High Speed Rail Project (HSRP)

[z]

Once you have a model for one type of elevated rail station, it's trivial to make versions for the other types of elevated rail.  You can even use the exact same model for all of them.  You don't even have to make different textures for different types of rail; these are already included in the NAM.

As you may have noticed, the elevated rail stations included in the NAM illustrate this principle.  The model and modding for one was carefully done, and then the others were churned out very quickly, assembly-line style.

The HSR presents no particular problems for station builders.

To be fully NAM-compatible, please use the guidelines in the Transit Switch Entry Costs and Station Capacities thread.  For properties other than the Transit properties, please use PIM-X to generate them.

[vershner]

I've now uploaded my HSR textures to the LEX.

http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=3227

[mgb204]

Nice, good to finally see some love put the way of HSR, I'll be downloading these .

[vinlabsc3k]

@mgb: Why don't you make a patch for the missing El-HSR over TIR, TOR and TIA, as you did for PS?



For newbies:

TIR = Tram In Road
TOR = Tram On Road
TIA = Tram In Avenue
PS = Project Symphony

[Tarkus]

@mgb: Why don't you make a patch for the missing El-HSR over TIR, TOR and TIA, as you did for PS?

With PS, it was merely a matter of replacing existing models for the Maxis Highways-over-TIR/TOR/TIA puzzle pieces that already existed in the NAM.  HSR-over-TIR/TOR/TIA crossings don't exist, and would require RUL updates to create.  That requires a NAM update, and can't be done in a simple patch.  We're looking at ways to reimplement TIR/TOR/TIA crossings as non-puzzle piece items as well, so it's probably going to be awhile.

Jonathan did briefly reappear and left us some updates to the Elevated HSR (nothing for GHSR) during the NAM 33 development cycle, with a few interesting features added, though there's been some real teething issues with those updates in testing.  I've been attempting to clean things up, but have no idea at this point if we'll be able to get it ready for this release.  We're already at the point where the NAM 33 cycle has been the longest development cycle in team history (we've just gotten past the mark set by NAM 31.0), and community morale needs the boost of a new NAM release.

-Alex

[mgb204]

Tarkus is on the money here  ... I've actually thought about HSRP a lot, if I were to devote time to it I'd probably start with a couple overpasses for diagonal GHSR, that's where I always get bogged down with it. However re-making existing puzzle pieces is no fun task, I'm simply not skilled enough right now to create new pieces from scratch though.

HSR really doesn't seem to get a lot of love, but the BTM doesn't really fit in Europe (ok, maybe some TGV lines, but the style isn't really right), not to mention the lack of a ground option. Regular Maxis Monorail is a joke, it's fine for a game, but doesn't work when you are trying to get some realism at all. That's why I use HSR to compliment rail (and occasionally BTM) as part of my transit systems. I've relotted a bunch of stations (mostly from Ill Tonks) to work with HSR, in many cases they are multi-network - I probably should release them at some point.

There is a working solution already for TIA, try this out. I think I'm more likely to look at creating work-around solutions like this in the interim as opposed to remaking networks.

[vershner]

Does the NAM team have Jonathan's GHSR version which removed the walls and lowered the track to the ground?
It would be good to get that released if possible.

[eggman121]

I could look for you but I think the GHSR is elevated for a reason...



You would need to make a no shadows patch to compliment your work so that the shadows don't appear on the L0 sections.

As for the long term future of the HSRP we (the NAM team) are looking at alternative implementations of the HSRP. The HSRP in the NAM33 build is quite a mess at the moment and is quite RUL2 heavy especially if we decide to expand on it.

I know that the HSRP was designed for the Vanilla Monorail Network to be left alone but Who really uses the current monorail network in its vanilla form? 

vershner I must compliment you on your fantastic textures and helping to renew interest in the HSRP project 

-eggman121

[mrbisonm]

Oh Great!!!!

Tell me that this is going to be continued.....You guys got all my support.


Really Great!!! Love this to be available one day.

Fred

[vershner]

You would need to make a no shadows patch to compliment your work so that the shadows don't appear on the L0 sections.

This image suggests that he already sorted that:   (from Jonathan's post back in 2009)

As for the long term future of the HSRP we (the NAM team) are looking at alternative implementations of the HSRP. The HSRP in the NAM33 build is quite a mess at the moment and is quite RUL2 heavy especially if we decide to expand on it.

If it were just a replacement for the monorail though, wouldn't we loose the GHSR?

vershner I must compliment you on your fantastic textures and helping to renew interest in the HSRP project 

Thank you! 

[Tarkus]

This image suggests that he already sorted that

Unfortunately, I don't believe that particular project ever made it off of Jonathan's hard drive.  He had an HD crash quite some time ago and did lose a fair bit of HSRP work in the process.

If it were just a replacement for the monorail though, wouldn't we loose the GHSR?
[/quote

The only thing that would change is that the base network being used for the override would look like HSR instead of Monorail.  It would actually simplify the situation with T21s a great deal in the process

-Alex.

[vinlabsc3k]

...

There is a working solution already for TIA, try this out. I think I'm more likely to look at creating work-around solutions like this in the interim as opposed to remaking networks.

I've already known this.

...

With PS, it was merely a matter of replacing existing models for the Maxis Highways-over-TIR/TOR/TIA puzzle pieces that already existed in the NAM.  HSR-over-TIR/TOR/TIA crossings don't exist, and would require RUL updates to create.  That requires a NAM update, and can't be done in a simple patch.  We're looking at ways to reimplement TIR/TOR/TIA crossings as non-puzzle piece items as well, so it's probably going to be awhile.

...

-Alex

I thought that it was feasible with a duplication of the already existing Monorail's puzzle pieces and then substitute the IID, because the paths are the same.

