Post here if you want to contribute something to the NAM or when you need support for your creations.
Similar to the thread at Simtropolis, I start this thread here at SC4D. This thread is intended for development of the NAM and to showcase it.
More information are added here soon.
I want to show the OnSlope Puzzle Pieces which I've created. There are Highway OnSlope Puzzle Pieces to connect elevated with ground highway. Thus the elevated Highway tool can be used to create overpasses and it can be connected to ground highways like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg143.imageshack.us%2Fimg143%2F9485%2Fcapture04292007011109lz8.jpg&hash=3945424d876cfdac0ebad4a854cdcc62f3399500)
Unfortunately, the shaddow issue which appears on every OnSlope Puzzle Piece stands out much more on highways.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg143.imageshack.us%2Fimg143%2F4416%2Fcapture04292007011121zf2.jpg&hash=50839f4156fd4555e111c176baf7441f93734042)
Moreover, there is an OnSlope Puzzle Piece for lightrail to connect GLR with EL-Rail.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg294.imageshack.us%2Fimg294%2F4633%2Fcapture04292007144516ym4.jpg&hash=2877a147f238cfe36e3ffc515f2311bfafee2ff4)
Finally! On-slope pieces for highway. aleking will love this :)
Not only aleking, I suppose. ;) As I already said at SimForum, this is great news, memo! The next NAM will be the best ever! :thumbsup:
yep, that's sure to make Aleking drool :P
memo, nice job on those On-Slope pieces. It's good to see that we've got NAM Development over here now as well. ;)
-Alex
These are great news memo :thumbsup:
I am sure that with euro textures, these shadows wont be a problem ;)
I already posted this in the team topic, here are some pics of HOV lanes.
They are early development pics, all that I need to model now is the entrance of the lanes to make them functional.
(and maybe diamond marking)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg142.imageshack.us%2Fimg142%2F7021%2Fhov1kq2.jpg&hash=4de09872ab972f30d1e36986ad92d6f1634e4b6d)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg142.imageshack.us%2Fimg142%2F3898%2Fhov2mr0.jpg&hash=97f0a1cc2f7e117eb90b7408fd26012bec65fa2a)
darn RULs :bomb:
Well, it took me 1 hour to discover that one of the paths had the wrong number, lol :party:
Good job everybody :o
the HOV is beautiful and impressive :o
This is great news. This thread being here, the highway on slope pieces and the HOV. All great stuff. Just when I thought the NAM couldn't get much better, I find out it will.
Robin :thumbsup: &apls
HOV? You are god Fukuda!
I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention. Is the Highway OnSlope Puzzle Piece available now?
Additionally, I have the '06 NAM (I believe) which has a Monorail over Elevated Highway bridge. Has there been modifications to the bridge in '07? Or, are there a more pleasing bridge elsewhere?
Thanks!
@fukuda: As I said elsewhere, you wouldn't find something like this in Germany. ;) On highways, lanes in different directions have to be separated by a barrier (this is even the case in a construction area). Since the highway is still two tiles wide, have you considered moving the barrier in the middle, so the highway gets four "true" lanes in each direction?
@sisum: Yes, the first two pics show a Highway On Slope Puzzle Piece. :) It will be included into the next NAM. As far as I know, the monorail bridges won't be modified, but there are quite a few bridges available already, and more are in the making. Just keep your eyes open. In the future, new bridges won't have to be included into the NAM, but it's possible to download them individually. The only file that needs to be updated (and downloaded again whenever you install a new bridge) is the NAM Bridge Controller file that is already available at the SC4D LEX.
