Cave terrain

[Alarantalara]

Okay, I think that finishes all the flat images. If noone points out any problems I'll start shading them over the next few days.
Despite appearances, this is not quite as versatile as the bridge: a few combinations look very bad in order to make the other ones look good. Since fixing the problems requires creating some new WML to match more cases, I'm not going to do it until I have this basic set finished.

Pauxlo: this is not a top-down view; a 90 degree corner becomes 67.38 degrees due to perspective.

EDIT: The zip behaves as an add-on, so you can get a better quality image if you put it in your add-ons directory and try it out with the map editor.

Further edit: Corrected WML problem with wrong ends being displayed on terrain that wasn't flat or underground.

[Unnheulu]

Maybe a stupid question, but, how do I see it in the map editor? There doesn't seem to be any wml with it...

EDIT: Thanks artisticdude! Those rails look soooo cool, keep it up!

[artisticdude]

There is. Not in the images folder, but in the main folder there's a file called _main.cfg that includes all the code.

[Eleazar]

It seems that the rails end weirdly from several directions.

The northnern most and southern most tile that looks like it has a weird rail in it are just plain sand tile.

[Alarantalara]

It seems that the rails end weirdly from several directions.

The northnern most and southern most tile that looks like it has a weird rail in it are just plain sand tile.

It looks like the bridge macro is very strange then, since those tiles will end correctly on grass and caves but not sand. I did some testing and the opposite happens if I switch the names of the end tiles (se to se-end, etc.) Therefore, I am assuming this is a WML problem. I'll see if I can fix it by changing the terrain codes in the macro.

If you stay on grass, is everything okay?

EDIT: I think I have a solution.
Change

Code: Select all

{BRIDGE               *^Br\ *^Br| *^Br/  (G*^,U*^) (C*,K*,*^F*)                rails}

to

Code: Select all

{BRIDGE               *^Br\ *^Br| *^Br/  (*^) (C*,K*,*^F*)                rails}

in _main.cfg
(I've corrected it in the download in the earlier post.)

Yet another edit: The circled problems from your image are what I meant when I said this is not as versatile as the existing bridge. I can't fix these without drawing more images and modifying the core bridge macro. I'll probably do it eventually, but this is as far as I can get otherwise.

[Alarantalara]

Since nobody seems to have any problems with the shapes, I've done some of the textures. Example and some of the new pngs attached.

[Eleazar]

If i didn't say it before, making all these bending things fit in perspective is impressive.

*As for the texture, it would look better if there was more of it. Against the green, the tie appear uniformly brown until you zoom it.

*And the outlining/shadowing would look better if it was aliased.

*Finally if you are still willing to mess with this, some of the ties on the curve are very short, almost short enough they track looks liable to slip off. On real RRs i've noticed curves may have longer ties, so it's OK to err on the other side.

[Alarantalara]

So that means you want something more like this?

Lengthening the ties is no problem. I should have noticed that when I added the sides of the rails to the image.

[beetlenaut]

In the N/S rails, would it be possible to shrink the gaps between the ties? At the moment, the N/S sections seem to be viewed from overhead, while the angled sections look fine. I think changing the gap sizes a little would fix this. (You could also increase the gaps on the angled tracks instead.)

[Alarantalara]

In the N/S rails, would it be possible to shrink the gaps between the ties? At the moment, the N/S sections seem to be viewed from overhead, while the angled sections look fine. I think changing the gap sizes a little would fix this. (You could also increase the gaps on the angled tracks instead.)

Can I say no? Please?

Seriously, there are very few spacings that tile nicely. 4, 6, 8, 12 are the only ones that work well vertically. I'm currently using 8. If I change to 6 again (see the earlier images in the thread), I either get no space for things between the tracks or the ties become smaller, which means I'd have to redo all the tiles.

Even worse, I'm not sure that would fix the problem, since it's basically a 2D surface on the ground with no height to give it definition and viewed from an unfortunate angle. Using the same viewing angle and project, this is a cube, for example.

cube.png (242 Bytes) Viewed 3341 times

However, it can be reasonably shaded, while these ties have a vertical height above ground that is about 1/10 their width or about 0.4px.

I am open to suggestions.

[doofus-01]

I can't try it myself now, but do you think it would help to have a bright line along the next-to-bottom pixels of the wood ties, to make it look like a raised corner?

[Alarantalara]

I already had a lighter line there. I've made it a bit brighter, since some of the rest of the tie got lighter and I didn't change it to match. Also, I've remove bits of the bottom to give the impression that the underlying terrain is uneven in height and covers the side of the tie. Attached is an image showing the changes.

[artisticdude]

There seems to be some strange distortion in one of the curved rail tiers. I think perhaps the angle should increase towards the middle instead of at the left end. Or is this just me?

[beetlenaut]

I either get no space for things between the tracks or the ties become smaller, which means I'd have to redo all the tiles.

Actually, the ties should also become thinner, but only in the one N/S tile. Based on your cube example, they should lose one pixel in the vertical direction. However, if the tiling doesn't work when you do that, then my question about whether it is possible is answered. It's not a big deal.

[Alarantalara]

Actually, the ties should also become thinner, but only in the one N/S tile. Based on your cube example, they should lose one pixel in the vertical direction. However, if the tiling doesn't work when you do that, then my question about whether it is possible is answered. It's not a big deal.

They already have. I currently use 3px for the tie width, 1px for the vertical part of the tie, and 4 px for the space in between on horizontal ties. The "diagonal" ties are 3.6px wide and 1px high. I've tried to keep the space between them at 5px, but it didn't always work, so it changes between 4.5 and 5px.

This is based off of an imaginary 4px wide tie that never gets drawn.
Edit: The math for a 4.2 px wide tie says that the diagonal ties should be 3.6 and the horizontal should be 2.8. While I did base it on 4 and rounded like crazy when I originally drew it, I suppose this means that my ties are closer 4.2 px wide.

Also, I misdrew my cube. The top face should be 6 pixels bigger.

There seems to be some strange distortion in one of the curved rail tiers. I think perhaps the angle should increase towards the middle instead of at the left end. Or is this just me?

It's not just you. I need more antialiasing. Fixed in latest attachment.