RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[metarvo]

More FARHW FA2 RHW stuff is always a plus in my book.  Nice job, SA. 

The simplification of the ramps is going to be a big help in those urban areas in which ramps are very close to overpasses and the like.  Nice work, Ganaram. 

[compdude787]

Hi, I'm having a problem with the Type A1 Inside FlexRamp. The one the bottom of the picture is the culprit; strangely enough, the one on the top works fine.



Could you please make sure this gets fixed? Thanks!

EDIT: And with the one on top, the chevrons are in the wrong direction (this is with Ontario textures, btw).

[Nosimx]

Really good stuff in ugly shape: the L1-Road-MIS crossing is draggable, well done!, but my Euro textures go pretty wild in between.

[Shadow Assassin]

FA2 is taking shape...

Here we have FA2 RHW-4 in curve mode:


And in regular fractional-angle mode:

[Gugu3]

 

[compdude787]

That curve actually looks way smoother than if you were to use an ortho-to-FA3 piece, and then an FA3-to-diagonal piece. Nice work!     

[Shadow Assassin]

Thanks guys.

Dual-tile:

[Gugu3]

 

[compdude787]

Tasty

[packersfan]

Someone mentioned that I can use 7.5 meter bridges over RHW if I use the draggable viaducts.  Okay, but how do I transition with the draggable viaducts on a slope.  Do I mix and match with puzzle pieces?  Thanks.  Doubtless most of my issues are due to ignorance and not limitations of NAM.  Keep up the GREAT work!

[compdude787]

Someone mentioned that I can use 7.5 meter bridges over RHW if I use the draggable viaducts.  Okay, but how do I transition with the draggable viaducts on a slope.  Do I mix and match with puzzle pieces?  Thanks.  Doubtless most of my issues are due to ignorance and not limitations of NAM.  Keep up the GREAT work!

Do you mean the on-slope transitions? Those are there; there should be one for each network.

[GDO29Anagram]

Someone mentioned that I can use 7.5 meter bridges over RHW if I use the draggable viaducts.  Okay, but how do I transition with the draggable viaducts on a slope.  Do I mix and match with puzzle pieces?  Thanks.  Doubtless most of my issues are due to ignorance and not limitations of NAM.  Keep up the GREAT work!

Do you mean the on-slope transitions? Those are there; there should be one for each network.

It's a lot trickier than that, in case you guys don't know; there aren't any dedicated Road, One Way Road, or Avenue FlexOSTs; it might be impossible to make them, even. The only reason that RHW can have dedicated FlexOSTs and not any other network is because the RHW network is just flat-out weird. Instead, you have to use the RHW FlexOST; there's a modified version of it in the Draggable Viaducts tab ring, without RHW stubs. And the extremely tricky part is that it's not a drag-through override, it's a stub adjacency override.

In other words, you first have to place down the FlexOST, and then drag the thing that's below, without EVER dragging THROUGH the actual OST; I can't emphasise this enough because it's so easy to get it wrong here.

[Tarkus]

Anyone wondering about the status of the FLEXFly project--it's unlikely to make it into NAM 33.  More details in the NWM thread.

-Alex

[compdude787]

Anyone wondering about the status of the FLEXFly project--it's unlikely to make it into NAM 33.  More details in the NWM thread.

-Alex

Shoot, I was really looking forward to being able to use more FLEXFlys at multiple levels. Maybe I can wait another year for them... 

Or I can join the NAM team and finish them myself. That may be a bit over my head, but I do want to make more diagonal ramp pieces. I can see this happening to me, though: (oh wait, it's happened to me already whenever I try and make an RHW interchange  )

[GDO29Anagram]

Shoot, I was really looking forward to being able to use more FLEXFlys at multiple levels. Maybe I can wait another year for them...

Or I can join the NAM team and finish them myself. That may be a bit over my head, but I do want to make more diagonal ramp pieces.

Well, you'd need to know multiple different things to generate a Flex piece from scratch:

- You'd need to have knowledge of INRUL, RUL0, RUL1, and RUL2 modification
- You'd need to have knowledge of using some sort of 3D modelling software, such as Blender or 3DS Max
- You'd need to know how to path
- You'd need to have knowledge of generating textures
- You'd need to know how to use GIMP, Inkscape, or equivalent
- You'd need to know the P57 IID scheme, and the entire NAM IID scheme in general
- You'd need to know how to use Github
- You'd need to know how to use the command prompt or equivalent
- You'd need to have knowledge of geometry to find the correct radii of certain curved components
- You'd need to have general knowledge with writing computer code
- You'd need to have knowledge with using the Reader

Most NAM Team Members are chosen on the basis of knowing and demonstrating some of these skills, and it's usually RUL0, texturing, and pathing because those correspond with all of the publicly available tutorials. Rarely do we have someone learning INRUL modification from the very beginning, but we've had a few people demonstrate very proficient modelling capabilities.

