===[COMMITTED]=== Macedonian wonder

[Nescio]

2 minutes ago, m7600 said:

Ok, how about now? I removed the foot and made it a bit more slender.

The shape looks good enough. I also stumbled upon a bit clearer image of Wikimedia Commons:

Spoiler

I'm not sure you can fit in 16 columns on each side of the central courtyard, but it would be nice to give it a try and see how it looks, if that's not too much trouble.

[Nescio]

20 minutes ago, m7600 said:

I managed to put 14 on each side without changing the rest of the building.

That's quite close! There are not that many people who count columns, but for those that do, it's a nice detail to get right. Perhaps you can make the courtyard a bit larger and the rooms on the left and right a bit narrower? Compare your top view with the layout posted on an earlier page.

Also, the frontal entrance (not the rest of the portico, nor the second storey) should have two rows of two columns, then the (open) doors, then another row of two columns, and finally the courtyard, giving a nice look-through.

[Genava55]

28 minutes ago, m7600 said:

On the other hand, I wonder if it's really necessary to add it, since in some reconstructions they decided to omit it, in this one for example:

Probably disagreements between archaeologists, the footprints of the remaining building can be difficult to interpret:

http://en.protothema.gr/palace-of-aigai-biggest-building-of-ancient-greece-opens-to-public-photos/

https://www.aigai.gr/www.aigai.gr/en/explore/palace.html

Edit: Either open and uncovered, or open but with columns and covered by a roof.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Genava55

[Nescio]

Another minor detail: could you indicate the back doors at the left and right sides? (Doors are just a different part of the same texture, right?) You can find the correct locations in e.g. the first image of this post.

1 hour ago, m7600 said:

@Nescio Is this ok for the veranda?

On the other hand, I wonder if it's really necessary to add it, since in some reconstructions they decided to omit it, in this one for example:

39 minutes ago, Genava55 said:

Probably disagreements between archaeologists, the footprints of the remaining building can be difficult to interpret:

http://en.protothema.gr/palace-of-aigai-biggest-building-of-ancient-greece-opens-to-public-photos/

https://www.aigai.gr/www.aigai.gr/en/explore/palace.html

Edit: Either open and uncovered, or open but with columns and covered by a roof.

(The following is also true for many other archaeological sites.)

What we have today is the platform, the foundations of the walls, and the remains of some columns. It is therefore known where the walls were, how many rooms the building had and what their sizes were, the locations of the doors, and also that it had two storeys. What we can't say for sure is how tall all of the walls were, how high the roof was, how many windows it had or where, and not even the locations of the internal stairs (which were made of wood, not stone). The purpose of reconstructions is to give an idea how the author thinks something may have looked like. A critical attitude and making up your own mind is always healthy.

Indeed, that specific reconstruction does not show the veranda. Nor does it include the extension at the back with the secondary courtyard, which is excavated and the dimensions are known. Consequently your model doesn't include it either. That's fine, we could justify it by assuming the extension was a later addition that did not yet exist when Philip II was alive.

As for the veranda, we know it was there and that it extended along the full length, from back to front; the platform upon which it stood is there. What we don't know is how exactly it looked. It may have been entirely wooden (I'm speculating here). I suggested adding it because it would make the building more interesting to look at when rotating the view. (Symmetry is nice and all, but also a bit boring.)

What you do with all this information is up to you.

[Nescio]

17 hours ago, m7600 said:

Wait, disregard what I said before. You're talking about the central courtyard, I thought you were talking about the front side. I don't know if I can fit 16 in the courtyard, but I'll give it a try.

Yes, I was talking about the columns of the central courtyard.

As for the front side, the porticoes to the left and right of the entrance had twelve columns each .

You might want to have another look at the last image in this post.

[Genava55]

Is the word Veranda really appropriate?

http://www.macedonian-heritage.gr/HellenicMacedonia/en/C1.1.1.html

Are the columns on the right side clearly identified?

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43636542?seq=15#metadata_info_tab_contents

[Nescio]

Have another look at this frontal view, I find it particularly helpful:

On 23/04/2020 at 12:43 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

It also shows the platform on the right side of the building, upon which the veranda may have stood.

Of course, there is a risk of confirmation bias, with people making new reconstructions looking at the reconstructions done by others (like we're doing right now ).

52 minutes ago, Genava55 said:

Is the word Veranda really appropriate?

http://www.macedonian-heritage.gr/HellenicMacedonia/en/C1.1.1.html

Maybe not. [EDIT]: go to .4: http://www.macedonian-heritage.gr/HellenicMacedonia/en/C1.1.1.4.html

52 minutes ago, Genava55 said:

Are the columns on the right side clearly identified?

