Rome Legionary

[Alexandermb]

This is a good drama pose for the centurión and legionary if its planned to have pillum



 

Spoiler

 

Edited December 23, 2017 by Alexandermb

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

On 12/22/2017 at 6:46 AM, Sundiata said:

I think Roman legionaries deserve a more unique stance, no? They're so iconic, just like their military rigour and discipline. Plus they're easily the most identifiable unit anyway, I think. 

Sure, but this guy isn't even a trainable unit. Lol. And rightly so, he's out of the time frame. 

[Sundiata]

8 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

he's out of the time frame. 

"The currently accepted range for the use of the armour is from about 9 B.C. (Dangstetten) to the late 3rd century A.D."  We have 9 years of Lorica Segmentata to work with  

I think the brith of Christ is such an arbitrarily strange date to cap the timeframe anyway. Christianity didn't become relevant to any of the civs in the game until after the 3d or 4th century AD, so I don't really understand the choice. It's very awkward from a reference point of view, and a weird choice for a historical game.. 

• Part 1: Antiquity
• Part 2: Middle Ages 

That seems sooooo much more logical to me. At least that's what the Vulcan inside of me says. Using actual historical periods for a historical game... Sometimes simpler is better, and with my proposed timeframe, work on Part 2 could already be started using the work done in Millennium AD. 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

The Part 1 Republican Romans represent the 2nd Punic War era, give or take a few decades. Representing the Principate era Romans would be a whole other ball o' wax. I think the "0" a.d. cutoff is just a handy guideline, not a hard cutoff. Look at Boudicca and the Britons. They're more of a Part 2 faction, IMHO, but are included in Part 1 because they were part of the Celts faction originally. But as far as a long-lived faction as the Romans, you have to pick a timeframe by which you're depicting them. Segmentata Legions, Imperial Gallic G helmets, and standard Auxilia aren't really a Punic Wars era thing.

Edited December 23, 2017 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

10 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

The Part 1 Republican Romans represent the 2nd Punic War era, give or take a few decades. Representing the Principate era Romans would be a whole other ball o' wax. I think the "0" a.d. cutoff is just a handy guideline, not a hard cutoff. Look at Boudicca and the Britons. They're more of a Part 2 faction, IMHO, but are included in Part 1 because they were part of the Celts faction originally. But as far as a long-lived faction as the Romans, you have to pick a timeframe by which you're depicting them. Segmentata Legions, Imperial Gallic G helmets, and standard Auxilia aren't really a Punic Wars era thing.

Having said that, I think heroic poses and whatnot are very cool, and would work fantastically if the game had Battalions. With mosh pit combat, you lose sight of your soldiers easily and their animations are crucial in picking out, say, your swordsmen from your spearmen, etc. so you can proper micro them. In that case, standard animations for different classes of unit are essential. But with a Battalion system in place you don't have that problem of having to pick your units out of a jumbled crowd. Their animations can be more unique and interesting, rather than standardized.

There are so many plus sides to battalions, like letting @Alexandermb run wild with animations, formations, more tactical combat, battalion upgrades, army formations, set piece battles, etc.

Edited December 23, 2017 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Sundiata]

0AD has pases, which could be used more logically to represent the different developmental stages of an individual civ. We're not talking about stone age to late iron age like age of empires, but a logical evolution from the Early Republic (phase 1), to Middle and Late Republic (phase 2), and eventually the Roman Empire (phase 3). You can even add a phase, why not? A lot of people would like to see this kind of evolution in their civs as they play the game. It's more fun, and makes you more emotionally invested in the game, if you see "your people" evolve, not just expand. 

Also, I'm honestly allergic to splitting the same civilisation in to different factions (Romans) on one hand, and then amalgamating a bunch of other civilisations in to a single faction (Gauls, Iberians) on the other. 

Edited December 23, 2017 by Sundiata

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

22 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

0AD has pases, which could be used more logically to represent the different developmental stages of an individual civ. We're not talking about stone age to late iron age like age of empires, but a logical evolution from the Early Republic (phase 1), to Middle and Late Republic (phase 2), and eventually the Roman Empire (phase 3). You can even add a phase, why not? A lot of people would like to see this kind of evolution in their civs as they play the game. It's more fun, and makes you more emotionally invested in the game, if you see "your people" evolve, not just expand. 

If you do that for the Romans, then wouldn't you have to do that for all the others? Phases are city growth, not jumps in time*. It's one of the things that separates the game from AOE. It depicts a civilization at a particular point in time, usually it's peak within a certain time frame. Punic Era for the Romans just makes a lot of sense when you look at Carthage and how huge that conflict was.

 

*Having jumps in time would be an awesome campaign idea for the Romans, actually. You'd progress from one Roman faction to the next in a campaign. Having full-factions for the Roman eras allows you to delves deeper into those eras than if you just had 1 Roman faction with Ages.

 

22 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

Also, I'm honestly allergic to splitting the same civilisation in to different factions (Romans) on one hand, and then amalgamating a bunch of other civilisations in to a single faction (Gauls, Iberians) on the other. 

