Introduce new RUL 1002 for the SAM?

[Magneto]

Hi there,
I have a project for SAM streets, I'm thinking on possible options that could allow smooth transitions from the different sets without making it an eyesore or avoid undesirable conversions.

Presently there are 2 possibilities I can think of to achieve that:
-use transit-enabled lots
-use a 2 tiles road stretch between 2 SAM

The TE'd lots are a no-go for many reasons (slope unfriendly, menu clutter, colour inconsistencies between lots & transit...) .

The road stub technique is interesting, but depending how wide are the SAM networks involved in the relation, this doesn't look good at all despite my attempts at retexturing the road to SAM transitions:



When 2 narrow SAM sets are placed back to back, the road stub in between looks like a steel ball stuck in a straw 
The problem is, I'm limited to the "bound of the tile", forced to keep the textures generic so they still can work in every situation they are called for.

To circumvent this I thought maybe RUL 1002 could be used to trigger the necessary textures overrides.
This way, each possible SAM relation would be covered by a unique set of textures.

I know it's not allowed to release publically RUL code without the approval of NAM team, so I ask the RUL peacekeepers out there, would the NAM consider incorporating some extra lines of RUL code for such a project, before I take the plunge in some texturing?

Additionnally I might need some help for the code, still some interpretations problems 

Looking for a NAM member response, but any input is welcomed.
Thanks

[Swordmaster]

Good initiative! These are a huge bother to me as well.

My opinion is that there's a third option here, namely to use a puzzle piece. I remember David (dedgren) once made a few of them, but they were not released. The only point of attention would be to make color-corrected textures (given the model vs texture differences) but that's hardly a problem.

I personally would prefer this approach right now since there are some limitations to a RUL-2 solution. For starters we have discovered the currently practical limits of adding ever more code to the controller. The past few months the number of lines has actually decreased, not increased. This isn't to say additions are impossible, but we'll want to use our RUL "real estate" in the most optimal way. The further issue is stability. For this to be a stable setup we'd need a bit of code there to cover all possible alignments and make them stable. I'm thinking of intersections and curves that could be adjacent to these transitions. All put together I think a set of puzzle pieces would be a simpler solution for now. Even so I'm hardly an expert, so I wonder what others have to say, too.


Cheers
Willy

[memo]

I'd actually prefer a RUL-2-based approach. As far as I can tell, no additional adjacency code would be required. Each combination of SAM needs at least 1 override, or 3 at most for absolute stability. Thus, you are looking at 3*(10+9+...+2+1) = 155 lines of code for 10 SAM sets. Three lines of code per two IIDs is a very efficient ratio. Actually, it is utopian in any other case. Using puzzle pieces, you would need 55 puzzle pieces for this, which would be much more work. I'd say, go for it.

[Magneto]

That's good news! Thanks for accepting this project.

Now to the textures 

[GDO29Anagram]

That's good news! Thanks for accepting this project.

I should mention that it's theoretically possible for SAM-SAM transitions to be just one tile, but that would entail additional modifications to RUL-1 (albeit just 2-4 lines at least, though it would probably entail more RUL-2 code as well). What I have in mind is just one tile of SAM with the Road tool using a Disruptor-type transition. Anyway, either method, whether solely RUL-2 or RUL-2/RUL-1 combo, would work.

BTW, I advise you look at your member label... I think you'll be pleased with the recent changes...

[Diggis]

Now to the textures 

I can help here, having all the original textures. Are we just wanting a single tile transition? Or spread over 2 tiles?

[Magneto]

I should mention that it's theoretically possible for SAM-SAM transitions to be just one tile, but that would entail additional modifications to RUL-1 (albeit just 2-4 lines at least, though it would probably entail more RUL-2 code as well). What I have in mind is just one tile of SAM with the Road tool using a Disruptor-type transition. Anyway, either method, whether solely RUL-2 or RUL-2/RUL-1 combo, would work.

Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't know it could be done since I haven't looked at RUL-1 code (yet).

Should it be a one or 2 tiles transitions, I'm fine with either personally. That said, if there's not much code to add then maybe we should go for a single-tile transition? Anyway this is your call folks.

BTW, I advise you look at your member label... I think you'll be pleased with the recent changes...

Nice surprise indeed 

I take this opportunity to thank every member of the team (don't even know all of ya! :shame:) for accepting me as an associate, I truly feel honoured.

