Posts: 703
Threads: 9
Joined: Nov 2007
Here is my experiment...italy trees. They dont look like pine trees, like the Slovakia trees. Comparison:
Slovakia trees:
Italy trees:
Not much of a difference, but the Italy trees seem to be a little brighter.
TEAM PACIFIC
Yeah, that is a problem, I know.
The perfectly stacked trees don't do this because the pattern prepeats perfectly at the edges so there are no edges, it's the same thoughout. I wonder if only ONE layer was changed what would happen...
I'll have to see them in game up close on the deck. the sk tga just cannot be read at low alt as anything but pine forext the second you see it (looks great from alt though.).
Posts: 703
Threads: 9
Joined: Nov 2007
Maybe we could try to find the tree textures for jungle and try to get the colours to darken to the same degree as the Italy or Slovakia trees.
I'll try to find them. Or if anyone else has them, please post here!
TEAM PACIFIC
Posts: 703
Threads: 9
Joined: Nov 2007
825x601km roughly...In pixels, that depends on the map file you are working on.
Map_c is 16512x12032 pixels while my other maps are 4128x3008.
TEAM PACIFIC
We should come up with a standard for having a few of the tiles NEVER being set to "fields_" to produce clutter trees.
We should also make a point of throwing every texture we might want in the load.ini as a palate. Perhaps we could make an annotated, blank, load.ini where instead of listing the textures we have, we list the "type" that can be put there.
Like: "Midlands3 will never be set to fields_texturename (no clutter trees) and should look like low scrub."
Or "Airfield0 will be very light (coral?). Airfield1 can be light green. Airfield2 can be tan, Airfield3 will be dark green."
Just so when various people mess with load.ini, it doesn't put trees in someone's airfield, etc.
Question: does anyone care if some airfields are not perfectly aligned? For some fields I can get a better look to them if they align with the tiles in a particular way. Munda, for example, can have the little hill in the dispersal area if the runway is East-West instead of being 75-255.
tater
Posts: 703
Threads: 9
Joined: Nov 2007
What happened to you being a stickler for historical accuracy?
I'd rather have no hill than having the runways in the improper directions. But thats just me.
TEAM PACIFIC
Funny, cause I think the hill is far more important. The Munda cost is pretty far from reality, frankly, so it's hard to line up properly.
East-West, relative to the coast looks right, though it should be slightly ENE instead. Relative to the water, it looks pretty good, as far as the compass is concerned... maybe a few degrees off.
tater