

I already explained why I'm 'against' it. Sharks and such didn't life in an enviroment were they had to track down enemies miles away and destroy them. Or were they had to avoid beeing seen on radar. Or were they had to carry aircraft... As I said: Their bodyshape is very well fittedfor living under water, but eyes, teeth, necks... All these have developed because of different reasons (getting food or limited biological systems). A peacock for example didn't really need it's tailfeathers. But it attracks females, resulting in more offspring. But effectually, it hinders them in fleeing and is "expensive" to maintain. So a droid that copies a peacock wouldn't have it, since it made no sense to him.

I think the reason why we picture bipedes like us is just our lack of imagination. We are fast, but a cheetah is faster. We can swim, but fish can do so better. We can't fly. We can't climb as well as monkeys. That we are biped is also for the same reasons as above:

We needed our hands free to use tools -> completly unnecessary when weapons/tools can be attached to your body as additional limbs.

We run biped because it consumes less energy then running on 4 legs. Which was critical for persistance hunting, but not so much for droids. I think beeing faster (without getting tired) is here much more beneficial.

Accuracy is much higher in humans when throwing spears and so, but when you have droids with strong AI and a gun, this is no argument. Even our now a days robots are much more superior in aiming then humans. Not only do they aim much faster, they are way more accurate.

Alternes? Like in seeing their foes? Quite outdated to "see" your foes instead of relying on satellites or improved forms of radars.

And weapons as I said, can easily beeing attached to the droids body.
Actually, I think something like a big cat/wolf) with "wings"/jet propulsion for flight/swim and retractable weapons would be a better land warrior.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Not anymore. Since upgrading from Windows XP to Windows 7 last summer my 3D Studio Max 6 will not work anymore. From what I can tell is that its totally incompatible with Windows 7 and only like 3D Studio Max 10 or later (I think) works with Windows 7. I also tried a month trial demo of the latest version of 3D studio max (now called Autodesk 3ds Max) but it has long since expired in which I removed it from my computer since it was taking up space.

I have tried to use the free program called Blender but I can't seem to get anything to work even with following tutorials. Which leaves me with Gmax a VERY old free demo program from 3D Studio max that was made in the early 2000's. It can edit stuff, but seems to have trouble exporting it.

Sorry.

No worries. I wasn't aware you'd lost the software access.

For 3d modelling I use Rhino but what I have not sorted out is what format (and format settings and limits) wireframes are saved in here and if it can do that. Come to think of it I don't have it loaded and its been a number of years since I've used it so would be a bit of a struggle to recall how.

Yeah we definetly disagree on our view I don't see any intelligence behind evolution. It is basically just luck and chance for me. By chance, mutations happen that are benefit, and with luck an individual with a beneficial gene survives and has a lot offspring. You can have the best genes ever, but still don't find a female or get eaten/sick before you reach adulthood. Happens. On the other hand, the worst genes (as long as they are not lethal) can life long and have offspring with luck. But over all, those with better genes have a slightly better chance of survival. The chances might be small, but keep in mind that we look back to 3 billion years of evolution - or longer. And the first billion years were really simple creatures that had "offspring" not in years but in days, hours or even minutes. And there were MANY. Under perfect conditions, for example, e. Coli can reach cell densities from over 10^8 cells per mL and dublicate every 17 (!!!) minutes. And they are quite complex compared to their early ancestors. These numbers are incredible big and it's hard to imagine that something so complex like our brain could develope out of basically nothing.
But then look back how much corn changed since we started to grow it. Or Cows. Or a chihuaha/wolf. These were non-natural selections of course, but it's the same principle - and happened in just 10.000-20.000 years.

I already explained why I'm 'against' it. Sharks and such didn't life in an enviroment were they had to track down enemies miles away and destroy them. Or were they had to avoid beeing seen on radar. Or were they had to carry aircraft... As I said: Their bodyshape is very well fittedfor living under water, but eyes, teeth, necks... All these have developed because of different reasons (getting food or limited biological systems). A peacock for example didn't really need it's tailfeathers. But it attracks females, resulting in more offspring. But effectually, it hinders them in fleeing and is "expensive" to maintain. So a droid that copies a peacock wouldn't have it, since it made no sense to him.

I think the reason why we picture bipedes like us is just our lack of imagination. We are fast, but a cheetah is faster. We can swim, but fish can do so better. We can't fly. We can't climb as well as monkeys. That we are biped is also for the same reasons as above:

We needed our hands free to use tools -> completly unnecessary when weapons/tools can be attached to your body as additional limbs.

