Since the length is more than 20 times greater than the height (12000 m long, about 560 meters high) it is very flat, so it's hard to see the terrain features.
That's a shame, but understandable. Unless you can scale up the height? Multiply all the height points by a factor of 10. It will look exaggerated, but at least we can get the general idea 💡
Also, would it be too much work to get a similar detailed contour map for Death Valley? I know it's mostly flat, but I just like having the full collection
I also find it annoying that the most interesting areas and steepest hills are out of bounds. Would be awesome to try and drive up the mountain bordering Death Valley. Also there's a lake in the lower left corner of Andalusia but we can't go near it
The four largest files in the APK are Unity height maps. I've made images from them where height = red * 256 + green. Quite hard to identify which is which (apart from the flat one, haha), because they don't seem to correlate well with the background image used in the editor. So I'm not sure if they're even correct (if they aren't actually used in the editor, they could be out-of-date), but maybe they'll be useful.
Not sure exactly what you mean... but anyway, why?
It seems to tolerate track outside the allowed area of the map, it's just that you might see gaps in the ground. I'm pretty sure the height data is made to fill the scenery extents (as in, the outer perimeter of the grey border in the editor).
Not sure exactly what you mean... but anyway, why?
It seems to tolerate track outside the allowed area of the map, it's just that you might see gaps in the ground. I'm pretty sure the height data is made to fill the scenery extents (as in, the outer perimeter of the grey border in the editor).
Oh, right. Yes - at any coordinate within the square area. I don't exactly know the extents of the areas yet though! What I assume are extents in the heightmap files are clearly ignored by the editor (they're in the 100s, not 1000s, and not centered on 0,0). The scenery files are better, but Eifel (and Flat) are scaled. These are upside-down...
Andalusia... the points at +/- 3500 seem correct for the edge of the grey area...
Death Valley... +/- 2994...
Eifel... the points at +/- 8000 must be scaled in to the edge of the grey, which is at about +/- 6000...
Scenery files... more questions than answers! I've made some SVG files from them (using just the vertices and the triangles, ignoring the KD tree) and rendered them. Each triangle has an attributes value, not a colour, so I just assigned a unique colour for each attribute value. In all cases (at least) the orange area is 'outside' the height map area entirely; we never see it.
Eifel Flat (file: cfe1e8bafd7bc0f45b09adfb04c84b82)
(orange -9600,-9600 to 9600,9600 / grey -8000,-8000 to 8000,8000 / terrain -6000,-6000 to 6000,6000 division 6,6)...
... ok I guess, not much to correlate there.
Eifel (file: 0327ce0504420e54fa826624d0ed189c)
(orange -9600,-9600 to 9600,9600 / grey -8000,-8000 to 8000,8000 / terrain -6000,-6000 to 6000,6000 division 6,6)...
... no wait, what? Why are the Forest areas scaled up? (How does that even work in a mesh?)
Death Valley (file: 765fb1a0d6b38b042a8c7153a1d0652e)
(orange -3592.67,-3592.67 to 3592.67,3592.67 / grey -2993.89,-2993.89 to 2993.89,2993.89 / terrain -2993.89,-2993.89 to 2993.89,2993.89 division 5,5)...
... where's the grey gone? It's behind the yellow...
... no further questions there, except, why the two layers?
Andalusia (file: d71517d7c4fbe714999594a8f346963e)
(orange -4200,-4200 to 4200,4198.18 / grey -3500,-3500 to 3500,3498.18 / terrain -3500,-3500 to 3500,3500 division 7,7)...
... really? PD, what on earth is going on there?! Why does only the grey correlate to what we see on the backdrop?
edit: Updated images showing 1km grid, home straights and terrain outline (from the file data, except I made the home straights 600m long). Added the names of scenery files in the .apk.
I don't know. That would only be possible if they use a texture to show the areas of forest, city, etc and we can replace that texture with a nice high-res one, in the .apk.
I'm starting to think the areas must be on a texture, since a) the above scenery files simply do not match apart from the grey, and b) it just looks more like a texture than polygons (soft edges, possibly low-res).
