[img]http://www.muwum-lexicons.de/ds4/titel.php?t=MG%20Refit:%20Desert%20Nomads[/img]This is a thread dedicated to the redevelopment of the MegaGlest "Desert People" faction (replaceing egypt and persian). Feel free to post ideas related to them here. [url=http://s3.amazonaws.com/readers/socyberty/2008/05/25/168520_0.jpg]Concept-Art Wheat[/url], Cows (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-K02_m-om0bc/Tzzt3nvMmHI/AAAAAAAAATA/Bxrfn3kNYGU/s400/agriculture+in+ancient+egypt.jpg)[url=http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/6895/renderheilotaisphendonewo4.jpg]alternative[/url]- Momentum (upgrades) Concept art (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7078/7193905986_a3266ff431_o.jpg)[url=http://cghub.com/files/Image/046001-047000/46226/102_max.jpg]concept art[/url]). Players could choose which to have, and each would have an advantage over the other (say, perhaps Rostam is slow and powerful while Zahhak is weaker but faster). Players would only be allowed to have one of the two possible heroes at a time.Could Market become the only source of gold for this faction? For example:
- slaves are not allowed to harvest gold;
- market produces gold automatically, like Energy Sources produce energy in Magic faction.
The main concepts originally behind this were economy and cavalry. Both camel and horse cavalry.What are you referring to?
Could Market become the only source of gold for this faction?This would require a change in code. Unless you trade stone for gold, in which case you still have to get to AI to do it.
[img]http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/8091/deserttechtree.jpg[/img]Green = build/produceLastly, if this faction is going to be cavalry driven, has anyone here heard of the Mameluke?I think the focus should be infantry.
Lastly, if this faction is going to be cavalry driven, has anyone here heard of the Mameluke?I think the focus should be infantry.
I don't think we should depend on that concept, but if such a feature (automatically generate resources in a time interval) becomes available, I think it would be a very interesting concept. At any rate, it looks like Molaos already coded a way to do that (https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8567.msg85473#new) in his engine. Perhaps in the future, we'll see a port of that features in MegaGlest?This would require a change in code. Unless you trade stone for gold, in which case you still have to get to AI to do it.
Remember that MegaGlest is primarily focused on stable multiplayer and not gameplay features. You should probably resign yourself to that design decision if you want to work with MegaGlest just as you would resign yourself to singleplayer for the current GAE. Although Hailstone did promise that he was working on multiplayer for GAE.
If we focus on cavalry we should discard the archer and add some melee cavalry, if not it should stay.What would the melee cavalry be, by the way? Zoy mentioned the Mameluke, and camels have been mentioned before (those seem more like a ranged choice to me, though).
In my opinion, MegaGlest should also deal with enriching gameplay experience...(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdapcuFpBZ1rsxt0m.jpg)
In my opinion, MegaGlest should also deal with enriching gameplay experience...No of-topic discussion!
Remember that MegaGlest is primarily focused on stable multiplayer and not gameplay features. You should probably resign yourself to that design decision if you want to work with MegaGlest just as you would resign yourself to singleplayer for the current GAE. Although Hailstone did promise that he was working on multiplayer for GAE.
In my opinion, MegaGlest should also deal with enriching gameplay experience...
ZorZoy* ;)
ZorZoy* ;)
Anyways, the reason that I want to code for MG is because GAE is on its deathbed. I do plan on making new gameplay features, since MG will eventually be the only remaining fork, and new content needs to happen.
</off-topic>
Oh, and just a correction, the Companion was actually a Greek cavalry. Maybe we should make them a Cataphract?
First don't be rude, second please don't talk about engines in this topic.ZorZoy* ;)
Anyways, the reason that I want to code for MG is because GAE is on its deathbed. I do plan on making new gameplay features, since MG will eventually be the only remaining fork, and new content needs to happen.
</off-topic>
Oh, and just a correction, the Companion was actually a Greek cavalry. Maybe we should make them a Cataphract?
