• Welcome to SC4 Devotion Forum Archives.

RealRailway (RRW) - Development and Support

Started by Swordmaster, June 14, 2013, 08:42:19 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Indiana Joe

#780
I'm just another one in a large crowd when I applaud your amazing progress in learning RUL code Isabella.  &apls

Just as an FYI, the quadruple track rail project (as well as TTR) has already been started as a part of the RealRailway mod by Willy (Swordmaster).  He's been away from development for several months, and it's hard to tell what's been done already been done and whatnot.

The way you're implementing things now makes sense from your perspective.  But I promise you that the transit modders working off of 10 years of collective experience have their reasons for the advice they give.  To keep things all up to current NAM standards, QTR will need to use INRUL starters to allow the network to intersect other override networks through current RUL code standards.

The difference in track spacing won't really save any work.  While STR paths can be re-used on straight sections, it won't work on curves and such if you think about the geometry.  The network should really be designed to work mainly alongside standard DTR rather than STR (which is why a single-tile, overhanging QTR network was originally considered for the RRW).  And finally, the setup is not particularly realistic by real life track standards, where standard track spacing is maintained so that infrastructure components can be easily re-used.

So keep going in your experiments, but keep in mind that there are certain standards that the project will need to be adjusted to before inclusion in the NAM's RUL files.  Switching now will only save work.   :thumbsup:

Please don't hesitate to ask for any help in your project, or the best way to implement things with future development in mind.

isii94

So you're saying that I should change the whole thing to be based on one tile?
I actually had RHW 4 in mind when thinking about that project and the transition from RHW 2 to RHW 4 also includes a lane shift (which could be smoothed out more on the railway network)

STR just makes more sense to me beacause IMO it seems kind of pointless to branch a (clearly visible) bi-directional network off a uni-directional track. (I was talking about branches/switches all the time)

The gap between the fast and the slow tracks was inspired by the East Coast Main Line (UK) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple_track#mediaviewer/File:Otterington_railway_station_MMB_01.jpg

When I have figured out how to make INRUL starters, I can change that, of course ^^

By now I've added to RUL2:

  • A T intersection inducing the override (will be removed later)
  • If the neighbouring tile along the network is overridden, the current tile will be overridden, too
  • If a rail line is drawn next to a overridden stretch on the correct side, it will form the opposite side
  • If a diagonal tile is next to a shared-tile diagonal tile, it will change to 4 track railway

In the INRUL I've added the capability of drawing shared-tile diagonals which automatically convert to the override
MD coming soon...

GDO29Anagram

#782
Quote from: isii94 on July 20, 2014, 03:30:07 PM
So you're saying that I should change the whole thing to be based on one tile?
I actually had RHW 4 in mind when thinking about that project and the transition from RHW 2 to RHW 4 also includes a lane shift (which could be smoothed out more on the railway network)

I actually have some angst against the idea of a single-tile Quad Track Rail; for capacity purposes and because it'd have more breathing room for texturing, I've always envisioned a two-tile QTR instead of a single-tile QTR.

As of the spacing on the tracks and whether each track should be the same space or not, I don't think it matters if you can manage to retexture everything to be one specification or the other. As of reusing textures between STR and your version of QTR, it doesn't really reuse textures in the sense the game can reuse them, but rather how the texture maker can reuse them; in the end, it's still different textures to the game's eyes.

Also, starters are traditionally implemented using RUL1, not INRUL. Even if the rail-rail T-crossing is useless, there's still a possibility that it can screw up sections of rail that it's not supposed to override if it were a part of an INRUL pattern instead. There were RRW track junctions/switches that used part of the same pattern (adjacent Rail-Rail T-crossings), which could cause INRUL interference: if you drew out a track switch, you could accidentally draw out QTR instead (it could be avoided, but I wouldn't wanna risk it). There's actually some dev notes on INRUL Interference scattered in our dev discussions so I'd recommend avoiding the INRUL-based starter and instead using a RUL1 starter in the long run.
<INACTIVE>
-----
Simtropolis | YouTube | MLP Forums

Tarkus

Count me among those who favor the idea of a dual-tile implementation.  It'd add a new layer of functional differentiation, which as someone who likes new features to really add to simulation, is something I'm a fan of doing when possible.  Since you have picked up RUL2 so quickly, I'd suspect the process of making a starter would also come easily to you.

-Alex

noahclem

If waffled a bit on the issue but I'm sold on 2-tile QTR too  ::)  Really impressive work, btw. Wish I caught onto things so quickly  :D

eggman121

I'm also sold on the dual tile implementation of QTR. My only question is that how will this fit into the current DTR and STR we have at the moment in terms of turnouts and track geometry?

I will take a look myself at the mainline shown by Isabella to see how the track changes from the QTR she is designing to the networks we have at the moment.

I did float a proposal with Willy a while ago about the pathing of the track. As you know the STR is bi-directionally pathed. I have the view that if you path the QTR track in both directions than use PPs with the pathing desired than the track could become more flexible with the track having multiple configurations along the same network. The PPs could have paths that can mimic either Dual DTR, TTR with an STR line next to it or other configurations. This would open up many possibilities for many track configurations.

