Redesign of all HQ and support factories

[Saver]

As mentioned by @amygdala , no hitbox was considered in this project. Based on the current assessment, I am uncertain whether I should adjust it. The hitboxes are very different and could be more of a focus for the balance team.

There are far too many images here for you to form an opinion.

[Krapougnak]

Ver. 1 and 2 are clearly an improvement. I can't choose between them, but clearly one of the two as both versions are better than the actual unit. Thanks for the great work.

[Saver]

@nuggets
So you mean it like that?

Currently, air factories behave this way when an engine is being built.

Would this adjustment be okay for others as well?

To make it look right, I would suggest that the unit can also drive diagonally out of the respective factory, which doesn't completely distort the look.

[Nuggets]

@Saver said in Redesign of all HQ and support factories:

@nuggets
So you mean it like that?

Yeah

[BlackYps]

I don't consider this to be an issue that needs fixing

[Saver]

Hi, I think it's good that opinions and ideas about the project are being shared. I also appreciate the highlighting of problems that were not previously recognized as such. And this phase shows new possibilities or ways in which a potential problem can be solved.

In my view, an idea should always find its way into a discussion and not be immediately dismissed.

Of course, I accept all opinions. In turn, other opinions must also be accepted, or a compromise must be reached. That sounds very philosophical, but it expresses the core of what I want to achieve.

This is just a brief statement from my perspective

Here are a few opinions from the posts mentioned over the last few days. (These were also mentioned in another forum post, but I didn't want to overload that individual topic with them.)

@jip I also believe that all factions should definitely retain their diversity.

@e33144211332424 I think your ideas are good, but currently very difficult to implement.

@nuggets I wanted to test a small idea without making any modifications, but unfortunately the result is worse than the current option.

So I would keep the idea in mind in case a compromise is needed.

Here are three pictures of the test/idea:

But it was only a quick attempt, as my free time is currently taken up elsewhere.

[Nuggets]

@Saver Anything helps imo, but the most annoying part is when the engie has to go to the top right (which is the case in every setons game as top rock

[IndexLibrorum]

@Saver Have the buildings arms rotate and "lift" the engineer off the platform? Or is that too weird of a solution?

[AI_Easy]

Great work. I personally can dig all of the redesigns you've made from a cosmetic perspective.

Something I personally like about the current factories that are in the game is that you can clearly see what is being built inside of the factories, which is very important from a game play perspective when a player is scouting enemy land factories, air factories, and naval factories too. The fact that the unit being built inside of the factory is easy to see and is recognizable, not being blocked by roofing or walls on the factory, I think is very important for the game. A piece of advice I would like to add is I would consider removing the pillars & roofing from the UEF land HQ factories as well as from the Aeon land HQ factory; or at a bare minimum make it no harder to see what is being built inside of the factory than what is currently in the game.

Anyways, great work! Glad to see it coming along.

[mirddes]

absolutely beautiful! outstanding job! well done.

[Saver]

@IndexLibrorum Hi, the idea sounds good.

But unfortunately, I don't know how it could be implemented. I've only created a construction animation so far. For your suggestion, the crane would need to be able to swivel in every direction.

And I have no idea how to tell the factory whether to go left, right, or straight ahead.

[Saver]

@GospelOfThomas39 Thank you, I'm glad to hear that.

Your suggestion is a good point and makes strategic sense. However, this fact affects almost all factories/factions.

The Cybrans, for example, obscure their units with the construction arms (even though I raised the arms slightly and spread them out).

With the Sera, it's more the construction animation of the individual unit.

At the UEF factory, the girders were slightly reduced in size and textured.

For the Aeon, I moved the front section forward a bit to allow for some visibility.

You also have to zoom in closer to see the unit.

To illustrate, here are a few pictures.

I had the units built to about 70% so you can better assess the situation.

I hope this answer can offer a new perspective on your suggestion.

[Saver]

Quick update: I'm currently putting the project on hold while I try to learn GitHub. If I'm successful, you might see it ^^ Thanks again for all the great suggestions and contributions.

And for the consistently constructive suggestions.