I'm calling you Zor and you can't stop me. Also GAE would be far from dead if Hailstone goes through with his plan to add multiplayer. In fact it would then be a significant improvement from MegaGlest with its tile system, improve menus, and various other benefits.
One thing that you might want to sort out early is the technology level / time period you're working with. It doesn't seem ideal to mix mamluks from the 900s with Bronze Age technology like the khopesh. I do really like the idea of buying troops at the slave market, though. I'd probably merge the cataphract and mamluk unit, since most of what I'm seeing about mamluks puts them as elite heavy cavalry, and maybe add another type of mercenary/slave elite soldier that you could hire/purchase at the market. Maybe a mamluk cataphract and mamluk marksman?
In my opinion, it probably works better to not have the entire faction based on nomads, as that precludes a lot of advanced technology and development. You can't really mine iron if you never stay put, and there's only so much you can trade for with milk and meat. In a lot of places, the nomadic herders maintain strong ties with the settled peoples, so having nomadic units fighting as irregulars alongside more regimented troops makes sense. Nomads are great at moving quickly (it's really their defining trait), but can't be weighed down by armor or heavy weapons, and they have to be hardy to survive so long out in the desert, so they make perfect sense as light camelry. I'd put a camel rider as an anti-cavalry unit because their stench is supposed to alarm horses. I know about MG's attack boost, but is there a way to reverse it and have an aura that weakens enemies? Their speed and lack of armor would also make them ideal as archers because they wouldn't survive long in melee. Speed, long range, and an anti-horse aura would make them a good knight killer (if they had crossbows or guns, they'd be perfect at it).
Attack-boosts: are modifications to nearby units (positive and/or negative / enemy and/or friend) they can be defined for each skill (so even stop-skill) and multiple boosts means multiple instances of the same boost.Ah, been wondering for a long time. That particularly clears things up. Time to fix the wiki page.
I do not like the garden unit.You're so poetic. :P
Not the name or its purposes.
AI wont use it correctly.
I vote we chuck it.
I think that we should temporarily ditch it. Then bring it back WHEN MG gets emanations.They already do. Apparently attack boosts are just a somewhat confusing name for emanations. While attack boosts can't be named, etc, they perform the same functions as emanations. Anyway, I think we should keep the garden. The AI constructs buildings in a way that the garden will be used correctly, provided only one is built (since we're going to go the non-stackable boost path, aren't we?). Ideally, there'd be a way to tell the AI to only build one, but since that is not possible, we can set a unit cap of 1 for the garden.
I don't like capping something just to help the AI, what if someone wants to build a garden in another base?I think that we should temporarily ditch it. Then bring it back WHEN MG gets emanations.They already do. Apparently attack boosts are just a somewhat confusing name for emanations. While attack boosts can't be named, etc, they perform the same functions as emanations. Anyway, I think we should keep the garden. The AI constructs buildings in a way that the garden will be used correctly, provided only one is built (since we're going to go the non-stackable boost path, aren't we?). Ideally, there'd be a way to tell the AI to only build one, but since that is not possible, we can set a unit cap of 1 for the garden.
Yes, but I'd presume the range would be large enough to cover the average base.Actually, you can do that:
I agree, capping things to help the AI sucks. We would really benefit with better AI control. If we want to be ambitious, Lua AIs, or on the basic side, a way to tell the AI how many of a unit it should try to build in its base (helpful as we could tell it that building 2 barracks is great, but building 2 archmage towers is not).
