BC poly limit

[MarkyD]

What is it? I have heard 15k is ok, but i have read through old pages here all night and I have read different opinions on what is what...

question:-

Using atleast 4x 2048 x 2048 texture sheets....  (current base standard) whats the poly restiction fellas.

[Nebula]

BC has been able to play 160K models but most like to keep it at, near, or under 15K.

[tiqhud]

textures, polys, all add-up , thats why 15k poly,

[Raven Night]

I limit my models to 8000 polys or less. Not sure if that is the limit, but it is one I havent had troubles with.

[Adonis]

Texture consumption is more the issue than poly count. 15k is reasonable.

[Jay Crimson]

Generally (and that means you're using no crazy resolution for textures, so sticking to what, 1024x1024 or maybe 2048x2048 tops) I think the golden rule for any current game (may differ per engine) is somewhat around:

< 4000: Plays smooth on all PC's
4000-8000: Plays smooth on most PC's (bar the very old PC's still using GeForce3/4 etc)
8000-15000: Plays smooth on modern PC's
15000 > : Plays smooth on modern high-end PC's.

That is not taking into consideration the largest fleet battle which can quickly lag up ofcourse.

[Starforce2]

with all the dual core crap comming out the 512meg vid cards being reasonably priced now don't worry about 15k. Alot of games like silent hunter 4 and such are far more intensive than BC and most people build their pc's for those type of games.

[Aeries]

I wouldn't be too terribly concerned about the poly counts... I've been able to use DJ's Century [about 21k last time I checked] with almost totally maxed game settings on nearly any machine. I don't think it's really so much the computer's limitations as it is the archaic game engine... on a personal level, though, my goal has been to keep my stuff below 30k... [you know me, LOVE the uber-detailed stuff. ] I mean, the models are only a couple megs each, so for the system to load the models isn't so much an issue as it is an issue for it to load a number of large super-detailed texture files. Really, it's the textures that hurt performance; 10, 20, or even 30 megs of textures per ship [depending on the ship and all that] can really hurt performance after a while, especially on an older machine with, say, a sad little 64 or 128 meg graphics card.

[Dawg81]

i would say go all out

[DJ Curtis]

I wouldn't be too terribly concerned about the poly counts... I've been able to use DJ's Century [about 21k last time I checked] with almost totally maxed game settings on nearly any machine. I don't think it's really so much the computer's limitations as it is the archaic game engine... on a personal level, though, my goal has been to keep my stuff below 30k... [you know me, LOVE the uber-detailed stuff. ] I mean, the models are only a couple megs each, so for the system to load the models isn't so much an issue as it is an issue for it to load a number of large super-detailed texture files. Really, it's the textures that hurt performance; 10, 20, or even 30 megs of textures per ship [depending on the ship and all that] can really hurt performance after a while, especially on an older machine with, say, a sad little 64 or 128 meg graphics card.

If I had that ship to do over again, (which I might, lol) it would definitely not be that high.  Probably closer to 15k.  I really didn't need to use that many polys to get the job done, in retrospect.

You would really be amazed at how much detail you can model in with 10-15k if the mesh is clean and efficient.

[limey BSc.]

i would say go all out

QFT and cookied!!!

I've taken to not even looking at the poly count of the stuff I'm making till I'm done, if I even look at all!

[DJ Curtis]

Not to sound old and frumpy, but...

That's modeling blasphemy.

There is some measure of pride inherent in knowing you can build a mesh that is the best you can possibly make it, and a minimum expenditure.  Working on the principle that the ideal mesh was one that described exactly what you want in as few polygons as possible.  It's a recogniztion of economy and reason.  Not using more than you need to just because you can.

I used to operate under that principle, but I've found that as a modeler, it is far more satisfying, and better for gamers, to build a mesh that is both beautiful and economical.

For me, poly count is a matter of pride.  It is a measure of my competency, and in my opinion, a measure of the competency of others, as well.

[Aeries]

Ahh, that all makes sense. :]

I'm rather pleased with a current project I've been working on [that has yet to be posted, anywhere]. It's almost done, and has merely 5,000 polies so far. I suspect it won't be any more than 10k when it's entirely done with all the little details I want to incorporate... it's been a huge learning experience that I'll incorporate into the final rendition of the Mithra, which I've been planning for quite a while now. ;)

I suppose a measure of discretion with poly consumption and constructing these models is needed in order to not only be satisfied in your own work, but for other gamers to be satisfied in it as well? :]

In any case, I do look forward to your next shot at the Century Dj, whenever you get around to her again! :]

[WileyCoyote]

I try to be under 25k polys, but I learn fast.

[DJ Curtis]

You certainly do.

[limey BSc.]

Not to sound old and frumpy, but...

That's modeling blasphemy.

There is some measure of pride inherent in knowing you can build a mesh that is the best you can possibly make it, and a minimum expenditure.  Working on the principle that the ideal mesh was one that described exactly what you want in as few polygons as possible.  It's a recogniztion of economy and reason.  Not using more than you need to just because you can.

I used to operate under that principle, but I've found that as a modeler, it is far more satisfying, and better for gamers, to build a mesh that is both beautiful and economical.

For me, poly count is a matter of pride.  It is a measure of my competency, and in my opinion, a measure of the competency of others, as well.

To clarify, I'm not condoning wasting polys. For example, using any more than 2 for a flat square is pointless and wasteful. However, in my opinion, quality should NEVER be compromised for poly count, which is why I don't have a limit for my Voyager model. I don't want to get tied down with a limit that I'll either have to break, or compromise on quality.

[DJ Curtis]

Quality and low poly counts are not mutually exclusive.

[Villain]

Low polycount is relative.

[DJ Curtis]

I'm sorry Prime, but you're incorrect.  In Star Trek: Bridge Commander, a low poly count is not relative.  In fact, the numbers are quite well established.  It happens that I know this kind of thing fairly thoroughly, and you can trust that I hold a certain degree of intellectual authority in this matter.

[Arvis Taljik]

I agree whole-heartedly with DJ. I couldn't have put it better myself.