Some of the most experienced NAM Team Members will have knowledge in all of these things, or nearly all of them. I have only very basic knowledge with using Blender, but I can say that I'm very proficient at INRUL and RUL2 code, texturing, and pathing.

But the one thing that makes Flexdev so tricky is this: you not only need to be part-artist, part-modeller, and part-mathematician, you need to be part-computer programmer. Flexdev is probably the most code-intensive thing that ever has to be developed in the NAM, short of generating a network from scratch, or even more, programming a code generator that writes the code for you, or even more so, short of creating the installer. Very few NAM Team Members start out writing RUL2 code or INRUL code.

There's probably no other programming language that's analogous to RUL2 code; it's all numbers, and those numbers are IDs for each tile, and you need to know what all of those numbers correspond to. Because there's absolutely no English words whatsoever and that you have to memorise what the numbers do, it'd be considered a low-level programming language. The only way you can read it is if it's commented. Like this:

Code Select Expand


0x57830300,3,0,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830300,3,0,0x57020000,3,0
0x57830300,3,0,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830300,3,0,0x57020000,3,0
0x57830380,1,1,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830380,1,1,0x57020000,1,0
0x57830380,1,1,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830380,1,1,0x57020000,1,0
0x57800000,1,0,0x57030000,1,0=0x57830000,1,0,0x57030000,1,0
0x57800080,3,1,0x57030000,3,0=0x57830080,3,1,0x57030000,3,0
0x57800200,3,0,0x57030000,3,0=0x57830200,3,0,0x57030000,3,0
0x57800280,1,1,0x57030000,1,0=0x57830280,1,1,0x57030000,1,0
0x57830000,1,0,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830000,1,0,0x57030000,1,0
0x57830000,1,0,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830000,1,0,0x57030000,1,0
0x57830080,3,1,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830080,3,1,0x57030000,3,0
0x57830080,3,1,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830080,3,1,0x57030000,3,0
0x57830200,3,0,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830200,3,0,0x57030000,3,0
0x57830200,3,0,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830200,3,0,0x57030000,3,0
0x57830280,1,1,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830280,1,1,0x57030000,1,0
0x57830280,1,1,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830280,1,1,0x57030000,1,0
0x57830000,3,0,0x57800200,3,0=0x57830000,3,0,0x57830200,3,0
0x57830080,1,1,0x57800280,1,1=0x57830080,1,1,0x57830280,1,1
0x57830200,1,0,0x57800000,1,0=0x57830200,1,0,0x57830000,1,0
0x57830280,3,1,0x57800080,3,1=0x57830280,3,1,0x57830080,3,1
0x57830200,2,0,0x57800100,2,0=0x57830200,2,0,0x57830100,2,0
0x57830280,0,1,0x57800180,0,1=0x57830280,0,1,0x57830180,0,1
0x57830100,3,0,0x57800300,3,0=0x57830100,3,0,0x57830300,3,0
0x57830180,1,1,0x57800380,1,1=0x57830180,1,1,0x57830380,1,1

Even I can't understand what that says, unless it's commented.

Code Select Expand

;----RHW-4----
;---L0 RHW-4---
;--Branch--
0x57830300,3,0,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830300,3,0,0x57020000,3,0
0x57830300,3,0,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830300,3,0,0x57020000,3,0
0x57830380,1,1,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830380,1,1,0x57020000,1,0
0x57830380,1,1,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830380,1,1,0x57020000,1,0
;--Override--
;OFT, to 00
0x57800000,1,0,0x57030000,1,0=0x57830000,1,0,0x57030000,1,0
0x57800080,3,1,0x57030000,3,0=0x57830080,3,1,0x57030000,3,0
;OFB, to 02
0x57800200,3,0,0x57030000,3,0=0x57830200,3,0,0x57030000,3,0
0x57800280,1,1,0x57030000,1,0=0x57830280,1,1,0x57030000,1,0
;EFT, from 00
0x57830000,1,0,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830000,1,0,0x57030000,1,0
0x57830000,1,0,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830000,1,0,0x57030000,1,0
0x57830080,3,1,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830080,3,1,0x57030000,3,0
0x57830080,3,1,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830080,3,1,0x57030000,3,0
;EFB, from 02
0x57830200,3,0,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830200,3,0,0x57030000,3,0
0x57830200,3,0,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830200,3,0,0x57030000,3,0
0x57830280,1,1,0x57000000,1,0=0x57830280,1,1,0x57030000,1,0
0x57830280,1,1,0x57000000,3,0=0x57830280,1,1,0x57030000,1,0
;00-02, OFT
0x57830000,3,0,0x57800200,3,0=0x57830000,3,0,0x57830200,3,0
0x57830080,1,1,0x57800280,1,1=0x57830080,1,1,0x57830280,1,1
;02-00, OFB
0x57830200,1,0,0x57800000,1,0=0x57830200,1,0,0x57830000,1,0
0x57830280,3,1,0x57800080,3,1=0x57830280,3,1,0x57830080,3,1
;02-01, Branch
0x57830200,2,0,0x57800100,2,0=0x57830200,2,0,0x57830100,2,0
0x57830280,0,1,0x57800180,0,1=0x57830280,0,1,0x57830180,0,1
;01-03, Branch
0x57830100,3,0,0x57800300,3,0=0x57830100,3,0,0x57830300,3,0
0x57830180,1,1,0x57800380,1,1=0x57830180,1,1,0x57830380,1,1

There's actually one programming language that I know of that is so high-level, it's self-documenting; you can read the source code, with barely any comments, and understand what it does, but I don't know the name of it. RUL2 code doesn't lend itself to that kind of convenience.

