"Custom Settlement: modells and objects" - collection point

[Gharbad the Weak]

According to any tolkien book I ve ever read there is absolutely no evidence that osgiliath has been rebuilt in the fourth age. The craftsmanship needed to build the numenorean way was lost over the centuries especially during the fatal 17th century TA. Maybe a reduced osgiliath with lower quality buildings was built over the ruins in later times but that is mere speculation. I know thats not what TATW players wanna hear but thats the way it is...

It isn't that far fetched really... Maybe the kings of the reunited kingdom didn't choose to rebuild the city according to the lore, but that doesn't mean that you can't choose to do so.

[AragornElessar]

Agree with Gharbad if we want to rebuild it let us rebuild it

[Barsoom]

Me too, the decision to rebuild is the player's. Frankly, I find the argument on Osgiliath profoundly uninteresting. It makes more sense to me to have this kind of discussion on Amon Sul, because that at least was never a major city; and even there I'm in favor of giving the choice to the player.

[2-D Ron]

I'm sort of wondering in what kind of building do da boyz live? The books never mentioned anything that I can remember nor did the movies show anything, those orc cities need some sort of building surely? Some simple hutt or yurt perhaps?

Just threw something together quickly, something sort of like this perhaps?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

There are Orc Huts and Camps in the Return of the King extended edition, Sam and Frodo get caught in the middle of the Orc gathering to the Black Gate.

[mondpeiler]

well, to amom-sûl once again:

my "problem" is not a lore-one, but a gameplay-problem:
right now amon-sûl is a "settlement" on the campaign-map. the faction controlling it, dominates the region.
so if you make an "open" field-battle-map to gain or loose controle over a region (with income, buildings and the ability to train units there) it makes no sense (to me).

I have two suggestions for the battlemap korsan proposes:

1)
amon-sûl is an open battle-map, where you fight if your army stands there on the campaign map, but is no "settlement" and has no aftermath on the domination of the whole region.
the settlement you have to conquer to dominate the region, amon-sûl lies in, is a fortress on the campaignmap near the actual weathertop.

2)
the amon-sûl-map of corsan is the actual "settlement" which you have to conquer for domination of the region, but this settlement (as a ruin) has no inhabitants.
so: no trade-income, no tax-income, no troups to be trainable,...

[Lemoniser]

Why not just make a new town which was built on the ruions of Amon Sul? So maybe while its at the level with no wall there will be a wall but it will be too far away from the plaza to matter, be in dis repair and you can not go on it. Of course the town then grows and these old fortifications are incorporated into the town. While I believe that this would be the best case scenario turn out I think that it's far too much effort for one settlement and so it should just be made with one or 2 maps (a town/minor city built on the old ruins and maybe an upgraded version where it has been re-built). I'm pretty sure that this is what most people who have commented on this thread want too.

[Hero of the West]

In MOS amon sul is no longer a settlement.. i added amon sul as a wonder on the campaign map.. the original amon sul settlement is no named fortress near amon sul (in sindarin).. for MOS the beattle map could just be placed near the wonder

i would definately not mind implementing it :p

[Korsan82]

well, to amom-sûl once again:

my "problem" is not a lore-one, but a gameplay-problem:
right now amon-sûl is a "settlement" on the campaign-map. the faction controlling it, dominates the region.
so if you make an "open" field-battle-map to gain or loose controle over a region (with income, buildings and the ability to train units there) it makes no sense (to me).

I have two suggestions for the battlemap korsan proposes:

1)
amon-sûl is an open battle-map, where you fight if your army stands there on the campaign map, but is no "settlement" and has no aftermath on the domination of the whole region.
the settlement you have to conquer to dominate the region, amon-sûl lies in, is a fortress on the campaignmap near the actual weathertop.

2)
the amon-sûl-map of corsan is the actual "settlement" which you have to conquer for domination of the region, but this settlement (as a ruin) has no inhabitants.
so: no trade-income, no tax-income, no troups to be trainable,...

