Hi
Thanks for the replies.
I've had a think about both methods.
Rob. The grid method is fairly simple but with the problems mentioned by MSW this would mean that as well as the unit's grid location being activated, another 5 would have to be activated (which 5 would depend on the direction the unit was facing) to account for 'cross-border' collisions. In some crowded battles this could mean around 600 units being checked for collisions. The way around this would be to have much smaller grid sizes but then you could have problems in storage for a large grid. I will be playing around with this and seeing what I can do.
MTW. I was sitting down and thinking of this actual approach last night and I may go with the uber-entity collision system, possibly using a combination with the grid system. Using uber-entities would cut down the initial collision testing down to 32-36 unit groups, 40-80 forest clumps and 6-12 buildings.
Back to chewing on the pencil in front of the drawing board.
Thanks again for the replies.
Cheers
GrumpyOldMan
Thanks for the replies.
I've had a think about both methods.
Rob. The grid method is fairly simple but with the problems mentioned by MSW this would mean that as well as the unit's grid location being activated, another 5 would have to be activated (which 5 would depend on the direction the unit was facing) to account for 'cross-border' collisions. In some crowded battles this could mean around 600 units being checked for collisions. The way around this would be to have much smaller grid sizes but then you could have problems in storage for a large grid. I will be playing around with this and seeing what I can do.
MTW. I was sitting down and thinking of this actual approach last night and I may go with the uber-entity collision system, possibly using a combination with the grid system. Using uber-entities would cut down the initial collision testing down to 32-36 unit groups, 40-80 forest clumps and 6-12 buildings.
Back to chewing on the pencil in front of the drawing board.
Thanks again for the replies.
Cheers
GrumpyOldMan