@eran0004 That map for Andalusia includes the non-drivable areas as well right? Do you mind adding in the border of the drivable areas & the start/finish straights? And also add a pdf version if possible. Sorry if I'm too demanding! Great work as usual 👍
@eran0004 That map for Andalusia includes the non-drivable areas as well right? Do you mind adding in the border of the drivable areas & the start/finish straights? And also add a pdf version if possible. Sorry if I'm too demanding! Great work as usual 👍
Yeah it's certainly not easy. I think you've done it before with a less detailed Andalusia map (page 2 of this thread I think), so maybe just copy paste from that?
Yeah it's certainly not easy. I think you've done it before with a less detailed Andalusia map (page 2 of this thread I think), so maybe just copy paste from that?
I saw that @Outspacer shared images of the SVG-files he created in this post, so I simply grabbed the image of Andalusia and extracted the borders from that image. Grabbed the home straight locations as well, and this is the result, in HD resolution
My image is 2049x2048 because it was created in Adobe Illustrator, and the artboard just loves to interfere with the grid so when you create a rectangle to crop the image, it will either snap to the artboard or to the grid and it's hopeless to know which unless you zoom in 600% and correct it manually.
Edit: Can you create a high resolution image of the home straight locations?
My image is 2049x2048 because it was created in Adobe Illustrator, and the artboard just loves to interfere with the grid so when you create a rectangle to crop the image, it will either snap to the artboard or to the grid and it's hopeless to know which unless you zoom in 600% and correct it manually.
Edit: Can you create a high resolution image of the home straight locations?
How's this, for now? If you can handle SVG directly, that might be a better way for me to provide a full set. (I'm using batik-rasterizer to produce the PNGs).
I saw that @Outspacer shared images of the SVG-files he created in this post, so I simply grabbed the image of Andalusia and extracted the borders from that image. Grabbed the home straight locations as well, and this is the result, in HD resolution
Would it be too difficult to create a detailed map for Death Valley? Or is the elevation differences too small to be useful? I already have Eifel so this will be to complete the set.
Would it be too difficult to create a detailed map for Death Valley? Or is the elevation differences too small to be useful? I already have Eifel so this will be to complete the set.
Awesome, thanks! You can't drive on the mountains anyway so you don't really need it. Possible to also plot the boundaries and straights? I don't think it's been done before for DV so you have to start from scratch unfortunately...
Awesome, thanks! You can't drive on the mountains anyway so you don't really need it. Possible to also plot the boundaries and straights? I don't think it's been done before for DV so you have to start from scratch unfortunately...
I'm not sure if increasing the contrast is the right thing to do, but until we have some reference for what the actual heights are, why not! The alternative is using the same colouring for all the maps, which would show that some are hillier than others. Neither choice is a clear winner.
I'll upload a complete set of boundaries and home straights (in both SVG and PNG) when I get home
Right, here's a dump of my current Scenery folder.
I restyled the home straights to look a bit more like PD's, but with a deliberately larger white triangle.
Scripts are included, but if the SVGs and/or PNGs are useful already then there's no need for them.
(The XML files are the original data).
The out-of-bounds mountains are partly modeled, some of the bits you can't see from the in-bounds area have no visible model. But the heightmaps fill the square, and appear to match the visible model (I haven't tested it much). Laying track works wherever there is height data, since it puts an extra model on top of the terrain. But of course, you have to use shenanigans to escape the limits in the editor - see the 35km track thread
The out-of-bounds mountains are partly modeled, some of the bits you can't see from the in-bounds area have no visible model. But the heightmaps fill the square, and appear to match the visible model (I haven't tested it much). Laying track works wherever there is height data, since it puts an extra model on top of the terrain. But of course, you have to use shenanigans to escape the limits in the editor - see the 35km track thread
I've saved a track that's mostly on the lake. Don't get excited, it's a terrible track to drive! I was really enjoying it on Eifel Flat, but when moved to Andalusia the home straight gets longer, the track narrower, and it doesn't quite fit inside the lake
I've saved a track that's mostly on the lake. Don't get excited, it's a terrible track to drive! I was really enjoying it on Eifel Flat, but when moved to Andalusia the home straight gets longer, the track narrower, and it doesn't quite fit inside the lake
Sweet, thanks! Don't worry, I'm not too concerned whether it's nice to drive or not, I just want to see close up what the lake and its surrounding scenery is like