Highway on-slopes and HOV lanes, fantastic work. NAM continues to push SC4 forward, I really don't know why we need SC5
I read somewhere about the possible development of draggable GLR, I use this a lot but as we know it's a pain to lay, is draggable a possibility?
thats an excellent idea and addition to the game...
i think belfastuniguy is right why do we need SC5, lol the only thing that SC4 need is to be in 3d for be perfect :D
belfastuniguy, I've got great news for you. Not only is Draggable GLR possible, it's actually going to be an integral part of the next NAM release. ;)
I also wonder why an SC5 would be needed as well . . . there's still a lot more that can be done with SC4. ;)
-Alex
Hello
My new Rail-Viaduct
left = old Rail; rect = new Rail
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg184.imageshack.us%2Fimg184%2F4049%2Feisenbahnbogenvo7.jpg&hash=b05adeac48bf3f1797222335bf6fc6f38dcdbcef) (http://imageshack.us)
for more realistic City...
I like it :thumbsup: . More European looking imo ;)
Oooooh! those are lovely, one question will both types be available? I don't think i could bare the decision :'(
Maybe the concrete supports are a tad too massive now, but definitely an improvement over the "lightweight" supports that were lend from the lightrail tracks. Personally, I'd like to see some old-fashioned brick arches, like in this picture (http://www.fohl.de/bruecken/2000.05.28.lothianbridge1.jpg).
Yeah the picture Andreas gave shows exactly that type of architecture I love! Some of these would be pretty cool to sc4.
Those overpasses look fantastic, memo! There is so much great stuff going on, I can't wait until the next NAM already!
I think it would be cool to see the elevated heavy rail pieces look like this. (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=18008)
better?
Here new screen
left is the Lots, rect is NAM-modell
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg527.imageshack.us%2Fimg527%2F5783%2Feisenbahnbogenmauer1cq8.jpg&hash=c38456d0dc835316128941baf4d43cfb49fae9e4) (http://imageshack.us)
The NAM model looks even better now :thumbsup:
However the other model seems to need some more texturing work ;)
ArkenbergeJoe, the new elevated heavy rail model looks fantastic! Es ist sehr gut! :thumbsup:
-Alex
Quote from: Fukuda on April 29, 2007, 01:10:06 PM
I already posted this in the team topic, here are some pics of HOV lanes.
They are early development pics, all that I need to model now is the entrance of the lanes to make them functional.
(and maybe diamond marking)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg142.imageshack.us%2Fimg142%2F7021%2Fhov1kq2.jpg&hash=4de09872ab972f30d1e36986ad92d6f1634e4b6d)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg142.imageshack.us%2Fimg142%2F3898%2Fhov2mr0.jpg&hash=97f0a1cc2f7e117eb90b7408fd26012bec65fa2a)
darn RULs :bomb:
Well, it took me 1 hour to discover that one of the paths had the wrong number, lol :party:
Wicked!!!!
Looks just like the Parkway North (I-279) here in Pittsburgh, PA!!
http://maps.google.com/?om=1&ie=UTF8&ll=40.48926,-80.009565&spn=0.001905,0.003616&t=k&z=18
Here is finally Version from
RailxBlankTerrainStraight Puzzle Piece and
Straight Rail OnSlope Puzzle Piece
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg49.imageshack.us%2Fimg49%2F5764%2Fbogenviadukt1ef8.jpg&hash=6e2ab0bb25509dda4f8f1c2d0ad875e4aa139db4) (http://imageshack.us)
wunderbar &apls
I love you made them puzzle pieces :thumbsup:
that looks wonderful, so is that elevated rail converting to rail??
That looks absolutely outstanding, ArkenbergeJoe! Great work!
Yes, those are modified elevated heavy rail puzzle pieces. ArkenbergeJoe changed the rather small supports that were "lend" from the lightrail (el-rail) model to something more suitable. Now imagine a road running below those stone arcs... (where's the "drool" smiley?) :)
Yes... drooling indeed. Looks great.
Good work on the on-slope pieces too. We've been needing those for a long time and I'm thrilled to see them included in the next version.
Keep up the good work, everyone :thumbsup:
Here is the better Model from the Rail-viadukt. With street- and GLR-bridge.
