Editing Vehicle files

[gunship]

and its fun to mod a game a little

[bus]

Is there some one who cans creating data base tools, which cold make thing easer for editing units?

[Oudy]

Thanks for the comments Madmatt

Let me be perfectly clear...there has been absolutely no hacking of TOW. Someone has figured out how to read the SFS files (but not write them), most of which are simple text files. The only thing I have done is modified a couple of the files and put them into my TOW directory. Nothing in the original program has been altered. If you recreate the directory structure in your main TOW directory such as "Tow\data\...\pz_ivf1" the modded files will overwrite the original files, but not change them. This allows you to add different units to the game.

None of the original files are changed, nor are the executables. The only thing you can do is overwrite data files. I think that the ability to mod the game is a good thing. In general games that have active modding communities seem to be more successful and greater longevity. But until I hear something on the issue from the devs, I am unwilling to upload missions with modded files. I have great respect for the people at Battlefront and 1C and wish the game great success.

All the best

Oudy

[Markus86]

These days, a game will die very fast without mods It can only be in the sense of the developpers.

At least when they have sold addon number three for another 20 bucks

[Oudy]

Here is one for Firefly fans.

I changed the gun, armor values, and country (to UK). File is based on the US A4M3 76mm Sherman with the gun from the UK Challenger. As you can see there is a little clipping in the barrel, but overall not too bad. I haven't gotten the UK markings yet, but it's only a matter of adjusting the locations to fit the tank.

[SlapHappy]

Oudy

Nice work. How are you identifying which meshes to move? Trial and error, or are you able to view them with a utility? I haven't had any luck finding something to read the .msh format files (with or without the textures). I noticed in the file header there is a "BS" in all the .msh files.

The only thing I was able to find is there is a custom SDK provider called Bitmanagement Software which is a German concern. They provide an SDK for Blender. They also provide custom SDK's for developers. The Blender exporter is called "BS Exporter". That's just a shot in the dark, though after doing a pretty exhaustive search on Google for any scrap of info I could find.

[Jeff Duquette]

Nice Oudy!

How come your not using the penetration figures listed for the Archer?

Jeff

[SlapHappy]

These mod vehicles are great, Oudy. You should try Either the "Jumbo" or the Sherman 105 next. Although it would be difficult to make the Jumbo look right at this stage with the tools available.

[Oudy]

Thanks for the comments.

Slaphappy, I'm using the SFS reader by Dr.Jones. You can read the files since most are text. I'm figuring out how they fit together largely by trial and error. I'm working on a faq to explain what I've learned.

At this stage I'm not trying to make the units look like they should because I don't know anything about 3d modeling. I have no skill in that direction. I'm just trying to get the right gun on the closest body and then make the stats as correct as I can.

Jeff, I used the gun data for the Challenger I tank. I chose it because in the encyclopedia it said that the Firefly had the same gun. It carried a 77mm. 17pdr. Mk. V. The Archer has a 76.2mm 17pdr. Mk.2 gun. Should I have used the other gun? It can always be changed if I put the wrong one in the tank. The interesting thing about the Firefly is that it apparently had less frontal hull armor than the M4A3 76mm. Sherman tanks did.

So far I'm just playing around to see what types of changes I can make. But it has distracted me from mission making.

Oudy

[SlapHappy]

Originally posted by Oudy:

Thanks for the comments.

Slaphappy, I'm using the SFS reader by Dr.Jones. You can read the files since most are text.

Oudy

Yes, I know . I was just curious if you were actually viewing the .msh files, since I haven't been able to open them in a viewer program to identify what part they represent in the overall model. If you're having to pick through all those meshes by trial and error, I could see how it could take you a while to complete a model transformation. Still looks promising, though.

[Oudy]

SlapHappy, you can identify all of the meshes and their collisions by looking at the hier files. They explain how everything is connected together. And no, I can't read the .msh files. I haven't even tried.

Oudy

[SlapHappy]

Oudy

Thanks. I got your email and replied. Thanks for the tip about the hier files.

I'm feverishly working on trying to balance those grenade bundles as I believe they were inadvertently underpowered through an oversight.

