===[COMMITTED]=== Spartan Structures

[serveurix]

I'm still surprised by the look of the theater. Why is there a temple-like structure on the stage ?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

5 hours ago, serveurix said:

I'm still surprised by the look of the theater. Why is there a temple-like structure on the stage ?

It represents the theater at Artemis Orthia, which was just a temple first, with a theater built around it later.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

11 hours ago, LordGood said:

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Rooftiles are all grainy and still has this odd split. the 3D-ness is restored, though

Part of the problem is that the texture itself has a lot contrasty areas and grain. Another problem is the zoom, the player isn't gonna see it this way generally. And another problem is that the parallax is quite extreme and stretches the texture. Lastly, you've also UV mapped the rooftiles on a lot of these buildings to be very large compared to the other Greek buildings. The other Greek buildings UV mapped them smaller so that they look higher res and less stretchy.

 

In this shot you see the difference in the mapping and the size difference of the tiles. Perhaps some adjustments to the UV mapping can help. I also reduced the contrast of the parallax alpha layer so that it doesn't stretch the diffuse map so much, to this:

 

[serveurix]

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

It represents the theater at Artemis Orthia, which was just a temple first, with a theater built around it later.

But that theater was built during the roman period, after 0 A.D. timeframe.

[LordGood]

That information was out before I even uploaded the screenshots of the theater in this very thread.

I know. I'm not in any rush to fix it either, but it's on the todo list. 

[serveurix]

2 minutes ago, LordGood said:

That information was out before I even uploaded the screenshots of the theater in this very thread.

I know. I'm not in any rush to fix it either, but it's on the todo list. 

On an other note, I don't think the theater should look like one particular famous theater but more like a generic spartan theater (it's not a wonder).

[LordGood]

have fun, kids

[Lion.Kanzen]

10 hours ago, serveurix said:

But that theater was built during the roman period, after 0 A.D. timeframe.

 0 A.D timeframe is from 500 BC 753 to 500A.D

The time frame of Romans was BC to 476 A.D

 

[LordGood]

empires ascendant cuts off at 1 AD with a little wiggle room, its a roman vaulted theater no doubt about it. It'll be a good atlas object when i get around to replacing it but like I said I'm in no rush to do so

[fatherbushido]

(Offtopic but I really appreciate the stables is a nice idea (in many rts we have a factory for infantry and a factory for vehicles).)

[LordGood]

Just now, fatherbushido said:

(Offtopic but I really appreciate the stables is a nice idea (in many rts we have a factory for infantry and a factory for vehicles).)

did you want me to make entity templates for them or did you have something planned? I know i don't usually optimize them as well as i could

[fatherbushido]

Sure, it's anyway a good idea to have the template related to the actor.

If you prefer I do, I can too (but I feel you are more qualified for footprint and obstruction size).

 

 

[Sundiata]

LordGood making it shine bright Lacedaemon!

[av93]

I'm seeing walls done? (for scenarios and modding).

If I can ask also an offtopic, do you remember if all buildings (beside specials, temples and wonders) have all the same footprint?

[Hannibal_Barca]

Quite diverse footprints I would think.

Consider brit vs hellenic corral, the 2 kinds of houses

 

If you meant inside a civ then definitely not

[av93]

Specially walls should have the same footprint (I don't know if already have it), cause then some walls are easier to place than others. End Offtopic

Very nice new flavour. More diversity always is welcomed!

[serveurix]

1 hour ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

 0 A.D timeframe is from 500 BC 753 to 500A.D

The time frame of Romans was BC to 476 A.D

 

Sorry, I meant 0 A.D. Part 1 timeframe.

[LordGood]

@fatherbushido Word of warning: range, stables, and workshop parent templates are all parented to the barracks template. Once all the art assets are finished, and the cavalry and archers are removed from the barracks parent template, things will look a bit more normal.

[fatherbushido]

Awesome!

Does someone want to have fun and update the Spartans demo map?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Do you plan to make archery range, stables, etc. for each civ? Even if not all civs need them, they'd still be good to have for mods or scenarios.

[Lion.Kanzen]

On ‎04‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 12:20 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

So you gonna take this responsibility(fun).

 

On ‎04‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 11:18 AM, LordGood said:

I think we need elephant stables and siege workshops for all the civs where applicable tbqh

 

On ‎04‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 6:59 PM, LordGood said:

AAaaaagh- probably

 

4 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Do you plan to make archery range, stables, etc. for each civ? Even if not all civs need them, they'd still be good to have for mods or scenarios.

 

[LordGood]

iirc all civs have at least one unit in each category to warrant all 3 buildings, to not need to build one would throw off balance without another check. If a spartan player wants to build a stable and range just for cavalry skirms power to him lol

[Grugnas]

Good job with those builginds, they just look amazing. the rampant plants are a quite neat detail.

Someone already said that, but decoration shields on barracks wall would be really nice  to highlight its military purpose.

Farmstead fundation and visual actor have different shapes resulting in an unpleasing overlapping when built.

 

[WhiteTreePaladin]

5 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Do you plan to make archery range, stables, etc. for each civ? Even if not all civs need them, they'd still be good to have for mods or scenarios.

That's one thing I liked about AoK over AoE3. I never cared for the combined barracks. Separate buildings slows down some rushing as you can't train all the different types of units until you have built the respective buildings. It also lets you target enemy unit creation more precisely. For example, you can opt to destroy stables first to prevent cavalry creation if your current units are more vulnerable to cavalry. Plus, building variety makes cities look nicer.

[av93]

4 hours ago, WhiteTreePaladin said:

That's one thing I liked about AoK over AoE3. I never cared for the combined barracks. Separate buildings slows down some rushing as you can't train all the different types of units until you have built the respective buildings. It also lets you target enemy unit creation more precisely. For example, you can opt to destroy stables first to prevent cavalry creation if your current units are more vulnerable to cavalry. Plus, building variety makes cities look nicer.

Well, most civs in aoe3 (if not all) have separate buildings into barracks, stable and foundry.