Preivew of things in the pipeline

[GaryChildress]

Hmm... not sure I like the colored version...

The other version is ok, but not what I had in mind, exactly. Also it hit me that manpower would usually not be something you can produce in cities, rather something you got from owning cities (for instance). So it would be granted, and the graphic might never be visible...

A producible version of manpower might be trained manpower. For example, there would be gross manpower created by owning cities and then out of that manpower you could train "regulars" by producing them in a city (representing recruits who went through boot camp or training). Anyone not trained would = "conscripts". Obviously, the number of "regulars" would be limited and could not exceed total (gross) manpower.

[GaryChildress]

Or, conversely, you could represent "manpower" as trained manpower from sending recruits through bootcamp. Bootcamp would be represented by production done in cities whereas total manpower overall would not be limited. So you could produce infinite "concscripts" if you wanted but they would be of poor quality.

[GaryChildress]

Hmm... not sure I like the colored version...

The other version is ok, but not what I had in mind, exactly. Also it hit me that manpower would usually not be something you can produce in cities, rather something you got from owning cities (for instance). So it would be granted, and the graphic might never be visible...

How about something like this for "manpower"?

[ernieschwitz]

That looks a lot better

[GaryChildress]

So I've refined things a little with the infantry subformations. I don't think I'm going to do 4 versions of each subformation type. Instead, I'll do 2 versions at this point. However, I will be doing regime specific units, including ones that Ormand has used in 4 seasons mod (in case anyone wants to swap out my older graphics there for the newer ones. Overall, I'm much happier with the way these graphics came out, more so than previous infantry graphics.

[GaryChildress]

I've been experimenting with something like this for infantry subformation graphics. I could do something similar with vehicles as well.

What are your thoughts on this type of subformation graphic?

[GaryChildress]

Here's a more realistic unit using this new design. I believe I should be able to represent heavy machine guns, mortars, and other crew-served weapons in the same way. This design will also make it a lot easier on me since I can use the same pose for all instances of a particular time period and people/regime. All I need to do is swap props and colors mainly.

[ernieschwitz]

I've been experimenting with something like this for infantry subformation graphics. I could do something similar with vehicles as well.

What are your thoughts on this type of subformation graphic?

This looks interesting. Have you tried looking at how it works out on a counter yet, in game?

[GaryChildress]

I've been experimenting with something like this for infantry subformation graphics. I could do something similar with vehicles as well.

What are your thoughts on this type of subformation graphic?

This looks interesting. Have you tried looking at how it works out on a counter yet, in game?

Here's a preview in game. What do you think?

I put in every graphic that I have that could conceivably take up space in a subformation. So, in other words, this graphic is as crowded as it will get.

You'll need to DL the pic to get a full sense of how it would look in game, since the forum is reducing the orginal size.

Thoughts?

[GaryChildress]

Here they are as they appear in the game sizewise.

[ernieschwitz]

I like the Idea. They look beautiful, so very much up to your standards.

However, I am not sure I would use them. The reason is somewhat more of a game choice, than anything being wrong with the images. I just like to, at a glance, be able to see what the different SFTs are. This makes me need to study the different pictures in more detail.

I am sorry.

[GaryChildress]

I like the Idea. They look beautiful, so very much up to your standards.

However, I am not sure I would use them. The reason is somewhat more of a game choice, than anything being wrong with the images. I just like to, at a glance, be able to see what the different SFTs are. This makes me need to study the different pictures in more detail.

I am sorry.

No worries. Thank you for your honesty.

[lion_of_judah]

I would use them! they are 10x better than those which came with the game....

[GaryChildress]

I would use them! they are 10x better than those which came with the game....

That's cool. I think there are probably about 6 or 7 people who still play this great game that I know of (sadly). One is better than none under those circumstances.

[Ormand]

To tell the truth, I rather like the newer design. Perhaps in the June I could look at swapping many of these newer graphics for the older ones in FourSeasons!

The one thing that is big-time different is covering up the background terrain. I suppose this is OK. The series has generally had the subformations with the terrain in the background. This has some serious challenges though. And, is somewhat redundant given the Hex Info window.

I am curious how you do all this, Many years ago, I fooled around with Poser, but ran into a terrible roadblock regarding clothes. Then I sat down and learned some 3D modeling with Blender, and over did it.

[Ormand]

I would use them! they are 10x better than those which came with the game....

That's cool. I think there are probably about 6 or 7 people who still play this great game that I know of (sadly). One is better than none under those circumstances.

Actually, I think there several more than it looks like. There are several people who play via Steam. Mostly, they play random games, and often a version of Civ, via 1 Town Start, etc. But, it is not a dead franchise, and just might get further work done to it in terms of a new version - it will just take a while to get there.

[GaryChildress]

Which version below do you like best for infantry subformation graphics?

Here are two possible layouts. The first one has the name of the rifle and a graphic of the rifle on the side in the info box. The second one has the name of the rifle in the info box but the rifle itself is being held by the soldier.

Note, the soldier at the bottom represents a WW1 era Russian soldier and the one on top represents a WW1 era African soldier.

[ernieschwitz]

Which version below do you like best for infantry subformation graphics?

Here are two possible layouts. The first one has the name of the rifle and a graphic of the rifle on the side in the info box. The second one has the name of the rifle in the info box but the rifle itself is being held by the soldier.

Note, the soldier at the bottom represents a WW1 era Russian soldier and the one on top represents a WW1 era African soldier.

I like the one holding the rifle, most. If I may interject my opinion

[GaryChildress]

Which version below do you like best for infantry subformation graphics?

Here are two possible layouts. The first one has the name of the rifle and a graphic of the rifle on the side in the info box. The second one has the name of the rifle in the info box but the rifle itself is being held by the soldier.

Note, the soldier at the bottom represents a WW1 era Russian soldier and the one on top represents a WW1 era African soldier.

I like the one holding the rifle, most. If I may interject my opinion

As one of the scenario creators extraordinaire, your opinion is of the utmost importance. Thanks for responding.

[Ormand]

I tend to like the one with him holding the rifle. Although, I also tend not like the writing. It seems busy to me. I also like these images better than the earlier ones. They have a better overall look. Somewhat more realistic but also an illustration.

If you do decide to go without the writing, I would also tend to suggest a transparent background. The reason being that in the game you can load two images for the SFType. Thus, you can load in a single colored image for the background, and still have the opportunity for the image to be transparent and show the terrain image, if you want. Two options can be available.

What I need to check is if with an event you can load images for the various peoples as well as the main image. I suspect so, but I am not 100% sure. If so, the process of assigning images can be automated with an event rather than having to do it manually for each and every subformation and people type. A process that is rather tedious and boring. Since it is likely that there will be on more patch, I'll check and make sure that it can be done.

I confess that the one thing in the editor that I found to be the most mind-numbingy boring thing to do was to set the graphic overrides for Landscapes. It had to be done for each override. Thus, I set it up so that you can select more than one at a time, indeed all of the ones you want to override.