This is exactly the reason why I suggested "wastelands" which cant be conquered but only passed. It would add much to the game if there are areas in game with just a garrisonable fort it in but no settlement. I never liked the idea to conquer every province on my way to mordor which looks absolutely ridiculous.
But for the current issue: I haven't played TATW for ages now and totally forgot there is a region with a settlement for Amon Sul. Under given circumstances we don't have any other chance but to make it a settlement... If only my wastelands suggestion would be considered

[WesternWarrior]

About amon sul u could may be make it a reward 4 recreating arnor and say the the elves helped you rebuild it, u could maybe also make it so the elves have to still control all there starting regions or mayb jst rivendell when u reunite the kinngdom to get it. a dont think its that bad of an idea either coz when ive played eriador/arnor ive never managed to get amon sul past a wooden fort which fits a suppose, so u could have ruined battle map of amon sul and a rebuilt 1 for arnor and any1 who doesnt like arnor and rebuilding stuff could jst stay eriador and the ruined map, any way jst a thought hope it makes sense

[sebsebseb1234]

I think it is very important to have tha ability to rebuild Amon Sul becuse when you restore Anor you have to be able to rebuild the old Cities and Castles of Anor (Amon Sul, Annuminas,Fornost)

[Veah]

Every city able to be rebuilt is a good detail in the game, I would say YES.
But I find two problems:

-A city with 0 income and 0 population has no value, especially for the IA. It could have income and population if we consider that the nearby lands are cultivated, but then why should a ruined city be capital of a region if there are populated settlements in the region??

-When fighting a siege battle, we should have a ruined city model. Once rebuilt, there should be another city model, but AFAIK custom settlements can only have 1 model.

[el Cid]

Every city able to be rebuilt is a good detail in the game, I would say YES.
But I find two problems:

-A city with 0 income and 0 population has no value, especially for the IA. It could have income and population if we consider that the nearby lands are cultivated, but then why should a ruined city be capital of a region if there are populated settlements in the region??

-When fighting a siege battle, we should have a ruined city model. Once rebuilt, there should be another city model, but AFAIK custom settlements can only have 1 model.

Well I don't know how to solve this. But somehow the engine recognises and places constructed buildings. E.g. when you have a practice range it will be placed in the settlement. Maybe this function could solve this?

I don't know though? MBA?

[Raiven]

But it occurs only for certain buildings in certain places AFAIK.

[King Kong]

I was a little hesitant to say this, but somehow I feel that the idea this thread doesn't really work as intended. The problem is that making a custom settlement has to be very coordinated and it's hard and very ineffective if I try to include one model here and there.
Theoretically it is possible of course, but since no single object has been fully done yet, I don't think this thread serves a real purpose at the moment.

I know that I could also have helped the people here a bit more and could have told them how to coordinate this better, but I just don't have the time for this.
I also really highly appreciate the efforts of so many people here, but I have the feeling that it causes more trouble and confusion than to be really "productive".

All people who still want to work on something can continue this of course and I would also try to include everything that can be needed, but I can really only use full and proper objects, with good polycount, uvmap and textures. If there are people who seriously want to add settlement objects for TATW, you can also make your own thread, this will also ensure a much better feedback and recognition for you.

For now, the thread will be unstickied...

[el Cid]

I was a little hesitant to say this, but somehow I feel that the idea this thread doesn't really work as intended. The problem is that making a custom settlement has to be very coordinated and it's hard and very ineffective if I try to include one model here and there.
Theoretically it is possible of course, but since no single object has been fully done yet, I don't think this thread serves a real purpose at the moment.

I know that I could also have helped the people here a bit more and could have told them how to coordinate this better, but I just don't have the time for this.
I also really highly appreciate the efforts of so many people here, but I have the feeling that it causes more trouble and confusion than to be really "productive".

All people who still want to work on something can continue this of course and I would also try to include everything that can be needed, but I can really only use full and proper objects, with good polycount, uvmap and textures. If there are people who seriously want to add settlement objects for TATW, you can also make your own thread, this will also ensure a much better feedback and recognition for you.

For now, the thread will be unstickied...

KK I think it'd certainly be more useful if you'd give the exact requirements, like x amount of polys etc.

Just my two cents.

[Brego]

Another issue with this is that all buildings in one settlement should have matching textures and style, meaning all of it should at least be textured by the same person and maybe also modelled, cause otherwise you'll end up with a city consisting of lots of buildings that doesn't fit that well with each other.

[Mr.Jox]

Hello everyone! Since KK has granted permission for everyone inside TATW and Devils_Advocate(not modding anymore but can grant permission) is active, as well, as leo.civil.uefs, maybe it's time to make this thread active again and done all settlement stuff what left for TATW?
FOR THE THIRD AGE!!!