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43636542?seq=15#metadata_info_tab_contents

The columns of the right portico of the front side, I believe so; all maps and reconstructions I've seen so far display them.If you meant columns of the veranda along the right side of the building, not that I know of; hence why I'm speculating they may have been wooden.

I can be wrong, of course; I'm neither an archaeologist nor an expert of the site in question.

41 minutes ago, m7600 said:

Even if I did incorporate it, it would be a problem in terms of game play, because it would require a mostly empty footprint, like @wowgetoffyourcellphone pointed out. Unless we fill it with pottery and other ornaments, but I don't think that would work. I don't know, I'd have to try. Yet, there would be a further problem, which is that the building would be much longer, it would be considerably longer than the model for the Hanging Gardens of Babylon.

Yeah, I know, I'm actually fine with omitting the secondary courtyard at the back. When I first suggested it, I didn't know how your model would compare to other structures, but your more recent screenshots make it clear it's large enough and there is no need for the extension.

41 minutes ago, m7600 said:

Asymmetry can look really good... when it's done correctly. I'm not questioning the architect's skills, I'm questioning my own ability to represent this historical building in an accurate way... That being said, did the veranda have stone columns, like the ones that are in the screenshot that I posted? Or do you think they were made of wood? Was the roof of the veranda probably made of the same material as the rest of the roofs of the building?

Again, I'm speculating, yet I doubt it was as monumental or durable as the central courtyard. My guess is the veranda was made from more perishable materials.

41 minutes ago, m7600 said:

Yeah, but I wanna get this right. Or at least as right as possible. If artists can do whatever they want, then it would be kind of pointless to consult classicists and historians. I think that for a project like 0 AD, we always have to reach a balance.

Perhaps it's best to include the platform on the right side but omit the veranda (which we don't know how it looked like).

Getting the number of columns of the central courtyard (and frontal porticoes) right is more important to me.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Nescio
see link

[Nescio]

5 minutes ago, m7600 said:

Ok, then maybe you'll like this update. The central courtyard now has 16 columns on each side, and each side of the porticoes has 12 columns. However, you can see that in the case of the porticoes, the columns are too close to each other. The building now has the size of the Hanging Gardens. If I have to accommodate more space between the columns, then the model will be larger than the current Persian wonder. I don't know if we want that. Probably not.

Thank you very much, I certainly do appreciate that! And no, the structure shouldn't become larger. I actually how the porticoes look. (The frontal entrance still needs to be improved, though.)

5 minutes ago, m7600 said:

By the way, I read what you wrote about the doors, I'll tackle that issue next. But I want to resolve the issue about the columns and the veranda first. Speaking of which, you can see that the latter now stretches across the entire right side. I'll replace stone columns will be replaced with wooden beams.

Could you make the veranda lower and narrower and give it a simpler roof? Or make it perhaps a simple fence?

Please read http://www.macedonian-heritage.gr/HellenicMacedonia/en/C1.1.1.4.html again.

6 minutes ago, m7600 said:

And maybe I'll have to make the entire building have less height, it looks perhaps too high right now.

I don't think you should make the structure lower, it had two storeys and the front was tall and meant to impress.

[Nescio]

Also, please remove those gilded shields from the architrave (above the columns). They're a Roman addition to the temple of Zeus at Olympia, part of the spoils from sacking Corinth in 146 BC.

[Genava55]

1 hour ago, Nescio said:

If you meant columns of the veranda along the right side of the building, not that I know of; hence why I'm speculating they may have been wooden.

Yeah that's them, I find it confusing. Thx, for the reply.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Genava55

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Looks incredible. 1 request? Can you make the foundation platform go about 3x deeper? Shouldn't add too many triangles and will help the building blend into hills better.

 

*Ideally we could eventually have a set of platforms of various sizes we can use for structures such as these as simple props, but that's out of scope of this structure.

[vladislavbelov]

On 14/03/2021 at 3:27 PM, m7600 said:

Do you mean how many meshes for this Wonder, or how many meshes for the total number of buildings in the Macedonian civ? This wonder uses 9 different meshes, each of them uses its own texture file.

I'm worrying only about how many meshes on a visible scene at once. In case of wonder if it doesn't completely reuse existing textures for other buildings then the best implementation is to use a single mesh with a single texture with a maximal side not more than 2048 pixels (atm).

[Carltonus]

While waiting for a willing modeler in order to finish the veranda (is it necessary?), let us pick the specific name for the new wonder. Am thinking of "Basíleion tôn Aigôn". Are the cases used correct?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

On 01/04/2021 at 10:45 PM, m7600 said:

Here's the .zip file, in case you want to try it out in the Atlas editor or in the game. I didn't bother making a mod.json file, seems like overkill for something that is still a work in progress. Just unzip the contents into the folder named "public". Obviously this is not finished, it needs the veranda, and the base texture is f--- up in a few places. This is as far as I've gotten with this for now.

