Viking skin IMPLEMENTED

[DreJaDe]

Norden Warriors

Uncommon

The viking line

[DreJaDe]

Maceman

Varangian

Voulgier and svardstavier

[DreJaDe]

Viking Warlord

Berserker

Huskarl

Archers vikings

[DreJaDe]

Axe thrower

[godOfKings]

Ur northern axe thrower looks like upgrade of axe thrower, change it, also ur mace is the ugliest looking mace i have ever seen, and wats with varangian and warlord looking exactly the same??? Once again u r doing the same thing u did with centurion and equites

While using similar armor to make a coherent army is good, u should also give noticeable differences between unrelated and different units so that ppl wont confuse them to b same or upgrades of each other when they r not

[godOfKings]

U can make either varangian or warlord stand with huskarl's stance, since huskarl's armor is completely different, even with same stance the difference between huskarl and other unit will b clear

Make mace 1 px bigger or 2 px if possible, add some spikes, honestly just copy weapon from current maceman skin

[DreJaDe]

Ur northern axe thrower looks like upgrade of axe thrower

Shouldnt matter that much...

also ur mace is the ugliest looking mace i have ever seen

You didnt hold back lol. It's fine for me.

varangian and warlord looking exactly the same???

They are not. It's the stance being quite unique to the two I think made you think that way.

I get it. The stance is too eye-catching.

But if you go beyond that, they actually have almost everything made different.

Once again u r doing the same thing u did with centurion and equites

With the big ass lance equite have and the centurion helmet?... I think maybe you have the problem... Not the skin. Idk... These are for the same skin also... They should more uniformed and I think the difference is quite big already either way.

While using similar armor to make a coherent army is good, u should also give noticeable differences between unrelated and different units so that ppl wont confuse them to b same or upgrades of each other when they r not

I did though...

I will assume it's the art style and stances.

And for me... I think how units are implemented also gave that idea. Usually, there's not that much unit that gets implemented so players have time to get used to them...

Saw these comment back in aoww and even AOF but it change as time goes on.

U can make either varangian or warlord stand with huskarl's stance, since huskarl's armor is completely different, even with same stance the difference between huskarl and other unit will b clear

I also considered the use of the unit. The two units I assume will not really be used that interchangeably or at the same time. Although I already assumed pretty much that it's just the stance. I have a theory that once they are in game or if that didnt work with time and new players... It's gonna work out just fine.

Btw, Huskarl stance is the same one I used with my varangian skin before (so not varangian)... And I definitely don't want the warlord to have that stance. I tried it...

[DreJaDe]

Make mace 1 px bigger or 2 px if possible, add some spikes, honestly just copy weapon from current maceman skin

I believe I have received an exact opposite comment of this comment before...

Not sure if its the mace or the flail soldier.

But yeah, mace are usually small... And it seems that maces don't actually have spikes. I basically tried to do that in this skin.

[godOfKings]

The mace looks like a broken axe right now, if u put maceman in the midst of axemen they will look like axemen with broken axes or the designer made mistake in designing or something

As for huskarl, varangian and warlord, best thing is give warlord a completely different stance, may b the axe going downward instead, or may b in front of the shield, like how swordsman sword is in front of shield

Anyways my standard for aos units is that units that r upgraded can look similar, stance, armor, helmet etc. Units that r not upgrade but related can have somethings similar but stance is better to not b similar, or even if stance is similar, weapon cannot b similar

For equites and centurion, u could simply give the horse of one of the skin a different color (like how it is white for default centurion) then all my complaints would b gone,

u can see the small differences as the designer, however from a player point of view, the large bodies that r similar (like horse, armor, helmet, stance) will just bring more unnecessary confusion when lots of units using the skins r involved

[godOfKings]

U can make the northern axethrower axe look slightly different, for instance instead of holding at same incline as other axethrowers, his axe could b more straight up, or blade is facing other direction, etc.

[godOfKings]

There, does it look that bad? May b not historically accurate but atleast player will understand that yes, this is indeed a mace

[godOfKings]

Ok an actually more serious work with more effort

[DreJaDe]

warlord a completely different stance

Wouldn't give it another stance... Nope.

Using swordsman stance will also block the shield and will lose the appearance of the axe besides the fact that that axe is a two handed axe.

my standard for aos units

Yours... Not mine. It's a "skin". Made enough difference to show them. I say it looks quite nice enough for "uncommon".

There, does it look that bad? May b not historically accurate but atleast player will understand that yes, this is indeed a mace

I see no reason why they wouldn't think that unless they don't know what a mace is.

If you're going to create yours. Please change the looks a bit besides just the mace.

[godOfKings]

Alright fine i wont give u suggestions anymore, all i did was show how to make ur maceman look more like a maceman, y would i make new skin that looks like urs?

