I think you are really on to something. So much of my time in Wings and any 3D modeling package for that matter is spent playing with topology to make it void of n-gons and where possible triangles. The current "Bridge" just . . . well let me try and show you.
Right now it does this.
Two polygons, different polygon count right?
So right now when I bridge it just spans the two with polygons and where the edge counts don't match up it just creates them on the side that has fewer edges.
Which creates n-gons. We hate n-gons.
So then I have to spend ages dicking around "stepping down" from the high edge count to the low edge count and end up with something like this.
New segments had to be added and the topology altered so that when subdivided, things look good. Especially when animating.
If you could re-tool "Bridge" and create a "Bridge+" that automated this stepping down process. . . you would probably have solved a modeling problem that plagues all 3D modeling programs.
I googled and found a table that shows different strategies based on how many you want to step from and too.. . . automating this would be amazing.
Right now it does this.
Two polygons, different polygon count right?
So right now when I bridge it just spans the two with polygons and where the edge counts don't match up it just creates them on the side that has fewer edges.
Which creates n-gons. We hate n-gons.
So then I have to spend ages dicking around "stepping down" from the high edge count to the low edge count and end up with something like this.
New segments had to be added and the topology altered so that when subdivided, things look good. Especially when animating.
If you could re-tool "Bridge" and create a "Bridge+" that automated this stepping down process. . . you would probably have solved a modeling problem that plagues all 3D modeling programs.
I googled and found a table that shows different strategies based on how many you want to step from and too.. . . automating this would be amazing.