Create A Hero Reborn

[TheGreatRings]

Being a superhero fan, I'd love to see some superhero-type units. That, and I'm working on an era that will require them.

What do you mean? Like superman. If you could give me the unit descriptions, what powers etc I could try...

I didn’t give a whole lot of detail because nobody else was, and I figured I’d just state the general idea and leave the specifics up to you, the artist. But if its more detail you want…

Obviously “superman” specifically would be copyright infringement, as would Batman, Wolverine, etc. For which reason I’m keeping my ideas pretty generic. The following are sort of generic types of superhero, any of which would be good:

-A vigilante/assassin type of character with a stealthy appearance. Similar to the Default Assassin, but more modern.

-Your typical fighter. Basically a guy with big muscles and a flashy costume who can throw cars around and survive being hit by a missile.

-Some sort of psychic. No idea how this unit should look though.

Does that help?

Edit: either gender is fine for units, if you decide to work on these.

[Reepurr]

This is sort of late but uh...

Four legs would be fine if you're practicing Zigg, but my original idea was kind of a spiderlich. Human body (with extra arms) and spider legs. Lots of spider legs.

[Golden_Soldier]

check the portraits for the rise of wesnoth topic... there is an epic unit that sort of looks like that in there

[PeterPorty]

I want a blond peasant with a bigger hat, with a slightly different clothe, (maybe leather? brownish might work) and a sickle. As stupid as it may sound, I'd really like it... Oh, and if you could make a big guy, but that still looks level 0ish, that would be awesome. He could have a sledgehammer or a two handed axe.

[StDrake]

@StDrake

I get this on my iTouch and Computer...

The attachment 's Unit.png is no longer available

Doh carp, and sue your country for censoring the internet...or try this way:
(or look for proper railway cannon pictures, especially Dora)

[Midnight_Carnival]

Can you get me one of those cannons?

Thanks for the green lady, I will work on her if you don't mind, not complaining.

[Major]

That thing would be about ten hexes long and two hexes wide.

[johndh]

That thing would be about ten hexes long and two hexes wide.

HAPMA!

[Major]

Ahhh. Although it would look strange, a metal monster weighing hundreds on tonns being the same size as a horseman.

[Mica]

WINR

[Major]

Although it would look strange

[Jetrel]

Although it would look strange

Yes. We've decided that our terrain is intractably out of scale with itself, and with the units, so scale doesn't matter much for terrain. But for units themselves, all units should be in roughly correct scale with each other. This is for example why we did the enormous upgrade to the dragon, recently - because "a full-grown dragon" should look pretty big.


An aside regarding siege stuff:
Siege equipment in most games is poorly represented. In games like warcraft/AoEmpires/etc, you erect these incredibly fragile buildings in a tiny amount of time - virtually anything, archers included, can take them down, siege stuff just does it faster. In order to make siege equipment not ridiculously unbalanced, they make it very fragile. Most especially, there's a ridiculous bit where siege equipment is able to aim at individual soldiers, and often hit them (like the catapults in warcraft 1/2), which is just unbelievably absurd - in real life, siege-against-infantry was only useful when there was such an enormous mass of infantry that "aiming" didn't matter - only when there was a high enough concentration of men in the very loose area you were aiming at that you were likely to hit someone by accident.

A more interesting way to do it, gameplay-wise (and which be much more realistic), would be to make siege stuff incredibly durable, incredibly hard to move, and make it the only way to "assault impregnable fortresses". Buildings would be changed to be much, MUCH more durable (basically flat-out impossible to knock down, although wooden stuff could get torched), and siege would become like a barely-mobile building. Buildings would be so durable they'd almost become like terrain - in fact, you could never 'delete' them like you can in virtually all RTS games. You could collapse them (whether knocked down or burnt), but that would change them from "an easily-maneuverable for the defenders and impassible for attackers" terrain, into a pile of rubble and half-collapsed walls (difficult for anyone to navigate, but providing decent cover). The other thing is that, very much unlike wesnoth, you'd need some mechanic where terrain like castle walls is only (easily) accessible from one direction.