[nev403]

The 77mm was a detuned or "low recoil" 17pdr , kinda 1/2 way tween the hot 17pdr and the US 3inch , the firefly should use the 76.2mm Mk2 gun. All 3 guns had a different shell casing and ammo was not interchangable

There was MkIIc firefly and MkVc the IIc used the early cast hull and the Vc was based on the MkV sherman with welded hull ,i cant remember off hand which US version the Mk V equated to , the US considered it an poor varient and didnt use it much. The Vc had the same lower front hull as the Lee/Grant/Canadian Ram with the 3 sections bolted together with flanges , not the thicker cast lower front hull shown in the Sherman image at top of this page .

The US didnt adopt the full power 17pdr because they considered it dangerously overpowered and paid the price in normandy when the 3inch showed itself to be little better then the short 75mm , because it used the same shatter prone APHE projectile. They even tried removing the HE charge and filling the void with lead but it didnt help much . Fireflys were issued just before the normandy invasion and the crews had fired only a few rounds on the range before going to france , they soon found in combat that the gun would jam after firing a bunch of rounds rapid fire , the solution was to drain 1/2 the oil out of the recoil buffer because it overheated and expanded and prevented the gun from recoiling fully and ejecting the empty case

[ June 10, 2007, 04:39 AM: Message edited by: nev403 ]

[Jeff Duquette]

Hi Oudy:

What Nev403 said. Just to add a bit the US 12th Army Group began pressing the British to begin sending them 17-pdr Firefly’s a couple months into the campaign in Northwest Europe. According to the 12th Army Operations reports a handful did end up being shipped over to the Americans.

As to your new very nice(!) vehicle edit -- The error isn’t on your part. The Challenger, Archer and Firefly should all be using the same penetration values (and if someone were to make a mod with the Achilles -- M10 TD with 17-pdr -- it should be using the same gun and penetration values as Challenger\Archer\Firefly). The problem is that the game is showing one set of penetration values for the Challenger and another for the Archer. Both should be the same.

The Comet was equipped with the 77mm, and would have lower penetration values than the gun on the Archer\Challenger\Firefly\Achilles.

Knowing what I know thus far about how the game seems to be modeling slope effects, I think the Archer’s penetration values represent a better guesstimate for your Firefly mod. However, the same penetration values for the Archer should also be utilized by the Challenger.

ToW values for Archer’s 17-pdr APC @ 0-degress

100m = 172mm

500m = 162mm

1000m = 150mm

1500m = 136mm

2000m = 124mm

NOTE: These are not actual 17-pdr penetration values @ 0-degrees, however if you are trying to maintain consistency within the games engine the above would be the values you would use.

Best regards

Jeff

[ June 10, 2007, 08:31 AM: Message edited by: Jeff Duquette ]

[Oudy]

Thanks for the input Nev and Jeff

Here is the revised Sherman Firefly with the correct gun. Again, you can see the clipping in the barrel.

Oudy

[Silencer]

impressive.

you'll also need a need picture change on the bottom for the PZIV F1

what are the real values of the 17lbs gun?

[ June 10, 2007, 10:21 AM: Message edited by: Silencer ]

[thewood]

Does this take the place of an existing unit, or can you add completely new units?

[ColonelBlimp]

Absolutely beautiful work Oudy!

It really is heartening that people are filling in the gaps in the units this early!

On Wikipedia for some reason it says 89mm turret front. Don't know where they got this from, but it would be nice for the Brits to be a little less prone to being Swiss Cheese.

Also, what is the game's nature concerning additional armour put on tanks, i.e. tank tracks, sandbags etc.? I know a lot of British tank crews put anything they could find on and I would be nice to see this reflected in the game somehow. I know the IS-100/85 or something has a bit of extra track stuck to the front but I don't know how this affects things.

[FinnN]

Originally posted by thewood:

Does this take the place of an existing unit, or can you add completely new units?

You can completely add new units, or modify existing ones.

The possibility is there for an extra bit that interacts with a round before it hits the target, but as the shape appears to be held in the 3D file I don't think anyone can add these as yet.

