Jump to content

Alexandermb

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

  • Posts

    3.284

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    166

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Alexandermb

  6. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Nescio said:

    Personally I don't mind having siege engines of different sizes, however, regardless of size, they all follow the same principles and ratios. The ones in those screenshots look way too tall and top-heavy, hence unstable. For stone-throwers the width ought to be 50% of the length and the height 30% of the length (i.e. a 10:5:3 l:w:h ratio).

    This reference show it has a rope holding the back zone though i have done it that way for use again the reload animation so i don't struggle making it specificly for roman ballista considering performance/space. 

    I could make it a lil bit longer i belive.

     i was also thinking on place the rope, but didn't worth the polygons:

    Spoiler

    image.png

    Or maybe i could reduce a the height, but the main point is to keep the levers in the same place and same rotation to avoid making 3 more animations of 400 frames lenght for a single ballista.

  8. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    I'm freaking TELLING YOU THESE GIANT SIEGE ENGINES DO NOT FIT THE GAME WORLD.

    Just played a match to prove you are wrong, it does fit. They aren't MOUNSTROUSLY BIG enough to make a difference between buildings and scales.

    1. Smaller than a Palm.
    2. Small than the roman wonder, wich is a good comparisson having in mind wonder isn't real scale. Why i would compare roman ballista scale with Gaul houses or fortress? Every architecture has its own design and size and obviously romans had taller buildings wich are already seen in your mod with Insulaes, Also can be seen at every other roman building such as aqueducts or colliseum.
    3. Isn't that big.
       
    Spoiler

    screenshot0019.pngscreenshot0017.pngscreenshot0022.pngscreenshot0023.pngscreenshot0025.pngscreenshot0015.pngscreenshot0013.png

    @Stan` Any way to avoid this to happen in my configuration? (Low) I know i can avoid this enabling shadows but i don't have a graphic card to properly play at 30 FPS with or whitout shadows.

    Spoiler

    screenshot0024.png

    This is probably the face of every player looking at lithobolos and ballista actually:

    Spoiler

    image.png

    Before it shots looking that small size:

    Spoiler

    image.png

    After it shots looking the damage:

    Spoiler

    image.png

    What i have changed with that?

    Well, if you see those huge ballista aiming at your town you should have this expression based on the damage it would do, and the pyschological effect it has:

    Spoiler

    AdvancedImpureFishingcat-size_restrictedimage.png

    So if the enemy already reached that knowledge/late game artillery, and you still at phase 2 you will assume you are done.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

  11. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    The ship scale bothers me a lot... Some ships can be used in rivers others can be some kind/near to the real scale

    Ship Scale is already an issue, at some point if gameplay performance isn't that bad with huge maps naval battles with ships should be real scale, but im not the one to decide that.

    Neither we have the performance available for have the amount of sea we need.

    Just throw out of the board that AoE scale gameplay stuff, thats already wasted and disgusting at this point of 3D worlds. I can't enjoy a game like AoE Online not because of the cartoon look but the size of a Ship or an artillery having the same size of a cavalry.

    We already have AoE 2 DE and in the way an AoE 4 with walls with the size of an elephant why we need to sell the same product but cheaper?. Every company/indie group should have their own artistic vision and gameplay.

    That era of fake scale stuff has ended a long time ago with the death of first RTS's.

    Spoiler

    IT'S TIME TO STOP

     

    • Like 2

  12. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    In other talk, from the beginning i've always considered siege artillery excluding ram a joke, not visually speaking, because that haven't been updated since the beginning of the game i assume (excluding roman ballista) but size.

    A polybolos, scorpion and oxybeles having around the same size of a Lithobolos, but the lithobolos does by far more damage? Thats a joke. That lithobolos scale only can throw a sling rock.

    Small artillery have a good size, but Roman/Carthage Ballista and lithobolos are a joke.

    • Like 1

  13. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    7 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    Hmm. "Real size" here is overkill and will likely be detrimental to gameplay, not to mention look super weird next to buildings and ships. It's cool af of course, but do you intend to make Wonders real size? Trees? Ships? Cliffs? Mountains? How about army sizes? 300 pop after all. 

    Doing it whitout "real size" its a problem at least to me when animating, not only with artillery but in any other case, using other measure likely lead to bugs and problems when animating/meshing at some point ending on a week of blender looking a wait to fit the size issue with infantry.

    Animals, Trees, Weapons, Helmets, and anything that is used or affected by the human scale mesh on game should have real size either it will end looking cartoony and breaking historical accuracy.

    Gameplay related size only matter on ships if we ever had ship boarding but thats far from being possible i belive, if that happens then we can scale up all structures and ships if we ever have navmesh. 

    And its only in this case Height for roman ballista. Lithobolos does have around 1,5 or 2 footprint more however i haven't touched that yet.

    Imagine having a WW2 Tank being smaller, it would end looking very ridiculous and people will make fun of it.

    Structures somehowe already have a decent size, not to mention that it was wrong at first place when the game was done not the scale of the buildings but the Scale of all living entities being too big for the world size.

    Because if i do a RPG Size Scale infantry on a RTS map i will need a RPG Scale size with RPG level of Detail.

    And yep, the point was doing it huge not comparing to buildings because its already useless to compare sizes since we already know buildings aren't real size scale.

    The main idea is to introduce what i've proposed in gameplay splitting artillery into Small boltshooters, Medium Stonthrowers, Huge Stonethrowers. If its okay either this ballista is replacing the actual one, or another one im planning to do after polibolos with medium size for med artillery.

