 | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —James Brown
|
| | | (...) much (...) Excellent! It looks like we might actually be getting off the ground here... All we need now is a concensus as to what we're actually modeling. My preference is either: a: the 'roving dat file' approach that Mookie (I think) (...) (25 years ago, 7-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Joachim Probst
|
| | | | | Hi, (...) (ala (...) I would prefer (b), because of the relativly simple handling. (...) (25 years ago, 7-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | (...) holding up the works for whaever reason. A few rules that I insist on if I do the mpd: 1.no use of parts that do not exist/have never existed in colors you have used them in (in case someone ever tries to build the model or any of the (...) (25 years ago, 7-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | | (...) Regarding the unifficial parts can people who have them please send them to me? I am going to make a package containing all the unofficial castle parts I have and any I get sent so that everybody is using the same version (if there is more (...) (25 years ago, 7-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | (...) That you insist on? How about we all AGREE to some rules? After all, this isn't just YOUR project, right? (...) I don't think this is valid at all. One good thing that could come out of this is showing off just what we _could_ do if we could (...) (25 years ago, 7-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | | | (...) Sorry for being rude. I should have said that they are suggestions. (...) o.k. then forget that one then. (...) i am not entirly sure why i put the comments in... (...) nope. I am not. I am just going to make a gatehouse, that's all. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 7-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Joachim Probst
|
| | | | | Hi Jonathan, (...) avalable Why not simply put them into the MPD, too. So you get them in all cases. (...) OK, I will take a look at some clouds and hills for POV, in the meantime. (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Shawn H. Golley
|
| | | | | | | What are MPDs? I've build a peasent hut in LeoCad. Exactally what do I do with it to get into CastleDatville? (25 years ago, 8-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | | | (...) What I meant is that when you post your model to lugnet, make sure that the unofficial parts are included in the MPD or whatever. -- Jonathan Wilson wilsonj@xoommail.com (URL) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Different Idea over CastleDastville —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | | (...) Why no STEP commands? Sensibly laid out STEP commands can make a submodel much more easy to understand by a person looking at it. And I can't see why including the STEP commands is a hassle for anyone using the DAT files. Fredrik (25 years ago, 9-Nov-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| | | | |