The Road-, Avenue-, Rail- and Highwaybridges = another models
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg259.imageshack.us%2Fimg259%2F1193%2Fbridgevierteloq2.jpg&hash=92c9544454099cb371b335cd413a5f4c6ee77d1a) (http://imageshack.us)
I love it! &apls
that is so awesome
whats the chances of a identical version but with a concrete texture?
Bridges for Road and Avenue
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg238.imageshack.us%2Fimg238%2F4706%2Fblechtrgerbrckenhz2.jpg&hash=76eb611960195f1dc15bcfe960ab6b2d1f8c6eb3) (http://imageshack.us)
This is some fantastic work here, that railbridge is looking very interesting. :thumbsup:
Quote from: kwakelaar on May 13, 2007, 12:38:55 PM
This is some fantastic work here, that railbridge is looking very interesting. :thumbsup:
I agree! Great work, everyone! I love those underpasses,
ArkenbergeJoe!
WOW! Other than that I'm speechless. &apls
Quotebelfastuniguy, I've got great news for you. Not only is Draggable GLR possible, it's actually going to be an integral part of the next NAM release
:thumbsup: All the work that seems to be going into this allways seems to amaze me...
And now I hear Light Rail will be Draggable you've intreeged me and tickled my fancy even more with this exiting thing called nam, keep up the great work for this game :thumbsup:
Here is the diagonal Puzzle for the GLR-mod...
...and another Bridge for the Highway
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg455.imageshack.us%2Fimg455%2F5044%2Feisenbahndiaquerungzq0.jpg&hash=f439c223bee4068a4a8ac3e2e5b4d43472fed6ed) (http://imageshack.us)
You've outdone yourself now!
Wow! that is amazing &apls
I love these and cannot wait to use them
That is looking beautiful, ArkenbergeJoe! :thumbsup:
I agree with the people posting before me. These look great Arkenbergjoe! I especially like the change to iron sides on the bridge when crossing a road or anything else. Looking forward to use them myself and seeing them in lots of MD's :thumbsup:
These are amazing... and draggable GLR will be another dream-come-true! :thumbsup:
Yes it will! Will we be able to make diagonal crossings for GLR-road/avenue/one-way/street?
Quote from: snorrelli on May 17, 2007, 07:11:11 AM
Yes it will! Will we be able to make diagonal crossings for GLR-road/avenue/one-way/street?
Yes, this will be possible with the draggable GLR. :) Here's a pic that shows the possibilities:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg508.imageshack.us%2Fimg508%2F9898%2Fnamkz1.jpg&hash=4cfcf96f237afc43c33d9c0dc6cddca6242127cf)
wow.....so how far away are we from making this available (where is the eager smiley?)...seriously, you guys are making great progress here for the next NAM...it will really be something special.
WOW, this is stunning developement :thumbsup: Resounding applause to everyone involved &apls
Wow... :o
You guys are heroes! &apls
Wonderful work, the NAM gets closer to reality with every update. :thumbsup: &apls
***I am gasping for breath for the next half hour or so***
Quote from: Yoder7652 on May 17, 2007, 07:24:59 AM
wow.....so how far away are we from making this available (where is the eager smiley?)
There are still a few things to sort out, but the next version shouldn't be too far away. :)
WOW! Draggable GLR! I'm in awe...I can't wait! Absolutely fantastic work, my friends!
Yay - GLR - Draggable &apls &apls &apls
The new rail pieces look fantastic also. Awaiting the next NAM with great interest....... :thumbsup:
ArkenbergeJoe,
I hope this isn't too much to ask, but can you show us what the diagonal elevated heavy rail looks like?
Thanks,
--mapper
Awesome draggable GLR!
just curious, can you do the same thing with the "rural variety" without a sidewalk? I and im sure many others use GLR to put our el rail lines on the ground out in the suburbs where a continous elevated structure isnt entirely necessary.
Draggable.....GLR...need....to....Breath....Draggable....Draggable...GLR....need....to...have...Draggable GLR!!!