<ai-behavior min-static-resource-count="100">
<worker-units>
</worker-units>
<building-units>
<unit name="archmage_tower" minimum="1"/>
<unit name="barracks" minimum="2"/>
<unit name="farm" minimum="2"/>
</building-units>
<resource-producer-units>
</resource-producer-units>
<warrior-units>
</warrior-units>
<upgrades>
</upgrades>
</ai-behavior>
Oh, yes, forgot about that (https://docs.megaglest.org/XML/Faction). Still, it can only tell a minimum, not a maximum. Not sure how the AI would treat a building with a minimum of 1. Would they only typically build one, or would they build more but with lower priority?Yes, but I'd presume the range would be large enough to cover the average base.Actually, you can do that:
I agree, capping things to help the AI sucks. We would really benefit with better AI control. If we want to be ambitious, Lua AIs, or on the basic side, a way to tell the AI how many of a unit it should try to build in its base (helpful as we could tell it that building 2 barracks is great, but building 2 archmage towers is not).Code: [Select]<ai-behavior min-static-resource-count="100">
<worker-units>
</worker-units>
<building-units>
<unit name="archmage_tower" minimum="1"/>
<unit name="barracks" minimum="2"/>
<unit name="farm" minimum="2"/>
</building-units>
<resource-producer-units>
</resource-producer-units>
<warrior-units>
</warrior-units>
<upgrades>
</upgrades>
</ai-behavior>
I'd like to keep the garden until we tested it and it doesn't work ...We should probably test the garden with a placeholder, then, so as to avoid wasting modeling efforts. I don't see why it *wouldn't* work, though. I'm rather optimistic for it, though. Buildings like the garden also make the buildings of MegaGlest a bit more varied while making the faction a bit more unique.
Oh, yes, forgot about that (https://docs.megaglest.org/XML/Faction). Still, it can only tell a minimum, not a maximum. Not sure how the AI would treat a building with a minimum of 1. Would they only typically build one, or would they build more but with lower priority?The AI would have to build all the buildings/units it says to, then it could build more of a kind.
Yes, but if we just modify the same mesh it will still look similar.Um... no. There is almost no limit to modifying it. It's Blender man! 8)
If a couple meshes were created they would differ better, also we don’t want all they guys to run the same so there will need to be more than one animation.There are 3 animations for movement, and they all look different. 4 animations if you count the lil surprise I've included.. ;)
If you don't mine Arch I will try my hand at animating a walk cycle and see if it looks any good.I don't mind, it's good to have a lil competition eh man? :P
Well I guess that’s enough planing for now, we can start on the art and change things along the way.
Ill start by making the chariot.
Pretty good start I'd say! Nice work to everyone! Hopefully we can regroup after christmas and continue on this steady pace.
Arch has taken one of my old crappy models and turned it into that awesome man model you've all seen. He has also made an armory model, along with some fairly cool weapons.
Mightymic has started work on a castle model. It could use a little bit more love, but it is a solid start, and I'm digging the design.
Someone named lucas(Sorry I don't know who you are!) has been busy changing names and .xmls. Which is awesome. We should really start prototyping gameplay and hopefully get some models ingame.
And yeah, I've been up working on my house model, which I've had some issues with.... But it's getting there. And I've started a new icon background, which is a fair way off but I'm excited!
Over Christmas I will try to make a design document and some concepts/textures for the buildings so that the art style is tied together across all contributors. Also i would like to take on the modeling of the garden/obelisk/well models for the nomad faction...There's already a general design document here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/11jdEdRhQ4sGB0UL5KHs8K6XVtzrI-z6MLp9hnBb3JXc/edit). Why not collaborate on the same document so we can keep things in one place? In fact, we should probably specify on that document what we're modeling, so we don't end up with multiple people trying to model the same unit or modeling a unit someone else already completed.
Someone named lucas(Sorry I don't know who you are!)If you think of Lukas Theis ... that's me.
In fact, we should probably specify on that document what we're modeling, so we don't end up with multiple people trying to model the same unit or modeling a unit someone else already completed.
Over Christmas I will try to make a design document and some concepts/textures for the buildings so that the art style is tied together across all contributors. Also i would like to take on the modeling of the garden/obelisk/well models for the nomad faction...There's already a general design document here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/11jdEdRhQ4sGB0UL5KHs8K6XVtzrI-z6MLp9hnBb3JXc/edit). Why not collaborate on the same document so we can keep things in one place? In fact, we should probably specify on that document what we're modeling, so we don't end up with multiple people trying to model the same unit or modeling a unit someone else already completed.
