Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 26-3-2013 9:59, Thomas de Groot wrote:

>
> My solution is to create a street surface related to the highest side of
> the street, extending enough over the other side to enable the trace()
> function to place the houses there at the correct level.
>

These are really nice views of your city!

I assume that you *do* want sloping streets(?) They look very natural like that,
IMO. So if I understand the problem correctly, the sides of the buildings that
are lower down on the slope are being 'buried', while the sides with the steps
and the door are looking too high (that is, the steps etc. are ending before
they reach the ground.)

Although I don't know the method you are using to trace() the buildings onto the
ground (if indeed that *is* the method you're using), it seems to me that the
trace for each building should be done at all four corners--four traces, in
order to get the *highest* of the four. Then, that elevation would be the one to
place the building at. And along with that idea, the buildings/steps etc. would
need to be built so that they *always* extend farther into -y. Most of the time,
that extra building depth would not be seen--it would be underneath the
ground--but in situations such as in your example scene, it would show up and
look natural. (Yes, there would be *lots* of steps, depending on the ground
slope--but that might look quite nice.) I'm thinking that the 'extra' building
depth (and steps) should be deep enough in -y to compensate for, say, a 45-deg.
ground slope(!) as a maximum. Or maybe 35-40 deg.

Post a reply to this message