Been trying to understand the scaling choices for autogen objects, as they are deliberately oversized in a consistent manner.I was playing around with GeofA's suggestion to turn off autogen and instead rely on higher settings on textures and mesh. When I started putting the autogen back on I noticed that the ground scale of the textures in the higher detail mesh bears almost no relation to the autogen textures that sit in them. Houses are the size of office blocks, trees are 200 ft tall and exceed shrubbery on a factor of about ten to one.Can you tell us what design limitation led to this, or is this simply an error? If so, instead of resizing autogen objects at a texture/[pixel level, how about reducing the physical size of the objects by about 50% AND reducing the peak size? After using the high detail textures, the sense of scale is completely different than when you're using autogen objects - try it and see. It could be the texture resolution is out of scale with the autogen and the rest of the sim, but I don't think so, I think it is the autogen.Also, why do we have to have myriad trees, repeated, for `forests`. Can we not have a single large autogen `object` for the bulk, with individual trees at the edges? That would reduce the texture load immensely now that forests are distcint objects from trees.Allcott

The size of autogen is something I've heard people complaining about every now and then, but honestly I'm not reaching the same conclusion. It seems to be spot on, and in fact in some instances I believe they could afford to be a bit bigger. This is just the impression I get when I park an aircraft next to a tree or a building, but in no situation does it appear that houses are the size of "office blocks" as you claim, nor do any of the trees seem to be 200 feet high.I suppose screenshots would go further in backing either of our claims so if I get the chance I will try to dig one up.