Jump to content

wowgetoffyourcellphone

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

  • Posts

    10.217

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    491

 Content Type 

Posts posted by wowgetoffyourcellphone

  1. ===[TASK]=== Celtic Unit Textures

    in Official tasks

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    All of these textures makes me wish there was an equipment feature for the game. Actor swap using techs isn't nearly flexible enough.

     

    With some actor shenanigans, I could see something "easily" being hacked in, actually being a lot of work, lol. Though, it wouldn't work in the ideal sense, hence "hacked." What I mean is, it would be very cool to be able to train Light, Medium, and Heavy versions of some units. Let's say you only have X amount of resources, you'd train the Light version. If you have an abundance of resources or save up the extra resources, you could train the medium or heavy versions, their textures and props changing accordingly. Promotions could still work the same way, with XP, it's just the actors would be controlled with the light/medium/heavy feature, with some corresponding stats changes. I think something like this would work better with Battalions though.

  10. Your 0 A.D. Screenshots

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    18 hours ago, Sundiata said:

    Perhaps the skybox can somehow be triggered once the camera reaches the angle that the horizon becomes visible? No need for a skybox above that angle (i think?), and the ground will remain black where the map ends when seen from above? 

    1. The skybox proportions are also wrong if you look at it. Looks like a pizza box. The sides are squished, compressing the texture.

     

    2. Also, the skybox doesn't seem to move upward with the average height of the map, so that the "ceiling" of the skybox by default is very very close to the terrain on the default blank map in Atlas. This causes some problems, notably with water reflection of the sky on user-created maps. The solution to that particular problem is to lower the default height of the blank map to something like height="2048". As always, see Delenda Est for this viable and easy solution.

    • Like 1

  11. Your 0 A.D. Screenshots

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    On 11/1/2017 at 4:46 AM, Sundiata said:

    Thanks, but they could be a lot better. The Skybox isn't working properly. At low angles, you can see the lower rim of the box above the horizon?? Very displeasing, from an aesthetic point of view. The Skybox should extend far below the horizon to avoid such weirdness.. 

     

    I have complained about the skybox for a long time. Perhaps there is a ticket.

  13. Readjustig the UV of the (m_pants_tunic_short.dae)

    in Tutorials, references and art help

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    The unit texture sizing needs changed to 1x2. That way the legs/skirts may extend naturally downward. Then the top part can be for both arms. This way, there can be asymmetry in the texture. For instance, Romans of the Punic Wars only wore a greave on one leg, not both. Currently, there's no way to do this in the texture. If we do as I say, this asymmetry can properly be addresed, and issues that you bring up in this thread can be solved as well. It would also solve the long skirt problem for females as well as males.

     

    But that's a lot of textures to fix/change. Perhaps a script can be written to rearrange the existing textures in batches. Then all the artists have to do is a bit of cleanup.

    • Like 1

  14. ===[COMMITTED]=== Gastraphetes

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    On 10/23/2017 at 2:32 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    I get this from the gastra.

     

     

    screenshot1305.png

     

    screenshot1306.png

    This is a problem with Alpha 23, not Delenda Est. I tested it in Alpha 23 and still got this. Public mod only, Delenda Est disabled. So, I tested it with the Alpha 22 release and got no visual error. Only new skeleton in A23 over A22 is the target marker.

    • Like 1

  15. Farm / Field diminishing returns

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Nescio said:

    I actually like this functionality (or think it's at least quite interesting), although the current value (0.9) does seem a bit high.

    I think the point was, and I'm just guessing, that it would be more profitable for the player to build 5 farms, each with a worker, than to stock 1 farm with 5 workers, given that the need for food is greater than the need for the wood to build the farms.

    • Like 2

  17. Accuracy graphs for ranged units

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    13 minutes ago, Nescio said:

    Units will always inflict at least 1 damage, right? If so, it doesn't really matter whether the armour is 90% or 99% or 99.99%, nor what the attacker's pierce damage is; what counts is the number of attackers and their attack rate. E.g. twenty archers need (2000/1.0)/20=100 seconds to level down a barracks.

     

    9 minutes ago, LordGood said:

    noooooo thats how it's done in AoE but not here

     

    7 minutes ago, Nescio said:

    No? So health is not an integer? Interesting. What about other values, e.g. resources?

     

    3 minutes ago, LordGood said:

    You'll have to ask one of the programmers about that, I just know from my Ponies ascendant armor experiments. Takes a long time to put knights down with archers lol

    LordGood is right. 

  18. Accuracy graphs for ranged units

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone

    2 hours ago, elexis said:

    > Also, pierce damage damaging buildings is really unrealistic.

    Didn't we come to that conclusion several times already, always increased the Pierce damage and are now at 99% and it's still too few? Anything speaking against making that 100%? (I guess the formula, but perhaps we can go to 99,99%)

    As far as realism goes, yeah slings and arrows doing damage against a barracks is pretty silly. But as a gameplay abstraction I don't mind arrows and lead bullets doing some damage. 99% pierce armor is fine with me. Still takes a darn long time for a bunch of slingers to take down a barracks at that level of pierce armor, as long as slingers don't have crush attack; significantly longer than it takes the same number of spearmen or swordsmen. Ima do some tests, brb. I could do it with maths, but fighting things out in Atlas is so much more fun!

     

     

    EDIT:

    In Delenda Est, 30 slingers of mixed rank, representing a likely force of slingers raised by a player, it took them 4 minutes to take down a barracks! lol The barracks had 96% pierce armor. This is okay to me. lol By stats alone, it would take them 12 minutes to take down a fortress, but in reality they never would because they would be killed by the arrows shot by the fortress, as the fortress outranges them, rightly so. :)

  19. Farm / Field diminishing returns

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    8 hours ago, wraitii said:

    IIRC we implemented diminishing returns to try and "spread" farms to make them more realistic and more vulnerable to raiding. I think we can safely say it's a failure, though :/ 

    There's no shame in trying something out to see if it works. Isn't that one of the things an alpha is good for? If it works, keep it. If it doesn't, modify or remove it and try something else.

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...