And that's just RUL2 code; INRUL code's even more diabolical because it's even more low-level than RUL2 code. You're not dealing with DWORDs, you're dealing with single numbers, and you need to generate 4-8 different versions of the same piece of code to account for all of the rotations and reflections. You may have seen a video where I wrote the INRUL code for one of the in-dev ramps, already...

[compdude787]

Wow, that's quite a bit of stuff to know. It seems really daunting! Makes me wonder what will happen first: me learning how to do this myself, or someone on the NAM team making the ramp pieces that I want to use. Having seen the low-level code that's needed for adding new stuff to the NAM, I have so much more respect for you on the NAM team. If it was easy, everyone would be on the NAM team.

I just feel torn between wanting to help add more ramps to the RHW and being overwhelmed by the amount of coding and work involved. But I want some diagonal ramps for RHW-8S and maybe even -10S, preferably some FA ramps (an offramp that branches off a freeway at a 45-degree angle is pretty unrealistic, IMO).

[GDO29Anagram]

I just feel torn between wanting to help add more ramps to the RHW and being overwhelmed by the amount of coding and work involved. But I want some diagonal ramps for RHW-8S and maybe even -10S, preferably some FA ramps

Diagonals are far more awkward to work with than orthogonals, and admittedly, I've done nothing to improve the current suite of diagonal ramps.

They're a whole different ballgame than orthogonals; for example, since the branch coming off of the ramps are determined by an absolute direction and not relative angle, Type A1 Diagonal Ramps have an orthogonal branch and Type B1 Diagonal Ramps have a diagonal branch. If you've called the Type A1 the Type B1 and the Type B1 the Type A1, you've already messed up the name of the ramps.

Would it make sense to refer to them by the angle? It actually isn't. If we kept on using relative angles to determine ramp type, how do you make an ramp with an FA3 mainline and an FA3 branch relative to the mainline? One ramp is easy: it's an FA3 ramp with a branch with an absolute direction of 0 degrees, or orthogonal, but then you'd have another ramp with an absolute direction of 36 degrees, or FA1.5. I've thought of this several times in the past, and ran into the conclusion that an FA mainline/FA branch ramp would have one ramp with an orthogonal branch an another with a diagonal branch, or some super-ugly combination of two other FAs. Confusing.

There's more: dead space on the S and C networks is just massive; diagonal width increases faster than orthogonal width, and in order to maintain fairly smooth ramps, you'd have to make them quite large. It also means that the current Type A1 and B1 diagonal ramps may have to be redone someday.

I also have the intent to (yes, seriously) make the diagonal ramps draggable.

[Indiana Joe]

If we kept on using relative angles to determine ramp type, how do you make an ramp with an FA3 mainline and an FA3 branch relative to the mainline?

Now you're giving your teammates nightmares.   

[compdude787]

I still get confused with the names of the ramps, and I can never remember which is which. So sorry if my explanation was a bit confusing because I have no idea what type it is. (I admit that I never pay attention when going thru the tab ring; I just plop the one that looks right.) See the 6S ramps on the left side of the picture below? I basically would like to see a ramp like that, except with 8S.


I can live without 'em for now because I'm really looking forward to seeing the expanded draggable ramps and the new elevated ramps for my downtown area. But if one of you guys get really bored one day, then here's something for you to work on....

[GDO29Anagram]

I still get confused with the names of the ramps, and I can never remember which is which.

That would be a (wait for it...) Diagonal L0 RHW-6S Type C1-FA3 Outside Ramp that you're pointing to. The shorthand would just be Diag 6S C1-FA3 ramp.

Type CX and FX ramps are in a weird area between FARHWdev and Rampdev, and probably awkward to try to implement without sitting down and discussing the footprint and standard position. A diagonal ramp adds an extra layer of weirdness in that it's a diagonal ramp; diagonals follow completely different rules than orthogonal ramps, and I've not memorised those patterns fully; orthogonal ramps only need rotations 1 and 3, and those are easy to remember because those are odd numbers; diagonal ramps would end up having rotations 1 and 2, or whatever combination that has two adjacent numbers.

And that's excluding the geometry of such a ramp.

This is why I didn't wanna touch diagonal ramps right away.