Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I am brand new to DakkaDakka and perhaps am posting incorrectly. However, I will be launching a kickstarter in June for a bundle (~30) terrain pieces, suitable for any scifi war game including W40K.

These files would be for downloading and printing purposes for those either with 3D printers or access to (many large cities have at least one library that provides reasonably priced printing services).

For now, I wished to provide a link to the facebook page that I created that contains 3D renderings of the models, upcoming videos of prototype printing, instructional videos of cleaning off support pieces, and notification of the Kickstarter launch date.


It is only if you're interested.

https://www.facebook.com/SimplePolytrix/


Thanks for your consideration.

For those who don't want to deal with Facebook, here are a few renderings:

Looks interesting. I'm not 100% sure about the "tech orb on top of tank trap" type pyramids, for tank traps I'd probably want something more basic. Or are they for some other purpose?

 ph34r wrote:
Looks interesting. I'm not 100% sure about the "tech orb on top of tank trap" type pyramids, for tank traps I'd probably want something more basic. Or are they for some other purpose?

They are actually numerical markers, 1 through 6, signified by the halos around the spheres. A friend of mine told me that sometimes markers are used in 40K? I am not familiar enough, but I didn't want to make glaring 1, 2, 3, etc markers that would go out on the field. This way, it's subtle, and the painter could contrast the halos for easier identifying.

They are objective markers. The missions use 1-6, and hidden number markers with 1,2,2,3,3,4.

Thank you, I didn't really know for sure though I suspected it was some kind of objective. That makes sense.

I think if someone paints the halos they will stand out a bit better. So far some people have spotted the numbers right away and others haven't.

Those are actually rather clever numerical markers.

5 and 6 seem like they'd be a bit difficult to differentiate from an overhead view. Perhaps if the coils around the orbs were rotated 90deg such that the coils intersect at the top?

Thanks!

I hadn't thought of the view from up above, but that would make more sense of players standing over them. Rotating it would be a simple solution that would be effective. I'll make the proper adjustments.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here are some more I have done. I post a new model every couple of days.

Most of these models will be in pieces and required assembly to reduce printing time, eliminate problem areas, and allow for some pieces (like the turret) to swivel rotate as an option for users.

Again, my goal is to casually enjoy modeling on the side generic sci-fi terrain. I would enjoy the notion that the pieces can be implemented in a variety of tabletop games.

I just got a 3d printer and am interested in these models. Do you have a pricing scheme in mind? These will be available only after June/KS?

 ph34r wrote:
I just got a 3d printer and am interested in these models. Do you have a pricing scheme in mind? These will be available only after June/KS?

I haven't quite sat down and approached the idea of the price, though I am guessing it will be around the $40-50 for everything with the thought the bundle will consist of about 30-40 terrain pieces. It might be a bit more but I am comparing my work with other successful Kickstarters similar to mine, and they all had I believe around that price range plus stretch goals.

I won't be able to get the bundle ready until the end of May. I suspect things will be all done by then. During the month, I'll be test printing as many models as I can afford and using the photos of them on display for the Kickstarter and my Facebook project page https://www.facebook.com/SimplePolytrix/.

After the Kickstarter, assuming it is even reasonably of a success, I plan on getting a website set up so people can download the files individually, paying probably through Paypal. They won't sell for very much, maybe $1-10 each I am guessing.

Again I haven't sat down and really thought about how much I have invested in making the models, the time and such, but I would MUCH rather have a lot of people getting affordable bundles and seeing them printed than jacking the price up and getting only a few people interested.


This is a direct video link to the project's facebook page showing an animation of all the models done so far in a walkthrough

https://www.facebook.com/SimplePolytrix/videos/1910573555878787/

I wanted to keep this thread instead of making a new one since I'm updating.

I have a second model printed. Again this is only a prototype test print, and there have already been modifications to this version after printing.

Scale is going to still be about 32mm. Dimensions are roughly 15cm x 20 cm.

The Kickstarter is tentatively scheduled to launch Friday, July 21 in order to coincide with the gaming convetion, GenCon. The Kickstarter will include a bundle of over 25 models ready for printing on your home 3D printer or via a 3rd party vendor such as Shapeways. Printing options will be available on the Kickstarter. These files will be later sold after the kickstarter concludes on my website individually as well as packages.

Why not hollow?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Why not hollow?

Infill is set within the slicing program used to do the 3D printing (Simplify3D, Slic3r, Cura, etc). You can set infill to 100% or set it to 20% and it will have the inside hollow (except where needed for strength/structure) with a hexagon, rectilinear, grid, triangle, or wiggle pattern.

.

 JBSchroeds wrote:
Infill can still be a massive time-sink for something that big, even if it's all the way down at 20%.