Have fun

Finn

[Oudy]

ColonelBlimp

The armor mask had 89mm armor but the turret itself even on the M4A3s is 63mm. The big difference that I found was on the hull armor. The M4A3 has the front hull armor listed as 102mm but on the Firefly it only said 51mm. I'm not sure why and if an expert on the Firefly tells me differently I'd be happy to change it.

Oudy

[Jeff Duquette]

Looks great Oudy!

The invisible portions of the Firefly barrel -- is this some sort of texture issue and the background color of the game’s encyclopedia screen? It looks like there is a camouflage scheme on the 17-pdr barrel. Do the same portions of the barrel disappear during actual game play, or is this only occurring in the game’s encyclopedia screen?

[Oudy]

Jeff

It has to do with the actual skin graphic. The original barrel was located in one location on the skin and the new barrel is somewhere else. To get it to skin correctly without the invisible parts, you would have to remake the skin file which is way beyond my limited graphic capabilities.

Oudy

[Dr.Jones]

Oudy,

in this case I think that UV coordinations in gun mesh are not matching all new pixels location in this tank texture, like you said.

br.

Dr.Jones

[Markus86]

Oudy I don't know how complex it is, but my studies also include graphics so maybe you can contact me and I could see what I can do.

Only if you like of course

If so, please use Theatre of War as email topic and use this email

markussieber2@gmx.de

regards markus

[nev403]

The MkV hull had 51mm@56 deg slope on the upper hull, the lower hull unit with the final drives in it was where the different thickness was , the cast nose on the version you used is 102mm , the IIc Firefly had this same cast lower hull , but had the upper cast hull from the M4A1 i think it was called in US service. The MkV had the thinner lower hull that was in 3 sections bolted together with 2 flanges running vertically up the center of the lower hull section (same as Grant/Lee/Canadian Ram) that was the 51mm @15 deg nose , the MkV was same as early US M4A3 with short 75mm or US M4A4 , you used the M4A3 76mm which has a completely different turret , a better choice to convert to a Vc Firefly would be the M4A3 with short 75mm

US M4 = Brit Sherm MkI with small size turret

US M4A1 = Brit Sherm MkII(cast upper and lower hull and small size turret)this is best version to mod into IIc Firefly

US M4A2 = Brit Sherm MkIII(64mm upper hull at less slope and 102mm cast lower hull and larger size turret

US M4A3 short 75mm = Brit Sherm MkIV This version was hardly used by brits

US M4A4 = Brit MkV(hardly used by US , they considered it a poor variant, used in pac by USMC to some degree)

US M4A3 76mm ,is the model you used which has the 3rd turret design and the thick cast lower hull.

The M4A3Esomethings were the improved suspension versions with HVSS suspension and wider tracks, All the M4A3Esomethings used the 3rd turret design but i dont think the brits ever did use that 3rd turret(or used it in very limited numbers) ,there was a total of 5 different tracks used on various sherman models, 3 skinny ,1 slightly wider , and 1 very wide used on the last of the M4A3E models(E8 called the Easy8) , 3 different turrets with 2 or 3 different glasis plates , and a cast upper hull and 2 or 3 different welded upper hulls, and 2 different lower front hulls , 1 cast and 1 bolted. There was probably at least 5 different engines used ranging from a aircraft radial air cooled used in Lee/Grants and 1st gen Sherms to 5 GM industrial inline 6 cyls all geared together at the crankshafts to make a 30 cylinder, 2 were flat opposed , 2 were in a Vee and the 5th was straight up . The Brits installed diesel engines in some of thier MkIII's used in north africa and Italy to try and reduce fire hazard , but it was ammo storage that led to the fires , not the gas engine

As i said before , the various models soon became a hodge podge of parts cobbled together in repair shops , in some cases , M4A1 cast hulls would have the rear 1/2 replaced with flat welded plates .

Only 1 Sherman in the Canadian Armd Corps made it from Normandy to end of the war without being knocked out , It was a tank from the Sherbrooke Fusiliers Regt. 2nd Can Armd Bgde

[ June 10, 2007, 09:20 PM: Message edited by: nev403 ]