I disagree with this method, mainly because you can use the arch tool and use exactly as many brushes as you would like, and then vertex manipulate them to cover the gaps. And also by doing angled slices like that you're going to end up with off grid vertices at the top which I'm sure you would agree is a pet peeve for most mappers.
@mastercilona The arch tool will create an arch. You will still need to use brushes to fill in the gaps above it. This system will use less brushes. The arch tool is more useful for things like curved ceilings or train tracks.
I disagree with this method, mainly because you can use the arch tool and use exactly as many brushes as you would like, and then vertex manipulate them to cover the gaps. And also by doing angled slices like that you're going to end up with off grid vertices at the top which I'm sure you would agree is a pet peeve for most mappers.
yadda101 6 days ago
You could use the arch tool and then vertex manipulate the brushes so they fill the gap.
7IrishBandit 1 month ago
why not use the arch tool? is this more optimized or something?
mastercilona 1 month ago
@mastercilona The arch tool will create an arch. You will still need to use brushes to fill in the gaps above it. This system will use less brushes. The arch tool is more useful for things like curved ceilings or train tracks.
darkironphoenix 1 month ago
@darkironphoenix oh okay. thanks for pointing that out to me.
mastercilona 1 month ago