Should I have 2 horses pulling the chariot or 1?Since there's already a camel archer, I think it'd be better to be throwing spears from the chariot. As for the number of horses, I don't care either way, but one horse is technically plenty to pull a chariot and easier to animate while keeping the model within a size restriction. I'm not sure if the unit will be able to fit as a size two unit as it is.
I think there should be 2 but will it look fine in glest?
Also what will he use, bow or spear?
Ok here is the mesh:If we're using one horse, you'd probably want the hitch of that chariot to come on both sides like in this image (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-efZv2wtWJ54/UGHyXKzoMtI/AAAAAAAAgx4/QfSPQ6qHA9Y/s1600/racing_chariot.jpg). Other than that, looks good.
Looks good. Do you mind if I give some suggestions? You don't have to take it.I think I might expand on the building tomorrow. I'll add some simple plants to the bottom (bearing in mind it's a desert building). The "end of the logs" though is actually supposed to be a plank on top. Like a "railing", but being cheap, I didn't emphasize that. I might extrude that a little so it's more obvious. I'm not sure if different corner bricks fit into the model style, though. I'll probably extrude the team colour.
- Try adding some skirting to around the base of the building. Just to break up the one big solid wall texture.
-Add some moss around the base as well, it helps transcend from the ground texture to the model. All of Magitechs buildings do this.
-Maybe even some plants or grasses around the base too.
- Change the end of the log from being brown to how the inside of a tree looks... (didn't explain that well, here: http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/dole/dole1109/dole110900029/10727914-redbud-wood-log-isolated-on-white.jpg (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/dole/dole1109/dole110900029/10727914-redbud-wood-log-isolated-on-white.jpg).
- Add a different type of brick in the corners (example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29574758@N00/4593651257/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/29574758@N00/4593651257/))
- Bevel the corners so it doesn't look so perfectly square.
- Add shading in the team colour bit, maybe add some fog. Perhaps even extrude it out or in a bit? whatever, just to make it stand out less.
Make behind the door black, and maybe shade behind it or even add skirting around it.
Do you not have the Art folder in your dropbox? You should make a folder for the nomads and stick it in there.
I couldn't find a way to make plants around the base look natural. They always looked slightly out of place, but others are willing to try if they wish.
Hey, I noticed on the doc that there's two cavalry who are on anti-cavalry duty (the Mameluke and the Camel Archer). There's too much overlap, so I suggest that we differentiate them a little (without stepping into the realm of the Cataphract).Fine by me. Spears (or lances?) would generally be more effective for anti-cavalry, anyway, due to their reach. The camel archer would be the same as any archer, but stronger and faster. The cataphract is a swordman on horse: a force to be reckoned with.
Here's what I propose:
Spear-wielding Mamelukes should be anti-cavalry (well, they should be multipurpose, but get a bonus against cavalry).
Camel Archers should be anti-infantry (as arrows typically beat infantry irl) and anti-air (for obvious reasons).
and Cataphracts should just be anti-everything (since their cost justifies it).
What do you think?
It just occurred to me, there's no defensive structures!
Do you have any plans, Muwum?
[url=http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumblarge_639/1318445765APlANq.jpg]Sandstone tower[/url] with a cheap ballista.Do you mean what model? Use mine please. Just append stuff from one blend to the other. :)Sorry I use the old blender...
Do you mean what model? Use mine please. Just append stuff from one blend to the other. :)Sorry I use the old blender...
Well I have tried to append thing many times and its never worked for me.
Even the ancient 2.4x version should be able to append a model fine.
I haven't learned the horrible new way Blender works, I have 2.62 but I never use it.
However I have a way of doing things and I can get your model into mine.
However since yours isn't UV mapped yet...
