-
Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:
- Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
- Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
- Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
- Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
- Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
- Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.
Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.
By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.
Ade-gp 0.0.48
- Thread starter GHD
- Start date
- Messages
- 12,243
- Country
-
As I say, it is different from what it was previously for custom lines, but, when compiled, it seems ok.
The way it is now is intentional. Brilliant ideas are now handled by the a simple addition to the standard line-straightening code (which is why the issue was fixed so fast).
Repositioning to the left edge is possible. But that's what got me into trouble in the first place. Besides, I don't see that you gain anything by positioning to the left edge, since, for most patterns, that's the middle of a "repeat". You're almost always going to have to do some "fine-tuning".
Don
Repositioning to the left edge is possible. But that's what got me into trouble in the first place. Besides, I don't see that you gain anything by positioning to the left edge, since, for most patterns, that's the middle of a "repeat". You're almost always going to have to do some "fine-tuning".
Don
tgibson
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 11,344
- Country
-
Here is a tiny problem with the Texture Editor.
My Texture_Def file looks like this:
gp_PatternedLines_TRG|40F|80F|False
gp_PatternedLines_40F|0F|40F|False
gp_ParkingDes|0|0|false
gp_Patterns|0|0|false
gp_LineBase|20F|20F|true
gp_Asphalt-dark|20F|20F|true
gp_Asphalt-light|20F|20F|false
gp_Asphalt-medium|20F|20F|true
gp_Concrete|20F|20F|true
gp_Dirt|20F|20F|false
gp_Gravel|20F|20F|false
gp_Red_20F|20F|20F|true
gp_White_20F|20F|20F|true
gp_Yellow_20F|20F|20F|true
gp_CrossHatch_Red|20F|20F|false
gp_CrossHatch_White|20F|20F|false
gp_CrossHatch_Yellow|20F|20F|false
gp_Signs_Red|0|0|false
gp_Signs_White|0|0|false
gp_Signs_Yellow|0F|0F|False
gp_CC_oakland|400F|100F|False
There are 21 entries. I also have 3 texture files in the folders not yet in the Def file.
And here is what it looks like in the Texture Editor:
As you can see the last entry in my Def file is listed here as No Def.
However, the suggested numbering is completely correct - the new files are offered position 22, just as they should be. And the values from the Def file are displayed when I display the oakland texture. It's only the designation of No Def that is incorrect.
When I then add the second new file (J_line) to the Definition file, I get this screen:
The oakland file no longer has the No Def designation, but the newly added J_line texture does. This pattern continues as I add the other two new files, leaving only the last one with the No Def designation, even though it has been added. The resulting Texture_Def file looks perfect.
Everything else seems to work just fine for me, all lines and polygons being added and displayed in GP Editor and FS correctly.
Hope this helps once again,
My Texture_Def file looks like this:
gp_PatternedLines_TRG|40F|80F|False
gp_PatternedLines_40F|0F|40F|False
gp_ParkingDes|0|0|false
gp_Patterns|0|0|false
gp_LineBase|20F|20F|true
gp_Asphalt-dark|20F|20F|true
gp_Asphalt-light|20F|20F|false
gp_Asphalt-medium|20F|20F|true
gp_Concrete|20F|20F|true
gp_Dirt|20F|20F|false
gp_Gravel|20F|20F|false
gp_Red_20F|20F|20F|true
gp_White_20F|20F|20F|true
gp_Yellow_20F|20F|20F|true
gp_CrossHatch_Red|20F|20F|false
gp_CrossHatch_White|20F|20F|false
gp_CrossHatch_Yellow|20F|20F|false
gp_Signs_Red|0|0|false
gp_Signs_White|0|0|false
gp_Signs_Yellow|0F|0F|False
gp_CC_oakland|400F|100F|False
There are 21 entries. I also have 3 texture files in the folders not yet in the Def file.
And here is what it looks like in the Texture Editor:
As you can see the last entry in my Def file is listed here as No Def.
However, the suggested numbering is completely correct - the new files are offered position 22, just as they should be. And the values from the Def file are displayed when I display the oakland texture. It's only the designation of No Def that is incorrect.
When I then add the second new file (J_line) to the Definition file, I get this screen:
The oakland file no longer has the No Def designation, but the newly added J_line texture does. This pattern continues as I add the other two new files, leaving only the last one with the No Def designation, even though it has been added. The resulting Texture_Def file looks perfect.
Everything else seems to work just fine for me, all lines and polygons being added and displayed in GP Editor and FS correctly.
Hope this helps once again,
