===[COMMITTED]=== Onager

[Stan`]

Thought It would be nice to have pureon's model textured so...

 

Included in this package :

• Textures
• Improved Onager UVMap
• Simulation Actors For Packing Unpacking

public.7z

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Does have AO map too?  I think the little squares can be iron?

Edited May 15, 2016 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Stan`]

Just now, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Does have AO map too?

AO is integrated. You can't have AO and Diffuse on animated meshes. (Engine Limitation)

[Lion.Kanzen]

Can be nice have fixed and onager with wheels.

[Lion.Kanzen]

@stanislas69 can be nice have a More wood textures to give a variance. And this can be cool with siege engines.

[Enrique]

9 hours ago, stanislas69 said:

AO is integrated. You can't have AO and Diffuse on animated meshes. (Engine Limitation)

Why not add the AO into the same diffuse map then?

 A different texture tone for the "ends" of the pieces of wood would make it more interesting and less monochromatic. Or at least some metal pieces or a higher detail wood grain.

[Stan`]

2 hours ago, Enrique said:

Why not add the AO into the same diffuse map then?

 

11 hours ago, stanislas69 said:

AO is integrated. You can't have AO and Diffuse on animated meshes. (Engine Limitation)

 

2 hours ago, Enrique said:

Why not add the AO into the same diffuse map then?

 A different texture tone for the "ends" of the pieces of wood would make it more interesting and less monochromatic. Or at least some metal pieces or a higher detail wood grain.

I'll see what I can do.

[Stan`]

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

A more woodish tint (yellow, brown, instead of grey) and I think is winner wiiner chicken dinner.

[Stan`]

Edited July 8, 2016 by stanislas69

[Lion.Kanzen]

Perfect!

[Stan`]

Here are the files

 

 

onager.7z

Edited July 8, 2016 by stanislas69

[Lion.Kanzen]

Can be nice have a version with wheels.

in AoE You can packed  the unit to move faster and unpack it. But You can move slower but you don't  need wait for pack up.

[Stan`]

On 5/16/2016 at 1:12 AM, Lion.Kanzen said:

Can be nice have fixed and onager with wheels.

 

14 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Can be nice have a version with wheels.

in AoE You can packed  the unit to move faster and unpack it. But You can move slower but you don't  need wait for pack up.

I know  I understood the first time, I just do not want to break @Pureon's model

[real_tabasco_sauce]

On 07/07/2016 at 6:01 AM, Stan` said:

On 15/05/2016 at 4:12 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

Can be nice have fixed and onager with wheels.

 

On 06/07/2016 at 3:47 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

Can be nice have a version with wheels.

in AoE You can packed  the unit to move faster and unpack it. But You can move slower but you don't  need wait for pack up.

I know  I understood the first time, I just do not want to break @Pureon's model

@borg- and I are thinking about how to add best to add the onager to rome. I would really prefer the onager to have wheels and no need to pack up. For this, the unit would just have to have a long prepare time.

However, it seems adding wheels is not as simple as I would have thought. (I hoped to be able to add wheel props).

Any ideas? I guess it could just be packed/unpacked like other siege, but it would be more interesting to be mobile.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Onagers did not have wheels, except maybe in Medieval times.

 

Make it buildable in the field. Make it the only siege weapons (except siege tower?) that can be built in this way. Requires an Arsenal to be built first.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

39 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Onagers did not have wheels, except maybe in Medieval times.

 

Make it buildable in the field. Make it the only siege weapons (except siege tower?) that can be built in this way. Requires an Arsenal to be built first.

Yeah, I guess that's right.

Well, what I have is added a pack/unpack functionality just like other ranged siege. It has area attack, shorter range, short prepare time, 5 sec repeat time. My main issue with building siege in the field is that it gives you such a massive amount of flexibility compared to other civs. That being said, the unit isn't particularly good vs buildings.

So I think it would be good to allow legionaries to build them. Another option would be to instead unlock them upon reforms tech and also allow training them at army camps. This way they can be built near but not in the middle of the fight.

