• Welcome to SC4 Devotion Forum Archives.

RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

Started by Tarkus, April 13, 2007, 09:10:49 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Haljackey

Quote from: Seaman on June 04, 2018, 11:38:59 AM
I am really sorry for putting a puzzle piece issue between this FLEXible wonders.

Has anybody already come up with a way to solve this?


Don't be sorry! This is still a support thread after all!

What I do to fix this sort of thing is to drag the 'sharp' curves on one side so it configures to the right RHW network. You can then carefully demolish the curve pieces or use the remove tool (probably works better). Then plop our smooth curves / FAR in place. Should stabilize.

Note for really short stretches it might default back to RHW-2 after you do this. Yours seems to be 3 tiles so might be a tight fit! You might have to extend it an extra tile or two or use the curve piece instead of FARHW.

Anyways hope this helps!

Seaman

Quote from: Haljackey on June 04, 2018, 01:01:38 PM
What I do to fix this sort of thing is to drag the 'sharp' curves on one side so it configures to the right RHW network. You can then carefully demolish the curve pieces or use the remove tool (probably works better). Then plop our smooth curves / FAR in place. Should stabilize.

Note for really short stretches it might default back to RHW-2 after you do this. Yours seems to be 3 tiles so might be a tight fit! You might have to extend it an extra tile or two or use the curve piece instead of FARHW.

I tried dragging out the network, then remove-tooled the unwanted part and plopped the FAR piece. Unfortunately, this FAR piece has some inbiult stubs which poked the unstable short strech of the 6C network to revert back to RHW-2.

I really like the look of the 6/8C-RHW for the curves, since I am sometimes a little bit itchy about how the median of the RHW-4/6S doesn't stay the same width in the curves. Also the use of FARHW makes for some smooth curves which look really nice in the region view.

I guess the removal of the inbuilt stubs would help in this kind of situations, since the remove tool is a nice feature, which wasn't available in the earlier NAMs. But on the other hand it would make the "normal" use of the pieces more complicated...

Thanks for your suggestion, Haljackey!

noahclem

I love the look of those networks too! Since Stephen's R5 curves (for 1-tile networks) there's now an (at worst) comparably wide-radius and realistic-looking option out there that supports modern implementation. But if you, like me, often find times you'd prefer your highway in a "C" setup you'll have to work within the bounds of the old pieces. I assume it was because their geometry would make filler piece creation and use something of a circus that those diagonal networks were left out of the original implementation and the new methods followed quickly enough that doing that would become deprecated before long anyway, that they weren't made.

To do a 90 degree curve you're limited by how far the innermost part needs to be to maintain its network override. That should be 3-4 tiles in an ortho direction, roughly twice that in actual diagonal tiles. That's a bare minimum though and one wrong click, including after you've already successfully made it, can send you back to having to redo enough curve to override it again. Throw in trying to deal with slopes or terraforming and you've got yourself one hell of a half-day headache--but it can look pretty good  ;)

Tarkus

I have actually begun initial work on implementing diagonal starters . . . so far, I've just done the L0 RHW-4 as an initial proof-of-concept, but once I can find nice false intersections that work well, I plan to get all the networks.  That might help in this situation, as there is at least one base diagonal tile in between the puzzle pieces.  FlexFARHW is, of course, the ultimate solution.

-Alex

Seaman

Thx, Noahclem and Tarkus.

Quote from: Tarkus on June 04, 2018, 03:17:31 PM
I have actually begun initial work on implementing diagonal starters . . . so far, I've just done the L0 RHW-4 as an initial proof-of-concept, but once I can find nice false intersections that work well, I plan to get all the networks.  That might help in this situation, as there is at least one base diagonal tile in between the puzzle pieces.

Diagonal starters would indeed be helpful in this situation. Especially the dual and triple tile networks always take a considerable amount of effort to start a diagonal stretch. But I assume, they need also more effort to create the diagonal starters for, compared to the single tile networks. Maybe, at some point, you'll get to them...  ::)

Quote from: Tarkus on June 04, 2018, 03:17:31 PM
FlexFARHW is, of course, the ultimate solution.
Well I just wanted to start laughing about the hilarious finicky pattern for a draggable FARHW-6C layout. But then I realized, that the NAM team tends to think in FLEX pieces lately. And for something like that, at least all the textures and paths are already there... hmm doesn't look impossible on a second thought.  &Thk/(

Tarkus

Working on optimizing the fully diagonal parclo setup . . .



Added a little code to allow one to "cheat" the end of the diagonal Type A1 interface there by stuffing part of an R1 MRC in there.

-Alex

bladeberkman

So stable! Loving the slight curve on the second orthogonal exit, very smooth.  :thumbsup:

Seaman

wait... this geometry seems... unfamiliar. Alex, have you sneaked in a new ramp type?  :bnn:


matias93

To me it looks like a skillful usage of the disconnector and a flex curve over a diagonal B ramp. If you note, the first tile is identical on the exit ramp at the other side.

