Age of Strategy Forums

I had these ones made some time ago, forgot to send to @Midonik so he could check, and since i had seen them again, will just post b4 i forget it again in the middle of my mess

The bunker The main turret AA turret

Great thanks. The second two are magnificent, the frist too but I'm not sure if we need it in game.

well the first one can hold infantry (although with 1 range it would b useless)

How about as forcefield generator? All units around it will get high armour.

It would need some modifications. D.D.D idea was to make it add range to infantry in it. I would prefer that bonus armor that that tbh.
Also, @DoomsdayDragonfire, I didn't notice at first, but the basic turrent is supposed to be rocket launcher and I would prefer to keep it like that. I'm not sure if we should have the gun one, maybe as an AT, but I must think.

samuelch wrote: ↑Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:44 am How about as forcefield generator? All units around it will get high armour.

I like that aswell, but I think the forcefield generator should be a gem upgrade unit... Same as for the railgun one...

Midonik wrote: ↑Fri Jan 18, 2019 1:25 pm It would need some modifications. D.D.D idea was to make it add range to infantry in it. I would prefer that bonus armor that that tbh.
Also, @DoomsdayDragonfire, I didn't notice at first, but the basic turrent is supposed to be rocket launcher and I would prefer to keep it like that. I'm not sure if we should have the gun one, maybe as an AT, but I must think.

If you want a rocket launcher, why not put the patriot to engage both air and ground units? Missiles are pretty much able to perform that. Main bonus vs air and decent amount to tanks, but almost nothing against infantry. And yeah, with 1 extra range to infantry, the building would became a nice if not the best multipurpose defensive building on the game, also human infantry would be able to perform much better when defending critical positions and engage battles from a safe distance, rather than suffer many casualties when facing alien units under close combat...

The rocket artillery has bonuses against bulidings and infantry. And it's is suitable for that. Missiles has many types, just as shells. They can be AT, but also HE (high explosives). The HE ones would be pretty suitable to destroy infantry, like katyushas. I'm not sure if it's possible to make an launcher suitable to attack both ground and air targets. Maybe it is, that's sci-fi so we can go a little crazy hehe anyway. I would prefer it had bonuses against infantry, bulidings and air crafts if anything. Perhaps we should have two forms, one anti-ground an one aa. The railgun would be AT so no pont to give it bonus vs vehicles.
As for your tower, I will tell you why I'm against, and that's rather for realism than gameplay purposes.
You know what are the main defensive structures in modern times? Bunkers. Not towers. Bunkers. As you said the towers could increase the range, so generaly good idea right? Why aren't we using it? Are the army commanders dump? No. There must be reason for it. And the reason for it is that the tower like structures would be easier to destroy by artillery and bombs, and that much reinforced concrete is a rather expensive I would say. Bunker is dig in land, so down parts can't be destroyed by artillery bombs. If you destroy the down part of tower, it would collapse. And whole down is basically ready, cause you just use the ground, that's saves you time and materials, both crucial.
Now, what we can do with that. We can overlook, but it, but imo that's wrong. The humans won't suddenly decide to switch to towers for no particular reason I guess, as they are worse in the cases I pointed up there. We acctualy overlook that in case of reptilans, but they are aliens, their warfare evolued in different technology environment than on Earth, were the artillery and bombers wasn't that devastating, as they use only giga lasers or plasma grenades for that. Or something, point is that we want them to stand out from humans. For humans tho that is not worth losing the bit of realism and sense I think.
That's why I would prefer the force filed generator, just add something on the up or your tower and perhaps make it a bit smaller and that works.

Well, it is a bunker already, but with an observation garrison on top and I'm aware, i made that way for that exactly reason... We all know that any structure, above and underground is easily destroyed if used the right weapons... But i see you are not using the full perspective of the thing... If you want realism, you forgot about the environment... In the real life, not only the enemies want to kill you, but also the nature, and since some places you just can't simple make it be digged in fast enough, any weather isulated shelter is the good pick, but you can't expect to find these spots around the corner, so we started to make out own...

But also there is another thing that is, visually, a dug in bunker isn't easy to make, the initial idea of that concrete bunker was to made it surrounded by the ground, but there is a problem of "What if it is placed on sand, or rocky, or any random tile?"... It just dont get a good contrast of the structure and background that way, actually there is, but can't make it right now... But no worries, i will try to change that for you, but not now...

I like to imagine some places with Hazard, toxic or corrosive atmosfere (pretty much day/night system but for enviroement), most of places you can't simple find a natural cave or dig for a shelter, but since it is a futuristic period, Buildings above ground could be made much faster and with less efforth, thx to advanced engineering, maybe even possible to have pre-build structures on futuristic military grade 3D printers to provide shelters to protect from the environment and weather, and we can assume for sure, as sci-fi game, with so many high tech stuff, there is no economic problems to worry at all...

Btw about rockets and Patriots... It is very possible to use missiles against both air and ground forces, but in RL, that is quite expensive to do, but isn't a thing to worry here. With missiles you can basically put bonus against everything, since you can put them to fill all roles possible using diferent payloads, you can put, if possible, alongside 2 forms, multiple stances for diferent payloads instead of many versions, like spells for aof, to add napalm effect, HE effect, EMP effect, toxic or what ever u want to put.

So i attempted to make these again to fill Midonik requests, but on underground... But can't put the proper shadowing on some parts with trasparency on gale for it for some reason, so the result is not that good, if someone could do the necessary edits to finish this, would be great...

Recently I learned a important step on how to work with gale, i mean, how to make transparent shadows on it, so think i managed to make it looks what i was expecting this time...

Looks good

Dont forgot the occupancy display. I made quickly images but you might (ekhem, should) wanna correct them:

Well, can't do much about that atm, btw, you plan to let them be ocupable now? I was wondering them to be an automatic system that is hidden underground and pop up to attack, so i didn't made room for doors and stuff...

They were supposed to be occupable from the very beginning, as they were supposed to have same stats as AoWw's concrete artillery.

I think missiles and turrets shouldn't have carry capacity, the image looks too small to carry units anyway, and if they r both good against enemy and carry infantry, then wat purpose would bunker have?

The purpose of bunker was not to be there but I guess we can do as you say.

Midonik wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 5:55 pmLooks good

And here I thought u already approved of having bunker in-game

But that image obviously needs the occupied version image