I tend to use 20% as a base, it is usually the maximum I print with. But you can literally print it with 0% infill and it will be fine. As long as your walls are set for 5 top and bottom for solid layers, maybe increase the parimeter shell, the slicer program will adjust where needed which literally accomplishes the same thing. If you really wanted to, you can also simply port it into meshmixer or fusion360 and delete an inside, but then you have to build support or you have to literally slice the model up into 4 pieces (each wall) to print them flat and then assemble them. That ultimately will result in a weaker piece, than simply just printing with 0% infill and requires no assembly.




80mmx80mmx80mm (3.14961") cube with a layer height of 0.2mm (200 microns) will take 27 hours (estimate) which also varies greatly by the printer. Delta printers will have that cut in half, the higher end will shave about 5 hours off the time vs the lower dollar models. That is if you set the infill at 100%.

Now taking the same thing with an infill of 20% it will take 8 hours. Then if you take the same size object with a 0% infill, it will take 3 hours. (Again time will vary depending on other slicer settings, stepper motor, printer hardware, etc). I can also do 0.1mm (100 microns) with 0% infill, which will take 5 hours. Depending on what the texture you want to achieve, 0.2mm is usually enough for a more realistic finish unless you want a smooth finish and don't want to mess with primer+filler auto paint.

Interesting take on 0% infill, I'll have to give that a try with the 5 top and bottom layers.

 JBSchroeds wrote:

 Dark Severance wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Why not hollow?

Infill is set within the slicing program used to do the 3D printing (Simplify3D, Slic3r, Cura, etc). You can set infill to 100% or set it to 20% and it will have the inside hollow (except where needed for strength/structure) with a hexagon, rectilinear, grid, triangle, or wiggle pattern.

Infill can still be a massive time-sink for something that big, even if it's all the way down at 20%. I obviously don't have the 3D model in front of me to fiddle with but there's got to be a more advantageous way of sectioning that building than what's shown in the prototype picture. I'll keep my eye out for the kickstarter, but I really think you should look at an alternative assembly method for that design that cuts out that big rectangular section in the middle. With 3D printing the filament is usually so cheep that it's the time to print that is the limiting factor for how useful something is going to be.

These are purely prototype printing for scale and overall detail definition. Final models that will be available for the KS will be shell hollow.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dark Severance wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Why not hollow?

Infill is set within the slicing program used to do the 3D printing (Simplify3D, Slic3r, Cura, etc). You can set infill to 100% or set it to 20% and it will have the inside hollow (except where needed for strength/structure) with a hexagon, rectilinear, grid, triangle, or wiggle pattern.

Have you settled on a personal favorite of the example programs? I have just been able to use Makerbot Desktop since all of my test printing has had to go through a Replicator at the library. I am wanting to have a secondary source of prep besides that program.

 Dark Severance wrote:
Have you settled on a personal favorite of the example programs? I have just been able to use Makerbot Desktop since all of my test printing has had to go through a Replicator at the library. I am wanting to have a secondary source of prep besides that program.

It basically, comes down to whatever works. They all technically have the same capabilities, although some have better features than others. If those aren't a necessary thing, then use what more people with that particular 3d printing community are using. It makes resolving issues with prints much easier when they know what settings to tweak.

I have no experience with Slic3r currently. I did initially start with Cura because it was free. It worked but did require a bit more knowledge than I had at the time so troubleshooting printing issues was interesting in the beginning. The new version out has some nice features with it that gives it a bit more robust capabilities. For the most part most people prefer it because it is free. I did pay for Simplify3D. I was having issues with one of my printers, I did the 2-week trial and after installing it just worked. I didn't have to do any fiddling or tweaking, just set my printer, material, and filament choice. I use the advanced option now but the main reason that I got was because of those settings for supports. I can have it autogenerate supports and remove some, as well as some other features. The support removal is very easy compared to Cura printing the same object. But it is also $$.

Eventually, I'll be doing testing with all three slicers, comparing quality with the same settings. There are some people who have done comparisons, they use the same model but don't use the same settings entirely or have other issues with the prints, which they point out in the videos but then don't go back to correct them to give a proper comparison.

Disclaimer: I am by far an expert. However, this is one of the many reasons 3D printing will never be a consumer based product and will always be a hobbyist product. Even if you manufacture the most perfect, flawless machine. Then made multiples, there are slight variations in those machines. Temperature, filaments, weather, slicer program and then add user interaction means that 2 of the same machines will function differently with different people, even using the same settings. Those variations are really only a matter of mm but sometimes that is all it takes to go from a bad print to a successful print.

Hey everyone, I wanted to share this painted building I modeled and printed out recently. In the same breath, I am running a kickstarter beginning July 21st that will include this downloadable file for printing in 32mm scale but also 40 other downloadable files. Some Backer Tiers will include Lifetime Future Discounts on all models that are posted after the Kickstarter. Thanks

If interested, the easiest method to get the latest information on the Kickstarter's launch and to see other painted terrain that will be included, visit https://www.facebook.com/SimplePolytrix/.

