New Terrain

[Questdog]

I've made a slightly new version with different mountains and water:



The mountains are a recolored version of kissa's New Realistic Peaks (the original looked too much like giant ant hills to me) and the water is a mix between Deliverator's and Nitram15's water mods with the coast recolored to be more distinct from the ocean.

P.S. The mountain at the top on the right of the group of three has marble placed on it, so that is why it looks a little funky....

 

[Hydromancerx]

My problems with the red desert:

1) It does not look like sand; it looks like clay
2) You cannot have two different kinds of desert in Civ 4. The desert terrain and dune terrain are used side by side in the desert in Civ 4 so that ALL deserts become a mix of the red and yellow. If you could use either/or for a desert then it would make sense to have two different and unrelated textures. But since the two textures must reside adjacent to one another on the map, it makes no sense that one be from the Sahara and one be from Australia.

Deserts come in all colors. It really depends upon the rock you have. There are of course red sands deserts like I mentioned or more yellowish like the Sahara but then there are even bright yellow deserts, gray deserts, white deserts even black volcanic ones. However if you wanted to design a scenario without the red desert then just use the dunes instead.

As for not making sense of colors next to each other just look at the painted desert, there are white, red and yellow deserts all in stripes. In Hawaii there are black volcanic soil right next to rust red soil. Not everything has been shaken up on earth to come out to a dull beige. There are plenty of contrasting soils on Earth.

I see no problem with the Sahara to me next to the Outback. In fact there are many Sahara looking dunes in Australia. Such as the Yeagerup Sand Dunes in western Australia. Which actually look more white than yellow.

An idea I had was to have terrain varieties like there are feature varieties (although those are mainly used for forest only).
That means terrain that has different art but the same behavior.
Map scripts would place the functional terrain like normal (so no changes to them). Then some code would run to replace some of that terrain with the varieties according to rules.
It would allow to have terrain art that is only meant to smoothen certain terrain combinations or different desert looks in different areas of the world.

There are some difficulties though:
- That extra terrain would need art
- If with the terrain we have the engine gets problems already, it might not support that many different terrain arts.
- The varieties would probably need to be full terrains but the access functions need to be modified so the graphics engine sees the variety but all functional code in the dll or Python gets the mother terrain.

Well that's the main problem if we are already pushing the limits. I don't know what the big deal is. They look pretty awesome next to each other like this going from wet to dry.

Visually I prefer the suggested replacement, though I take Hydro's points also (it IS a matter of personal taste). Functionally, the stuttering issue makes me think that a greatly simplified set is also needed. So, all in all, I am in favour of introducing this change to support mutliple flavors.

Before you guys go out and change stuff how about we just make a "transition terrain"? One that would go between the red desert and the yellow dunes?

I will make a modular version, and make the current set modular also. I think it will just be the art defines XML files in the modules, but that means I will need to give different id names to the new graphics. The text etc. will b the same.

Hold up dude. Perhaps we can find a solution with a new type of desert terrain that transitions better.

 

[AIAndy]

Before you guys go out and change stuff how about we just make a "transition terrain"? One that would go between the red desert and the yellow dunes?

Transition terrains is more or less what I was talking about. But as varieties without extra properties and not placed by the map script. With the added gain that variants could also be used on a per area base to generate different looking kind of deserts or similar.
Nonetheless it might be pushing the system. So it would need some testing with a good amount of extra terrain to see how it turns out if we already get stuttering with the terrains we have now.

 

[Koshling]

Transition terrains is more or less what I was talking about. But as varieties without extra properties and not placed by the map script. With the added gain that variants could also be used on a per area base to generate different looking kind of deserts or similar.
Nonetheless it might be pushing the system. So it would need some testing with a good amount of extra terrain to see how it turns out if we already get stuttering with the terrains we have now.

Yeh, I think we need to wind up with at LEAST two sets:

1) Arty, nice looking set (might need more than one since this is where the disagreement is)
2) Minimum resource set (to address issues for people that have the stuttering)

 

[Hydromancerx]

What about this? Have this new one replace the desert and then name the red one gets renamed as "Outback" or something.

 

[BlueGenie]

Not really about the terrain but adheres to "minimum resource": Is it possible to reduce the size of units and the size of the graphics files with them, and so reduce graphics resources needed?

I've for a long time felt that compared to the terrain they are on, and features, the units are all HUGE. Halving them in height (25% size) {EDIT: Just realized that it's 3D models, so it's 12.5% total rather than 25%.} seems to me better (still big but not humongous). The only objection I could think of would be more difficult to see, but that's where the flags come in anyway. See a flag and see the unit, basically.

This might also make it possible to have heroes increase in size easier, and have ships, tanks, and the like bigger than other units.

Cheers

 

[Questdog]

If it can be made so that different terrain sets can be selected according to the taste of the user, why would anyone oppose that?

I appreciate that Hydro likes the current scheme and I don't think he's "wrong" to like it, but for me it is so hideous as to be unplayable. And adding one transition texture is not going to change that. I was not exaggerating when I said it looks like a Jackson Pollock painting. One man's art is another man's spilled paint....