I haven't learned the horrible new way Blender works, I have 2.62 but I never use it.I gotta be honest. With all due respect, you're being a bit stubborn about versions. Yes, there's a big UI change, but it's a part of life, and from my personal experience, it's much easier to use with the new user interface once you learn it. You just have to give it time. At least a few days of practice. After all, you didn't just jump into Blender 2.4x right off the bat, did you? As well, the majority of hotkeys are unchanged. A minority have been changed to be more logical, but the vast majority (all the ones that I can remember) are unchanged. If you're like most 2.4x users, you mostly use hotkeys anyway, right? The biggest change is that the spacebar now opens a menu to search ALL functions (if I recall correctly, the 2.4x Blender used the spacebar to add objects). So if you know what a feature is called but don't know where it is on the menus or the hotkey, no fuss, just hit space and type the name. Say you want to extrude (hotkey "e") but can't remember the hotkey and don't know where it is in the menus (heck, I don't know offhand, though could probably find it easily enough), just hit space and type "extrude".
Just saying, Dynamic spacebar is my favourite thing ever. I recommend everyone to use it... I don't understand why it isn't default....I virtually never use it... but it is nifty.
Just saying, Dynamic spacebar is my favourite thing ever. I recommend everyone to use it... I don't understand why it isn't default....What do you mean by "Dynamic space bar", what does it do? Its not default?
(http://i.imgur.com/HF86v.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/3aUQk.png)
That crack cocaine. It gets so many of the young ones. Sad times.Hahaha....
Blender 2.6+ please. Just ask if you have issues we'll help. <off-topic/>
Simple, get Win7. ;)Blender 2.6+ please. Just ask if you have issues we'll help. <off-topic/>
I'm itching to get started modeling for this project but...
Ubuntu uses 2.62 as the default install but the latest export script needs 2.63 or higher. Is there any way to upgrade a Ubuntu install?
Blender 2.6+ please. Just ask if you have issues we'll help. <off-topic/>
I'm itching to get started modeling for this project but...
Ubuntu uses 2.62 as the default install but the latest export script needs 2.63 or higher. Is there any way to upgrade a Ubuntu install?
That's what the Njord use. Why not a sand golem that throws massive rocks? That would be epic!
Zoy: How about a log carried by 4-6 men, like a human powered battering ram. Maybe assisted by cavalry..?
Ubuntu uses 2.62 as the default install but the latest export script needs 2.63 or higher. Is there any way to upgrade a Ubuntu install?What do you mean "Ubuntu uses 2.62" is that the Blender version?
Sand golem sound too fantastical to me, how about a big catapult / trebuchet?That's what the Njord use. Why not a sand golem that throws massive rocks? That would be epic!
Zoy: How about a log carried by 4-6 men, like a human powered battering ram. Maybe assisted by cavalry..?
Sand golem sound too fantastical to me, how about a big catapult / trebuchet?That's what the Njord use. Why not a sand golem that throws massive rocks? That would be epic!
Zoy: How about a log carried by 4-6 men, like a human powered battering ram. Maybe assisted by cavalry..?
Ubuntu uses 2.62 as the default install but the latest export script needs 2.63 or higher. Is there any way to upgrade a Ubuntu install?
Elim, it's okay if some factions are more fantastic than others. I think that a more magical artillery would fit them best. What if they were summoned by a Magus, but had a limited lifetime?
AgreedElim, it's okay if some factions are more fantastic than others. I think that a more magical artillery would fit them best. What if they were summoned by a Magus, but had a limited lifetime?
Eh no, I'd really rather not see this faction get very fantastical... The magus is enough.
Sorry, I'm not at home until the 7 January 2013, so I have only limited access to the board and not much time for posting.No offence but that's a complete copy of magic.
For the defence unit Zoy came up with a great idea: we could give the well an additional attack-boost adding negative hp-regeneration to enemy units.
The sand golem would be in my opinion more like a slow, but strong unit and not really a defence. I don't really like the idea of having just an other tower shooting arrows...
No offence but that's a complete copy of magic.
If you want to do the sand golem then do it, but I am not going to do art for it.
See how this is:
(http://guidesmedia.ign.com/guides/15972/images/Egyptian_Market.JPG)
Sort of angled walls and maybe a cloth cover thing in the front?
