I'm not entirely sure about the stalactite texture though, it looks a bit too bark-like to me.
Yeah, I gotta say, smooth rock and smooth bark do look very similar even IRL. I'm using the underlying reach terrainset texture without cuts/weathering for the stalactites and they are particularily smooth in all the reference images I've seen. However, I could probably add smooth buldges or some more depth. But I think I won't get something as distinct as the flowstone.
I'm also thinking that it may not be necessarily to have a full set of blocks for both stalactites and stalagmites, particularly since these are relatively low-use cases and the ID/memory space for one would probably be better dedicated to another rock variant. I'm thinking we should just have a single speleothem texture based on your current flowstone. People can either use this for stalactites (as it seems you do in a couple spots in the image), or use the reach/motm terrainsets for stalactites given that they have a fairly smooth-looking texture already.
Yeah, I don't disagree. Although, I do want to add that it won't be very realistic to use the stalacmite/ flowstone block as stalactites. Stalactites form a seemingly much smoother rock than stalacmites. At least as far as I can tell from the reference images I looked at, I'm not an expert though. I think a good compromise would be to scratch the stalactite full, fence and wall blocks but keep the cobweb block!
Edit: Some more
speleothem info:
Stalagmites are the "ground-up" counterparts of stalactites, often
blunt mounds
- Broomstick stalagmites are very tall and spindly
- Totem pole stalagmites are also tall and shaped like their namesakes
- Fried egg stalagmites are small, typically wider than they are tall
So caves that have stalagmites that are a wall with a fence on top are not very accurate.
I took the pic half-way through my replacement process, so any existing use of flowstone as 'stalactites' is an oversight on my part. The reach/motm sets may work well with the alt textures, but the new textures are much too coarse imo.
Also, regarding the checklist: are the "11 secondary rock variants to be used as accents in terraforming" that you scratched off referring to the old versions of the terrainsets which you kept as alts?
Yeah, I scratched that for now, since we agreed to wait for feedback to only implement whatever is still necessary. From my own testing it didn't seem like it was. The alt sets really tie the pink/tan/buff terrainsets (reach, wl, dorne, rm) together and the four existing variants of metamorphic rock (north, ironislands, eastern islands, eyrie) already work as alt sets within each other. With the colour change and dedicated alt I've added for the stormlands set, this now works both with the biome shaded eastern islands set, the regular iron islands set AND with the red mountains sets. In addition, some of the ores, specifically the iron ore might work like a charm to create banding in the red mountains set, while the silver and gold ores should go really well with the westerlands and possibly reach sets. Coal works well with Iron islands, north, lava and possibly the stormlands set. And, albeit some of them are visually distinct (I'm looking at you, copper ore), generally all of them overlay nicely with all terrainsets.
But, again, that's my opinion so please test and see for yourself!
My focus now is fixing the bugs with the mis-shaded overlay effect, adding overlay to pebbles top onto terrainsets and responding to feedback that comes in from you guys.