We run biped because it consumes less energy then running on 4 legs. Which was critical for persistance hunting, but not so much for droids. I think beeing faster (without getting tired) is here much more beneficial.

Accuracy is much higher in humans when throwing spears and so, but when you have droids with strong AI and a gun, this is no argument. Even our now a days robots are much more superior in aiming then humans. Not only do they aim much faster, they are way more accurate.

Alternes? Like in seeing their foes? Quite outdated to "see" your foes instead of relying on satellites or improved forms of radars.

And weapons as I said, can easily beeing attached to the droids body.
Actually, I think something like a big cat/wolf) with "wings"/jet propulsion for flight/swim and retractable weapons would be a better land warrior.

I believe the armitures of the bipedal humanoid makes it a little superior to most forms. Very agile and able to manipulate it's 'stance' to suit a very wide host of situations. Something that was equally as strong with 4 legged motility would be a little improvement of course if that can be done to blend the two form strengths. Not saying I completely disagree... differing needs and priorities and all. But navally, I think life has found ways to master spacial dynamics in underwater environs. Whether the room for the interior of the creature is optimized for use for organs or altered for use for cargo or weaponry is an easy adaptation.

BTW, have you seen the stages of evolution that led to flight? This was an eye opener for me. There are some stages that appear rather 'less than optimal' and have represented form sacrifices for no apparent reason along natural selection lines.

 

[Faustmouse]

I believe the armitures of the bipedal humanoid makes it a little superior to most forms. Very agile and able to manipulate it's 'stance' to suit a very wide host of situations. Something that was equally as strong with 4 legged motility would be a little improvement of course if that can be done to blend the two form strengths. Not saying I completely disagree... differing needs and priorities and all. But navally, I think life has found ways to master spacial dynamics in underwater environs. Whether the room for the interior of the creature is optimized for use for organs or altered for use for cargo or weaponry is an easy adaptation.

BTW, have you seen the stages of evolution that led to flight? This was an eye opener for me. There are some stages that appear rather 'less than optimal' and have represented form sacrifices for no apparent reason along natural selection lines.

Another good question is: How would you imagine droid aircraft? Would you also take birds as example? Maybe this is a bit off since birds fly much lower then aircraft normally. But there were also birds over 11.000 m high.

No I haven't seen that. Is this a movie or an article? I'd like to see it.

 

[Yudishtira]

There is no reason for automata to be developed in the same shape as (most of) these animals. If any such machines are ever built, it will be as novelties. They are totally alt-timeline. So I guess I mostly agree with Mouse on this one. Some animal forms will be copied (if they haven't already), but they will be like dragonflies (maybe) and things.

Just for one example of how droid evolution will go in non-biological directions: Not sure if you've seen the droids in Star Wars Clone Wars that 'roll' at high-speed into position to fight, and instantly reconfigure/'transform' once there. No animal will ever do that but droids will and it is way advantageous to be able to do so.

As an aside, I would not have a problem with (artificially-engineered) animals that are huge and have 'symbiotic' human crews. That may be alt-timeline too, but to me it's far more likely (to come true) than a supercarrier or supersub in the shape of a whale.

As for intelligent design, my position is that the 'intelligence' of DNA and evolution themselves is greatly underestimated by us at present. Evolution is clearly smarter than a supercomputer, although its intelligence is somewhat more alien than what we're used to or can create. In the words attributed to Spock: "It's life, Jim...but not as we know it."

 

[Thunderbrd]

Another good question is: How would you imagine droid aircraft? Would you also take birds as example? Maybe this is a bit off since birds fly much lower then aircraft normally. But there were also birds over 11.000 m high.

No I haven't seen that. Is this a movie or an article? I'd like to see it.

I don't know... there could be some interesting benefits to having the capacity to turn off any rocket, field, or propeller based aviation that would come from the mechanical actuation of actual bird wing based flight which would only be possible for an advanced AI to really work out the details of enough to manage the capability from a technological standpoint. Again, it could be an interesting stealth mechanism and could provide an amazing degree of aerial maneuverability in some situations.

I saw the stages of evolution that led to flight covered on a TV segment but you know how it is with those 'discovery channel' type shows - referring back to them later in discussion takes an eidetic memory. There's probably some interesting info on the web somewhere on the matter. In fact, I'd suggest reading some of the well presented material on 'Intelligent Design'. I recognize the data they present and find it significant but I keep a more open mind on what the 'source' of the intelligence may be. It's probably a lot more complex than the religious thinking would like to simplify it into imo.

 

[Yudishtira]

Here is the upacked trike model and skin from Dune MOD.

Thanks Sparth!