This is incredible. Unbelievable. Fantastic. I would go on but I think I am gonna passout from hyperventilation. LOL
---Gaston
Quote from: Fledder200 on May 18, 2007, 06:22:35 PM
Draggable.....GLR...need....to....Breath....Draggable....Draggable...GLR....need....to...have...Draggable GLR!!!
Actually,
Fledder, when I first saw the draggable GLR, you and Liaane were the first thing I thought of!
The draggable GLR looks great! Although will it still crash the game?
Also need the draggable GLR! Would be a nice addition!
Quote from: mapper on May 18, 2007, 05:18:46 PM
ArkenbergeJoe,
I hope this isn't too much to ask, but can you show us what the diagonal elevated heavy rail looks like?
As far as I know, Swamper77 is still working on the diagonal elevated heavy rails, so I don't know if there are screenshots already.
Quote from: Zaphod on May 18, 2007, 05:44:08 PM
just curious, can you do the same thing with the "rural variety" without a sidewalk? I and im sure many others use GLR to put our el rail lines on the ground out in the suburbs where a continous elevated structure isnt entirely necessary.
Yes, there's also a rural variety available. :)
Quote from: cameron1991 on May 18, 2007, 09:30:13 PM
The draggable GLR looks great! Although will it still crash the game?
We won't be able to fix the crash issue, but since you use the normal el-rail tool for dragging GLR, the game is much less prone to crashes than before. However, you will have to use "starter puzzle pieces" to start a draggable el-rail stretch, and those are still "dangerous". Also, you will have to use puzzle pieces for special intersections, such as el-rail x GLR, because the GLR would convert to el-rail (or the other way round) if you cross those - remember, GLR is still nothing else than el-rail on the ground.
But all in all, it'll be much easier to use; I was able to replace an entire GLR puzzle piece network of a city (which took me several hours to build) in less than 15 minutes with draggable GLR.
This is all great news. I just spent about two hours last night making a glr network in one of my cities. This next NAM will be great!!
The bridge pieces look incredible as well
I can't wait.
Robin :thumbsup: &apls
Quote from: Andreas on May 19, 2007, 06:50:48 AM
I was able to replace an entire GLR puzzle piece network of a city (which took me several hours to build) in less than 15 minutes with draggable GLR.
That brings me to a question I had about the new draggable version. Will we have to bulldoze all our plopped GLR puzzle pieces before installing the new NAM, or will they be compatible side-by-side?
They are compatible side-by-side. I can vouch for that since I have the Developer's copy ;)
-Jan
Yes, all existing puzzle pieces are still in place. For some setups, you will still need them anyway (such as el-rail over GLR, and of course the starter puzzle pieces), and even if draggable GLR is much easier to use, I assume not everyone wants to tear down his entire GLR network and replace everything after installing the next NAM. ;) The same goes for the GLR stations - they will have to be updated for the draggable version, but this can be done by installing a simple patch. And the good news is that you don't need to bulldoze the ones that have been built already as well.
Good news all around - thanks! :thumbsup:
diagonal elevated railpieces!! just heard that they will be in the next NAM, even with transition to the pieces that are already in the NAM!!
hoping the release is even sooner than i dare to expect!
GO NAM-TEAM
The chat at ST is a wonderous place... (will edit later)
Quote from: Masochist on June 01, 2007, 02:27:24 PM
The chat at ST is a wonderous place... (will edit later)
it makes my eyes bleed :D :D :D
Could someone please reply this:
"What's the capacity (and anticipated traffic) of the new Avenue/GLR dual network"?
This is needed for making roadtop stations for these networks. Here is my thread on ST (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=124&threadid=67803&STARTPAGE=4&). Roadtop stations count the through traffic as "usage", so the total capacity must be greater than the "target capacity" by the anticipated through traffic, so as to offset the through traffic. The result is not perfect, it's just an approximation, but there's no other way.
Capacity must be such that the stations must not be clogged (due to the through traffic) thus degrading quality of service before the network is congested. On the other hand it must not be too high, because the station will feature excess capacity, not on par with the Maxis standards. I have used this technique in the current RTMT version, getting satisfactory results.
