470 replies to this topic

[Mercyy]

woohooo looks great

what a giant city
The skyline is (I think) just because you hav to see the place where the object point is. (You can see this points in the Worldbuilder)

[Shikari]

I stumbled on this topic today, and having read every single post and viewed every screen I must say you deserve every congratulation for your devotion and attention to detail. Its no small task you have attempted, and what you have achieved is phenomenal. Keep up the fantastic work

[njm1983]

thank you ^

I finally got the field caught up to where it was last night:

[Wundai]

omg that fortress is smaller than the Minas Tirith walls isn't it? Great

[Lord of the Rings Junkie]

You should be able to have a line of 20 S.E.E. sized mumakil on that map, just like the movie!! (Yes, I actually counted.)

Edited by Lord of the Rings Junkie, 03 December 2007 - 08:17 PM.

[DragonLord]

This map looks too good. WE WANT IT NOW!

[njm1983]

I promise Im giving it as much as possible, hopefully someone can work out the model geometry issues and then place in new skyline and this will be ready to go, but I have roughly half the field to go, hopefully after this weekend my responsibilities to it will be finished. no promises though.

[zachdaddy_3000]

"Do not come between a njm1983 and his Minas Tirith".

[Dain Ironfoot]

Those last shots of fighting in the streets look bloody good! (It actually has streets now.. w00t) I assume those Gondor buildings are BFMEII or somthing as I don't recall seeing them before.

[Cylleruion]

Great work! And... now I will make a totally irrevelant reply.

Nazgul, I like your signature, "Do not come between the Nazgul and his mod." LOL. Anyway, I have some ideas to improve the mod and make it more movie-ish, I'm still compiling the list... its not THAT much but there is some ideas there. You probably thought of them too... I will post it around here sometime.

Njm... hehe nice work, again. And I like your signature. That Boromir joke cracks me up.

[njm1983]

Naz asked me to post in here about these little details for the city, and what im faced with:

1) In photos I have and renders of the city there is more than 1 size trebuchet.
this is solved by the new one that has been made, and keeping the old one.



2) do we keep the tree icon, for rebuildable trebs or do i just place them on the map so once they are gone, they are gone?

The map placement of the trebs is more "realistic" because lets face it I dont think anyone would try to rebuild a trebuchet on a wall during a siege or attack. let alone the man power and resources.

But in the interest of game play:
I have a number of different Ideas for this:

1. 2 different Icons for wall trebs. 1 for the large with a bucket correctly scaled. and 1 for the small that builds the trebs only, no bucket. the small trebs wont need a bucket because the outer wall already provides the correct housing.

2. 2 different Icons for wall trebs. 1 large and 1 small that builds the trebs only, no bucket. bucket would be already placed as part of a wall object

3. 1 Icon for the large trebs only. small trebs map object placement, once destroyed its gone.

4. 1 Icon for small trebs. no bucket. Large trebs map placement once destroyed its gone.

heres a photo of what I did, the large treb would be in the bucket in the middle


Please give some input on this. thanks

Edited by njm1983, 06 December 2007 - 03:46 AM.

[Nazgûl]

@Dain: yeah I think they're all BFME2. I've seen a lot of them in WB =)

@ Cylleruion: Thanks Use the apropriate suggestion thread under Development and we'll consider them =)

[Nazgûl]

I'm not sure about the "no rebuilding" to start with.... hm, what do you guys think? Or should we make them stronger? Cause a normal battle field treb goes down rather easy and losing all trebs at MT makes the city just a big sitting duck...

[njm1983]

I vote for the 2 different Icons no buckets.

[Nazgûl]

Explain "buckets" plz ... (I know what a bucket is - but not in this context?)

[njm1983]

its the tower underneath, that the trebuchet sits on. when you select the tree icon and build a treb its the stone wall building under it.



Im proposing that we have 2 different icons for the 2 trebs. red squiggle is large treb icon. yellow is small treb icon. the small treb icons would be placed where they are in the photo and other places in the city. and when selecting the icon and building the treb. only the treb itself builds on that spot. same for the large treb. the stone structure will already be under it.

Edited by njm1983, 06 December 2007 - 03:06 AM.

[av8r]

I think whatever you guys decide will be fine, but since you asked...I like the idea of one sized treb like in the movie but something in size between the two that you show now.

[Nazgûl]

If you back up in this thread you'll see that the movie HAVE 2 sizes... that's the whole reason for this debate

[njm1983]

Why do I have to write an essay to explain all the complicated details of this.

Heres is a render of the city. red circles large trebs. yellow small trebs.


model geometry issues become a problem with the icon being scaled to 2.0. the "bucket" that builds is the correct size but the treb ends up placed on the original size of the model.

thats why I want to remove the buckets all together. and just have trebs built at Icon locations. but I want to seperate the two size trebs by differing icons, that way the different trebs are built in the spots they are supposed to be in.

it should be noted that the outer wall of the city will have 18 trebs, 9 on each side, 4 large and 5 small.

I think people will complain if the trebs arent rebuildable, and im trying to save the modelers time by not having to mess with the model geometry of the bucket.

[Nazgûl]

Sûl, what are your comments?
I'll ask Robnkarla for some input as well, and maybe Lauri and TDP could give some useful feedback... =)

I'd go for rebuildable ones though, but make them take a while, or make them stronger than "battle field" ones. Other than that, I think we should make use of the two models according to your research on that render. Noone knows MT better than you now, and as far as the model geometries go I'm sure we can adjust them as needed