[roeter]

Genma Saotome, on 27 November 2015 - 11:28 AM, said:

An off the wall thought: What about using the data you wrote out as an input to a program that creates an .s file (also using the existing logic to determine all xyz values). That way the only change inside of the .w file is to replace via a text editor the lines for the forest with lines for the static object just created. Such text editing is trivial and (for now) there is no need for any new file structures. The new program could even spit out the .w lines describing the static item and if it was rather bold, do the editing in the .w file too.

That would be possible, but you've missed a point here. Doing so would alter the world file such that it is not longer the same for MSTS and OR, and that's exactly what I try to avoid.

Just think of what would happen if things were done this way, and you are building a route. You've created a forest in MSTS RE, then want to check if it looks right in OR. It doesn't, so you want to go back to the RE and change it. But you can't - the action above has removed the forest from the world file, and replaced it by an .s file entry. Even if the RE is capable of processing and displaying this, you no longer can alter it as a forest in the RE. That makes it all a lot more complicated.
One of the nice things of my suggestion is that the forest can co-exist in both MSTS and OR - in MSTS as a uniform forest, in OR as a multi-tree forest. But it happily lives in both, and that's making things that much easier.

Regards,
Rob Roeterdink

[Genma Saotome]

roeter, on 28 November 2015 - 03:14 AM, said:

You've created a forest in MSTS RE, then want to check if it looks right in OR. It doesn't, so you want to go back to the RE and change it. But you can't - the action above has removed the forest from the world file, and replaced it by an .s file entry.
Regards,
Rob Roeterdink

Understood... good point.

[scottb613]

Hi Folks,

One issue discussed on TS that would probably speed route development considerably is getting away from the basic rectangle for forest regions... Getting these rectangular shapes to conform to the free flowing borders of real world forests is difficult and time consuming if done well... This issue was brought to Goku's attention as part of the development of TSRE5 and his response was that it's a limitation of the world tile and there's no way to do it without respective changes to its format... Ideally - if we could just draw a free flowing polygons to define the border of forest it would provide an immense benefit to the community... I'm unsure of the technical hurdles associated with same but anything that can substantially reduces development time of routes - seems directly proportional to the number of new routes (the lifeblood of ORTS) we'll see...

Thanks for listening...

Regards,
Scott

[Garry]

I agree with Scott, that the rectangular forest is not the best and should be improved.
At the same time I would like to put forward the request that the trees have the option of being placed in rows and regularly spaced. This would make it possible to model orchards and vineyards successfully, also most commercial forests are artificially planted in a regular pattern.
Garry

[scottb613]

Garry, on 06 May 2018 - 05:52 AM, said:

At the same time I would like to put forward the request that the trees have the option of being placed in rows and regularly spaced. This would make it possible to model orchards and vineyards successfully, also most commercial forests are artificially planted in a regular pattern.

Hi Garry,

Thanks - not sure if this is what you're after with orchards: http://msts.steam4me...s/orchards.html

Regards,
Scott

[Garry]

Thanks Scott
This looks to be just what I am after. I am about to have a bit of a play with this in TSRE.
I spent a long time on my Lake Geneva route trying and failing to get the vineyards to look right.
I think it was partly this that made me move on to my current Zurich to Baden route. Problem, which one do I proceed with now?

What about seasonal textures? Do forests have Spring and Autumn textures, a nice bit of blossom in spring, and red orange brown leaves as they fall in autumn? That would be an improvement.

Garry

Although this looks the part it is a method for placing individual trees in a regular pattern. So looking at the picture on the Steam 4me site there are over 100 objects there. To cover a hillside with vineyards would soon exceed my patience and probably the ability of the computer to plot them.
In one short section I have about 50 square vineyards (about 100m square), each has about 500 plants.
Trying to get the squares to fit on the hillside, each sloping a different way was a nightmare, and then I am not very pleased with the result. But if this could be done in forests ...

Garry

[scottb613]

Hi Garry,

Yeah - I haven't looked at the grid placement in TSRE5 yet - don't know if it's been ported over...

Yep - seasonal textures should be fine - even though TERRTEX doesn't support it yet - I still resort to bat files to swap them out...





Regards,
Scott

[Garry]

I like the picture Scott.
With seasonal textures you could have activities that showed this view, then one from summer or winter without having to copy and paste files.
Garry

[Goku]

I don't see reason to use the GRID feature. It looks so not realistic.
For aligning objects, TSRE has a lot of better features.

For me the polygon forests are easy thing to do, but there must be someone who will want to do it in OR too.

[Garry]

I was trying to model vineyards. Each has an irregular outline, but the plants are regularly placed in rows. Also this is on a steep irregular hillside.
Garry

Attached thumbnail(s)

•