===[TASK]=== Celtic Unit Textures

[wackyserious]

Experimenting with the Celtic Cavalry

Also tried to photo-manipulate and reconstruct Brennus' texture (it now uses the m_tunic_long.dae instead of the hero mesh)

Also experimented with the high waist Celtic pants.

 

[Sundiata]

@wackyserious, some more Celts, including some with those typical patterns  

 

Brennus sacks Delphi

 

The surrender of Vercingetorix to Caesar at the battle of Alesia. A little romantic, but worth the share I think  

 

Vercingetorix performs the old horse switcheroo, in a final whimsical gesture

Edited March 24, 2018 by Sundiata

[wackyserious]

NAKED FANATIC

Experimented with textured brushes then selected its layers and used it to crop the base body textures, the result is a splattered subtle player color as seen below.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

ehhhhh, let's not make SKIN into player color.

[wackyserious]

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Just experiments Plus those are very subtle

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Just now, wackyserious said:

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Just experiments Plus those are very subtle

Okay. Just saying there should be some consistency on what's player color and what's not.  

[wackyserious]

Does anyone know what kind of armor is Caratacos wearing?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

He's kind of just wearing a leather abdominal thingy. lol

[wackyserious]

I can't find any reference about it and cannot compare it to anything. I was assuming that it is some kind of padded cloth.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

58 minutes ago, wackyserious said:

I can't find any reference about it and cannot compare it to anything. I was assuming that it is some kind of padded cloth.

I think it was just based off of a cool old piece of concept art.

[Sundiata]

@wackyserious & @wowgetoffyourcellphone and others interested in Gauls and Britons.

I noticed 2 mistakes in the Gaul Hero units:

Brennus, a hero for the Gauls, is using a Brittonic Celtic helmet, namely the "Waterloo Helmet" which was found in London

Viridomarus, a hero for the Gauls, is carrying a Brittonic Celtic shield, namely the "Battersea Shield", also found in London.

 

The Waterloo Helmet (Celtic Britons, London):

 

The Battersea Shield (Celtic Britons, London)

 

Celtic Britons:

Cassivelaunus, an important British chieftain. Why isn't this guy, who led the defence against Caesar's second invasion of Britain in 54 BC, a hero for the Britons? Instead we have the anachronistic Boudica, Caratacus and Cunobeline, who are literally all from the wrong time-period?! I'm all for widening the current time-frame of 0AD, but why only for the Britons? 

 

 

 

Both the helmet and the shield are famous, which makes these mistakes rather noticeable... In addition, the Celtic Briton heroes look a little underwhelming compared to the Gallic ones, which makes the using the epic Brittonic reference material for the Gauls more questionable. There's plenty of epic Gallic references to use for Gallic Heroes.

 

Mainland Celts, good references for Gauls:

Celtic Raid on northern Greece

 

Hallstatt 

 

Celts attack Etruscans in northern Italy

 

Edited March 25, 2018 by Sundiata

[wackyserious]

This will need the official team's attention if a redesign is needed.

@LordGood @stanislas69 @feneur @Itms

Plus the forum community including ourselves and the others, specially those who have a good background on La Tene warfare and culture.

Also tagging @wowgetoffyourcellphone and @Nescio

[av93]

On 3/11/2017 at 6:01 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

I did.

 

Wow, rereading the forum I found that I didn't answer you, @Lion.Kanzen. It wasn't referring to one of your post. It was made by someone else.

BTW, @wackyserious you have in mind some differentiation between Celts and Britons?

Edited March 25, 2018 by av93

[GunChleoc]

On 3/18/2018 at 10:28 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

Is normal is the fashion trend.  however the Celts are divided in clans and clans have their own pattern? @GunChleoc 

A lot of that heraldry stuff is a Victorian invention done by English speakers and has nothing to do with traditional culture. A far as I know, it originally went like this: the richer the wearer, the more elaborate the pattern. I'm not an expert though.

[GunChleoc]

On 3/18/2018 at 11:05 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

Based in  this...

Basically this.

Those are 19th century

[wackyserious]

9 hours ago, av93 said:

BTW, @wackyserious you have in mind some differentiation between Celts and Britons?

Nothing solid at the moment, but we had a conversation about that some years back on another post.

Britons would be less clothed and have more body paint and will focus on light infantry.

Gauls would be more heavily armored compared to the Britons and as suggested by @Lion.Kanzen Some of the Gauls such as the Aedui are becoming less and less Celtic as the advent of the common era (CE) begins.

[Alexandermb]

12 hours ago, Sundiata said:

 

 

I'm just passing by to say i'm going to steal those references and see if i can do something.

[Lion.Kanzen]

I like those pants.

Edited March 26, 2018 by Lion.Kanzen

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

14 hours ago, Sundiata said:

I noticed 2 mistakes in the Gaul Hero units:

Brennus, a hero for the Gauls, is using a Brittonic Celtic helmet, namely the "Waterloo Helmet" which was found in London

Viridomarus, a hero for the Gauls, is carrying a Brittonic Celtic shield, namely the "Battersea Shield", also found in London.

You're absolutely right. I'd definitely give that helmet and shield to Brythonic heroes. Potentially, both items to the guy you mentioned:

 

14 hours ago, Sundiata said:

Cassivelaunus, an important British chieftain. Why isn't this guy, who led the defence against Caesar's second invasion of Britain in 54 BC, a hero for the Britons? Instead we have the anachronistic Boudica, Caratacus and Cunobeline, who are literally all from the wrong time-period?! I'm all for widening the current time-frame of 0AD, but why only for the Britons? 