"Lets be scientists and as such, remember always that the purpose of politics is not freedom, nor authority, nor is any principle of abstract character,
but it is to meet the social needs of man and the development of the society"

— Valentín Letelier, 1895

Tarkus

Thanks, bladeberkman, Seaman, Matias, and everyone for the kind words/support! To clear up the mystery as to just what all is going on with the diagonal FLEXRamp in question:

https://www.youtube.com/v/e3MnnUT92Uk

-Alex

Gugu3


Tarkus

Thanks, Gugu and everyone!  Now, for a follow up . . . the other two potential orientations for parclos (OxD and DxO).  I built both as "AB" or "Folded Diamond" variants, to best show off the potential geometry.





And yes, a side-effect of all this is that there will be some improvements to the draggable version of the Elevated Road Viaducts--potentially enough to vanquish the old puzzle pieces to legacy status, once and for all.

-Alex

compdude787

Wow, I haven't been on this forum for a while but this all looks awesome!!
Check out my MD, United States of Simerica!
Last updated: March 5, 2017

My YouTube Channel

roadgeek

Alex, This is FANTASTIC!!!! Those ramps are incredible. No more ploppables, except for the FARHW. Every time I see you mention Flex FARHW, my heart skips a beat. I suspect it won't make it into NAM 37 though, but it has been fun watching all this development. I especially love watching the videos, because when it comes to draggable, images don't always do it justice.

mgb204

Been meaning to show these pics off for a couple of weeks...



In case you missed it, what's special here is the triple stacked pieces, more clearly seen here:



Totally stable flex pieces, I've four of them used in the centre here all touching each other :). Can't take credit for the modding, that's all Memo and Tarkus. But this is one of the potential possibilities of using the expanded RUL code for RHW that Tarkus mentioned recently.

Quote from: Seaman on June 04, 2018, 11:38:59 AM
I am really sorry for putting a puzzle piece issue between this FLEXible wonders.

Has anybody already come up with a way to solve this?

Yup, just another time to break out the indispensable RHW disconnector tool, I made a tutorial for how:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w9y19j3DbA&t=1s

bladeberkman

Another game-changer!  &apls &apls &apls Can you make a symmetrical, directional, 3-way or "T"? Either way, I'm so, so excited about this!  :popcorn:

roadgeek

Quote from: mgb204 on July 13, 2018, 07:44:29 PM
Been meaning to show these pics off for a couple of weeks...



In case you missed it, what's special here is the triple stacked pieces, more clearly seen here:



Totally stable flex pieces, I've four of them used in the centre here all touching each other :). Can't take credit for the modding, that's all Memo and Tarkus. But this is one of the potential possibilities of using the expanded RUL code for RHW that Tarkus mentioned recently.

Quote from: Seaman on June 04, 2018, 11:38:59 AM
I am really sorry for putting a puzzle piece issue between this FLEXible wonders.

Has anybody already come up with a way to solve this?

Yup, just another time to break out the indispensable RHW disconnector tool, I made a tutorial for how:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w9y19j3DbA&t=1s

Ahhhh! Triple stacking! Yay! I could recreate San Antonio with those stacks.

Pythias900KMB

Quote from: roadgeek on July 26, 2018, 11:48:40 AM
Quote from: mgb204 on July 13, 2018, 07:44:29 PM
Been meaning to show these pics off for a couple of weeks...



In case you missed it, what's special here is the triple stacked pieces, more clearly seen here:



Totally stable flex pieces, I've four of them used in the centre here all touching each other :). Can't take credit for the modding, that's all Memo and Tarkus. But this is one of the potential possibilities of using the expanded RUL code for RHW that Tarkus mentioned recently.

Quote from: Seaman on June 04, 2018, 11:38:59 AM
I am really sorry for putting a puzzle piece issue between this FLEXible wonders.

Has anybody already come up with a way to solve this?

Yup, just another time to break out the indispensable RHW disconnector tool, I made a tutorial for how:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w9y19j3DbA&t=1s

Ahhhh! Triple stacking! Yay! I could recreate San Antonio with those stacks.

RoadGeek:

I am very touched at your interest in recreating San Antonio (aka my new hometown); still, there are some things that San Antonio has gotten wrong so please temper that zeal.  The Robert F. McDermott Freeway has a split-level set up where there are two lanes on the lower level and three lanes on the upper level in both directions; how are you going to emulate that with the NAM the way it currently is?

The Connally Loop has four lanes both clockwise and anti-clockwise that bypass the interchange with the McDermott Freeway from which two lanes access the interchange.  Vehicles egressing the interchange will find themselves on a six-lane carriageway; in the case of westbound McDermott Freeway, that is a seven lane carriageway.  What is your plan for that?

Tarkus

Quote from: Pythias900KMB on July 27, 2018, 07:34:06 PM
Vehicles egressing the interchange will find themselves on a six-lane carriageway; in the case of westbound McDermott Freeway, that is a seven lane carriageway.  What is your plan for that?

The P57 IID scheme does take "Ultra-Wide" RHWs into account . . .

-Alex

Pythias900KMB

Quote from: Tarkus on July 28, 2018, 02:16:53 AM
Quote from: Pythias900KMB on July 27, 2018, 07:34:06 PM
Vehicles egressing the interchange will find themselves on a six-lane carriageway; in the case of westbound McDermott Freeway, that is a seven lane carriageway.  What is your plan for that?

The P57 IID scheme does take "Ultra-Wide" RHWs into account . . .

-Alex

I am so eager to have at hand the RHW-12S and the RHW-14S, Tarkus!!!