• Welcome to SC4 Devotion Forum Archives.

NAM Issues Thread - PLEASE POST YOUR NAM QUESTIONS AND PROBLEMS HERE

Started by jahu, June 03, 2007, 10:15:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Pioneer


eggman121

Quote from: Pioneer on May 15, 2016, 01:46:06 PM
Any way I can make this work?

There is no elevated ramp piece for that situation since the RHW 6S is treated like a two tile wide network due too its width. Try the dual RHW4S to RHW 8S ramp. That should be a good substitute.

-eggman121

APSMS

I feel like the usefulness of that particular ramp should override the inherent modelling issues that accompany the ERHW-6 network.

I can imagine the number of "bug reports" that you guys get from cosmetic issues, especially related to that particular setup, but I still feel like the usefulness should overcome any inherent graphical glitches, provided of course that the setup works in the code.

Still it's not my decision, and I'm not the coder/support staff, but I'm sure you can understand where I'm coming from. I don't envy your job.
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

My Mayor Diary San Diego: A Reinterpretation

Tarkus

It's not quite as noticeable at that farther out zoom level, but the effect is pretty bad.  It was quite a bit worse before NAM 31, when the 6S elevated models were actually narrowed slightly.





And if we were to allow the RHW-6S A1/D1 ramps, someone's also going to be asking for A2 and D2 setups with a 6S out the bottom to be made, which ends up looking really, really, bad.





We kind of figured our best solution at that point was to omit the non-wide versions of these ramps at elevation.  Originally the "wide" footprint was actually going to be the only footprint for these ramps at any level--including ground.  Once the overhang technique came into play, we relented to all the requests at the ground level, while noting that the setup couldn't work at elevation.

There was some discussion of using overrides to try to get around some of the barrier nastiness, wherein there'd be versions of the elevated 6S and MIS that were missing the barrier on one side, but there's too many variables in terms of how people could end up using it--they'd basically turn into whole new networks--which made it unfeasible.

-Alex

APSMS

I understand the reasoning. The ballooning effect regarding requests is unfortunate.

I imagine it can't help that you can successfully drag these two networks next to each other, but can't have them interact. Still, the whole boon of having any Elevated RHW ramps is a plus, and draggable and FLEX versions even better (for the occasional minor slope compliance).

It doesn't help that, despite my efforts to do detail work in this game, I end up failing miserably so things like this don't bother me nearly as much as they should. I tend to be a perfectionist IRL, but I tried that in the game once and it kept me away for 6 months because I couldn't get it to work, so I've stopped paying attention in order to play.

Thanks for the explanation (I think I knew it already, but a refresher is always good)!
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

My Mayor Diary San Diego: A Reinterpretation

Tarkus

You're most welcome. 

Quote from: APSMS on May 15, 2016, 10:55:11 PM
I imagine it can't help that you can successfully drag these two networks next to each other, but can't have them interact.

I'm almost thinking that prevent code, to stop those two networks from being right next to each other, might mitigate things.

-Alex

titanicbuff

given its a S-6- I've had that on ground where it touches like that
I have struck an iceberg and Sank
Titanicbuff
Visit my website at: http://simcitybuffs.icyboards.net/
RTMT Team Member
NAM Associate

danholo

Trying to make an 7.5m Ave over RHW 6C with on/off ramps without good results. The 'best' I got is in the attachment. Trying to use dragable and the bigger problem is I can't find any proper puzzle pieces for this.

Any tips?

InvisiChem

Give a tile of gap between the MIS and RHW 6C. This might allow the RULs to override properly. Another idea is to convert to RHW 6S with the 1 tile gap to give more network for override.
Everyone has something to offer, most do not possess the courage to offer it.

peperodriguez2710

Hi, I'm finding american textures in some RHW pieces.






(The wide changing pieces one happens at all levels except 0, I think)


I'm missing any texture or they aren't Euro-ized yet?


Thanks a lot!

MushyMushy

I was making a T intersection with an avenue and a road and I decided to add turning lanes, but I noticed one of the pieces didn't have the LHD textures. They're still the Euro textures, but not LHD. I tried the other turning lane pieces and didn't find any others that had this problem.


mgb204

The issue only affects this intersection, basically you need to flip (horizontally) one texture, 0x5B02260E to fix it. It's the only texture in the TuLEPs that requires a special LHD variant.

Not sure why you wouldn't have this in the NAM to start with, since I'm pretty sure it was working fine a few versions back. I could be wrong though, perhaps it's only included with the special "UK" TuLEPs or something?

wallasey

Quote from: six9nc on May 13, 2016, 07:50:59 PM
I have had nothing but bad days dealing with Windows 10 and SC4.  So I finally did a clean install and now NAM 33 or 34 will not run correctly on my machine.  I get red squares when choosing flex ramps even though I made sure it was checked in the custom install.  Also, I get red squares for the maxis ramps and filler pieces.  Lastly, I 8 and 10 ramps aren't showing up correctly in the game and I cant even drag the starter pieces out.  I have attached photos when I attempt to drag out from the pieces. Also, when I hover over the NAM icon it says r69 May 15 2010.  Please help!



