Is this the transitional graphic set we are going for? This is more akin to the shaggy tile. This appears to be the inverse of single tile smoothing (if your reading this and don't know what I'm talking about you can research in the archives...) than the full transitions proposed by Mark and Tim based on the legendary document. I thought we had decided to go with the larger number of transitions for greater visual appeal. I ask because I am working on some smoothing graphics and don't want to redo them. The reason I ask is because these seem to have the same issues as the 'shaggy tile' scenerio. Also I really want to get the layering sorted out. I understood it that water was to be lowest level then we would work up such as : water -> sand (and desert), marsh, and cobbles (roads) -> grass and swamp -> trees (different types of forest) and hills ->mountain Where more tiles could be added to the appropriate 'layer' as they come on line. This method would allow for the eventual retirement of the river and lake arches, which are a royal pain, with appropriate water arches. Also is there any consideration being given to extending this (leaving the door open anyway?) to do stuff like health/magic auras over top of objects and players or special effects or weather animations? > First, is it expected/thought that the smoothing (blending) of tiles > is likely to be turned on/off at and object level? this may be more > for the mapmakers - do you see cases where you woudl say 'I really > don't want this grass tile smoothed with the neighboring tile'. This is part of leaving the door open no? _______________________________________________ crossfire-devel mailing list crossfire-devel at lists.real-time.com https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/crossfire-devel