Moss will only happen on the wetter side of things in most of the world's forests, so having both a mossy and a non-mossy option gives a lit and shaded side of the construction. Size of the download might be a big impact, though.
The stepping stones map is very nice. One thing that struck me right away was that you are missing stepping stones that are partly submerged, and partly dry.
Thank you, and yes - that one is quite difficult. I've been thinking of wet and dry stone and how to do it, but that might have to wait until part 2 while I finish filling out the forest stuff in this part.
I think I solved the partly wet stepping stone problem ;)
Part 1 has been handed over now and is due to be published as the November issue. Part 2 is all about waterfalls, so I've started with a handful of cliff symbols.
Part 1 will be published soon with all the trees and forest stuff, including the ruin parts.
I'm now working on part 2. So far I've done cliffs and heather. Standing stones are next, and then waterfalls and bridge sections. Bit of a strange bald spot in this map. I haven't decided what to put there just yet.
Again it looks fine. Looks natural it does not need anything. If you feel you need something put and old campfire remains. There are plenty of rocky cliff that look just like that bare with a little vegetation around.
A camp would be nice, but maybe a little too much work for the time, bearing in mind I have yet to do the standing stones and the waterfalls, but we'll see.
Sorry, I think I have used the wrong term. I mean two standing stones capped by a lintel stone, eg Stonehenge. And wooden ones as well as in ancient woodhenge. And perhaps some of the ancient barrow tombs or tombs consisting of 2-4 upright stones capped by a large flat stone, as is seen in so many places in Cornwall.
I would think that top-down views of standing stones would be at best very difficult because the appearance changes so radically with viewing distance and we humans don't get to see tall things from the top very often. Isometric give you a chance to add personality to each stone, but with the overhead view I expect that you'd have to rely largely on shadows to fill in the details.
This is very true, Joe. If all circles were as perfect as the day they were created I could just put fractalised polys of stone there and give them strange looking shadows, but there are also fallen and leaning stones that can give a much better feel for the nature of all the stones. Well, that's what I hope anyway.
Comments
A bit of river stuff this time. After all - what would a walk through the forest be without the streams and the stepping stones?
And things that loom under the trees...
Splendid water effects. Really looking forward to November. :)
After all - what would a walk through the forest be without the streams and the stepping stones?
Drier? 😉
Do I keep the non-mossy ones now I've figured out how to do the mossy ones?
Yes I say keep both give people more options.
Moss will only happen on the wetter side of things in most of the world's forests, so having both a mossy and a non-mossy option gives a lit and shaded side of the construction. Size of the download might be a big impact, though.
The ruin pieces are not as large as the trees, Joe, so it won't be too much of a catastrophe ;)
Yes to both, for the reasons given by Joe.
Do I keep the non-mossy ones now I've figured out how to do the mossy ones?
Of course, Sue.
You should never ask the Internet and expect anything other than a resounding "Yes" to any question though 😁
The stepping stones map is very nice. One thing that struck me right away was that you are missing stepping stones that are partly submerged, and partly dry.
Thank you, and yes - that one is quite difficult. I've been thinking of wet and dry stone and how to do it, but that might have to wait until part 2 while I finish filling out the forest stuff in this part.
I think I solved the partly wet stepping stone problem ;)
Part 1 has been handed over now and is due to be published as the November issue. Part 2 is all about waterfalls, so I've started with a handful of cliff symbols.
Love the paths. They speak to the issue I have with my mining map - yours are part of the terrain, mine float 5 ft in the air somewhere.
Food for thought. 🤔
Thanks :)
That may be because my paths are made up of terrain patches used a bit like brush dabs.
Part 1 will be published soon with all the trees and forest stuff, including the ruin parts.
I'm now working on part 2. So far I've done cliffs and heather. Standing stones are next, and then waterfalls and bridge sections. Bit of a strange bald spot in this map. I haven't decided what to put there just yet.
Either of the two ideas on fb sound good. On my cell.
Looks to me where is the strange bald spot?
The bare rock area above the tunnel where the water comes out.
The comments on fb are:
1) a path leading to stones ? A barrow or fogou entrance ?
2) The remains of a camp, 'protected' on one side by the cliff. Perfect for star gazing.
3) a ruined watch tower.
Can we also have trilathons
Option 2 (the camp) sounds good. Or there could be a prepared signal fire - from up there it will be visible for quite a while.
If it's not in part 1, forest camp symbols, like campfires and maybe "bushcrafted" tents / shelters out of branches might be a good idea.
Again it looks fine. Looks natural it does not need anything. If you feel you need something put and old campfire remains. There are plenty of rocky cliff that look just like that bare with a little vegetation around.
What are trilathons?
I like the idea of a beacon.
A camp would be nice, but maybe a little too much work for the time, bearing in mind I have yet to do the standing stones and the waterfalls, but we'll see.
Sorry, I think I have used the wrong term. I mean two standing stones capped by a lintel stone, eg Stonehenge. And wooden ones as well as in ancient woodhenge. And perhaps some of the ancient barrow tombs or tombs consisting of 2-4 upright stones capped by a large flat stone, as is seen in so many places in Cornwall.
At the moment I'm working on simple standing stones like those you see in ancient Celtic sites in Scotland.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=standing+stones+in+scotland&sxsrf=ALiCzsYf4a9_awo6t8kGSiO0tdO_E8HomA:1667089731927&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjDzp6a2Yb7AhW9hf0HHXxsDVsQ_AUoAXoECAIQAw&biw=2021&bih=1027&dpr=0.95
It's not as easy as you might think! LOL!
I would think that top-down views of standing stones would be at best very difficult because the appearance changes so radically with viewing distance and we humans don't get to see tall things from the top very often. Isometric give you a chance to add personality to each stone, but with the overhead view I expect that you'd have to rely largely on shadows to fill in the details.
This is very true, Joe. If all circles were as perfect as the day they were created I could just put fractalised polys of stone there and give them strange looking shadows, but there are also fallen and leaning stones that can give a much better feel for the nature of all the stones. Well, that's what I hope anyway.
A bit like this (though these are very raw at the moment and need some roughing up)
@Loopysue this is what I meant by trilithons. This is from a feeble attempt to illustrate them. Sort of a Stonehenge from above.
Ah yes, but that's a henge rather than a stone circle.
I've gone back to working on the waterfalls for now, but I'll see if I have time.