[Goku]

Quote

IMO there is no need for TSRE to support different sized tile files in either \tiles or \lo_tiles. The one size (the smallest area in each directory) should be enough. There many be other people with different opinions but AFAIK there are very, very few routes that use multiple area sizes as near terrain and none that use multiple area sized as DM tiles.

If you need two sizes, it's the same work like any size.

I don't say it can't be done, but for me there are more important things like new tracks and procedural objects and procedural terrain textures. Everyone will use that and almost no one uses LO_TILES, so the choice is obvious.

[Garry]

Hi Goku
I think the progress you have made with TSRE is staggering, it has made route building so much better. Thank you.

LO_Tiles --- I have 2 Swiss routes in progress and both would look much better if I could produce distant mountain tiles. If this was possible at some future date using TSRE I would certainly make use of it. I think that some way to toggle between near and distant would be the way to go, it is not too important how the route looks in TSRE, I always change to OR for a final look.

Procedural objects -- I think I read on an earlier post that these are similar to the way track and some other objects are produced in TrainSimulator2017. If so it would be great to produce curved platforms and bridges, and would be a good place to start to see how the texturing works as the curve progresses.

Procedural track -- I have started route building in TrainSimulator several times. Each time I have been defeated by complicated trackwork on a station approach. Trying to get double slips and crossings to render properly drove me nuts, and I was glad to get back to the "out of the box" track in MSTS.

Garry

[Goku]

Garry, on 30 October 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

Procedural track -- I have started route building in TrainSimulator several times. Each time I have been defeated by complicated trackwork on a station approach. Trying to get double slips and crossings to render properly drove me nuts, and I was glad to get back to the "out of the box" track in MSTS.

Procedural tracks doesn't mean flexible tracks. I don't know why people use this term the wrong way all the time ...
Procedural means only that shape is generated using algorithm, not manually by human: https://en.wikipedia...ural_generation

Only true thing is that if you want to have flexible tracks, you need to have procedural generated tracks first.

[Garry]

Hi Goku
So is the advantage of procedural tracks, that they produce smaller file sizes, so that OR gets faster frame rates? But initially for a route builder they will only produce straight tracks (and objects), so the object can be made any length as required by the geography of the route requires.
If this is the way they are used, how would it deal with the arches of a viaduct, or a platform with lamps placed every 25 metres?
I will be interested to see how this develops.
Garry

[Goku]

The advantage is:
- you can make all new tsection.dat shapes that are best for your route. Making it by hand is tremendous work.
- you can use as many track templates and textures in one route as you want.
- faster loading.
- and of course flexible tracks in the future.

[Goku]

Will be you satisfied with that amount of information?:

https://i.imgur.com/1BSgIFZ.png

[Goku]

And water window:

https://i.imgur.com/L7T6YX0.png

[vince]

Goku, on 30 October 2017 - 01:53 PM, said:

Will be you satisfied with that amount of information?: ..............SNIP PIC..........................

Hi Goku,

Could you limit the [Remove All Gaps] button to a selected ( the blue outlined one is in your pic ) sub-tile?

regards,
vince
sorry for the hijackhttp://www.elvastower.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sorry2.gif

[Genma Saotome]

Goku, the water level window looks ideal. Looking forward to testing it.

For the other window, am I correct in understanding it is the properties window? If so then (at first glance) it looks complete but for one thing: the name of the microtex file. Will want to work with a bit before passing final judgement.

What I don't see here (and I hope will be developed) are the controls I suggested to go with the Put function (e.g., to specify one of random rotation, 90d, 180d, 270d, or no rotation... as well as one of random flip, flip horizontal, flip vertical, no flip. And the Put function needs to apply microtex too (yes, I know it is an arcane matter but varying the microtex file to match the terrtex art can have a huge effect upon the appearance of the terrain -- rocky ground vs. vegetation in particular).

[Goku]

Quote

Could you limit the [Remove All Gaps] button to a selected ( the blue outlined one is in your pic ) sub-tile?

It was always limited to selection.

Quote

What I don't see here (and I hope will be developed) are the controls I suggested to go with the Put function (e.g., to specify one of random rotation, 90d, 180d, 270d, or no rotation... as well as one of random flip, flip horizontal, flip vertical, no flip.

I did solution for you: select patches -> right click -> put texture -> choose desired rotation in properties window.

Quote

And the Put function needs to apply microtex too

Changing second texture will be possible only in terrain shader editor window.