If this moves you to your very soul, super. Enjoy!
But not everyone has the ability to see more than a mess....

 

[Hydromancerx]

What map do you use? The perfect world ones for me turn out more like banded agate where each landmass is more or less banded by the temperature and rainfall.

 

[BlueGenie]

I have to agree with Hydro on that. The PW map with the new terrain is great, love it.

Other maps I don't know yet, have only started one game with the new terrain so far.

Cheers

 

[Flinx]

I´d like to see the new terrain in action.
Where do i have to place the folders?


edit:
Nevermind, i found it myself.

 

[Questdog]

What map do you use? The perfect world ones for me turn out more like banded agate where each landmass is more or less banded by the temperature and rainfall.

I use PerfectWorld and/or Big and Small. PerfectWorld tends to make too much desert. It may be realistic (though sometimes it is for sure too much), but it ain't no fun to play on a map that's 70% water and 75% of the land is desert.

With RoM I used a modified PW script with less desert (among other changes), but I can't get the C2C scripts to do the same things I did before for some reason. The default PW scripts make prettier worlds, but the Big and Small script is more fun to play on.

It ain't the maps' fault (at least for me); the terrains are just ugly (again, to me).

There's no way to arrange the muddy terrain to make it presentable and there are very few areas in the world where your vision of the barren terrain (volcanic ash) is called for. Maybe if it was only placed around a volcano, I could live with it (but I'd want it more textured and less flat). In most places when you find dirt that black, it means the soil is extra rich and just about the opposite of barren.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I use PerfectWorld and/or Big and Small. PerfectWorld tends to make too much desert. It may be realistic (though sometimes it is for sure too much), but it ain't no fun to play on a map that's 70% water and 75% of the land is desert.

With RoM I used a modified PW script with less desert (among other changes), but I can't get the C2C scripts to do the same things I did before for some reason. The default PW scripts make prettier worlds, but the Big and Small script is more fun to play on.

It ain't the maps' fault (at least for me); the terrains are just ugly (again, to me).

There's no way to arrange the muddy terrain to make it presentable and there are very few areas in the world where your vision of the barren terrain (volcanic ash) is called for. Maybe if it was only placed around a volcano, I could live with it (but I'd want it more textured and less flat). In most places when you find dirt that black, it means the soil is extra rich and just about the opposite of barren.

1. Some of the PW deserts are huge but I think the C2CPWf has a good balance.

2. I personally think the Dune Wars terrain look beautiful.

3. The muddy terrain looks best with the jungle feature or next to the lush terrain. It also looks nice next to the marsh terrain.

4. Well volcanic is hard, while I do agree that volcanic soil is rich with nutrients, barren volcanic rocks do not have much flora on them. It takes specialized pioneer flora to break it down and make the soil usable for larger plants. This is why when eruptions come the terrain looks very barren with stumps of trees and then as it recovers it can become much more lush with vegetation. In fact it would be cool to have eruptions turn terrain into barren terrain and then slowly have that terrain recover into either plains, tundra or rocky (depending upon what region of the planet they are on). On the other hand volcanic soil can be quite toxic sometimes, it really depends upon the volcano and the type of eruption.

 

[Nevets_]

If you guys are reconsidering changing the desert texture I made this a while back, might be useful:

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Not really about the terrain but adheres to "minimum resource": Is it possible to reduce the size of units and the size of the graphics files with them, and so reduce graphics resources needed?

I've for a long time felt that compared to the terrain they are on, and features, the units are all HUGE. Halving them in height (25% size) {EDIT: Just realized that it's 3D models, so it's 12.5% total rather than 25%.} seems to me better (still big but not humongous). The only objection I could think of would be more difficult to see, but that's where the flags come in anyway. See a flag and see the unit, basically.

This might also make it possible to have heroes increase in size easier, and have ships, tanks, and the like bigger than other units.

Cheers

Unfortunately it isn't the size of the unit that is the problem. It is the polygon count that makes it a problem. Changing the size of the unit ca be done by changing just one number in its XML definition but it does not reduce the amount of memory needed to display it.

 

[BlueGenie]

Unfortunately it isn't the size of the unit that is the problem. It is the polygon count that makes it a problem. Changing the size of the unit ca be done by changing just one number in its XML definition but it does not reduce the amount of memory needed to display it.

Even if reducing the size in the graphics file? Or that's not possible?

 

[Questdog]

Even if reducing the size in the graphics file? Or that's not possible?

It's not the textures; it's the meshes (the wireframe of the units). To reduce their poly-count would be a BIG job.....

 

[Koshling]

It's not the textures; it's the meshes (the wireframe of the units). To reduce their poly-count would be a BIG job.....

Anyway the stuttering was only reporetd after we changed terrain so it's probably not polygon load at all. It's something terrain specific - either a higher level cache in the game itself or a textures issue, not a poly isue IMO.

 

[Nevets_]

Could it be the transitions between tiles? If you double the number of tile types you increase the different kinds of transitions geometrically.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The two terrains. I post a better set when we get signs working again.

 

[Faustmouse]

I like the 2nd pic more, it seems much smoother, but it's harder to tell the difference between some of them.