On 23-6-2019 22:48, Bill Pragnell wrote:
> So the previous iterations have been a little unsatisfactory; because I was
> using a constant shell height, each successive step got progressively narrower,
> and the buildings all got squashed together.
> 
> The image here shows two different strategies: on the left, the original with
> constant step height. On the right, a revised algorithm using constant step
> width. The latter of course means that each successive step now gets
> progressively higher.
> 
> I think I prefer the revised look! Naturally I'll need to do something inventive
> with the buildings to stop them from just looking stretched out. Some kind of
> turret-based thing would be good, then I could hide the sharp ends of the apex
> levels at the same time...
> 
> Fun fun fun
> 
> Bill
> 

Both strategies have their merits imho. It much depends on what kind of 
final outlook you want. In the original case, that would be a "South 
Italian" village with the upper level houses all imbricated and holding 
to the slope as it were (you could introduce some random shifting and/or 
rotation for instance). In the second case, that would be a "Tuscan" 
fortified village, with a castle at the top. All in true Escher style of 
course :-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message