Jump to content

wowgetoffyourcellphone

0 A.D. Art Team
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10.211

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    491

 Content Type 

Posts posted by wowgetoffyourcellphone

  6. 0 A.D. on YouTube

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    3 hours ago, av93 said:

     

    Can you post some screenshots?

     

    Very High*:

    Spoiler

    screenshot1343.thumb.png.0d2e1e2bcfad785009c19a5a3e60a6df.png

    screenshot1338.thumb.png.f79ac51c17bab95aa060d5e79f863613.png

     

     

    Low, which is close to what they used to look like for me:

    Spoiler

    screenshot1344.thumb.png.1a576c1fe83c8ba6e66b1a2762b2fad0.png

     

    *I really think there should be an Ultra High setting for those with good cards, if only for cinematics and screenshots.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

  7. 0 A.D. on YouTube

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

     

    Lighting makes or breaks 0 A.D. I think the lighting settings could use a lot of tweaking to get the full effect, and of course the new shadow map for the next alpha is a vast improvement and should make the game look a lot better. I just often wonder why the game looks ugly on some videos and good on others. I think it's the maps they choose to play. Some really make use of the game's assets and lighting in a good way and some don't. Just some random musings. This guy does a pretty good video discussing the game. There's even a poll.

    • Like 2

  9. ===[COMMITTED]=== Horse Update

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    4 minutes ago, Alexandermb said:

    Thats correct, it can be just scale down the mesh and every animation and Works the advantage is that i got the Native blender file which allow to rescale whitout breaking something. looking and the 2nd image, could be scale the legs and make it a Little more fat i guess ?

    I'd say scale your own horse mesh, not the original horse mesh. Yours is much better. Yeah, the pony looks like it has "fatter" proportions, and stubbier legs. Also, its head is larger in proportion than a horse's head.

     

    ;)

    rv7Wign.jpg

    • Like 1

  11. ===[COMMITTED]=== Horse Update

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    Just now, stanislas69 said:

     When I'll commit it, I'll rename the old actors to pony, but what units should get those ?

    I think the Britons chariot should use ponies. Maybe @Alexandermb would like to make those next? Is it just as easy as scaling down the animations I wonder? The pony mesh geometry would be a bit different from the horse, namely in body proportions, but I imagine the skeleton could remain essentially the same.

     

    iron-age-britons.jpg90.jpg

     

  14. Proposal

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    20 hours ago, Sundiata said:

    I've been wanting to bring this up for a while, but there are so many little details that could be changed, that I want discus them in a single post/list. Anyway, for now:

    It's really awkward that you're able to start construction on a building within range of enemy units/buildings. It's kind of an immersion breaker, and borderline cheating, in my book. Tower-creeping is so, ugh.. Basically taking advantage of a less than ideal game mechanic, I think. Both, building a tower/fortress on your enemies' border within range of your enemies' buildings/units as well as starting construction on new structures when you're base is already overrun is just, ugh... Like sending 30 guys to rebuild a destroyed CC when the enemy army is still in your base??? Ugh... Sorry for all the ughs :P

    There are many of these "micro-cheats" that take advantage of less than ideal game-mechanics and pathfinder issues, like using 1 soldier to lure an entire army in to a kill box. Or pressing the halt button every couple of seconds while in combat, so that all the soldiers are reassigned to the most nearby target (this should happen automatically). It looks horrendous to see an entire army cut to pieces because they obsessively chased a single unit, passing an entire army that's systematically cutting them down.

    One could say part of the game is about managing your army's movements efficiently, but you're right in that it is currently very difficult to do this. Right now, at default stance every one of your units are berserkers who chase after and attack anything they come across within vision range. IMHO, there needs to be an "offense range" that is separate from vision range. First, remove "Violent" stance, as there is little difference between it and Aggressive. Now, make the offense range for Aggressive, Defensive, and Stand Ground be a percentage of vision range. Aggressive is attack anything within 90% of vision range and chase until target flees outside that range. Defensive should be default, at 60% of vision range and chase target to 75% of vision range. Stand Ground is something like 5% of vision range and no chase. These values are for melee units, as for ranged units you'd want somewhat different behavior. But you get the idea. This makes the units more controllable, instead of them constantly berserking anything and everything. And if the game used battalions, you could reduce the number of range calls by basing these offense and vision ranges on the battalion as a whole instead of on a soldier-by-soldier basis.

    There's a lot of this weird advantage taking. For example: Supposedly pro-players don't use walls. Nonsense! All these so called pro-players are building "house"walls" instead. What in the actual "explicative". Why would a row of houses stop an army? You just go through the backdoor, and exit through the front. Or crawl through the windows. O just kick through the wattle and daub or mudbrick house walls. But it's a little ridiculous that civilian housing provides an effective wall. Just use the actual walls... You know...  Plus house walls look really ugly... 

    I agree. They're basically just taking advantage of weird game mechanics. The game should encourage the building of actual towns, instead of this here that you mention: 

    Ugly like building farms around the CC (an illogical AoE convention), for easy garrisonability of women and skimping out on wood by not building a farmstead (which really should be a pre-requisite for building farms, or even gathering food in general. Why is the CC used as a storage yard, when a storehouse is one of the earliest structures you need to build anyway??)...  

    Yep. The game should strongly encourage the building of farms out away from the city's center. Maybe not forbid building them there, but farms should be really inefficient when built right in the middle of town. About removing the dropsite ability from the CC, I tried this out and it was hard to get the AOE out of my head. My brain always just assumed the CC would be a dropsite and became annoyed when units wouldn't drop resources there. It was difficult to untrain this expectation from my brain. What I would do instead is just move starting resources out away from the starting CC to strongly encourage building Storehouses and Farmstead instead of relying on the CC so much as a dropsite. The current game setup with a boatload of resources bunched up against the starting CC reminds me so much of Starcraft. 0 A.D. shouldn't be Starcraft in this regard. The CC is the founding of a city, not a stone quarry. It's also why in DE I have moved the major resource gatherer unit's training to Storehouses and Farmsteads: Slaves. Male Citizens are trained from the CC, while Female Citizens are trained from houses*. 