Afraid I'm having the same issue but my Nam Version is saying December 2015. Not sure if it's a LHD thing? The cleanitall interface runs during the install (I've reinstalled this a few times). Not sure if it dumps things in a conflicting filepath?

The only elements which work are single tile networks.

Could I ask whether the original advice still stands please? Thanks

EDIT:

I have removed NAM out of the plugins folder and run the game. There were no lingering NAM features. I then ran the standard installation but still had the same issue as reported above. I can't work out what the issue is here as all the other NAM features such as NWM work fine. If it would be possible to suggest any ides, I would be most grateful.

Thanks,

mgb204

I suspect you are not encountering the same problems. A NAM controller from 2010 is obviously wrong, somewhere there must be a very old version of the NAM to cause that. But Dec 2015 is what I would expect you to have, since NAM 34 was released in Dec 2015. That said, upon installation of NAM, it should attempt to run the "controller compiler" to make a custom one for you. That would be date-stamped based on when it was created. So if you are seeing Dec 2015, I'm guessing the compiler failed to run, therefore a default full controller was installed. If the compiler isn't running, most likely you don't have Java installed on your machine, which is required to run it. However, all this is probably a distraction, since it's unlikely to be the cause of your problems here.

The NAM installer is designed to remove any previous install before replacing it with a new one. Have you tried selecting the Custom Install during installation? Do this and manually select those RHW networks you actually want to be able to use. It looks to me like the textures aren't installed for them, but the code will be, because you don't have a custom controller.

As for the Maxis Highway ramps, have you installed the Maxis Highway Override feature? If so I wouldn't expect any of the Maxis Highway ramps to work, they are incompatible with MHO and therefore removed from install when this option is selected. If you don't want to use this feature, un-tick it during said custom install above.

wallasey

Hi Mg204; thanks for getting back to me!

Java can be rather haphazard with me; however I'm confident that at the time of the install everything was up to date.

As a principle, I always opt for the custom install as there are bits of the NAM I don't have cause to use (sorry!) and I like to chose my automata settings ect. To test the case, I did give the Standard Install a go but continued to encounter the same issue.

I had backed up the previous NAM from November; the issue didn't occur when I installed it again. Not sure what's going on.

In fairness, I'm pretty infrequent at playing these days and so if NAM 33 works, then I may keep on using it until a further release.

Thanks again for all your help,

Regards

srrvxd

Updated from 31.2 to 34 and my draggable rail wide radius turns no longer seem to work.  I have looked and cant find the option in the installer to get this to work.   I used to be able to build the rail to a 45 degree turn. then drag from the turn in the straight direction to get a WRC.   was this feature removed or what do i need to do to fix it.

APSMS

@srrvxd, Are you using the RRW?

It uses different drag patterns for the WRCs. AFAIK, if you are still using the default Maxis rails (with NAM improvements) then that drag pattern should still work, but the RRW (the brownish looking rails) works differently, and you will need to experiment to learn the new drag patterns.

Actually, there should be a manual included in the NAM files inside your My Documents/SimCity 4 folder. Look for the RRW manual, and it should have all the drag patterns. I'm still learning them myself, but I suspect that is your main problem. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

My Mayor Diary San Diego: A Reinterpretation

srrvxd

@APSMS
No i was not using the RWW and i have tried lots of different patterns and attempted to find something about it in the documentation/online but to no avail.  I will see if the RWW upgrade will cause to much trouble with the extensive network i have. 

Alan_Waters

Many times have seen the screenshots of other players that sims actively use MHW and RHW. In my game sims do not want to use these paths. On my screenshot it shows that the agricultural field surrounded by two of the town and village. The two lower circles - this RHW-2, and the left and at the top - an intersections with MHW. This I can see for a long time, and in different regions.
How to get sims to use all the paths?



Thank you very much in advance!

APSMS


Buses don't seem to be able to use this PP. Cars and El-Rail/GLR use it fine, but until I connected the road in the top left to the neighboring city, all the bu traffic was heading south 5 tiles and transferring to GLR, rather than just continuing on into the next city, which had been faster when the transition wasn't there.

As an aside, I'm assuming that overplopping TIR/TOR over an existing functional Road Connection doesn't actually work properly for the GLR? Cause that would save me a ton of space.

And I'll request it in the other thread too, even though I know work has ceased on GLR for the foreseeable future, could we have a TIR/TOR/TIA neighbor connector piece, or are there limitations on the number of different travel types that can be placed on such a connector loop?
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

My Mayor Diary San Diego: A Reinterpretation