Honestly i think we should start a new topic on an universally accepted standard for aos skins

[godOfKings]

Although stratego isnt too supportive on my ideas, i m still posting the images here according to how i think there is enough differentiation between all the unit skins in the skin pack without making it confusing for players

[Stratego (dev)]

Although stratego isnt too supportive on my ideas, i m still posting the images here according to how i think there is enough differentiation between all the unit skins in the skin pack without making it confusing for players

sorry if u feel me un-supportive, i try to be. but i also have my views

it is still forming along we speak so far i have in mind
0. Welcoming skins, kindness: before all please everyone be welcoming on a new skin, i would like to have skins and i would like to keep the enthusiasm of artists and keep the "good" vibes, so any comment should be nice and constructive, not "shitting" on the others work
So all skins are welcome if they are nice and detailed and good in-game style, so lets put effort on "how to put them in" - instead onf making efforts "how to not put them in"
1. Historical: most important is approaching to historical correctness (especially on weapon shapes and sizes, the clothing less "strict")
with a remark: if there is a "legend" like unit like william wallace, jeanne d'arc they can have almost "magical" apperance if they have that in their legend - so the historical strictness can soften there.
2. Distiguishabillity: second is distinguishability (so no 2 different type of units should not look same or too similar - this one is subjective though)
(so eg. b2189 examples were good about same looking drakonian archers -> i made them more different, also the taxiarchos vs spartan hoplite were too similar so -> we made a cape for taxiarchos and strong difference on teamcoloring)
3. No forced rulings on appearance based on in-game features: we must NOT change the unit art with non-historical things, or can-be-historical but "rule" based forced things rulings (eg: "all leaders must use white horses", "all 1 range units must have maximum xPixel long polearms")
with exceptions, eg. exception can be like:
- LEADERS: should be "nicer" or more "special" than others: eg. by using capes, flags, Golden armors, anything. Not meaning that other units can not have these also!, the key is (at least) within a skinpack the leader should be nicer/more special than non leader units.
Style and other Endru formal rulings: Naturally all that Endru wrote on that topic about style and details and all are also true (i have not merged them here yet)

-----------------------------
in here i still see the maceman vs elite maceman could use some more difference - what about changing shield decoration? eg. with more teamcoloring on it here and there? or maybe the helmet being fully teamcolored?

[godOfKings]

2: that is the main point i made all these posts, so rules to enforce distinguishability in case units historically look similar even though their in-game role is different

3: i didnt say to enforce a rule that all leaders use white horse, i said that if every other cavalry unit is using one color horse skin, just the leader can use a different color horse skin (not necessarily white, that is just an example) my points and ur points r similar here

[Stratego (dev)]

2: that is the main point i made all these posts, so rules to enforce distinguishability in case units historically look similar even though their in-game role is different

give me example please as i feel contradiction:
- as i wrote no ANY in-game rule should influence image appearance.
- i only said all units needs to be that different so people can differentiate.
so still not any in-game ruling i want to infulence this
but i feel we talk about different things - so i need na example what u ment here.

3: i didnt say to enforce a rule that all leaders use white horse, i said that if every other cavalry unit is using one color horse skin, just the leader can use a different color horse skin (not necessarily white, that is just an example) my points and ur points r similar here

exactly that is i dont want: to have a generally said "leader-horse-color", so horse color and ALL other appearance traits should be free to use.
BUT if you mean this:
"the make a leader different within a sknpack you can use capes, shiny armors or DIFFERENT HORSE COLOR than other horses in that pack" than that is fine for me - so as an elemnt how to make it different is ok (on that case, so not generally as a "rule")

[godOfKings]

As for point 0.

Normally if its a new player i try to act as polite and respectful as possible without trying to put him down or anything

Although i admit my criticism on maceman skin may have been too harsh but i considered drejade an old timer and casual friend and we dueled together in aos many times too so i didnt think he would b too offended on my opinion, well if u were @DreJaDe i want to apologize now and hope we let it all b bygones and work together again

[Stratego (dev)]

As for point 0.

Normally if its a new player i try to act as polite and respectful as possible without trying to put him down or anything

Although i admit my criticism on maceman skin may have been too harsh but i considered drejade an old timer and casual friend and we dueled together in aos many times too so i didnt think he would b too offended on my opinion, well if u were @DreJaDe i want to apologize now and hope we let it all b bygones and work together again

ok, i might know less of your friendship level, but still i just felt
a) Dreja either got offended
b) or simply felt "hard" to get his work in game
but as i see: lost "impulse"/enthusiasm on making these for AOS (and gone to other alternatives).

