Hi Michael.
Is increasing the size from 256 to 1024 going to be any benefit? Since I guess you're just increasing the size of the original file, you're not going to get any more resolution out of it as you're not using the extra filesize headroom to improve the resolution of the actual file content. (Or are you?) Did you see any improvement of ground resolution in the sim compared with the original 256px file? Did the textures take longer to load?
:-?
The file that I used for this is not the original file, in any way. I compiled a completly origional file from free textures that I found online, and formatted them in dxt1 format. The result is what you see in the pic I posted.
Im in the process of trying different textures, becuase of repitition, and so they dont look like "tiles" at a higher altitude.
I have noticed no loading time increase, and it maybe took 2 fps off of the average.
Although I have used 1024x1024 textures, I get the feeling that FS is only utilizing 512x512.. (But still double fs9 value!)
For that matter I gotta figure out a way to delete the 4x4 part of the bitmap layer. Which I dont think is easy :-[ Ill geter done tho! (I hope

)