But I need to know the exact capacities to make the same for these networks. It may be easy to say that it's the sum of Avenue + GLR capacities, or the maximum, but I would like to be sure. Several tests I made have not lead to conclusions, only to hypotheses, eg that the congestion dataview shows only the congestion of the avenue component (not the GLR). Road traffic appears to affect the (reported) congestion much more than GLR traffic. Furthermore I don't know if congestion is calculated separately for the avenue and the GLR part or if they somehow interfere. Another problem is that for "double" networks, like avenues, congestion is (definitely) calculated separately for each direction, but what about these specific type of networks? As defined in NAM, each direction contains an avenue branch plus a GLR track. But GLR truck is actually a "mono" network (though it has two tracks) ie congestion is calculated once (so does capacity). So should I add the GLR capacity twice to the station's capacity?
Looking forward to your replies.
Not sure where to ask the question, but there's a particular type of interchange/ramp system that I've seen many times in real life that doesn't exist in the game yet, and would be quite useful for certain applications. (Namely, as in real life, when adding a highway to an existing city as a "bypass" route.)
What I've seen is an avenue and a highway running at 45 degree angle to each other, but instead of crossing where they meet, they merge. The avenue to highway only has two ramps (not the full four; you can't turn backward) and then the combined highway contines away from the junction, sometimes "straight" from the highway side but more often "straight" from the avenue.
The advantage I can see here too is that it would be the only (or first) way to put ramps on a curved section of highway (using the straight-from-avenue configuration). (And, the highway can be used to route long-range traffic around a congested city center which the avenue serves, then this could be used again to reconnect on the other side.)
Basically, I'm wondering if anyone with the skill to do so is interested in making this....
cogeo: Unfortunately I don't know the actual capacity of the Avenue/GLR puzzle pieces. I just do know that each of these puzzle pieces consist of an intersection of Avenue and Lightrail. Thus I suppose that the capacity of the station should be greater than twice the capacity of Avenues plus once or twice the capacity of Lightrails. It appears to me that you had the same thoughts, so I can't really help you. Hopefully, further tests of you will be successful.
memo, thanks for your reply. Some further tests I made have shown that the Avenue/GLR do not really suffer from congestion, they need to have a failly high usage of both road + GLR traffic, to reach the same congestion levels as avenues (with road traffic alone). So this pretty much suggests that capacities should rather be avenue plus GLR capacity. I've settled with the capacities for my stations, I think they would be OK (though capacities will be seemingly high). The only problem with Avenue/GLR puzzle pieces (concerning capacities) is with the Avenue/GLRxRoad intersections, they look deeply red in the traffic dataview, but this may actually be a graphical-only issue.
Would this type of intersection ever be possible in NAM (the second image down) ?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi196.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa247%2Fbrewersfan386%2Ffig-3b-11-2.gif&hash=4da707cd65c8a1b03a290eeba5b71d0da8d9db81)
@Packerfan386 Yes, it is possible. In the next version of NAM this will be possible for AVE/AVE intersections. The way to draw it is by creating an AVE/AVE 4way intersection and then in one of the 4 corners you will need to draw a OWR in a 90 turn fashion around the corner. I dont have a picture handy but I posted one in the Show Us Your.... Interchanges.
Thanks for the reply :)...BTW what is "OWR"?
