Fortification drum tower

This bundle is marked as approved. It works and satisfies the submission rules.
This is intended to go along with my fortification building pack. I also added it to my presentation map for the fortification pack. There you can see how it's supposed to work along with settings, pathing map etc. It has different animation sets:

-Undamaged (Stand)
-Damaged with destroyed roof (Stand upgade first)
-Destroyed with only the destructed base remaining (Stand upgade second)

The model only uses ingame textures (for low filesize) and has a portrait camera, team colour, the standard animations (Stand/Birth/Death/Decay), attachment points (Overhead Ref, Origin Ref and five Sprite Refs) and two upgrade levels.

Edge versions can now be set through adding doors and tower sides to fitting attachment points. I uploaded the fitting model "TowerDoor.mdx" as portrait to this model and the model "TowerSide.mdx" as portrait to this upload. For how to set up the attachments properly check out the presentation map.

Attachment point names are (for a building facing the standard 270°):
-Upper 0° (Head Ref)
-Upper 90°(Chest Ref)
-Upper 180°(Chest Left Ref)
-Upper 270°(Chest Right Ref)
-Bottom 0° (Hand Left Ref)
-Bottom 90°(Hand Right Ref)
-Bottom 180°(Foot Left Ref)
-Bottom 270°(Foot Right Ref)

Updates:
-Changed the roof wrapping, making it less flat streched


Pls give credits, if you use it in your map.
You are allowed to modify it as long as you give credits.

Keywords:
fortification, drum, tower, wall, stone, building, structure, medieval, age, destroyable,
Contents

Fortification drum tower (Model)

Fortification drum tower (Model)

Reviews
12:41, 6th Jul 2014 MiniMage: Despite looking a little funky at the roof, it's approvable. I don't really like it, but my personal preferences are irrelevant. It's useful as-is.

Moderator

M

Moderator

12:41, 6th Jul 2014
MiniMage: Despite looking a little funky at the roof, it's approvable. I don't really like it, but my personal preferences are irrelevant. It's useful as-is.
 
I provided an excellent reference image. Click the link. then Hold "Ctrl" + "+"
It will zoom in. There's plenty other reference images out there. ;P

Yeah I saw it, but my tower isn't made to resemble the aoe2 watch tower. :eekani: (Though some parts might be similar)
The aoe2 one is a lower tech WATCH tower, while my drum tower is supposed to be a higher tech war/defence tower. Thus it is intentionally that it has a shingle roof and not a simpler wooden roof. :wink:
Though I guess the texture wrapping for the roof is a bit too streched. So I'll see if I can improve that a bit. But elsewise it looks fine to me. :grin:
 
Level 25
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
1,789
Yeah I saw it, but my tower isn't made to resemble the aoe2 watch tower. :eekani: (Though some parts might be similar)
The aoe2 one is a lower tech WATCH tower, while my drum tower is supposed to be a higher tech war/defence tower. Thus it is intentionally that it has a shingle roof and not a simpler wooden roof. :wink:
Though I guess the texture wrapping for the roof is a bit too streched. So I'll see if I can improve that a bit. But elsewise it looks fine to me. :grin:

Tech-wise. The AOE version is superior. Because there's larger gaps, more archers will be able to cram into there. If you give the archers crossbows, it'll be even more effective. Anyhow, I was referring to the roof when I said that I provided an excellent reference. Shingle roofs are not more advanced, they were added purely for a decorative purpose later on, specifically for castles. Granted, there's some extra protection, but adding more weight over your archers is not always ideal.

The thing is, shingle roof, back then, were largely made of wood, slate or flagstone. The material was then attached to a wooden frame. This was very costly and it was extremely hard and dangerous to repair, so it was only really used for larger towns or capitals. Not to mention the fact that it was very time consuming, since all of this had to be transported long distances, while pure wooden roofs could be repaired locally by chopping down some trees.

Even then, this design of yours is like a combination of the two. You use the more expensive material, but using a design made for a normal wooden roof.

Here's another reference picture; For a shingle roof this time.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-goWZVQCG6GM/URQddaJBwQI/AAAAAAAABQc/QTy2vBBlTqk/s1600/3.JPG
 
Tech-wise. The AOE version is superior. Because there's larger gaps, more archers will be able to cram into there. If you give the archers crossbows, it'll be even more effective. Anyhow, I was referring to the roof when I said that I provided an excellent reference. Shingle roofs are not more advanced, they were added purely for a decorative purpose later on, specifically for castles. Granted, there's some extra protection, but adding more weight over your archers is not always ideal.

The thing is, shingle roof, back then, were largely made of wood, slate or flagstone. The material was then attached to a wooden frame. This was very costly and it was extremely hard and dangerous to repair, so it was only really used for larger towns or capitals. Not to mention the fact that it was very time consuming, since all of this had to be transported long distances, while pure wooden roofs could be repaired locally by chopping down some trees.

Even then, this design of yours is like a combination of the two. You use the more expensive material, but using a design made for a normal wooden roof.

