Couple of things:
1--Nothing that I'm suggesting addresses Finish surfaces, only Roughing.
2--What you show is the effect of the step-down and step-over sizes which are large as shown. In all cases--even with "true" 3d path generation, the result is an approximation of the model. If the steps (down/over) are adequately fine, we call it a sphere or a cylinder or a cone, etc... But, even if you were to set the step-over and step-down at 1 micron, you would have the same issue, just with step sizes so small that you would ignore them...
3--The FeatureArea in PathWB allows calling the libarea engine to generate wires representing tool-paths. It is fed the Pattern Type (zig-zag, offset, spiral, etc...), the step-over, the step-down, and other inputs that we put into distinct OP commands (pocket, contour, face, etc...). Generally, the available inputs in any OP are a sub-set of the possible inputs available in the FeatureArea. But, as you say, in itself, it doesn't generate Paths, rather Wires.
4--The PathWB also provides a separate tool, FromShape, under Supplemental Commands. This converts the Wires generated by the FeatureArea into Paths. It also has a number of inputs you are likely familiar with--FeedRates, Retract Height, etc...
5--If I use the GCode-Inspector, and copy the GCode, and then paste that into a Custom-GCode Operation, I am able to simulate the Job, and you see a "cone-like" result, albeit with low-resolution due to the 1mm step-down setting.
I believe there is a limit to the number of lines that can be placed in a CustomGCode, but this demonstrates the idea. Where you required an OP per line, to do this as Chris showed, here, you set the step-down, step-over, as inputs.
6--Here is a high-resolution simulation result, with the step-down set at 0.1mm.
- (104.03 KiB) Downloaded 3 times