Unarmed
-
Posts
212 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Unarmed
-
-
I like the idea of minifactions, if only to act as wildcards in scenarios and campaigns and such. If someone wanted a challenge they could even be playable. Though I don't think we'd make any effort to include them until at least after the Seleucids are done, I'd see no harm in actually creating and researching their civ profiles.
Let me be clear. I have no intention of pressuring the team into making something. But like you said, it can be no harm in researching and thinking of a concept. And if I am capable, I would like to do this (partly) myself.
For a particular "African" minifaction like the Bantus, like you said, we could probably only be 20% accurate with the references and resources we have available, so I think it's okay to incorporate texture ideas (like for shields and such) from other nearby peoples.Yeah. And I was thinking, too generic isn't that much fun and unique. It's a game. Though something like helmets is too inaccurate.
But some Maasai features and Zulu features would be fine as long as it isn't too obvious and I think lots of people would enjoy it, if not, than they should give us detailed information how they should look.
Here some of my favorite tribal warriors (some weren't allowed on the forum):
(The spear)
I think I'm going to draw some concepts in flash, mainly for the purpose of fun.
-
1
-
-
The Anatolian biome has rabbits. Rabbits should only be in Spain, Portugal and northwest Africa.
If it is somekind of placeholder I can understand as there are no other animals. As a placeholder for a hare it is fine.
To fill it up deer and gazelle could be added. Wolves are also a good option.
-
Is like barbarians in empire earth 2. But can work better with trading post. And may be a group in settlement like bandits. Like AoE 3.
Village phase is a bit of a problem. They need a market I agree (that's what you mean with trading post right?).
Town phase seems necessary. Also shaman is not a good regular name I think it's more something for Asian or Native American I believe.
Perhaps we can take some inspiration from the Azande, they are from the 19th century but look quite generic.
As you can see they do have some unique features like the hair and the hat. Imagine these without the hats and with the Bantu shields.
We could do different types of haircuts including these.
Ok I'm going to copy a civilisation profile and edit it to the Bantu mini faction. And do research.
-
I (personally) really like minifactions, to be put on the map as 'settlements' (cfr. Age of Empires III) that provide unique units and technologies.
Something like that would be awesome.
Hmm Many things to fill. Check civilization profile example.
Note that it's supposed to be a mini faction not a full faction. I first thought of making them gaia or something like that, but I like the idea of playing them for a challenge.
But yeah I need to fill a lot. And information on them is rather rare so don't expect me to make a detailed concept in a few hours.
Going to do some research again and fill up the first post.
-
I was joking about African pygmies in the gorilla thread. But I did kind of like the idea of African (tribal) minifactions mainly for scenarios, Funny, I was browsing around the forum and saw in a thread Mythos had the same idea.
Though I did see a lot of pictures of more recent tribes, Maasai and Zulu, in Mythos thread. But it's not a bad idea to use those as inspiration, because it is impossible to go hundrend percent (I think 20 percent is already tough) accurate. Though I would like them to be as accurate as possible, so I would personally go for a very generic tribal faction. Let's call them the Bantu, see wikipedia why:
http://en.wikipedia....i/Bantu_peoples
(Other minifactions possibilites (not limited to) could be Congo pygmies and the Nok people.)
I also like the idea of playing as a underdog in a match against AI. The Bantu would be stuck in the village phase (or town phase?), and would have limited units, I would say like this:
-Spearman/spear warrior (spear + shield)
-Warrior (African club or axe + throwing knife)
-Tribesmen/hunter (bow and arrow)
-Female
-Perhaps shaman, but I think no healing building
I wasn't sure if Bantu did have archiculture but yes they did (I dislike that I have such a stereotypical view of Africa, I always think of primative hunter gatherers). So farms are good.
I want to do some research, also for fun. I would love to actually work on this generic tribal faction, but I haven't even started modelling and trying environmental stuff (which I will do when my computer is fully fixed). But yeah, if modelling and texturing goes well and I enjoy it, I would want to create them.
Here is a nice picture of throwing blades:
http://www.ezakwantu...al%20Africa.jpg
I have no idea if they fit the timeframe, but I have a book which says the Bantu were good metal workers. And:
These are other peoples but I assume the Bantu would learn this technology from the Nok. But iron doesn't mean a particular weapon would be present. The throwing blade could work like the proposed pilum mechanic for the Romans.
Here are African helmets and Bantu shields, no idea what timeframe:
http://www.hamillgal...ntuShields.html
http://www.hamillgal...TE/Helmets.html
EDIT: the Helmets seem to be from medieval period so I would say no to helmets.
Here are African battle axes and war clubs again, again no idea what time frame:
http://www.ezakwantu...ency%20Axes.htm
I guess the hardest part is the look of the soldiers and not the look of the weapons. I found this:
Again no idea what timeframe but to me it looks between the Middle Ages and 19th century. But that's a very wild guess.
I would go for bare chest, something rather boring like this (ignore the pants):
(I would love very flamboyant and unique, but that is the highest change of being inaccurate I think)
Experienced units would get a generic as possible helmet (no helmet see above) and shield. Also perhaps face paint.
Later I will do more research and edit this (not going to bump this).
______________________________________________________________________________________
(ROUGH EARLY CONCEPT)
UNIT DESCRIPTIONS
INFANTRY
- Generic Name: Bantu Warrior
- Specific Name: TBD
- Class: Swordsman.
- Hacker Armament: Battle axe or war club.
- Ranged Armament:
- Class: Swordsman.
Basic - None.
Advanced – None.
Elite – African throwing knife
- Appearance: Generic African. Tribal looking. Bald or short hair (?)
- Garb: - bare chested
- Basic - non musclar
Elite – visual abs (!) - Helmet: - none
- Shield:
- Basic - None.
Advanced – Bantu type shield made of wood or hide
Elite – Bantu type shield made of wood or hide - Figure(s): -
[*]Garrison: 1.
[*]Function: -
[*]Special: -
- Garb: - bare chested
- Generic Name: Bantu Spearman
- Specific Name: TBD
- Class: Spearman.
- Hacker Armament: Spear, maybe with distinct broad head/points.
- Appearance: same as Bantu Warrior
- Garrison: 1.
- Function: -
- Special: -
- Class: Spearman.
- Generic Name: Bantu Hunter
- Specific Name: TBD
- Class: Archer.
- Hacker Armament: Bow and arrow. Shorter range than other archer units. (!)
- Appearance: - same as Bantu Warrior
- Special: - hunting bonus (!)
- Class: Archer.
CAVALRY
None.
SUPPORT UNITS
- Generic Name: Bantu Woman
- Specific Name:
- Appearance:
- Garb: bare chested but with something covering her twins
- Helmet: none
- Shield: None.
- Figure(s): -
[*]History:
[*]Garrison: 1.
[*]Function: -
[*]Special: -
- Garb: bare chested but with something covering her twins
- Appearance:
- Generic Name: Bantu Healer
- Specific Name:
- Class: Healer.
- Appearance:
- Garb: TBD
- Helmet: -
- Shield: None.
- Figure(s): -
[*]Garrison: 1.
[*]Function: -
[*]Special: -
- Garb: TBD
- Class: Healer.
- Generic Name: Merchant
- Specific Name:
- Appearance:
- Garb: TBD
- Helmet: TBD
- Shield: None.
- Figure(s):
- Mount: None. Walking.
[*]History:
[*]Garrison: 2.
[*]Function: -
[*]Special: -
- Garb: TBD
- Appearance:
NAVY, SIEGE, CHAMPION UNITS, HEROES
None. Though maybe fishing boat (?)
NEW UNIT TRAITS
TBD.
CIV CENTRE UNITS
- Melee Infantry: Bantu Spearman (Spearman) + Bantu Warrior (Swordsman) (!)
- Ranged Infantry: Bantu Hunter (Archer).
- Healer: Bantu Healer (!) (Healer)
FORBIDDEN CLASSES
- Cavalry
- Slingers
- All city phase units
STRUCTURE DESCRIPTIONS
VILLAGE
- Generic Name: Hut
- Specific Name: TBD
- Class: House.
- Appearance: wooden hut or and perhaps clay and animal hide (TBD)
- Class: House.
- Generic Name: (?)
- Specific Name:
- Class: Farmstead.
- History:
- Class: Farmstead.
- Generic Name: Field
- Specific Name:
- Class: Field.
- History: Early Bantu speaking people cultivated oil palms but more importantly yams.
- Class: Field.
- Generic Name: (?)
- Specific Name:
- Class: Corral.
- History:
- Class: Corral.
- Generic Name: Mill (?)
- Specific Name:
- Class: Mill.
- History:
- Class: Mill.
TOWN (YES OR NO?)
- Generic Name: Civic Centre
- Specific Name:
- Class: Civic Centre.
- History:
- Class: Civic Centre.
- Generic Name: Market
- Specific Name:
- Class: Market.
- History:
- Class: Market.
FORBIDDEN STRUCTURES
- Tower
- Outpost
- Walls
- Docks (?)
- Barracks (all Bantu warriors would also be farmers or hunters)
CIV BONUSES
TBD or not needed (?) Something to reflect the migration of these people? (?)
TEAM BONUS:
Not needed (?)
TECHNOLOGIES
- Infantry: Weak but do not lose the ability to gather (!)
- Cavalry: Not available.
- Naval: Non existant.
- Siege: Non existant.
- Economy:
- Farming: Avarage.
- Mining: Average.
- Lumbering: Average.
- Hunting: Average
- Land Trade: Average.
- Naval Trade: Non Existant.
[*]Architecture:
- Defenses: Non existant.
- Farming: Avarage.
SPECIAL TECHNOLOGIES
Symbols:
(?) means I'm not sure
(!) means it's something I made up and want opinion about
- Generic Name: Bantu Warrior
-
You're awesome (as is everyone that contributes). Keep up the great work.
And tell me if the hawk pictures are good enough because I forgot about the tail.
Fact about rhinos: rhinos have poor eyesight.
-
Ok, I got some pictures. This is a common buzzard (good choice sinds it lives roughly everywhere the mod is set in). I also have a much better looking one, but that one doesn't have it's wings unfolded. But if needed I could also make pictures of that one or additional ones of this one.
Also about buzzards, rough legged buzzards and common buzzards are basicly the same, only the rough legged buzzard "has panties on".
There are also many variations of common buzzards, no one really looks the same. Some are even white for example.
-
Great work. I think the texture could be a little more interesting though. Not so dark and monotone. See the cool color variation here? http://2.bp.blogspot...leCrocodile.jpg
I would enjoy seeing both. Since you have those dark types nile crocodiles and the green types nile crocodiles.
-
Pheasants can run very fast, and often do. Chuckars are more rotund, don't seem like they'd be as fleet of foot - but apparently their behavior is quite similar.
Yes they can run very fast. My Golden pheasant could run very fast. I had another one who was easily startled and so this one did fly often. It looked kind of funny when my Golden pheasant would run.
I kept my Golden pheasant in the garden, he was very tame. The other one who was easily startled I did try, but he was very unpredictable and would fly away. When he did that he flied in the air and than he hide in long grass or bushes. I did manage to get him back in the coop.
And pheasants at least are very similar too chickens. Their mating ritual is slightly different, but other behavior like foaraging, sleeping, dustbathing etc. is the same.
So while they are only family they do behave similar. Chukars appearantly have the habit of running into hills:
Chukars have the annoying habit of running uphill when approached by dog or man.Anyway my point is, running is fine in 0 A.D. Though it would be kind of cool if they would fly, but it is not necessary for biological reasons.
-
That's better than nothing! Also, being artists, we need to actually do some art (instead of always cribbing textures from photos), so we can draw in the feathers we need if necessary.
Tommorow I'll make pictures. He is actually not that bad. The features at the end are a bit err... how do you say... well they used to be better. But nothing too bad.
The middle is only partly visible, but I think that should be able to overcome with drawing.
-
Which period of history is it ? Edit: Close enough : https://en.wikipedia...stribution3.PNG
I am sure it's not prehistoric (or don't you mean that?). I can't even find those. But I know about Caspian tigers so I figured these must be okay. I heard tigers were native in prehistoric times in Alaska, but I'm not sure if that's true.
And Panthera is about big cat preservation, I'm pretty confident they have (one of) the most accurate. It says historic range so I assume that's from when it was first written about.
But it's good that somebody else find accuracy important. And I make mistakes too. So keep doing what you do!
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Lions were in Europe, at last in Greece during the time frame too. But went extinct in in the first century AD according to Dio Chrysostom.
Though while typing this I read Greeks called all big cats lions, so it could have been leopards instead. Leopards would at least been in Turkey and I would assume Greece also. Spotted hyenas also used to life in Europe but I'm pretty sure they went extinct in the late Pleistocene.
I wonder if they lived in Egypt (spotted hyenas), but I can't find anything so I pressume not.
-
I'm afraid none of those are good enough. It's relatively simple to find shots from underneath, but that's actually less important (we will be seeing the birds from above in 0AD anyway).
Maybe the second one, but the noisy background (the bike) makes it less than ideal.
The perfect shots are basically like the ones I used as reference. Hard to find. I'm not even sure if I managed to match the same bird species on both sides!
If you find some really good photos, which aren't explicitly licensed as something CC-BY-SA compatible, you can always ask them.
I recomment searching on
http://commons.wikim.../wiki/Main_Page
and
http://www.flickr.com/search/advanced/
with the all three CC-boxes checked (which means only CC-BY-SA content)
How about the Taxidermy common buzzard I have at home? Would it be good if I made pictures of it?
Though I just looked, he is kind of dying and the wings are not fully spread.
Oops, why did I look for underneath. Lol. I guess it's time to go to bed.
-
Any artistic work is copyrighted by default per the Berne Convention. So unless explicitly marked as being under a CC-BY-SA compatible license, we can't use them (asking for special permission can work, but is not ideal).
Yes, you are right sadly:
"Op alle multimedia (foto’s, geluiden) op Waarneming.nl en gekoppelde is auteursrecht van toepassing.Tenzij anders aangegeven heeft u expliciete toestemming van de auteur nodig voor gebruik van multimedia."
Translated:
"On all multimedia (photos, sounds) on Waarneming.nl and (bla bla) is copyrighted. Unless indicated otherwise you'll need the permission of the author for the use of multimedia"
It's so strange that at school we have permission to use images in our works as long as we tell the source.
____________________________________________________________________________________
I have a Taxidermy common buzzard, a dead one, at home. With spread wings. How about I make pictures of it?
-
No i didn't even fetch any good references and didn't color match it. It was a 3 minute hack-job. I'm sure Enrique will do it properly, gorillas shouldn't be hard.
Well I ment it wasn't that bad.
But yeah to do your model justice it should be a real gorilla with a nice silver back.
-
The first skin is the bottom on both sides. Clearly can't be used!
Still no response from flickr, so we can't use the second texture (yet).
It's really difficult to find good references for birds, with their wings out, from above. Those kind of photos just don't happen. If you find a good clear shot of the top part of a wing, and the same from below, I could make a new bird in a few minutes. Finding photos (with CC-BY-SA) is the hard part.
This is the same for modeling as well. If I just find a clean profile picture then I can just finish upt he model in no-time. Finding a shot from the front or above, combined with a profile shot is where I spend 50% of the time (feel free to help out there if you want to see a specific animal done)
I think I can help. There's a Dutch site about animal reporting, I think all the pictures are free to use unless marked (I can ask on the forum if needed, I have an account). Let me show:
http://waarneming.nl...ang=en&local=nl (I hope it is now set to English so you can read)
Do these help:
http://waarneming.nl...w/6/4500096.jpg
http://waarneming.nl...w/2/4534432.jpg
http://waarneming.nl...w/3/2450163.jpg
http://waarneming.nl...w/3/4500093.jpg
http://waarneming.nl...w/6/4639876.jpg
You can set activity to flying to look for photos for flying. If you want I can look for more, just tell me what you need exactly.
I'll look for one above.
EDIT:
http://waarneming.nl/fotonew/5/2304935.jpg
http://waarneming.nl/fotonew/1/867741.jpg
More to come.
-
I might be a bit exaggerating, or may seem like, though about unit preservation.
It's not like it's really bad. I play mostly against AI though, but against them I can easily have a group that levels up and seems to survive very long because of that.
Though AI does stupid things like sending too few units and stuff like that.
And I float a lot of rescources late game. But that's because of AI and also because I preserve my troops and do not need to replace them. But with so many rescources it wouldn't hurt to act as if my troops are penal troops.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Heros.
How does everyone feel about the heros? I think they are nice, good enough, though I haven't really used them that much (in multiplayer I could see it being more important).
I kind of like how Dawn of War 2 and Age of Empires 3 portray the heros. Heroes will not die (no sure how it exactly works with Dawn of War 2 - don't have the game, but I have seen you need to revive them) but will become wounded.
I also personally prefer generic heroes for regular play and real heroes for scenarios but that's just me. (The generic heroes would basicly be the real heroes, same stats, same traits and almost the same look) But I'm not bothered by it or anything. So I don't care that much.
And I can understand people really wanting to play Hannibal or Alexander the Great in a multiplayer match.
