@ Red - Oh, I seeeee
A bit like asking Diamond and Ilanthar to make a map together, you mean?
I get it now
I like both erosion apps for different reasons
Mouse: Isnt that called the "I know - lets you and him fight" thing ? Anyway - software isnt quite like that. The best way I can explain it is if you had a group of painter artists and each person is a good artists who paints excellent pictures but each person has their own style. You could ask each to paint a picture and pick the best or even like all of them. But if you ask them to all share one canvas and one person paints one bit of the image and the other paints a different bit of it then you usually end up with a mess. Only in really big projects where you can break it down into discreet chunks can you get a team of programmers to build one large working thing. Even on these big collaborative open source projects you find that in actual fact one person does the whole of one section of it. The erosion bit of these apps are not big at all. Perhaps 100 lines of code - maybe not even that. Its just that its a very sensitive 100 lines. A small change to one of the parameters and the result looks very different and its not easy to determine what needs to be changed in order to make the result how you want it.
Last edited by Redrobes; 10-23-2017 at 06:19 AM.
@ Red - Oh, I seeeee
A bit like asking Diamond and Ilanthar to make a map together, you mean?
I get it now
I like both erosion apps for different reasons
Free parchments | Free seamless textures | Battle tiles / floor patterns | Room 1024 - textures for CC3 | GUILD CITY INDEX
No one is ever a failure until they give up trying
Waldronate: It is all trial and error ! The simulation is such a drastic simplification of the real world. So many processes being simplified down to a few equations and heuristics. That is the real problem.
I have vegetation in mine and when its switched on then it looks at the temperature and amount of water. With another heuristic then if the values are "good" then it grows a bit, if they are "bad" then they die off a bit. If plants grow then it takes up some of the water and then if there was sediment in it then it drops it out as height. So the idea was that if I have a flat flood plain (which is usually heavily sedimented) then hopefully a pocket of vegetation would grow and then the area there would rise up a little, stop the water flow there, dry up, plants die back a bit etc. So it would help braid the rivers at these flood plains and then help it form a single dominant river. I think because of all of this mine seems to look more realistic at the 100's of metres to few km type of areas compared to the 100's of km mountain ranges scales.
Because of the multitude of parameters like too much rain, not enough rain, etc then I can quickly overload some of the heuristics and equations so that it forms barren flooded and otherwise nonsensical output. As such its easy to drive it into these states and hard to keep in check. So it becomes a nightmare to use because I am wondering which of the many interdependent parameters is out of check resulting in bad terrain.
Mouse: Yes exactly. Both nice maps but hard to see how one map made out of a combination would work.
Last edited by Redrobes; 10-23-2017 at 06:42 AM.
Wow. That's some awesome stuff listening to you two talk about it and the programs. And here I was just trying to make my inkblot look like a voluptuous woman.
Please keep it in that order...Originally Posted by Kier
I may have been seized by dollhouse syndrome; it's hard to say. On the plus side, now the scale matches the compass rose and doesn't dominate the thumbnail.
### Latest WIP ###
wip3.jpg
Posting Permissions