    *I'd like to combine the Male and Female units into one unit, but it's currently not possible to do it in the way I'd like, so for now they reside as separate units.

     

    I derive no pleasure from defeating an enemy like this, and "pro-players" destroy "noobs", because the noobs don't know about these "faulty" mechanics. How is that fun? A lot of the "pro-players" depend on the ignorance of their opponents to win... This is supposed to be a strategy game, not a take-advantage-of-mechanics-that-new-players-can't-possibly-know-about game, because this stuff is not clearly written down anywhere. That's cheating, i.m.o...

    At least, their should be a strategy and tactical guide that explains the mechanics that should be looked out for, like: diminishing farm returns, embedding women with your workers, and the effect of experience on gather rates, garrisoning ships with siege and units so they actually become effective, never using formation when fighting, the effectiveness of kiting, the amazing efficiency with which women can take out battering rams... Those kind of things... Ideally, you should have easy access to this info in game, like a question mark button with each unit/building that brings up a pop-up message explaining all the specifics about that unit/building.

    I agree that some of these things can remain and should be explained better in the game. While others should just be eliminated or modified.

     

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

  15. ===[COMMITTED]=== Horse Update

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    8 hours ago, Alexandermb said:

    @Itms its posible to tweak the upgrade code by this way?:

    • Make it spawn an entity after upgrade its ended.
    • Upgrade again the entity but this time with a given condition: Having selected both units and after the upgrade is complete delete "B" entity.

      Thats my only thought about mount/dismount so far by now.

    Hmm, I think that is a gameplay decision. Right now it's possible to just swap the hero or whoever between infantry and cavalry versions. But what you're saying is that you'd like the horse to always be hanging around somehow when the unit is in infantry mode. I can imagine some issues with that, though I do understand that seeing the unit magically change from infantry to cavalry with the horse poofing out of nowhere is somewhat of a minor immersion killer.

     

    The horse-mounting feature could be included for narrative campaign-sake and mods, but I'd imagine it would be tedious micro to do that in a PvP match. One way to do it is with the garrisoning component too instead of the upgrade component. Or make a whole new component as I believe is now possible.

    • Like 1

  16. Suggestion: One voice actor per unit

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    17 minutes ago, feneur said:

    True, but this is a different thing: the sound system uses the existing sound files and slightly changes them to make it sound as if there are more different sounds than there actually is. So the solution might be to tie that modification to the entity rather than just have it random :unsure:

    Can bind the randomized pitch to the entity ID. 

    • Like 2

  17. [Sugestion] Publicity and reviews (and the like)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    9 hours ago, stanislas69 said:

    The problem is not getting balance feedback. The number of mods changing balance prove that. The issue is having someone taking the decision while keeping in mind changes to the game engine. Until we are in beta stage some new features can break totally the game balancing like capturing did. So it makes not much sense to balance Ana ever-changing game. Once those features are settled itll make more sense and it will be easier.

    My god, there may be hope after all.

    • Like 1

  21. ===[COMMITTED]=== Horse Update

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    On 12/10/2017 at 5:33 PM, Alexandermb said:

    Moved slightly backwards the right leg the left one is fine otherwise in the animation will look rigid in that leg

    here is the mod folder with the latest update including the 4 basic variants for the horses for easy handle.

    Horse_new.7z

     

    On 12/10/2017 at 5:36 PM, stanislas69 said:

    When everyone is okay with them I'll commit the horses, then we'll see for the riders.

    Looks good to me after poking around a bit. I have a few criticisms that should not delay committing these. But first, I'll thank you for creating base variants for the horses. This mirrors how things are done with the bipeds. Excellent. I also like a lot of the attack animations and 

     

    Okay, a could of not-release blockers:

    1. I think the walk animation should be a trot. The current "walk" animation looks more like a slow run. Trotting may be anachronistic, I don't know.

    Spoiler

     

     

     

     

    2. The capes for the riders could use some work.

    3. the "dangling head" props for the Gallic champion cav move weirdly.

    4. A lot of the spear models need remade to be as nice as the newer hoplite spear and sarissa. Some units, like the two-handed spear units, should use longer spears than they're currently given. Again, that can be done later, not a release blocker.

    5. The capturing animation could look a little more... lively. As well as the promotion animation. I imagined the horse rearing and the rider thrusting his weapon to the sky when he promotes.

    6. The death animation looks a little too fast. Just an actor tweak.

    7. I have some nigglings about the UV mapping still.

    8. Strange actor swapping behavior, such as my cavalry gathering meat with a slab of meat instead of a knife.

     

    None of these are release blockers, just a wish list.

     

    Great job though! I say commit it. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

  22. ===[COMMITTED]=== Update gatherer actors to have idle-carry animations

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    On 12/10/2017 at 5:22 AM, wraitii said:

    As done in https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP20631, we should update all gatherer actors so that they can support having idle carrying animations.

    This should/could be done incrementally, but in general I think a class of unit should be done across all civs at once.

    I look forward to this, because now the males look funny when shuttling resources. ;)

  23. ===[COMMITTED]=== Zebu Rigging

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    9 hours ago, GunChleoc said:

    Maybe bend the legs too as it falls?

    I think many animals stiffen up as they die. Or maybe have the animals legs give out first and have it fall straight downward and then fall to the side secondarily. Or front legs give out first then the back legs. Just some ideas. Many ways of doing it. 

×
×
  • Create New...