|
|
|
|
| Notices |
Do you own this game? Write a review and let others know how you like it.
|
 |
May 10th, 2007, 02:58 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 12,617
Thanks: 4,059
Thanked 5,818 Times in 2,870 Posts
|
|
Re: Pershing Icon Set
After reviewing the three top view drawings I have of this thing and making a few adjustment to the Icon this seems to be closer to the proportions of the M26. The composite at the lower right has a rear hull shadow line
3x normal size
Don |
May 10th, 2007, 03:34 PM
|
 |
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 368
Thanks: 146
Thanked 123 Times in 49 Posts
|
|
Re: Pershing Icon Set
So, what are the actual pixel dimensions on your mod here?
|
May 10th, 2007, 03:41 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 12,617
Thanks: 4,059
Thanked 5,818 Times in 2,870 Posts
|
|
Re: Pershing Icon Set
fender to fender no shadow line 42x23. Here it is 1:1
Don
|
May 10th, 2007, 03:54 PM
|
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 368
Thanks: 146
Thanked 123 Times in 49 Posts
|
|
Re: Pershing Icon Set
That is what my M-46 is in that comparison. I did the M-46 because that was what I was workin on and they are "basically" identical outside of the different engine deck and small details of course.
Do me a favor and slap that modded Pershing next to one of your latest T-54s and post it would ya? I want to see how those look in comparison to my Patton / T-54 comparison.
Oh, I forgot to add something about your mod that made me chuckle. You modded one of the things that I changed right off...LOL... The turret ring. My turret is too small. LOL. Detail oriented eyes look a like. 
So all these little detail talks gonna lead to some of my stuff making it into the game again?..LOL...
Joe |
May 10th, 2007, 04:27 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 12,617
Thanks: 4,059
Thanked 5,818 Times in 2,870 Posts
|
|
Re: Pershing Icon Set
T-55 / M26
3x normal size 
Don |
May 10th, 2007, 05:41 PM
|
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 368
Thanks: 146
Thanked 123 Times in 49 Posts
|
|
Re: Pershing Icon Set
Thank you Don.
I know this is gonna be a resource thing probably but, according to my source the T-55 should be at least 2 pixels shorter & about 2 pixels narrower than the Pershing. It looks like it is narrower, but not shorter...kinda my point, looks too small. I don't know. Screw it, we'll run with it. I'll start with what I used to do. I used to look up about three different sources, and go with the common source. I bought my Greenhill Data Book for the "cure all" of that to save time. Oh well, time to double, and triple check it on everything.  An update will be coming soon.
Joe |
May 10th, 2007, 10:16 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 12,617
Thanks: 4,059
Thanked 5,818 Times in 2,870 Posts
|
|
Re: Pershing Icon Set
Joe, there are fuel tanks hanging off the end of that vehicle that make it appear longer. And they do indeed extend the length of the Icon beyond the stated "hull length". Any source that gives hull length should NOT be including the fuel tanks ( though it wouldn't surprise me to find one that does ).
When checking 3 view drawings of the tank the width x length ratio for that vehicle from the front mud guards to the rear of the fuel tanks it comes back as 2.134. Check that Icon and it comes back 2.143. One pixel shorter makes it 2.095 and one pixel longer makes it 2.190 so 2.143 is, using the scale we are using, virtually dead on 45x21 which is what that icon is when the fuel tanks are added to the rear of the tank
Don
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode