Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

I would suggest using Dual Contouring instead of Marching Cubes, for the following reasons: It supports both smooth and sharp features It works well with level-of-detail methods It requires no lengthy lookup tables The one big caveat is that it is not as simple to parallelize for the GPU, if you are interested in that. PS: You may get stuck trying to ...


0

no matter what you do you'll have to run through the triple for loop to set up the float values to input into the marching cubes. normally you would use some form of noise to create 2d/3d maps. in your case I would do something like define a size, and then change all blocks to positive if their absolute x,y,z values added together equal less than the ...


0

Would you mind sharing your implementation with other interested programmers? I think there are a couple of people interested in a working implementation to play around with, so am I. I know I am "abusing" the answer function, but I do not have enough reputation to comment, sorry.


2

A hard but probably better way: if you walk on surfaces you would use navigation mesh based on triangles that share edges. In 3D space you could use tetrahedrons that share faces. Tetrahedrons should be able to fill your space reasonably and running A* on the graph of tetrahedra should be much faster, as you would probably not need so many of them. As in ...


3

Take a look at hierarchical A* (aka HPA*); its basically what you're looking for. However, keep in mind that adding pre-processing can add so much overhead that it might not be worth it. You will want to profile your existing planner first to make sure there aren't any obvious bottlenecks. Another thing you can try is to create a sparse probabalistic road ...



Top 50 recent answers are included