Some factions are longer-lived than others. The Roman Empire spanned 1000 years and went through massive changes many of the other civs did not. How much development can we depict with the Iberian faction? I seriously don't know. 

Amalgamating the "Gauls" into one faction may seem like the team's being boneheaded and Greco-Italo-centric, but what you can do with the Gauls civ is make it depict any number of a dozen tribes in a scenario or campaign; the same with Britons. With the Iberians you may have a point. I would split them into Iberians and Lusitanians.

 

We're getting way off topic now.  

Edited December 23, 2017 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

45 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

"The currently accepted range for the use of the armour is from about 9 B.C. (Dangstetten) to the late 3rd century A.D."  We have 9 years of Lorica Segmentata to work with  

I think the brith of Christ is such an arbitrarily strange date to cap the timeframe anyway. Christianity didn't become relevant to any of the civs in the game until after the 3d or 4th century AD, so I don't really understand the choice. It's very awkward from a reference point of view, and a weird choice for a historical game.. 

• Part 1: Antiquity
• Part 2: Middle Ages 

That seems sooooo much more logical to me. At least that's what the Vulcan inside of me says. Using actual historical periods for a historical game... Sometimes simpler is better, and with my proposed timeframe, work on Part 2 could already be started using the work done in Millennium AD. 

Part is late antiquity from 1BC to 500 BC. is established.

[Sundiata]

31 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Part is late antiquity from 1BC to 500 BC. is established.

Yes, I know it's established, my point is that the game shouldn't establish such arbitrary dates. Especially if you're making a historical game, you should use time frames that actually meant something to the civilisations you're depicting. 

Also, constantly referring all this super cool and iconic stuff to a fictional part 2 makes me a little sad  I want lorica segmentata and the colosseum  

But anyway, just some thoughts of mine.. We are totally getting off-topic, and I'll stop derailing (yet another) topic  

Edited December 23, 2017 by Sundiata

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

25 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

Also, constantly referring all this super cool and iconic stuff to a fictional part 2 makes me a little sad  I want lorica segmentata and the colosseum  

 

DE brother, DEEEE.

[soloooy0]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

 

 

Algunas facciones tienen una vida más larga que otras. El Imperio Romano abarcó 1000 años y sufrió cambios masivos que muchas de las otras civilizaciones no tuvieron. ¿Cuánto desarrollo podemos representar con la facción Ibérica? En serio, no lo sé. 

Amalgamar a los "galos" en una facción puede parecer que el equipo es egocéntrico y greco-italocéntrico, pero lo que puedes hacer con la civilización galos es hacer que represente a cualquier número de una docena de tribus en un escenario o campaña; lo mismo con los británicos. Con los íberos, puedes tener un punto. Los dividiría en íberos y lusitanos .

 

Nos estamos alejando del tema ahora.  

https://arrecaballo.es/edad-antigua/el-caballo-en-la-peninsula-iberica/

in this web is easy see documents for ancien age in europe and in the Iberian Peninsula especially

in nex days search documents 

euskadi and vascon zone no down never front rome 

balearic islan is mercenarie zone, and "corsair" in ancien age 

rome take actual catalonia balearic islans free 

cartago hire coast catalonia "" ""        """       """

and iber recover ""   """      ""       ""       ""    ""

 

 

[Alexandermb]

Here are the files for the weapon sheathed walk, in case of need i can make the shield on the floor animation or any other idle
Also have the legion shoulders props for remove just delete the actor prop line.

Roman_legion.7z

 

Edited December 24, 2017 by Alexandermb

[Stan`]

Hey @Alexandermb Thanks for those testudo anims, could you make idle variants for them ? Also the right version. I didn't manage to make columns change anims, but that would be great.
Ah and there is a bug with the spears, can you make it so they do not go through ? Maybe units should be more crouched so their heads aren't that visible.

Anyway it's pretty cool so far.

[Alexandermb]

The formations are started to working or is a patch you've made? if it so i could try again, last time i remember i barely could see the clipping or the animations working they switched from testudo to normal walk and so on.

[Stan`]

You need to apply this to see them

D1303.diff

[Alexandermb]

thanks in that case i'll test it today, since you are here and i don't remember where to report this, all bows have a little time variation compared to the attack animation of the infantry/cavalry the bow seems to fire first.

[Stan`]

Can you fix that by tweaking values ?

[Alexandermb]

@stanislas69 event needs to be the same, before was event="0.50" thats why its unsync

[Stan`]

@Alexandermb Same for every bow ?

[Alexandermb]

Yes, the all 5 have 0.50 on the event tag, heres are some screenshot with the bows on 0.35

[Stan`]

Great thanks

[Stan`]

Fixed in https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/21255

[Alexandermb]

@stanislas69 is there something else i need to check, to show the testudo formation ? only the phalanx show

[Stan`]

Just now, Alexandermb said:

@stanislas69 is there something else i need to check, to show the testudo formation ? only the phalanx show

Yes, you need to switch to the roman civ in atlas

[Alexandermb]

Idle should be crouched or standing?