Ideas for hiding obvious object tiling at shorter block lengths

I did some research on various block lengths and realized that the best choice for track is 5m since this allows using the same object for straight and curved track while still looking fine. However, with wall and other similar objects (tunnels and like), tiling becomes obvious. So here's my thoughts on improvements to that:

• Enabling different block lengths for track and other objects, BVE5 apparently already allows that (see the newest Ginza line shuttle released today. Uses 5m for track and 10m for tunnels, enough to defeat obvious tiling)
  
• Cycling any other linear objects (iincluding track) similarly to ground, that can drop a requirement for setting different block lengths for each object type (not just track and the rest of objects, 5m platforms are desirable too) and will work fine in tight curves too
  

I'd say cycles are probably the best solution, but no idea if it's possible to implement, so I've thought of another option

Variable length repeaters (BVE5's equivilant of wall / dike) IIRC have been around since the start.

This on it's own wouldn't be too much hastle to implement (indeed, the rather unfinished BVE5 parser has them), it's more whether they should be added to the current CSV format and how.
Adding one thing tends to break others.

How does Openbve know what block length to use for the walls then? There's no relevant parameter documented, and once I set Options.BlockLength to, say, 5, wall/dike objects are placed at the same 5m intervals as with track.

Well, as IIRC there's no upcoming .csv route replacement unlike .xml for trains, it can be added in .csv (like a few other things route devs have requested lately) and we can just hope nothing breaks 
They can work similarly to ground like this:

Code:

With Structure
.WallL(0) tunnelL.b3d
.WallR(0) tunnelR.b3d
.WallL(1) tunnellampL.b3d
.WallR(1) tunnellampR.b3d
.WallL(2) tunnel69L.b3d
.WallR(2) tunnel69R.b3d

With Cycle
.Wall(0) 0; 1; 2; 1


There's no need to define separate cycles for left and right side, Openbve will pick appropriate objects depending on which walls are specified by .Wall in Track section (left/right/both).

On an unrelated note: can (theoretically) Openbve be able to slightly deform track/wall/platform/etc objects procedurally depending on a curve radius and (possibly) cant value to avoid gaps and overlaps in sharp curves?

I have had some ideas about this floating around my head for quite some time already. Once I'll find the time, I'll do the maths and make a concrete proposal for this. I think it's doable, especially with Chris' work on moving all the stuff into internal plugins.

Delsin wrote:How does Openbve know what block length to use for the walls then? There's no relevant parameter documented, and once I set Options.BlockLength to, say, 5, wall/dike objects are placed at the same 5m intervals as with track.

Well, as IIRC there's no upcoming .csv route replacement unlike .xml for trains, it can be added in .csv (like a few other things route devs have requested lately) and we can just hope nothing breaks 
They can work similarly to ground like this:

I was referring to BVE5, sorry
(gets confusing as to who is talking about what...)

It'd be trivial to extend this in the current parser (probably on a per-wall / dike basis), but you'd still have the issue that stuff is placed along the tangent of the block, which makes it somewhat less flexible when dealing with curved objects.
BVE5 on the other hand places stuff along the path of the curve.

If you want to create curved /segmented copies of objects, see the Object Bender tool that's already available.
That's got the math inbuilt.