Oh, are we still arguing about this? You'd figure fantasy would be a large element in the MegaPack. After all, a bunch of humanoids with very straightforward medieval weaponry = boring. What's new or unique about that?
300 missed messages is a bit of a pain, so I mostly skimmed. I rather dislike the concept of removing the hero units, especially for a sand golem. While a sandgolem would look pretty cool in an actual desert, it'd just look awkward in a forest and seems to come out of nowhere. I rather like the choice of two heroes, as it requires the user to choose their strategies more carefully, as each hero has specific advantages. I'm personally neutral on having them summon units (so far, every hero is summoning something...), but whatever.
I'm really not sure if there's "too many" magical units in the Nomads. Unless something changed overnight, we have a magus and a flying carpet. The heroes and their summons make it look like there's more magical units than there actually is, but bear in mind you can only have two out of four, and only one of each of those (assuming that we're sticking with the ability to summon a phoenix and scorpion, which I feel is unnecessary).
I suppose you could argue about the magic well, as well (haha), but it has legitimate purposes too (upgrades) and is a rather passive defence. But anyway, the rest of the faction is very realistic. Counting just the combat units and ignoring the heroes and their summons, the realistic to magic ratio is 7:2. I think that's very reasonable.
And other aspects to remember is that the Legion faction (based on the Romans) is almost entirely magic free (lore-wise, they distrust magic). Tech has absolutely no magic, but many aspects of fantasy in its steam punk format. The woodsmen are sort of a high fantasy. O
I'd expect some degree of magic, but nothing extreme in the woodsmen. More overall, they'd be magical creatures than direct magic. Someone, for example, has already mentioned ents.
However, I believe this topic started as a discussion about an antistructure unit, a seige unit, which really is quite necessary for the nomads.
I'm not sure a ballista is the most reasonable choice to be lugging around a battlefield, nor do we want to be too similar to the battering ram.
An alternative would be to give them a sort of cannon. Now, obviously we don't want to get into guns in general, but a steam punk style cannon similar to that of the airship, pushed by a single humanoid, could make an effective nomad. The unit would be smaller and thus more nimble than most of seige units. It also has roots in history, as Constinapole fell largely due to the Turk's new weapons: cannons (granted, they were shitty slow to reload, a trait that could be carried over to such a unit here).
Also, I don't think we should get into planning the woodsmen too much yet. As it stands, we're already modeling stuff for the Njord and Nomads (but really, really need that base humanoid) and still changing stuff around like no tomorrow. We need to finalize our ideas for the two factions we're working on (but with that being said, I don't think any unit in the woodsmen should be "free").
Looks cool, do you want to texture it, or do you want me to?(click to show/hide)
1. The Nomads live in a desert, where wood is rather scarce. They probably use the wood for their structures and tools more than stuff that requires a lot of wood such as a ballistaI'm pretty sure cannonballs are harder to find than rocks.... and you obviously can't keep using the same damn cannonballs over and over.
2. The Romans already have a ballista, so we don't want to be redundant.Trust me this would look and act quite differently than the Roman ballista. I'm not even sure it's fair to call it a ballista.
3. IRL, ballistae are very inefficient at taking down buildings. They are excellent anti-infantry weapons, but are pathetic when used to take down things made of stone or strong wood. Now, before you say "but these have rocks on the tips!", the weight of a rock would severely weigh down the projectile, causing it to become very impractical. As you can probably bet, the Romans (who were one of the few large armies that used ballistae IRL) eschewed ballistae for anti-structure use and decided to use something that was actually effective, such as a catapult.Again this would shoot rocks, not large arrows, this would be quite effective and there is virtually unlimited ammunition for a weapon like this.
4. IRL, the Chinese were the first to actually start using cannons and gunpowder, but that technology was soon acquired by the Muslims (who then made it much more practical). It would make total sense for a desert faction to use very primitive firearms as weapons. Anyone with any concept of history (something we're sorta basing this refit on) would be expecting the desert guys to be using gunpowder.Time period is too late there man...
