Terrain shape brushes don't work yet, but I figure you probably knew that.
It should work.. Notice the "Add Shape" button? Or try pressing "5" when in any heightmap editing mode.
GUI needs cleaning up there, but I want to separate the "normal" add/level/smooth from the shape add one (which seems more difficult to underestand).
If it still doesn't work and you are indeed on the latest version, submit an infolog and I'll try to debug it.
Just note one thing, you might have packets being dropped if you have the default springsettings.
You should have things like this in your config:
LinkIncomingMaxPacketRate = 64000
LinkIncomingMaxWaitingPackets = 512000
LinkIncomingPeakBandwidth = 32768000
LinkIncomingSustainedBandwidth = 2048000
LinkOutgoingBandwidth = 65536000
MaximumTransmissionUnit = 140000
Numbers are arbitrarily large. The MTU probably doesn't need to be changed, but I couldn't be bothered to figure what does so I made everything network related large :p
You should also run this on your own machine for now and avoid using hosts. The networking is still unoptimized.
The interface for that seems about right, but the scale factor seems a little nonsensical. Elmos would be best.
Hmm OK, but let's leave that for later when it's time to fix the UI. It's not like the user is ever informed about the map size, so those numbers are asbtract for now!
I've also noticed that the way you implemented blend factor for textures is kind of odd. In SME or blender, if you paint over the same spot with the same texture at a low blend strength the opacity gradually increases until it maxes out.
OK, changed the blend factor to work more like the way you suggested. It really does make Add a lot more useful.
Your 'blend factor' is more like painting the texture to a separate layer with the layer opacity set to the blend factor. If you paint over the same spot it just achieves a uniform opacity, which is really useful and cool in its own right but not exactly normal behavior.
Since I also really liked my old blend factor I added it as "feature factor" (in need of a better name maybe). It pretty much filters only "features" of the texture if at low value.
I think you might be right about sorting out the modes that aren't useful, it seems like a few definitely wouldn't be, or at least would require special textures to do anything interesting. Colorize mode also doesn't work the way I'd hoped. I think your implementation is valid, but a more useful version would only set the hue without affecting brightness (which is what krita's color mode does).
Could you make suggestion how the list should look like?
Also separate what you think is not usable.
I'll put the colorize change on the TODO list :p
Detail textures still just look like soot to me.
I think we may be missing something about how that's used in other editors, or maybe that's what splat details are used for in spring, idk.
Spring uses both.
Splat detail: https://springrts.com/wiki/Mapdev:splatdetail
The example images there are poor examples (!invoke enetheru), with "without splat" looking even better to me, but beherith's map example does look great: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=22564
I'm already using RGB(A) detail textures like in the splat example, but I don't have a "Distribution image", and I'm not sure how to generate it. That said, using RGBA detial textures until splatting is done is probably a bad idea, as it just multiplies the colors. Stick with greyscale.
PS: Also increased the maximum texture size as performance was OK (for me).
PSS: Now also saves old height/texture window states.
FLOZi wrote:iirc, and it was a few years ago now, Aberdeen was made with the WorldInConflict map editor.
There, more stuff for reference =)