Power Facility





Objective Markers

Your designs are sharp, but the example models are pretty rough. maybe now what I'd want out there as the first printed examples of a design.

I'm a little confused, tho. If you already have these designs drawn up and they are printable, why do you need a Kickstarter? Why not just put the models on an STL selling site and start releasing them?

 Prometheum5 wrote:
Your designs are sharp, but the example models are pretty rough. maybe now what I'd want out there as the first printed examples of a design.

I'm a little confused, tho. If you already have these designs drawn up and they are printable, why do you need a Kickstarter? Why not just put the models on an STL selling site and start releasing them?

Thank you very much.

You're right. Unfortunately I don't have access to a better than low-quality FLM printer at my local library. They're really to just show potential and proof that they are printable and not just renderings.

The Kickstarter for me has 3 purposes. It is MUCH easier to gather interested people to Kickstarter (and cheaper) than it is for setting up a website and advertising. It also is launching so that I can get a general idea if there is even interest in this at all. If this Kickstarter isn't successful and only raises a few dollars, then clearly I shouldn't be continuing this endeavor.

Lastly, and personally, my goal is to raise enough money to purchase a high-end 3D printer so that I can continue creating models for download and test them more efficiently and cheaper than my current method.

 ph34r wrote:
Looks interesting. I'm not 100% sure about the "tech orb on top of tank trap" type pyramids, for tank traps I'd probably want something more basic. Or are they for some other purpose?

They were posted on the terrain reddit earlier this week. I really don't like them

They're objective markers from what the OP stated. the printer he has access to is fairly low tier and he works in the 2-6mm scale

 Stevefamine wrote:

 ph34r wrote:
Looks interesting. I'm not 100% sure about the "tech orb on top of tank trap" type pyramids, for tank traps I'd probably want something more basic. Or are they for some other purpose?

They were posted on the terrain reddit earlier this week. I really don't like them

They're objective markers from what the OP stated. the printer he has access to is fairly low tier and he works in the 2-6mm scale

Are they too messy? Not clear enough? Do you prefer having numerals instead of symbols? Too difficult to tell at a glance?


All of the models are scaled to 32mm. The markers are a bit smaller than a marine since I am not sure how large a person wants the obj markers to be. But scaling doesn't matter since they automatically can be scaled in the printer.

 3DArtwork wrote:

 Prometheum5 wrote:
Your designs are sharp, but the example models are pretty rough. maybe now what I'd want out there as the first printed examples of a design.

I'm a little confused, tho. If you already have these designs drawn up and they are printable, why do you need a Kickstarter? Why not just put the models on an STL selling site and start releasing them?

Thank you very much.

You're right. Unfortunately I don't have access to a better than low-quality FLM printer at my local library. They're really to just show potential and proof that they are printable and not just renderings.

The Kickstarter for me has 3 purposes. It is MUCH easier to gather interested people to Kickstarter (and cheaper) than it is for setting up a website and advertising. It also is launching so that I can get a general idea if there is even interest in this at all. If this Kickstarter isn't successful and only raises a few dollars, then clearly I shouldn't be continuing this endeavor.

Lastly, and personally, my goal is to raise enough money to purchase a high-end 3D printer so that I can continue creating models for download and test them more efficiently and cheaper than my current method.

Hm, it seems like there's kind of two different goals, but I can't imagine KS is really the cheapest option. If your goal is to crank out new 3D model files over time, something like a Patreon might make more sense, where folks subscribe to fund you over time for regular releases.

 Prometheum5 wrote:


Hm, it seems like there's kind of two different goals, but I can't imagine KS is really the cheapest option. If your goal is to crank out new 3D model files over time, something like a Patreon might make more sense, where folks subscribe to fund you over time for regular releases.

Well the printer option would only be if the KS was actually more successful than I expect it be. Patreon would be a nice option that I had not considered. I do plan on continuing making 3D model files over time, generally I was using my own site post-KS since it is built with a discount feature I can implement for those who backed high enough on Kickstarter. Several of the tiers offer various amounts of discount percentage off the retail price for life on all future models.

But I'll look into Patreon as well, thanks for the advice.

I just wanted to announce that July 21st I'll be running a Kickstarter for those interested in obtaining some 3D printable terrain. This bundle will consist of 22 unique models plus 2 large collection kits (bundles of pieces to build an interior corridor set and an urban city street set). Even if you don't have a printer at the moment, it is never too early to begin building your STL library because it WILL become a common household product very soon My goal is to raise enough money to acquire a suitable printer so I can make better quality prints for both testing purposes and photo shoots before the files are uploaded on my store.

Here is the latest thing I have printed and painted (amateur painter, I know). Cathedral ruins. For those interested, follow along on https://www.facebook.com/SimplePolytrix/ for the initial launch countdown!

THANK YOU!