Siege would become like a just-barely-mobile building. With great difficulty, you could move it into place. But once there, it'd be very difficult to dislodge, and it could systematically do its thing. That could include "gradually reduce part of an enemy fortification into rubble", or "allowing attackers to easily walk onto the tops of castle walls". Like in real-life, siege equipment would be very scary for defenders, because they'd have to either have their own siege equipment to knock it down, or mount an enormous sortie to get rid of it.


Ideas on doing this specifically in wesnoth, without rule changes:
- This is NOT a regular unit you can just throw into any map, and make work. The map and mission would be specifically written around this unit.
- Make some siege unit that only gets 1MP/turn, and only on "flat". This unit has no attacks, and is completely invulnerable to everything except fire, impact, and blade - and these might be very slight vulnerabilities - to the tune of just 10-20%.
- You do not recruit this. On the campaign mission in question, you are given a fixed number of these. Losing enough of them is a mission failure. Each turn, it'll calculate (based on the below) if you still have enough towers left to take out the fortress before the time limit.
- Your mission is to take out/breach some enemy fortification. To do this, you have to decrement a counter representing its "HP". To decrement this by one, a siege unit has to spend its entire turn "in range", which might be "within 4 tiles of the castle". Spending its entire turn symbolizes it taking time to fire.
- To make the mission interesting, you should have scarce enough troops, and need to keep enough towers alive, that you can't reasonably "turtle up" around the towers. The castle defender will be able to mount sorties against you.

[StDrake]

Side note - the discussion you've just started could easily be split to a different forum section

The way I've made my "siege equipment" is indeed more as mobile artillery - indeed not very fast, and ..

only useful when there was such an enormous mass of infantry that "aiming" didn't matter - only when there was a high enough concentration of men in the very loose area you were aiming at that you were likely to hit someone by accident.

.kindof like that - aim it somewhere general and hope it doesn't fly away elsewhere, including own units (which it often does if they're standing too close). More effective when shooting into a tight group of units since then there's more chance that one will get caught in the blast.
The railway cannon is planned to have a bigger blast so it's more likely to hit the desired target..and anyone else standing too close for comfort

[..] The other thing is that, very much unlike wesnoth, you'd need some mechanic where terrain like castle walls is only (easily) accessible from one direction.

speaking of which wesnoth could be easily modified to that - we'd just need a table of 6 variables for borders of the a hex and consider movement costs through into a border rather than into a hex..or in a very ugly way to code - make an unwalkable terrain type for walls and just handle shooting over them and perhaps gate opening with WML. Only thing left to question this way would be how to handle endurance of the wall and how to alter movement costs through it when, say, a siege tower or ladder is next to it..and note that it bloats maps awfully.

Siege would become like a just-barely-mobile building. With great difficulty, you could move it into place. But once there, it'd be very difficult to dislodge, and it could systematically do its thing.

overlays? yep, could be done with image overlays, just need to stuff that endurance variable somewhere

Ideas on doing this specifically in wesnoth, without rule changes:
- This is NOT a regular unit you can just throw into any map, and make work. The map and mission would be specifically written around this unit.

note that as you mentionned - in most games siege equipment is simplified, one part of it being - not showing the handling crew. If we consider it a unit of crew 'armed' with the siege equipment it could hold out on its own..and even make sensible vulnerability to attacks other than fire,impact,blade

[Tet]

Hi

I think it would be better to make a forum section ART REQUESTS. THen there will be a request and maybe an answer. This is much better than a single thread. There could be some rules as state clearly why you need that specific piece of art. There would be ownership of threads again.

I think allowing art requests would be beneficial. However neither Workshop nor Contribution should get spammed.

Therefore please consider a section of its own.

Here are the funny canons:

[artisticdude]

I think allowing art requests would be beneficial. However neither Workshop nor Contribution should get spammed.

Therefore please consider a section of its own.

I foresee a forum filled with pages upon pages of requests never replied to. I also see a certain redundancy in developing UMC art in the aforementioned forum, when there is already a forum devoted solely to the development of such UMC art.

And in the end, I don't think adding an extra forum (and I can't see such a forum ever appearing) would produce much more than a lot of noise, and certainly wouldn't help UMC authors enough to be worth the trouble of maintaining. Artists will still only help projects they are interested in (and in order to be interested in a project, most artists will want to have something they can actually play to determine whether or not the project is worth contributing to). Which is why it won't be done.