-
By the way about tigers. They also lived in parts of the middle east, look:
So if someone makes a map in Iraq or Iran, they could add tigers if they want.
-
I like the second skin better.
Because it is the most common hawk in Europe, the common buzzard. But yeah nobody is going to notice that only nature fanatics like me. *wink* *wink*
Though I'm not a twitcher (bird watcher). Who can tell any bird apart.
-
Pheasants normally walk, but they fly when they flee for something (which makes them very easy to hunt on with a gun). It's hard to take a picture though, as they hide themselves very well before they flee. So you never have your camera ready. It would be nice if it would be a skittish animal, with a flying flee animation. But I think that'll be rather hard. So I have no problem with only walking pheasants.
I used to have pheasants (though Golden) and I'm an animal freak, and it's only partly true. Pheasants prefer to run, or stand still and hide, however they will fly when startled.
While pheasants are able to fly fast for short distances, they prefer to run. If startled however, they will burst to the sky in a "flush."Look it up.
(But this is a chuckar, which is family of the pheasant but not a pheasant)
-
Auroch bull and cow done.
I don't think you need it (looks Auroch to me), but here are a lot of pictures:
http://carnivoraforum.com/topic/9481868/1/
Great work once again!
-
Leopards are kind of a must have. They lived in Southern Europe, Middle East and Asia (like now) and of course Africa.
-
Gorillas? What you need that for!? (joking)
It is awesome. And what if scenarios and maps (or just for fun) are nice. Let's conqueror central Africa!
That got me thinking, it would be cool if there were non-playable tribes that are stuck in the village phase for scenarios. If somebody would like to be making that and if there's not more important stuff.
I demand you make pygmy people now! (of course a joke, but I would like it)
I don't think the texture looks crude. I like the gorilla.
-
Well it shouldn't be very extreme of course. 0 A.D strives for as much accesibility as possible.
I would like it to be more important as of now (maybe I'm underestemating it). Not extreme. If you want to do suicide missions it should work as long as your opponent does not use unit preservation.
And some armies did waste their troops. So I guess it also depends on the civilisation.
-
Feel free to disagree.
and I don't see any significant benefit for this.Unit preservation. Not many seem to care about this. I however am a big Company of Heroes player in which this is very important and I dislike the suicide missions that are common in the classic RTS's (make units, attack and let them die, make units again, attack and let them die).
But there are other options to increase unit preservation:
-longer time to gain experience
-economy (I tend to float rescources late game)
-other (limiting units; I'm pretty sure no one likes this. It would be like this by the way: unit x 600 units available)
The french wikipedia mentions that in Carthage, the gallic mercenaries fought very individually and were used mainly as shock troops by Hannibal, who was unable to make them fight in order and follow formations. Impressing and weakening the enemy by launching risky attack was the biggest honor for them, so they loyalty didn't decrease despite their heavy losses.Interesting thanks for sharing. Maybe this could be implemented someway into the game.
_______________________
Ok I have another idea to improve unit preservation and lessen suicide missions:
-units become more costly when you loose them
I'm pretty sure no one likes the idea of a bigger army costing even more (though it makes sense)*. So instead when you have made a certain amount of number of units and the cost increases, loses of a unit increase the cost of this unit. Seems very hard to implement though, and there is a problem:
-someone who loses a lot of units from a attack(s) but manages to survive will be punished. (But I guess this player would have his economy stalled)
*What about upkeep? Seems a bit hard to implement though, and I think no one likes it. Doesn't make sense since your soldiers are always near a town, so there are no supply lines needed.
____________________________________________________________________
Is there anybody at all who is bothered by the unit wasting? Or is economy enough of a disadvantage? (I seem to be floating rescources late game and in theory I could go on and on wasting soldiers)
I mean it doesn't have to be really hardcore that when you lose one unit you are screwed, but I feel like using units should have a bigger impact as of now.
____________________________________________________________________
Ok some other ideas:
Eye candy:
-units deflecting arrows with shields
Movement:
-Heavily armored troops moving slower as lightly armored troops (if this isn't done already)
-Certain terrain slowing down units (high grass, mud)
===[COMMITTED]=== Hawk
in Completed Art Tasks
Posted
Yeah it is rough.
I can make a picture of the whole thing on only the floor if you think it's worth it. But I think it would be better if I searched on Flickr for good pictures. The problem is that shots of above are really rare.