[FfH II Art Team Blog]

[WarKirby]

of course not all. repentant angels have no wings, for example. but things like the herald are kind of special.



Anyways, unrelated question. I notice that the Imp model uses an aztecjaguar animation set, which seems to be included in it's folder. Was this custom made? I can't find it in the base game's .fpks

I have them all unpacked for convienience

 

[WarKirby]

ah ... ? Does the angel of Death using a flying animation akin to the thing I was suggesting with the Herald? I thought he was more the walking/floating type.

The angel of death is where the animation came from. Ploeperpengel made it, and I re-used it for the seraph

The only angels I really see as "flying" would be the Herald and the Ophanim. I wouldn't mind having the base angel having the flying promo though. And honestly I have no idea how many animations could apply to angels ... so meh.

Ophanim definitely won't be doing any flying. they're in a chariot.

I do agree that angels should be able to fly though, I'm going to personally correct that with an FF module soon.

 

[Tasunke]

Meh. It would be nice if the Ophanim had flying promotion.

It would be nice if the Herald had the AoD animation.

end statement

 

[Darksaber1]

dude what? Ophanim are ... sigh ... flying chariots.
But ya know ... thats just me, preferring the lore n all ... would it help you if their horses had wings?

Please no...would just ruin it.

 

[Tasunke]

Well ... I've now played .41 and see what the Angel of Death animation is about .... ok

I can see where the misunderstanding most likely lies.

Firstly ... I never was thinking of Changing the Ophanim animation. Only granting the "promotion" called flying.

Secondly ... I was considering the same for the Herald ... though I do think the AoD animation would look good on the Herald. and that is my opinion

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Umm...Ophanim already have the flying promotion. I believe they have since they were first introduced. I think they also briefly has the Blitz promotion.

 

[Tasunke]

Doh ... aye, MC you are correct. I really shoulda looked at the pedia first >< ...

 

[WarKirby]

Hey Kael, have you been gratuitously renaming files?

Importing art to FF from 0,41, a TON of things have broken. Looking at the artdefine, it appears the names of some models have been changed from 0.40

One example, the Lanun Warrior:

The artdefine we have in FF points to:
<NIF>Art/Units/Civs/Lanun/Warrior/Warrior.nif</NIF>
<KFM>Art/Units/Warrior/Warrior.kfm</KFM>

Which is pretty perfect. It points to a generic "warrior.nif" in the proper file structure. And the firaxis animation set.

But looking in FFH's artdefine, you've got this:

<NIF>Art/Units/Civs/Lanun/Warrior/Criminal.nif</NIF>
<KFM>Art/Units/Civs/Lanun/Warrior/Criminal.kfm</KFM>

It points to Criminal.nif. why rename the model ? Especially given what you already said about keeping model names generic.
And what's with the animations? Why a new .kfm? Did someone make custom animations just for a lowly warrior? It doesn't look any different to me...

-------------------------------------
Edit
Looking at other cases, the above appears to be a relatively isolated case. Most of our problems are actually due to having a shadernif defined, where FFH does not, and presumably removed it from the fpk

 

[WarKirby]

Unrelated:

The new khazad art, although nice, is a bit too big. they don't look very dwarven because of the large unit scale.

I've had a comb over the dwarven units in general, and standardised all their scales to 0.36. Image of the result attached to this post.

I'm pretty satisfied with it. I find it looks a lot better than the inconsistencies it had before. Dwarven slingers especially are massive, and the new berserker/crossbowman/arthendain are similarly oversized. It's only a little value in the xml, so easy to change

 

[Fafnir13]

Nice work! That art has been bothering me for a while now, although I couldn't quite say why. Changing the scale seemed to do the trick.

 

[WarKirby]

The new berserkers and arthendain were using a scale of 0.44, which is the same scale used for normal humans. Since they're differently proportioned, it's easy to see why it looked wrong.

 

[Algeroth]

To be honest, the axeman and gunman models looks like they are using human proportions...

 

[Tasunke]

Nay, I believe only the axemen are using human proportions ... It makes em look sure scrawny

 

[Skitters]

Unrelated:

The new khazad art, although nice, is a bit too big. they don't look very dwarven because of the large unit scale.

I've had a comb over the dwarven units in general, and standardised all their scales to 0.36. Image of the result attached to this post.

I'm pretty satisfied with it. I find it looks a lot better than the inconsistencies it had before. Dwarven slingers especially are massive, and the new berserker/crossbowman/arthendain are similarly oversized. It's only a little value in the xml, so easy to change

...what about the hunter - is it possible to resize the dwarf, but keep the wolf (is it?) at the correct size? Or do they search for pygmy beasts?!

 

[Valkrionn]

Actually, yes, because they're separate art defines.

 

[WarKirby]

Doesn't the hunter look fine already? He's at the top of the picture, to the right of the axeman. I personally think his scale looks pretty fine compared to the dwarves around him.


As a side note, dwarves have no unique ranger model yet

 

[Fenboy]

Doesn't the hunter look fine already? He's at the top of the picture, to the right of the axeman. I personally think his scale looks pretty fine compared to the dwarves around him.


As a side note, dwarves have no unique ranger model yet

Yeah, the Hunter is fine; cheers for doing this btw. And neither Khazad nor Luchuirp can train Rangers.

 

[Skitters]

Doesn't the hunter look fine already? He's at the top of the picture, to the right of the axeman. I personally think his scale looks pretty fine compared to the dwarves around him.


As a side note, dwarves have no unique ranger model yet

ah, sorry for the misunderstanding, I thought you were going to reduce the size of all the Dwarves by default, and I'd assumed that that would have meant the accompanying wolf would have been reduced in size too.

 

[Tasunke]

So dwarves go straight from Hunter to Myconid? I never knew ...

 

[WarKirby]

So dwarves go straight from Hunter to Myconid? I never knew ...

No, myconids are build. Not upgraded to.

They're strange mushroom beings that live in caves, not dwarves. So Hunter is as far alon gthe recon line as dwarves go. But then they build myconids.