1. They are historical! Before the advent of easily portable firearms (such as the arquebus or musket), hand cannons were used. They were small enough to be portable by an infantryman, but powerful enough to do damage.AKA a big gun. I want to keep guns out of this, they are "post-epic" era weapons entirely.
2. They make for interesting gameplay! Rarely do I find a faction's siege unit to be an infantry. I think that this would make for a very interesting unit. He'd probably do less damage than other dedicated siege units, but would be more mobile.He would just be spammed and/or easily killed.
3. It fits the Nomads much better than a ballista. I assume that if we did have a cannon unit (whether that be a bombard or hand cannoneer), it would probably be purchased from a market (seeing as the Nomads have ties to people with the ability to forge such great weapons). So yeah, the cannoneers would be mercenaries.Basically if some Nomads can get hold of this kind of weapon then Rome and I'm sure Njord, and Tech can too. So just no. Romans + Guns = NO.
To be honest, Arch, I don't think that the "time-period argument" applies here. The Tech are essentially Renaissance Europeans (although they had guns in the Renaissance), and by that time most of the empires that we're basing these factions on have been dead for hundreds of years.Yea I'm thinking tech is the most 'tech'nologically advanced faction with the airships and all. Magic is definitely more fitting in the 'epic' era.
I'm suggesting here that guns are still in their infancy, and are still spreading across the world. It's why the other factions don't have them.That doesn't really work... If Nomads have guns then Rome has them too.
Oh, and deserts are full of metal ores. There's probably more metal in the desert than there is wood, so cannonballs could easily be forged.We're not talking a fully open desert scored by the sun 23/7. It's just wood is a lot more sparse then compared too the rest of the land. Rocks > Metal Ore... That's pretty obvious. That means ammunition is practically free. Metal Ore requires a lot of work and good smithing.
When I think of desert nomads, I can honestly say that I cannot think of anything remotely anti-structure. I don't want to get Arch riled-up, but I think the sand monster (I was actually thinking of a djinn/genie, NOT the Persian genie) was the best idea as it fits in with the myths most people think of when they think Nomads (the djinn anyway)Djinn isn't too bad.... It relates and fits the era well. I still like my ballista but I think both would work...
imho, the anti-structure unit is going to be insanely out of placeTrue.
That looks cool, but remember it looks too much like the picture, maybe remove the 2 double pillar things that are holding up the cloth, add some food bins there and wood frames to hold up the cloth.(click to show/hide)
For the defensive unit problem, what about javelineers?
We're going to need a turret, one that's good, but cheap to produce.For the defensive unit problem, what about javelineers?
How do you want to limitate them to be just defensiv? We need some kind of stationary - defense. Or something that can not be move to easily (morph, ep-cost on move, ...) .
I fixed the ability to change votes. For whatever reason, only moderators and admins can set such an ability, so if the poll is edited by someone else (since it was reset), that ability is lost. Anyway, vote away.
And to keep people up to date, the djinn would likely summon a rock or similar magical property to hurl at the target.
Djinn are beings of magic in the first place, so it makes sense for them to float and levitate things. I'm fine with levitation, but I think it'd be more interesting if they had legs (maybe with some teamcolored, misty particle effect around them to make them look magical.)I fixed the ability to change votes. For whatever reason, only moderators and admins can set such an ability, so if the poll is edited by someone else (since it was reset), that ability is lost. Anyway, vote away.
And to keep people up to date, the djinn would likely summon a rock or similar magical property to hurl at the target.
Eh, you see the thing that makes mythical beasts awesome is when they act realistically, a troll in LOTR wouldn't be awesome if it floated around and summoned things. It's awesome because it's like a real creature. If we go the Djinn route it needs to NOT float and use a weapon and actually pick up a rock..
In our discussion we came up with 3 suitable siege units:A rock slingshot is not historically correct.
