Here is a video demo:

The UVs on the top of the tapered cylinder aren't quite correct yet

godotengine/godot-proposals#610 is implemented by this PR

Just to clarify : I haven't yet checked the physics in game, there may be a mismatch between what's seen and what's collided with

sorry about the wrong styles, I hadn't setup everything to have it run automatically, this is my first contrib...

For completeness: this also addresses the original proposal, godotengine/godot-proposals#12875

Physics have been made and tested to work with both Godot physics server (using regular non-tapered variants) and Jolt

I'll note here that a lot of the code between the tapered Cylinder and tapered Capsule is very similar, maybe it could be merged into a single parent class?

Also, I haven't made icons for the meshes or the shapes. I tried to have a go at it, but in the end it was programmer art...

Finally, maybe there could be a button to convert non-tapered cylinder/capsules into their tapered variants and vice-versa?

@Moddingear Please run --doctool after compiling Godot to update the documentation automatically.

I did the squash+rebase, but I kept the original commit from #109009 to keep their contribution

Last change is so that the tapered capsule, both mesh and collision, correctly handle being turned into spheres. There was a superfluous test to avoid that, but Jolt actually handles the case just fine...

I'm having a rebase issue, will undraft when fixed

When testing this I have found that for these tapered shapes, including the mesh instances, you can't make one side have a radius of 0. It is set to 0.001, not true 0. The only shape that can be truly 0 is the built in cylinder mesh instance which can already be tapered.

Idk if this is intentional or a bug.

That is to align with https://github.com/eoineoineoin/glTF_Physics/tree/master/extensions/2.0/Khronos/KHR_implicit_shapes#gltf-schema-updates standards

@TheCogster409 In the case of the shapes, Jolt explicitely requires the shapes to have radii greater than 0 (Maybe this could be relaxed ?).

But I do believe that it can be handled better, so i'm going to compare with CMP_EPSILON for the shapes, and allow the mesh to reach 0 value, and when it does, optimize the geometry on the end with 0 radius, like the cylinder does currently

When you say a conic, do you mean like an open top like a funnel?

This causes problems for both physics and csg as it violates the manifold definition.

In this instance, I think conic is just the case where one radius is zero

When testing this I have found that for these tapered shapes, including the mesh instances, you can't make one side have a radius of 0. It is set to 0.001, not true 0. The only shape that can be truly 0 is the built in cylinder mesh instance which can already be tapered.

Tapered capsule shape indeed doesn't accept 0 as top or bottom (prevents having to check for div by zero), but the tapered cylinder shape does.

@jrouwe I've allowed 0-radius cylinders in the latest version

@AThousandShips I've rename radius_top and radius_bottom to top_radius and bottom_radius everywhere in the new files that are user facing, but not in the Physics server as it's new and can be aligned to Khronos standards.

The code to generate the vertical lines on the capsule collider was thoroughly documented so it's more understandable.

Also, now the tapered capsule generated mesh handles 0-radius ends.

Just needs the code readability fixed, none of the implicit conversions