-eggman121 

Shadow Assassin

#786


I'm fine with either, though cosmetically I like the dual-tile implementation more as they're more indicative of real life in some parts of the network here (there have been cases where an extra  track is run on the outside of a pair which already has gantry)

By the way, this is what excites me more, the possibility of being able to do these kinds of platforms:

New Horizons Productions
Berethor ♦ beskhu3epnm ♦ blade2k5 ♦ dedgren ♦ dmscopio ♦ Ennedi
emilin ♦ Heblem ♦ jplumbley ♦ moganite ♦ M4346 ♦ papab2000
Shadow Assassin ♦ Tarkus ♦ wouanagaine
See my uploads on the LEX!

Kuewr665

About track spacing, I think signaling on multiple tracks are done by overhead signals than in between tracks.

I was concerned about stations on TTR and QTR before, but I like that picture above a lot

trabman11

A question about the Quad Track Rail System -

     If you were to put say (i don't know a default SC4 passenger train station) next to the quad tracks, would the station only be able to server on one side of the two tiles like with other systems (such as default bus stops to some NWM roads/aves?) or would the stations be able to sever both sides of the track even though to track sits on two tiles?

RISE UP AND FIGHT WITH SUPER BUNNY AND BOB!!!
  (\_/)           ☻/       /  \       
\(='.'=)/        /▌        |☢|       
(")_(")         / \       //||\\
*whispers* ...For what I don't know...I think they are anti-Google+ anarchists  ???

isii94

#789
Quote from: trabman11 on July 22, 2014, 08:48:40 PM
A question about the Quad Track Rail System -

     If you were to put say (i don't know a default SC4 passenger train station) next to the quad tracks, would the station only be able to server on one side of the two tiles like with other systems (such as default bus stops to some NWM roads/aves?) or would the stations be able to sever both sides of the track even though to track sits on two tiles?

It's the same as all other networks that are wider than one tile because transit stations can only serve adjacent tiles.

----

And a status update: Right now I'm getting a major headache creating my first puzzle piece...
MD coming soon...

GDO29Anagram

Quote from: isii94 on July 22, 2014, 09:07:13 PM
And a status update: Right now I'm getting a major headache creating my first puzzle piece...

If it's an issue with the code, you can follow up with a similar discussion that's been happening on the RHW Thread or you can share the code here. If it's something else, you may want to share the .dat file (textures/S3Ds/paths/exemplars/EffDir) so we can take a peek and see what's wrong.
<INACTIVE>
-----
Simtropolis | YouTube | MLP Forums

isii94

#791
It's just... Puzzle pieces are so much work  :-\ So far I've just created the textures and I'm applying them to the models

I think I'll mostly stick to INRUL patterns as you just need textures and a few lines of code for them (and a lot of paper for drawing tiles and writing down flags, as well as a lot of gestures for all the rotations). There are of course a few exceptions like crossover switches that can't be drawn.
Does this sound weird for someone who has just started transit modding?
MD coming soon...

TJ1

Hey guys I just installed the NAM on my Mac and the RRW isn't in there :(

APSMS

As the RRW is in Alpha/Beta stage, you'll need to select it as an option under custom installation. Be sure to also select the Rail WRC and other rail stuff (but NOT any texture overrides) from further down in the menu.

BTW, this question is better asked in the NAM Support thread. This is mostly a development forum, especially since the main support provider/developer Swordmaster is on hiatus.
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

My Mayor Diary San Diego: A Reinterpretation

TJ1

Quote from: APSMS on July 29, 2014, 09:22:07 AM
As the RRW is in Alpha/Beta stage, you'll need to select it as an option under custom installation. Be sure to also select the Rail WRC and other rail stuff (but NOT any texture overrides) from further down in the menu.

BTW, this question is better asked in the NAM Support thread. This is mostly a development forum, especially since the main support provider/developer Swordmaster is on hiatus.
Thanks APSMS  :thumbsup:

Swordmaster

Fantastic work here! Like everyone else I'm impressed by your learning efforts Isabella and I'm curious to see where this is going. I hope to be getting back into SC4 as the summer dwindles down, at least in the texturing part of it, so let me know if you want any help on that front.


Cheers
Willy

vinlabsc3k

I'm back, and impressed for the new development of this project!! :thumbsup:
Isabella, you are amazing &apls but I think the four tracks should be equidistant. &mmm
My creation at CityBuilders.



SimCity 5 is here with the NAM Creations!!

joshua43214

Are there any plans to release a texture pack?
As it stands now, basically all the rail yard plops are broken since there is no texture support for 3 and 4 track rails. The few textures included in the install only cover the most simple things for retexturing simple stations and the like.

Even a beta release would be great since we could create to our hearts content errors will disappear when RRW goes into final release.

isii94

I'll just quote the first post of this topic

QuoteHow about lot textures and lot support? Will there be compatible railyard textures?
Supporting existing content has always been a primary concern for the developers, and full compatibility is aimed for. Maxis lot textures are included in the mod. Third-party textures are not covered; their conversion to RRW is the responsibility of their respective creators. This can be done in cooperation with the RRW developers if so desired. It is likely that there will be a compatible railyard project coming up from the mod's developers.

If you meant that, it's up to the creator of the original textures.
MD coming soon...

Swordmaster

Not to worry folks - I'm still on this. Moreover, RRW-compatible railyards are still in the works, but TTR and QTR are a bit of a precursor to that (not to mention finishing STR and DTR).


Cheers
Willy