 

I'd be perfectly cool with removing those three Briton heroes in favor of 3 better-placed heroes. Can keep those original 3 in Atlas with the intention of giving them back to the Britons in Part 2 to fight against the Principate Romans.

[Alexandermb]

actual:

Spoiler

 

Edited March 26, 2018 by Alexandermb

[Lion.Kanzen]

Strong contrast in the helmet... is unbalanced if is compared with texture shield.

[Sundiata]

11 hours ago, Alexandermb said:

Gorgeous! I love the new shield! 

Although it seems to curve inwards at the top and bottom, while it's ok/preferable for this shield to be flat (was attached to a wooden frame). Remember the shield belongs to the Britons, and is inappropriate for the Gallic Viridomarus. 

On another note, that old helmet is the Ciumesti helmet from Romania (bronze). It has been featured in 2 famous Angus McBride illustrations, one of which shows Brennus sacking Delphi, making Brennus a nice choice to give that helmet to. Not saying it actually belonged to Brennus though... 

Which Brennus is featured in 0AD by the way? The one that sacked Delphi (279 BC) or the one that sacked Rome (390 BC)? I'm guessing Rome, right?

Also the helmet can be animated. Those wings had some kind of hinges allowing them to "flap" with the movement of the wearer. 

 

 

So:

• Bronze Shield: for a British hero, preferably Cassivelaunus.
• Winged Helmet: for a Gallic hero, preferably Brennus. 

 

12 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I'd be perfectly cool with removing those three Briton heroes in favor of 3 better-placed heroes. Can keep those original 3 in Atlas with the intention of giving them back to the Britons in Part 2 to fight against the Principate Romans.

So, Cassivelaunus, chieftain/king and commander of the combined British forces opposing Caesars second invasion of Britain seems like the number 1 choice. The four kings of Kent: Cingetorix ("king of warriors"), Carvilius, Taximagulus and Segovax, who allied themselves with Cassivelaunus and attacked the Romans who had laid siege to Cassivelaunus stronghold north of the Thames river, seem like interesting secondary choices. 

 

[DISCLAIMER]== Opinions ==[DISCLAIMER]

Spoiler

 

I don't think we necessarily have to remove all the British heroes, especially not Boudica who is a public favourite, I believe(?). It's just striking that AD references are shunned for other factions, while the Britons get 3 heroes from the AD period... The birth of Christ is just a horrible cut off point for a historical game, as that date meant next to nothing to any of the civs actually in the game...  "The Crisis of the Third Century" is a far more appropriate cut off date, as it allows us to showcase a much larger part of Roman (and British) history including much of the iconic Imperial Romans, which actually begins before the birth of Christ. Even the fall of Rome as a cut off date... Why not? And begin earlier as well, with the foundation of the Olympic Games in 776 BC, for example so that the most interesting periods of Greek (and Roman, Middle Eastern and African) history aren't blatantly cut in half. These are all squarely within Iron Age Antiquity, by the way.

currently:

• "0AD is a historical war and economy game focusing on the years between 500 B.C. and 1 B.C. for the first part, and a planned second part for the years A.D. 1 to A.D. 500." ?!

I propose:

• "0AD is a historical war and economy game set in Iron Age Antiquity"

Then we could make proper use of the phases: not Stone Age to Middle Ages like AoE II, but a sensible and historical choice for source material, making references a whole lot easier and logical/linear e.g.:

• "Village Phase":    Roman Kingdom  /    Archaic Greece.        /   Medes.               /    25th Dynasty   /    Hallstatt 
• "Town phase":       Roman Republic   /    Classical Greece      /   Achaemenids    /    Napatan           /     La Tène
• "City Phase":         Roman Empire      /    Hellenistic Greece   /   Parthians            /    Meroitic            /    Gallo-Roman

It would also allow us to showcase really important, rarely featured civs, which don't fit any other time frame than the extended 0AD timeframe:

• Neo-Assyrian Empire
• Neo-Babylonian Empire
• Kingdom of Lydia 
• Etruscans
• Germanics 
• Dacians

I don't see any other game out there with the potential to showcase these historical evolutions like this...

I also don't like deferring potentially awesome content to a mythical second part. Let Millenium AD be part 2. From the fall of Rome to the fall of Byzantium. The Medieval Period, you know, a sensible choice... Part 3, should be "the real part 1": Bronze Age. 

Also, wouldn't it be cool to have more than 3 heroes per faction, and instead of magically resurrecting them when they die (?!), they should stay dead, as they are unique characters. This would really incentivise players to keep their favourite heroes alive, and change the dynamics of a game for the better...

 

 

Edited March 26, 2018 by Sundiata

[Imarok]

Don't resurrecting heroes is an interesting idea. I like it

[Stan`]

I was thinking of making a patch to make them stunnable and wakable if allies were nearby but that works too. (actually I do have a repo for it.

[Alexandermb]

10 hours ago, Sundiata said:

Gorgeous! I love the new shield! 

Although it seems to curve inwards at the top and bottom, while it's ok/preferable for this shield to be flat (was attached to a wooden frame). Remember the shield belongs to the Britons, and is inappropriate for the Gallic Viridomarus. 

• Bronze Shield: for a British hero, preferably Cassivelaunus.

The shield is flat, only the 3 middle gems are prominent like the reference, and is saved by the name brit_battersea_shield, only need to make the wood back and is good to go.

Spoiler