 

new_macedonian_wonder.zip 3 MB · 12 downloads

Any progress, bro?  

[Stan`]

Here comes the review:
Bad UV

Bad uv, and make it a bit deeper You never know where those pesky players and mappers will try to place it

 

Some parrallax bug

Bad smoothing (I think)  (Should use shade flat)

Grass is floating which might look weird

 

Some broken actor parts

ERROR: CCacheLoader failed to find archived or source file for: "art/actors/props/special/common/garrison_flag_macedonians.xml"

ERROR: CObjectManager::FindActorDef(): Cannot find actor 'props/special/common/garrison_flag_macedonians.xml'

ERROR: Actor props/structures/macedonians/wonder_gardens_turf.xml255: required texture sampler normTex not found (material art/materials/player_trans_ao_parallax_spec.xml)

ERROR: Actor props/structures/macedonians/wonder_gardens_turf.xml255: required texture sampler specTex not found (material art/materials/player_trans_ao_parallax_spec.xml)

ERROR: Actor props/structures/macedonians/wonder_trees.xml255: required texture sampler normTex not found (material art/materials/player_trans_ao_parallax_spec.xml)

ERROR: Actor props/structures/macedonians/wonder_trees.xml255: required texture sampler specTex not found (material art/materials/player_trans_ao_parallax_spec.xml)

 

Not sure we need the veranda to be honest, it's already quite big

gp

[Stan`]

2 minutes ago, m7600 said:

Thanks @Stan`! I'll try to fix it this weekend. I feel the same way about the veranda, I don't think it's necessary.

Cool this you might want to do:

Quote

IP

Also, please remove those gilded shields from the architrave (above the columns). They're a Roman addition to the temple of Zeus at Olympia, part of the spoils from sacking Corinth in 146 BC.

Note that they are also wrongly uvmapped on some places

[Stan`]

You forgot some of those roman shield additions. I'd make the props (vases + nature) not symmetrical to make them more interesting to look at.

Might want to add doors in the inner courtyard

That back building looks a bit dull compared to the front one,  could use some windows.

You've got some underground unused faces

Other than that it looks fine.
Keep up the good work!

[Stan`]

I had to make quite a lot of adjustments. Can you check again?

There were a lot holes, and duplicated geometry.

and a bunch of useless faces.

 

 

wonder_wip_g2.blend

[Stan`]

1 hour ago, m7600 said:

@Stan` cool thanks. I don't think that I'll keep working on this model for now, maybe in a couple of months I'll get back to it. To be perfectly honest, I'm a bit bored with it. If you want to finish it yourself, that would be great. If not, no problem : P

I know the frustration I'll see if more time to finish and pack it comes my way

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Uh hi guise. How's this going?

[Carltonus]

On 2/7/2021 at 9:02 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Uh hi guise. How's this going?

Don't think this will be implemented in the next alpha, since @Stan` is busy with more finishing work. 

On 30/5/2021 at 11:55 AM, m7600 said:

...maybe in a couple of months I'll get back to it...

It's been "a couple of months" since they posted the above. Time to concede with my first sentence above?

Anyways, my impression on the current state of the palace model is... nearly done.

[Stan`]

It still needs AO baking, and maybe a few tweaks, don't remember.

[Carltonus]

Just the messenger here, nothing else. The only feature I have contributed currently is the proposed specific name for the building.

15 hours ago, m7600 said:

I encourage you to finish the model yourself. The file is there, and the model is almost finished, you only need to adjust some details and do the ambient occlusion baking.

Thanks for the offer, if only I had another computer with the space for such creative tools... expecting one sooner or later!

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

On 06/08/2021 at 1:31 PM, m7600 said:

 

 

Yes, it's been a couple of months, and I also said that maybe I would get back to it, I didn't say that I was definitely going to get back to it. I encourage you to finish the model yourself. The file is there, and the model is almost finished, you only need to adjust some details and do the ambient occlusion baking. If you don't know how to do it, you can find tutorials on this website on how to do both things, and you can also find tutorials on youtube on how to use Blender in general. Come on, let's see some initiative. I've already done 90% of the model, I invite you to do the other 10%.

Bro, there's no need to get upset! People just want to see your hard work make it into the game so it can be enjoyed.  

[Carltonus]

We have not seen any news yet from the original modeller of the palace. The feature freeze is in a few weeks, just to let the both of you know. Anybody else who is willing to finish the palace just in time for the above?