@Drollian said:Shure, with my Mesh i’ll have the same problem on the odd spaced points, but I’ve tried TerrainMesh and it felt like 1 direction is missing.
But this:
@Sploreg said:
there is a straight line possible there, just raise the points in between.
seems to solve my issue.
Just for my understanding, doing this:
will end up in a result like this??
http://i.imgur.com/18PVU.jpg
And like I stated before, you won’t notice it with smooth normals. Also you will be building on flat surfaces, the slope part will be in between the flat areas and probably not built on.
And like I stated before, you won't notice it with smooth normals. Also you will be building on flat surfaces, the slope part will be in between the flat areas and probably not built on.
sorry i haven’t read some answers i was in a hurry.
@zarch said:
I think the problem is that you are trying to sculpt with single points instead of multiple. For example if you raised/lowered a group of 4 points at a time. Also have you tried that with smooth shading on to see how it changes the look?
Note that with any grid shape there will always be lines that cannot directly follow the edges, that is unavoidable. Adding the lines you have makes one extra shape possible but as someone else already demonstrated if instead you group points you can then make any shape you like using the standard mesh.
Yes, after reading Sploreg's last post i think i've got the idea. I havent thought about that before.
@pspeed said:
If it is a grid then why are you running your lines diagonally instead of along the grid? I'm just kind of curious.
Or are you planning to support building in 8 directions versus the 4 that that sim-city like games have?
No, I'm not planning to support building in 8 directions. I want to modify the terrain in 8 directions because it provides more artistic freedom in designing it.
It doesn’t change anything. Half of the points have more lines connecting them, half have fewer. With the current technique each point is equal. And with smoothed normals the difference will not be visible.
@Sploreg said:
no just raise the points that are in between. See there are some that aren't raised at all there.
My ascii diagram was matching yours with the # not on the actual vertices, but on the lines. Do this instead:
you cannot get it exactly the way you want going one diagonal direction, but you can the other, as all of these wireframe pictures show. Just like if you use odd-spaced points with your mesh technique.
I will point this out again. You will not notice these things with smooth shading (smooth normals). I’m just trying to save you time by re-writing the underlying mesh structure when in the end it will look the same. The only difference would be if you have your polygons at that zoomed-in of level where you can clearly see the individual sides, and force the user to only modify even-spaced points. That is a restriction I do not want to impose on the terrain system.
zoomed-in where you can clearly see the individual sides,
I want exactly that. That's the style of the game. Every Quad is clearly visible. Thats why i need that Mesh.
It would look super beautiful and be awesome with that mesh and the possibility to modify odd and even-spaced points. I've tried it out and i fell in love with its look and simplicity.
Here is what im working on:
Telling me not be able to use that mesh feels like telling me to do Minecraft without the ability to use blocks, since its an essential part and the style of the game.
@Sploreg said:
What are you going on about?
Do it however you want. I will stop providing advice from experience.
I've edited this: since its an essential part and the style of the game.
Of course I could cluster the mesh in many points and simulate the pattern i want but why would i do that if i don't really need that and therefore it would only costs resources.
Seems like there is no simple approach to do it the way i want.
Do it however you want. I will stop providing advice from experience.
Im really glad for every advice and i appreciate the time you take answering my questions. If i've pissed you off in some way im sorry.
@drollian said:
Im really glad for every advice and i appreciate the time you take answering my questions. If i've pissed you off in some way im sorry.
No, just a frustrating day at work. Don't mean to take it out here. Apologies.
I need a beer.
I think that’s kinda like the approach @Sploreg was up to.
With this approach i’m having the problem that i would have n66-1 more heightmap information than i would need with my mesh (n), just to get a nearly wanted result (remember, i still think it would be totally fine to have different building behaviors on even and odd spaced points).
I feel bad about having that much more information to handle, its theoretically useless information because what i want could be done with another Mesh. With this style, on a 1024*1024 map, there will be 36.700.160 more float points, this means the maps i would be able to handle have to be 35 times smaller than the maps on the other Mesh.
Either i’ve missed something or this approach isn’t optimal.