I can help here, having all the original textures. Are we just wanting a single tile transition? Or spread over 2 tiles?

I'll gladly accept your help Diggis, thanks! (->PM)

And I second your question 

[memo]

Welcome to the team.

If you decide for the single-tile transition, you have two options:
• Only add a basic set of RUL-2 code, which means that the two adjacent tiles would always have to be straight SAM streets, in order to work. The transition would essentially be three tiles long. You could circumvent this using puzzle pieces.
• Add the full amount of RUL-2 adjacency code to be able to built compact setups. Take a look at the SAM_e-series file and search for 0x00aa0a00 which is the IID of the street-road-transition (1728 occurences). If you multiply this by 2 (for two directions), you get the amount of code that would be needed for a SAM-to-Maxis-street transition. Then multiply by the number of SAM sets. Obviously, this is not the way to go. The entire NWM has as much RUL-2 code.

A two-tile transition has the advantage that most of this code already exists because of the SAM-to-road transition. However, if you search for 0x00aa0a00 in the s-series file, this code is missing and the transition between two SAM sets would take four tiles, if you aren't using the e-series controller.

[Magneto]

Sorry for not answering before. This is tough decision, at least for me.

I should say opinion rather than decision; while I do appreciate you put me in charge of this project, my scope is too limited to fully gauge the consequences of such a choice. But anyway here it is.

Based on your analysis I'd go for a 2 tiles transition (as a test/first implementation), to keep the code to a minimum. Swordmaster already stressed that fact out and I have to agree, we should aim at efficiency first. I could be wrong, but I think most SAM users would be satisfied enough to have transitions, should they span on 4 tiles with the s controller.

It would still be possible to opt for a more compact solution later if the 2 tiles transition proves to be too unpractical to be put to real use. Texture-wise it would only take minor adjustments.

[Swordmaster]

I think the most useful setup would be where a transition is next to an intersection, hence my puzzle piece statement above.


Cheers
Willy

[Sim.Rico]

Hi there,
I have a project for SAM streets, I'm thinking on possible options that could allow smooth transitions from the different sets without making it an eyesore or avoid undesirable conversions.

Presently there are 2 possibilities I can think of to achieve that:
-use transit-enabled lots
-use a 2 tiles road stretch between 2 SAM

The TE'd lots are a no-go for many reasons (slope unfriendly, menu clutter, colour inconsistencies between lots & transit...) .

The road stub technique is interesting, but depending how wide are the SAM networks involved in the relation, this doesn't look good at all despite my attempts at retexturing the road to SAM transitions:



When 2 narrow SAM sets are placed back to back, the road stub in between looks like a steel ball stuck in a straw 
The problem is, I'm limited to the "bound of the tile", forced to keep the textures generic so they still can work in every situation they are called for.

To circumvent this I thought maybe RUL 1002 could be used to trigger the necessary textures overrides.
This way, each possible SAM relation would be covered by a unique set of textures.

I know it's not allowed to release publically RUL code without the approval of NAM team, so I ask the RUL peacekeepers out there, would the NAM consider incorporating some extra lines of RUL code for such a project, before I take the plunge in some texturing?

Additionnally I might need some help for the code, still some interpretations problems 

Looking for a NAM member response, but any input is welcomed.
Thanks

I like an option of a 1x1 tile transit enabled lot.  This way, (at least I think), in addition to being used as a road transition connector, it could be used as a transit enabled connector (if a version has a grass or transparent base) between a residential or commercial lot where you could offset the zoned lot from the main road by 1 tile. 

[Wiimeiser]

I like an option of a 1x1 tile transit enabled lot.  This way, (at least I think), in addition to being used as a road transition connector, it could be used as a transit enabled connector (if a version has a grass or transparent base) between a residential or commercial lot where you could offset the zoned lot from the main road by 1 tile.

The idea is to do this without a lot.

[Diggis]

I think the most useful setup would be where a transition is next to an intersection, hence my puzzle piece statement above.


Cheers
Willy

Having the transition as part of an intersection is problematic, in that what intersection? 3 way, 4 way? Which side do you transition on? Given the number of different options there could be, bearing in mind people will want to transition from every SAM type to every other SAM type, keeping them on the straight will still give us 55 different texture combinations. I haven't started these yet, but I will soon.