    My mystake in many cases was to "Follow" what it is ingame, following what it was already done lead many times to mistakes and weeks of struggling on blender trying to achieve the "Detail" or artistic work ever done on 0.A.D. 

    At least to me that lead me many times to mistakes and time wasted. I accept that i can't work with "fake measures", i can do adjusments to match gameplay but sometimes i can't go farther than this because every artist have his own way to work.

    • Like 1

  16. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    is little more beggier some of them. Roman at last.

    Imagen relacionada

    https://www.shedblog.co.uk/2008/09/30/full-size-replica-roman-seige-catapult-for-sale/

    Roman Ballista

    1 Step ahead of references:

    Spoiler

    image.png

     

    10 minutes ago, borg- said:

    I like the possibility of building a heavy artillery on the battlefield.

    For work, it needs to have a very high attack as it would be extremely vulnerable cuz cant move (right?).

    I really like the idea of Boltshooter/Stonethrower vulnerable to ranged damage, but it has a big effect on current balance. For this to work in my opinion, the patch/unpatch needs to work properly, and increased effectiveness against troops. 

    Yep, thats the plan, high attack output while removing the ability to move (i wonder if its possible to make it unable to rotate also).

    Yes also, it could have a bonus agaisn't infantry, being this weak agaisn't cavalry and ranged attacks.

    Boltshooter should be faster pierceing projectile while stonethrower regular speed sling stone projectile.

    For other cilizations like gauls and mauryans capturing this siege weapons i wish there was a feature that make the captured entities decay at time, in this case for weapons means that the gauls would learn how to use it but not build them, but not using it properly neither giving proper maintenance it will end consequently damaged over time and lastly decaying to death.

     

     

    • Like 1

  18. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    @borg- I tag you here so you read my proposal at the first post talking about a new artillery gameplay. I wonder if its reasonable what i have proposed and if its possible make huge ballista/lithobolos being build on battlefield instead of carrying it on a chariot.

    Gameplay speaking i need to split artillery in different clases.

    Boltshooter: Scorpion, Polybolos, Oxybeles. Good for killing infantry, this artillery should be able to be killed with arrows and slings and shouldn't be capturable, so you should use them for skirmishes and protect them as well.

    Stonethrower: Sling ammunation medium lithobolos/ballista. This should work well for fast siege deploy and ambushes with a decent range (Range should be about the same of a tower). Should also be killed by arrows and slings but this time allow to be captured.

    Heavy Stonethrower: Huge Rock thrower specially for siege towns from the distance. If its accepted that should be built on the battlefield whitout rotation i would do some meshes of the ballista being built. However this should require about half time of a Fortress. Why that? Well, you build a fortress with a full manpower and resources. If you are building a siege weapon on a battlefield that means time isn't your friend here being enemies able to see you will give them the chance to send the cavalry and destroy your ballista before its finished. The range of this one should be more than a tower. But this will have a decent amount of min range to give a chance of infantry and cavalry to destroy it before getting hited if they get closer. 

    Stat speaking:

    I need to increase repeat time of stonethrower from 5000 to at least 7000-8000 in order to avoid visual glitches of siege artillery being shot faster.

    For Heavy stonethrower since it could be a new template this one should be around 10000 being slow but buffing the range and crush damage.

    Boltshooter will see if it doesn't shoot faster when i've done the first new light artillery.

    • Like 3

  21. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    Ok, probably not going further than this, this was a pain to do and i don't remember how many times i've started from scratch because blender rotation bones bugs or clipping with the hip.

    And i want to look this beast already ingame. (Probably i will have to reduce attack speed for avoid having a tarzan climbing the lithobolos)

    Spoiler

    Lithobolos Attack Ranged - Operator Done.gif

     

    • Like 6
    • Thanks 4

  25. ===[COMMITTED]=== Siege Artillery Rework

    in Completed Art Tasks

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, Stan` said:

    @Alexandermb In case you didn't know the engine also supports animations variants for packing and unpacking. Thanks @Angen for noticing. 

    
Pack.prototype.Pack = function()
{
	if (this.IsPacked() || this.IsPacking())
		return;

	this.packing = true;

	let cmpTimer = Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_Timer);
	this.timer = cmpTimer.SetInterval(this.entity, IID_Pack, "PackProgress", 0, PACKING_INTERVAL, { "packing": true });

	let cmpVisual = Engine.QueryInterface(this.entity, IID_Visual);
	if (cmpVisual)
		cmpVisual.SelectAnimation("packing", true, 1.0, "packing");
};

Pack.prototype.Unpack = function()
{
	if (!this.IsPacked() || this.IsPacking())
		return;

	this.packing = true;

	let cmpTimer = Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_Timer);
	this.timer = cmpTimer.SetInterval(this.entity, IID_Pack, "PackProgress", 0, PACKING_INTERVAL, { "packing": false });

	let cmpVisual = Engine.QueryInterface(this.entity, IID_Visual);
	if (cmpVisual)
		cmpVisual.SelectAnimation("unpacking", true, 1.0);
};

     

    Thats good to know, i was about to ask something like that to fix the unsync horse hair while unpacking wich came from the 2nd update. Apparently every entity picks animation randomly when engine assume its his first placement on the world or the simulation. This is not a horse related hair bug but aparently entity issue.

    We need to have at some point on visual animation Force the entity to pick Always the first animation for all the actors and then start choosing randomly the rest of the idles.

    While packing or unpacking the game take the switch between packing and unpacking state visually as a new entity on the simulation, thats why i gets unsync.

×
×
  • Create New...