- A rock slingshot (http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/982/bouldershot1.png) - :thumbup: Historically correct :thumbdown: no magic
- A Djinn (http://www.maps4heroes.com/heroes5/pictures/tribes_of_the_east/alternate_upgrades/toe_academy_Djinn_Vizier.jpg) - :thumbup: pure magic :thumbdown: NO genies
- A ntouka (http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070326195005/gw/images/2/2b/Rampaging_Ntouka.jpg) :thumbup: based on the mythology :thumbdown: not much magic
Okay then, now that we have both the defense tower and siege unit worked out, we're missing something important - a logo. Each faction needs a faction symbol, so what should the Nomads' be?Horse. Symbolizing speed and mobility. The wolf of the Njord symbolizes strength and aggression.
I imagine a silhouette of a horse with a fiery mane on its back legs, poised to strike.Okay then, now that we have both the defense tower and siege unit worked out, we're missing something important - a logo. Each faction needs a faction symbol, so what should the Nomads' be?Horse. Symbolizing speed and mobility. The wolf of the Njord symbolizes strength and aggression.
Like this?
http://i.imgur.com/3E16S.png
Funny, Atze had already modeled a market before... :PThe new one is way better.
https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8104.msg81204#msg81204
Funny, Atze had already modeled a market before... :PThe new one is way better.
https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8104.msg81204#msg81204
Zoy... I'll tell you on Skype you mother.8)
That looks cool, but remember it looks too much like the picture, maybe remove the 2 double pillar things that are holding up the cloth, add some food bins there and wood frames to hold up the cloth.(click to show/hide)
Hands is already developing theZoy... I'll tell you on Skype you mother.8)
Anyways, does everyone agree on using the pic (or a variation thereof) that Omega posted?
That looks cool, but remember it looks too much like the picture, maybe remove the 2 double pillar things that are holding up the cloth, add some food bins there and wood frames to hold up the cloth.(click to show/hide)
ElimiNator, do you mean something like this? Sorry, I can not really English and google-translator confused :o sometimes.(click to show/hide)
...
P.S what happened to all the pots and crates you showed in your earlier pictures? :(
Awesome!(click to show/hide)
Looks good but it will need animals.(click to show/hide)
Hey guys, I have a gameplay idea that I want to run past you. What if all cavalry are mercs (and thus, produced at the market) but require a stable before purchase? The stable itself might have an upgrade or something, but it doesnt actually train anything.I'm rather happy with the current production, especially since the cavalry are the heart of the faction.
Great job Atze! Do you have a Skype account? Dropbox?
You should get them, it's much faster to share work and ideas using them. We are using them for communication in the Refit and sharing work, to get a fast implementation of the new stuff...Do you have a Skype account? Dropbox?
No. No.
The idea is not to have just a merge of egyptians and persians, but a new (fantasy) desert-faction, which is based on the historically nations of eygpts and persians.I would say that its not even based on Egyptians or Persians except in the loosest form. Rather, it's a universe of its own with its own backstory. But if factions are being replaced, this faction is replacing both Egypt and Persia.
+ The problem will be that, it will never be completed and not that the concept is not historically correct.
+ The problem will be that, it will never be completed and not that the concept is not historically correct.
...
Atze, can you please upload your excellent models somewhere for us to download.
...
Here is a picture of my progress on the camel rider:(click to show/hide)
but where are the artists of the team :look: , work with all its ? (icons, models ... ) Anyway, just a thought.
but where are the artists of the team :look: , work with all its ? (icons, models ... ) Anyway, just a thought.
I thought I used everything i have ... our Google Drive is very confusing, as we have many folders containing nothing... :(
... I just have the well and your models + the old market from omega
Here are 2 versions, is just an idea. ;) What mean you?I rather like version 1. It feels more natural.
version 1: (http://i48.tinypic.com/24y4rxu.png)(http://i47.tinypic.com/28chvl4.png)(http://i50.tinypic.com/2jciiyo.png)(http://i48.tinypic.com/2644bpi.png)
version 2: (http://i50.tinypic.com/14wyjva.png)(http://i50.tinypic.com/1gn637.png)(http://i45.tinypic.com/256vhgy.png)(http://i49.tinypic.com/1z30wex.png)