Thanks again to everyone

[zhanghm18]

@saver Thank you for your work. I think I prefer exaggerated models over conservative ones (meaning they look larger and have greater differences compared to the original version). For example, Cybran's buildings have more and longer "claws" or "spikes", while other factions' buildings have more and taller decorations or structures

[PrtScrn]

cool

[Nory]

Navy:

• Cybran: Very good overall; perhaps the T2 HQ and Support factories could be differentiated more.
• Aeon: Looks a bit too bulky; will take time to get used to.
• Seraphim: Good, apart from the bulky floating device added to the HQs, which blocks a lot of the (well‑crafted) model when viewing from the front.
• UEF: Very good.

Air:

• Cybran: Good.
• Aeon: Too many smaller elements that don't fit the clean Aeon aesthetic. I prefer the old engiemod HQs or the ones on Steam.
• Seraphim: Very good.
• UEF: Very good, with the small nitpick that the bridge of the T3 HQ looks out of place.

Land:

• Cybran: Improved over the previous version. The T2 HQ looks a bit busy, and the outward tilt of the spikes could be increased slightly on both HQs.
• Aeon: I think the engiemod version looked significantly better and was more fitting. Also, all factories are too tall.
• Seraphim: Very good.
• UEF: Very good. LOD 1 is significantly darker, which makes it look broken.

[Saver]

@nory Hello

Thank you for your summary and explanation. I’m very happy to hear that you generally like the models — with the exception of the Aeon ones.

Since I handled the reworking of the models on my own, I would like to respond to your individual points and also explain why certain things were implemented the way they are or how they evolved over time.

I will try to go through the individual points and models step by step based on your summary. However, I would prefer to discuss the Aeon separately, as the explanation and possible new adjustments will likely require considerably more time.

Naval:

• Cybran:
  Yes, the visuals could probably be a bit more pronounced here. What would you think about adding this indicator as well?

• Seraphim:
  The naval factory is almost identical to the version before the patch. The main difference is that the construction and destruction animations have now been added, and additional transformation components were also integrated into the lower tech stages.

Air:

• UEF:
  The bridge to the second tower already existed before the patch. However, I retextured it and shortened it for the animation so that it feels more natural when the two towers connect. So essentially, the existing design was only slightly adjusted

Land:

• Cybran:

Here, I stayed very close to the shape of the models from before the 2023 patch. However, since I cannot rework the textures and stretched shapes are no longer supposed to be used, I tried to recreate the original size and silhouette as closely as possible through new components, such as the added spikes. After all, the components still need to fit naturally into the model and should not appear completely “out of nowhere.” Unfortunately, I could not come up with a better solution for this.

• Seraphim:
  I still need to adjust the LOD1 model here. Unfortunately, I only noticed the issue just now.

• UEF:
  Thank you for pointing that out — I will revisit and fix that.

Since many of us have more or less unintentionally become “forced testers,” this also gives us the opportunity to work together on improvements. Through open discussions, shared experiences, and feedback, we can hopefully find solutions that benefit everyone and help create an aesthetic that appeals to as many people as possible.

Unfortunately, I also only have limited free time (volunteer fire department, my job, and family life alongside this) to work on these adjustments. Therefore, I kindly ask everyone to contribute constructively. Of course, I would also greatly appreciate any additional help

But for today, that’s it from me for now. See you soon.

[Saver]

Hello,

Based on the review and feedback from @nory, I initially implemented three adjustments:

1. Fixed an issue in the LOD1 model of the Seraphim T2 Land Factory, as it did not match the LOD0 model.

Mistake:
Fix:

2. Added an additional indicator to the Cybran T2 Naval Factory. This adjustment also required further changes to the animations of the T1 to T3 HQ factories.

Current:

New:

3. Fixed minor issues in the build animations of the Cybran Land Factories from T1 to T3, which caused unintended movement of the construction arms.

Since these adjustments are no longer part of the mod, they can only be viewed in FAF’s test mode. However, these changes are not immediately available yet, so the screenshots will have to suffice for a first impression for now.

After that, I will take another look at the Aeon Land Factory to see what further improvements can be made.