[Tarkus]

I thought that it was feasible with a duplication of the already existing Monorail's puzzle pieces and then substitute the IID, because the paths are the same.

I suppose you technically could replace the Monorail models with HSR models, but you'd lose the Monorail pieces in the process.  If we were to switch HSR from being a co-existing RUL override of Monorail to a reskin/replacement, as is actively being discussed (both here and on our private board), that wouldn't be a problem.

-Alex

[mgb204]

I thought that it was feasible with a duplication of the already existing Monorail's puzzle pieces and then substitute the IID, because the paths are the same.

I suppose you technically could replace the Monorail models with HSR models, but you'd lose the Monorail pieces in the process.  If we were to switch HSR from being a co-existing RUL override of Monorail to a reskin/replacement, as is actively being discussed (both here and on our private board), that wouldn't be a problem.

-Alex

Actually I already considered just such a change, albeit for the Monorail over CAN-AM piece. In any case right now I won't commit to anything whilst discussions about the possible future direction of the HSR/Monorail are on-going.

[noahclem]

Excellent work on the new HSR textures vershner    It's great to see this area getting some new attention--in some sense at least the monorail/HSR network is least-developed and highest-untapped-potential network. My thoughts and hopes on its future:

-Very-wide-radius-curves should be high- or highest-priority. As the network with the largest RL turning radii, as high as a minimum of 4km for the fastest Chinese lines, any attempt at recreating the character and feel of high speed rails in SC4 will be lacking if it doesn't include substantial efforts in that area. I've longed hoped for a system of curves based off of Shadow Assassin's 9 degrees of separation concept using all the posited fractional angles: 9 (FA6), 18 (FA3, the current primary FA), 27 (FA2, featured now only in drag-FAR), 36 (FA 1.5), and 45 (D). HSR incorporating that would be excellent, even if it didn't use particularly long curves, though longer would be better and some ability to cross them other than at diagonal and orthogonal points would be a plus.

-Incorporate it as a monorail replacement rather than an override. Not only would this drastically simplify the modding end of things but it also makes things easier for the user and avoids problems of override stability in tight areas. To me this seems clearly the way to go.

-Integration with RRW and perhaps even rural GLR. The ability to share tracks and stations when desirable could add lots of neat options and add value to the network as a whole.

-Conversion of (E)HSR from L2 to L1. Given HSR networks' strict slope restrictions (and necessary length of transition from flat to sloped track) this would seem an important step. A realistic L0-L1, non-on-slope transition would take up a number of tiles but much less than a realistic L0-L2 transition. If the track is to be given a new look and RRW gauge anyway then existing L2 stations with baked in textures would already need replacing.

-Cosmetically, the removal of the walls, etc on L0 network as is already being discussed and a look more similar to RRW but with concrete sleepers. Narrower elevated models more similar to those used for rail viaducts would be nice as well.

Just my 2 cents but it's an area of put a lot of thought into

[eggman121]

Pictures tell 1000 words.









Developmental photos of my remaking of the HSR/Monorail network.

These where posted in the RRW thread.

This is the sort of HSR I envision but I am all for others input 

So the HSR network I will be making will be a blend of the RRW and RHW technology's and won't be that hard to pull off.

I am fully committed to such a project 

-eggman121

[Gugu3]

This is really exciting!

[vershner]

-Very-wide-radius-curves should be high- or highest-priority. As the network with the largest RL turning radii, as high as a minimum of 4km for the fastest Chinese lines, any attempt at recreating the character and feel of high speed rails in SC4 will be lacking if it doesn't include substantial efforts in that area. I've longed hoped for a system of curves based off of Shadow Assassin's 9 degrees of separation concept using all the posited fractional angles: 9 (FA6), 18 (FA3, the current primary FA), 27 (FA2, featured now only in drag-FAR), 36 (FA 1.5), and 45 (D). HSR incorporating that would be excellent, even if it didn't use particularly long curves, though longer would be better and some ability to cross them other than at diagonal and orthogonal points would be a plus.

I agree that wider curves are the biggest priority. I'm not sure how the FAR curves are made and whether they would need additional textures (the current curves didn't), but certainly wider 45 degree curves are an absolute necessity.

-Integration with RRW and perhaps even rural GLR. The ability to share tracks and stations when desirable could add lots of neat options and add value to the network as a whole.

I'd hesitate on making it dependant on RRW. The RRW texture looks wonderful in a rural setting, but a lot of people won't choose it for an inner city. However, I agree that the ability to share tracks with ordinary heavy rail would be really useful. The other advantage of this would be that people who didn't want an HSR in their city could then use it to run an additional type of train on their ordinary lines.

-Conversion of (E)HSR from L2 to L1.

What does L1 & L2 mean?

Narrower elevated models more similar to those used for rail viaducts would be nice as well.

Personally I like the wide models currently in use. They look noticeably different to the ordinary lines which I think is necessary. The BTM already offers a much narrower viaduct, so it's good for the HSR to offer a bit of variety.

[eggman121]

What does L1 & L2 mean?

L1 and L2 are basically levels like L0 = 0m, L1 = 7.5m, L2 = 15m, L3 = 22.5m and L4 = 30m

Already used on the RHW project

I hope that is some clarification.



I guess to answer you main concern of the style of the Models is this.

To make wide radius curves with the current models would be quite difficult. It can be done but not every style of model is going to be made. Maybe alternative textures but not the model itself.

If we go into FAR territory than elevated models become a definite no no!

We would have to use plane based models with textures applied to them and that would be only available at ground level.

There would be too much request for networks passing underneath and would not be viable.

Basically my understanding is we may have to start afresh with new models and code to be maintainable and for room to expand. So a standard has to be set.

-eggman121

[mrsmartman]

The project looks good.