@borg- @chrstgtr Which sounds better?

• Always available from workshop
• Available from workshop, available in army camp after reforms tech.
• Available to be built by legionaries after reforms tech.

I think all three might be cool. In that case, would you all be fine with me adding this into the existing patch? or should this be separate?

[Atrik]

2 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Well, what I have is added a pack/unpack functionality just like other ranged siege.

Makes sens and probably good choice for balance. But since it's AOE dps, it friendly-fires right? Else my guess is that won't be a strategical unit, but one you can just spam because it's just a unit with superior stats.

[borg-]

They exist before the Marian Reforms, so it is not necessary to research this technology to build them.
Must have a building limit.
Need to build an army camp to be able to build them.
Can be built by all units, including women.
Can only be built in neutral or enemy territory. Cannot be built on own territory and used for defense.
I think a separate patch just for onager is better.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

5 hours ago, borg- said:

They exist before the Marian Reforms, so it is not necessary to research this technology to build them.
Must have a building limit.
Need to build an army camp to be able to build them.
Can be built by all units, including women.
Can only be built in neutral or enemy territory. Cannot be built on own territory and used for defense.
I think a separate patch just for onager is better.

Yeah, there are a dozen different ways to make onagers interesting and different. I was just thinking they could be built by the Marian Legions as another differentiation. It'd be interesting if the construction restriction patch was committed so that only Legionaries could build it.

 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

8 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

My main issue with building siege in the field is that it gives you such a massive amount of flexibility compared to other civs. That being said, the unit isn't particularly good vs buildings.

Right, if it's mainly good against units, then it becomes a battlefield implement rather than a forward siege emplacement. That said, I don't think it should be "horrible" against buildings, just not as effective as a good ballista. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Right, if it's mainly good against units, then it becomes a battlefield implement rather than a forward siege emplacement. That said, I don't think it should be "horrible" against buildings, just not as effective as a good ballista. 

Its about half as effective as a ballista vs buildings. So, still useful for pressure but not powerful enough to take down forts unless you have like 8.

7 hours ago, borg- said:

They exist before the Marian Reforms, so it is not necessary to research this technology to build them.

Yes so I'm thinking to train them from the arsenal without upgrade, and then only allowing legionaries to build them in the field. The thinking is that women and CS probably wouldn't be trained in this way but legionaries would. Since they already have the restriction to only build military buildings, I think it makes sense.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone I am not sure how to build a unit, but I think the restriction would be as simple as adding units/{civ}/siege_onager to builder in infantry_legionary.xml no?"

I am sure you have worked with building siege before, could you point me to an example?

Perhaps a building with the onager actor that instantly upgrades (or maybe promotes) to the unit? This would look clunky in the tech tree tho. (although since only legionaries build it it might not show up).

Edited August 25, 2023 by real_tabasco_sauce

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

5 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

@wowgetoffyourcellphone I am not sure how to build a unit, but I think the restriction would be as simple as adding units/{civ}/siege_onager to builder in infantry_legionary.xml no?"

Correct, though there are a few more tweaks to make it work nicely, you've essentially got it.

https://github.com/JustusAvramenko/delenda_est/blob/master/simulation/templates/mixins/builder.xml

 

https://github.com/JustusAvramenko/delenda_est/blob/master/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_catapult_stationary.xml

 

https://github.com/JustusAvramenko/delenda_est/blob/master/simulation/templates/units/imp/siege_catapult_unpacked.xml

 

I don't know if how I did it is the best way, but it works in DE. @Langbartmay have some good ideas on how to streamline the template and make it work as well as we want it to.

Edited August 25, 2023 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[real_tabasco_sauce]

@wowgetoffyourcellphone we need an actor for the packed onager. Are you aware of anything that might work, or would this have to be new?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

@wowgetoffyourcellphone we need an actor for the packed onager. Are you aware of anything that might work, or would this have to be new?

DE uses the packed ballista actor. There is no specific one for the onager.