Sorry but I have to know if this too will be possible in NAM/ RHW (never mind the signs)? ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi196.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa247%2Fbrewersfan386%2Ffig-3b-23.gif&hash=a67ab7b437865e98ee77ba3aba12ea26fbb9ec2d)
OWR = One-way road :P
It can be done, once the textures/models for the ramps are done. No one can do anything when they don't have access to said textures/models, though :(
-Swamper77
These intersections would be great additions to the next NAM! Excellent find, packerfan386!
thanks for the responses :thumbsup:
I have another &idea... Realistic railroad crossing (heavy rail) markings "$Deal"$
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi196.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa247%2Fbrewersfan386%2Ffig-8b-06.gif&hash=2e945b9142430ea71a2f8f7ff39dd035f0f7ed3d)
"dynamic envelope"
$%Grinno$%
Packer Fan,
There is only one problem with making realistic marking setups like that for the game: You would have to leave a lot of room between the crossing and any curves, intersections, or other roadway alignments for them to appear properly. The game only has one tile ID for each of the railroad crossings involving the railroad and road networks. So, I cannot specify how the markings will appear on the approaching roadways. You would have only one choice: The road would have to be straight and completely FLAT as it approaches the crossings.
I'm not trying to shoot down your ideas. I'm just saying that SimCity 4 is not setup for realism because it is a simulator. Some areas, we can make more realistic and more like the real world. This is not one of them. The best I can do for these railroad crossings, is have an offset rendered round "RXR" sign that faces traffic as they approach the crossings. It would be offset by 8 meters, meaning it would appear in the middle of the tile that is just before the crossing.
-Swamper77
how about an Elevated rail over road 90 degree turn. like the ones in chicago or new york or something. thatd be easier to put them in city centres.
packerfan386: If you don't mind my asking, where are you getting these intersection images from? Is it a website? I'd be interested in looking at some of them, just for my own curiosity. Thanks!
I suspect that Packer Fan got them from one of the federal sites, probably this one: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/index.htm (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/index.htm).
-Swamper77
If anyone wants to create a station for the GLR-in-Avenue puzzle pieces: I've just posted a detailed tutorial on how to mod these stations: http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1874.msg55398#msg55398 :)
Quote from: Swamper77 on July 30, 2007, 12:21:44 PM
I suspect that Packer Fan got them from one of the federal sites, probably this one: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/index.htm (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/index.htm).
-Swamper77
Thanks, Jan!
Quote from: Andreas on July 30, 2007, 02:36:25 PM
If anyone wants to create a station for the GLR-in-Avenue puzzle pieces: I've just posted a detailed tutorial on how to mod these stations: http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1874.msg55398#msg55398 :)
Thanks a lot for this one :thumbsup:
Is really professional, and very useful. Thanks for making the tutorials section even more interesting ;D ¡¡¡
Can someone tell me what is available now?
Quote from: dragonshardz on August 03, 2007, 09:28:28 PM
Can someone tell me what is available now?
You're probably going to have to be a bit more specific, my friend. If you mean which version of the NAM, the most current one is June 2007. If you're looking for something more specific, let us know and someone will get you what you need!
I am going to (try) make draggable Ground HSR, using the Starter Piece method. I Am also giong to have a go at making High Speed Rail seperate from Monorail again using the Starter piece method.
As I posted at ST:
I have done the Ground HSR starter piece , the orth RULs, the curves RULs, and nearly finished the diagonal RULs, but I am having trouble getting rid of the shadows and pylons.I have started on the HSR but don't know how to change the pylons.
I would love to have HSR at ground level.
I stopped using HSR a while ago and this would make me use it again, all the vest best of luck with this project. &apls
HSR at ground level is a good idea, I suppose. There is so much new stuff out there right now I'm not sure how much interest it is gonna generate. I think there is alot of developement going on for existing stuff. You might wanna start your own thread about it though. Just so you can get people who are really interested in it. (Just a suggestion) I would deffinately check out a thread with the name like:
"GHSR - Ground High Speed Rail... FAST and LOW is the way to go. %confuso
---Gaston
I'm just asking if there is anything close to completion/completed for the NAM that i might want to keep an eye out for.
@Dragonshardz There is no set release dates for any new features in NAM. I can tell you though that progress is being made on all fronts and specifically for my projects, SAM is the closest to a "BETA Release" but that is still about 4 weeks or more away depending on how RLS treats me aswell as other people that are helping me with critical parts to the release.