[godOfKings]

2: that is the main point i made all these posts, so rules to enforce distinguishability in case units historically look similar even though their in-game role is different

give me example please as i feel contradiction:
- as i wrote no ANY in-game rule should influence image appearance.
- i only said all units needs to be that different so people can differentiate.
so still not any in-game ruling i want to infulence this
but i feel we talk about different things - so i need na example what u ment here.

3: i didnt say to enforce a rule that all leaders use white horse, i said that if every other cavalry unit is using one color horse skin, just the leader can use a different color horse skin (not necessarily white, that is just an example) my points and ur points r similar here

exactly that is i dont want: to have a generally said "leader-horse-color", so horse color and ALL other appearance traits should be free to use.
BUT if you mean this:
"the make a leader different within a sknpack you can use capes, shiny armors or DIFFERENT HORSE COLOR than other horses in that pack" than that is fine for me - so as an elemnt how to make it different is ok (on that case, so not generally as a "rule")

The entire ruling thing started with this topic when i thought that northern axethrower could give the impression that it is upgrade of axe thrower when it is not, also varangian and war lord having same stance may also b confusing, there r not that many examples in the game right now except what b2198 posted

U can see my version of northern axethrower and drejade's version to see wat i meant, i made him hold the axe at a different angle, also axe looks different, does it is easier to recognise the difference between axe thrower and northern axethrower and not mistake it to b upgrade of axe thrower

[Stratego (dev)]

we talk about these images?

[Stratego (dev)]

i think your version also good but Dreja version too.

if u see them side by side all is very different - stance should not be "that" important on similarity checks.

so i think is is at most is on "border-line" or how english say - so both can be good.
yours naturally more distinguishable with the extra stance difference, but dreja version also good imho.
(but your version might resemble another unit with same stance - or any future unit with same stance - so that is why i think stance should not matter that much)

but i have no idea about this vangarian, but
a) if that is MEGA powreful unit (not a leader though) than Dreja stance is more... how to say: "fearsome" - so better choise.
b) if vangarian is a common soldier than yours migth fit bettter.
but this is just a subjective matter imho.

[godOfKings]

If we look at images while zooming in the difference will of course b noticeable, but we r playing in multiplayer we dont look at every unit by zooming in, so more difference is always better and more comfortable for the majority of the players

Varangian is a 2 turn mercenary with stats of an end game t3 man at arms so looking fearsome like drejade's stance may b indeed better

If stance cannot b changed then at least change design on shield, give a different icon, that would also b better than current

May b make the leader's shield more different with cooler design to make it stand out from other units in this skin pack

And the images i was talking about were these, its another reason i thought of the rules, they look so similar that anyone at first may mistake them to b an upgrade line with 3 tiers of axe throwers

[Stratego (dev)]

If we look at images while zooming in the difference will of course b noticeable, but we r playing in multiplayer we dont look at every unit by zooming in, so more difference is always better and more comfortable for the majority of the players

Varangian is a 2 turn mercenary with stats of an end game t3 man at arms so looking fearsome like drejade's stance may b indeed better

If stance cannot b changed then at least change design on shield, give a different icon, that would also b better than current

May b make the leader's shield more different with cooler design to make it stand out from other units in this skin pack

And the images i was talking about were these, its another reason i thought of the rules, they look so similar that anyone at first may mistake them to b an upgrade line with 3 tiers of axe throwers

"change design on shield" sure that is also good.
"stance change" sure can change
i just say we can not say "rule" on these, on individual cases anyone can have this or that idea that might also fit - but you can not rule more strictly than this not so exact "rule": "be different in someting" .

----------
"b an upgrade line with 3 tiers of axe throwers"
actually i would say all seems totally different units, like they were not even be in upgrade line connection at all.
so if you would say the "upgrade line units should resemble each other, so please make more similar looking" would fit better to me as remark on these.

[DreJaDe]

Multiple times I have said this already but Varangian and Viking Chieften are already too different.

Only their stance and shield is the same but even instant look seems to look different.

Not even that you'll use the two units at the same time anyway. And if you are enemy, even easier since 1 is filled with team color and even if same team. That team color I think is still decisive.

The chieften also fills more space while also looking more dressed. Less background color means more difference.

And again. I think the problem lies with the "artstyle" and what I call as "Instant look effect" where the perception is so influenced by seeing the similarity of the two since both of them stood out more than the rest of them in line with just most glossing over the units.

[Badnorth]

I'm not sure if front facing images are good, but these look nice

[Stratego (dev)]

I'm not sure if front facing images are good, but these look nice

yes, little side facing is better to have (especially as we flip them on attack)
but these can be still ok.

[Endru1241]

Tried to show a bit more difference.
@DreJaDe Please tell if it's still aligned with your art style.

[godOfKings]

That's better imho, i always prefer this little difference especially in stance, as that way it wont ruin the artstyle of the armor skin as well as keep better distinguishability