Here's another reference picture; For a shingle roof this time.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-goWZVQCG6GM/URQddaJBwQI/AAAAAAAABQc/QTy2vBBlTqk/s1600/3.JPG

I wouldn't say larger gaps are superior. Sure, more archers can shot at once, but it overs much less protection against enemy missile units what is much more relevant to, normaly outnumbered, defenders. (You might know if you played siege maps in Mount&Blade as archer ^^)

It might be true that shingle roofs have some decorative purpose that comes along and are more expensive than simpler wooden roofs, though up to today it is the most dominant type of roof on normal buildings (at least here in Europe).
Also as I said it is more of a tech/design thing for my building models (even if it might not be that historically accurate). I use three different tech levels. The lowest have straw or wooden roofs, the second has mostly simple slate roofs and the highest use ceramic shingles. This way it is easier to distinguish the tech level and also the higher tier stuff requires more expensive materials to build. Also the slate and ceramic shingle textures have team-colour on them what is very useful.
Furthermore even in AO2 the more advanced guard tower has a ceramic shingle roof, which would tech wise be more equal to my drum tower. :wink:

The second reference picture you gave is that for a residential house. I was more going for something like this.
 
Level 25
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
1,789
I wouldn't say larger gaps are superior. Sure, more archers can shot at once, but it overs much less protection against enemy missile units what is much more relevant to, normaly outnumbered, defenders. (You might know if you played siege maps in Mount&Blade as archer ^^)

It might be true that shingle roofs have some decorative purpose that comes along and are more expensive than simpler wooden roofs, though up to today it is the most dominant type of roof on normal buildings (at least here in Europe).
Also as I said it is more of a tech/design thing for my building models (even if it might not be that historically accurate). I use three different tech levels. The lowest have straw or wooden roofs, the second has mostly simple slate roofs and the highest use ceramic shingles. This way it is easier to distinguish the tech level and also the higher tier stuff requires more expensive materials to build. Also the slate and ceramic shingle textures have team-colour on them what is very useful.
Furthermore even in AO2 the more advanced guard tower has a ceramic shingle roof, which would tech wise be more equal to my drum tower. :wink:

The second reference picture you gave is that for a residential house. I was more going for something like this.

Larger gaps are superior for one very interesting reason. It's much easier to shoot down than up. A guard tower, as you call it, was basically a watch tower with better equipment. (The only real difference why there's upgrades of these is because it is an interesting game mechanic in strategy games) The purpose of a tower is not to level armies, but to warn a castle of approaching armies. It's not a purely defensive structure, it's military intelligence on the medieval scale.

That's supposed to be ceramic shingles? Ceramic shingles were only really used on building houses, not really on towers. Not to mention the fact that I thought yours had teamcolored wooden shingles. Also, ceramic tiles is not something new.

Btw, your reference picture is not round. Mine was and you failed to register that what was important was how it connected to the tower. Should I edit it for you to demonstrate what I meant? I'd be able to do it fairly quickly.

As for why it's the most popular today, that's natural. Today, we do not rely on flatstone, or anything like that. What we use today are fibre cement, metal, plastic, and composite material such as asphalt shingles. Most of these materials was invented in the early or mid 1900's. Because our transport is done using trucks, we can transport the ingredients and make it locally, or transport it using trucks that require no more manpower than the man who drives it. Thus, it's no longer a question about utilizing manpower, but purely economics.

Also, I'm Swedish, so I'm not sure what the "At least in Europe" implied. XD
 
Larger gaps are superior for one very interesting reason. It's much easier to shoot down than up.
True, but the only advantage lies in the little higher projectile velocity that comes from the potential energy difference (m*g*h). And that isn't that big in relation (not for light arrows, for heavy stones you'd throw at the attackers there that's very important). But a good cover that such a tower gives is much more important in comparison, as attackers mostly have to come over a coverless, open field.

A guard tower, as you call it, was basically a watch tower with better equipment. (The only real difference why there's upgrades of these is because it is an interesting game mechanic in strategy games) The purpose of a tower is not to level armies, but to warn a castle of approaching armies. It's not a purely defensive structure, it's military intelligence on the medieval scale.
The drum tower model is supposed to be a wall tower, not a scout tower (the pic was just to show the kind of the roof I'm going for). And their purpose is to be sturdy and allow the defending archers to shoot into the flanks of attackers climbing or destroying the adjoining walls.

That's supposed to be ceramic shingles? Ceramic shingles were only really used on building houses, not really on towers. Not to mention the fact that I thought yours had teamcolored wooden shingles. Also, ceramic tiles is not something new.
Yeah not new, but probably more expensive than just wood, what is kinda the point for me.

Btw, your reference picture is not round. Mine was and you failed to register that what was important was how it connected to the tower. Should I edit it for you to demonstrate what I meant? I'd be able to do it fairly quickly.
Mine is also round. :eekani:
In fact the U-shape was used mostly because you don't need and want the tower the be protective at the back in case your enemies take it over.
And if you mean the vertical white shingles in your pic, that seems to be just decoration and I don't want that on a military tower...

As for why it's the most popular today, that's natural. Today, we do not rely on flatstone, or anything like that. What we use today are fibre cement, metal, plastic, and composite material such as asphalt shingles. Most of these materials was invented in the early or mid 1900's. Because our transport is done using trucks, we can transport the ingredients and make it locally, or transport it using trucks that require no more manpower than the man who drives it. Thus, it's no longer a question about utilizing manpower, but purely economics.
No objection to that. :ogre_haosis:

Also, I'm Swedish, so I'm not sure what the "At least in Europe" implied. XD
Yeah didn't know where you're from so that was just in case you're from Asia or Africa or somewhere were that might be a bit different. :grin:
 
Top