Like the title says, at what size is it best practice to split the terrain into multiple smaller terrains? 1km x 1km? 2km x 2km? For more details, I am making a map that’s roughly 4km x 4km. Also, I am using MicroVerse and MicroSplat and I also own SECTR for scene streaming if that is necessary.
1 Like
What is your target device? Ideally you do this from the start. If you are concerned about this regarding performance, then use mesh for terrains. You are making a pretty big map, so using the terrain system in your final build is going to be slow either way.
This thread has everything you need to know about the subject. For the size of your level, it is worth reading everything there. Lot’s of data and use case examples regarding this.
For non terrain stuff, it makes a huge difference what models you use and how they are built, otherwise you just end up treating symptoms instead of addressing the actual cause of lag.
Target is PC only and performance is not really a big issue. I already have a 3km x 3km environment running pretty well. It’s split into 9 tiles which seemed to make sense with the total size being 3x3 but I wasn’t sure if one massive terrain would be better, or maybe 2x2. I was just wondering, for future reference, how many tiles I should split the terrain into. I’m not sure if Unity would handle one massive terrain object better or if more tiles is the way to go.
Ah I see. I prefer smaller than that…about 1/4 of that size, but that’s for reasons mentioned above. It really comes down to the resolution and per square km ratio more than the actual size length width etc. Smaller chunks gives more flexibility. I still think that not using meshes is a huge performance hog unless you have a short view distance or not much else in the level besides terrain.