GHSR
I have edited the RULs so GHSR is independant of the main HSR modd, although I still have to modd the maxis monorail to make the GHSR less "fragile".
I need help with removing the plyons and shadows, as far as I can see it's possible, but then I might not be able to see very far. If anyone knows how do this or where to get such infomation, it would speed things up. Also after i have removed the shadows and pylons I will post some images and see what people think.
GHSR
I Need help with Paths I have put the file in the dat with same IID, and the right GID, but when I go in game the paths don't work. Can someone help me I can post more infomation but I don't what infomation to post.
@Warrior Paths are not my speciality, but... What IIDs have you used? The IIDs of the original HSRP? If so then you are changing the IIDs for the El-HSRP and not the G-HSRP. You need to have the SC4Paths with the same IID as the tile you are pathing.
A little idea here for you. Take the path of the original HSRP and then lower the Z co-ordinate to 1 or 2m. This will put the path somewhere around the level of the tracks, Im not sure exactly what that height is.
BTW, it would be nice if you had some pictures, no matter how primitive. It sounds like your doing good work! Keep it up!
The HSR ar the same as monorail. I have got the Paths as the same IID as the tile I'm pathing, I think it might be something to do twith the 3D/2D thing but I don't know. I lowered the paths of the HSR/Monorail to 0 already. I posted the a picture today at ST but I'll put it here as well.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi200.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa230%2FwarriorST%2F1stGHSRshot.jpg&hash=ae03f18658de1574770841ddd66796a41f368bd6)
The height's 0.5m off the ground, by the way. It's the same for all Maxis-made networks - elevated highway's 15.5m, ground's 0.5m (that's why the ground highway model's raised slightly off the ground), el rail's 15.5, HSR's 15.5, based off monorail which is also (surprise - 15.5!).
Heres the TGI of the pathfile, the TGI of te Straight GHSR exemplar (that refers to the models) and what's in the path file:
QuoteTGI = 296678f7 a96683f 5d2d1100
TGI of staight GHSR exemplar = 6534284a ebe084c2 5d2d1100
SC4PATHS
1.2
2
0
1
-- Mono_3_1
7
1
3
1
0
2
2,-8,0.5
2,8,0.5
-- Mono_1_3
7
1
1
3
0
2
-2,8,0.5
-2,-8,0.5
I just thought do I need to add something to the exemplar file?
maybe only a lf/cr at the end
if it does not work, try replacing the 1 to 0 under the 7 (referring to mono path)
What do ou meanby lf/cr at the end? I the 1 was originally a 0 but I didn't know if 0 was valid, so I changed it to one but nothing happened and I forgot to change it back but I will now.
EDIT: Olasz weren't you working on something to do with HSR at one point?
line feed/carriage return - finish the path file with an empty row by pressing enter after the last coordinate. Sounds way too trivial but I've had similar pbs like that.
and yes, I've been working on HSR but have not completed
Would you mind telling me what you were doing out of interest?
So if add an empty line it might work?
daaaaaaaaaang that HSR line is looking really good
Quote from: Warrior on August 10, 2007, 10:49:32 AM
Would you mind telling me what you were doing out of interest?
So if add an empty line it might work?
your path file seems to be correct apart from the 1s after the 7s and the empty line I am used to.
according to the sc1.dat the exemplar group should be ok as well. do you have the drawpaths cheat?
Yes I have the draw paths cheat, I have just made the changes and I'm just checking...Nothing happened, still no paths.
Thanks patfirefghtr the models alright, and thanks Olasz for your time.
Very nice sig, Warrior. LOL
It was the best I could do in MS paint. Thanks for the slogan by the way. I still need help with T21s and the paths.
That's looking good there, Warrior! Do you have anything planned in the future for stations? I know I'm way ahead of everything, but there main reason that I never used the HSR is because of the lack of different stations. Either way, good luck with this project. I'll be following along!
Warrior love the new sig image that is very sweeeeeeeeeeeet!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Warrior, the GHSR is looking fantastic! To answer your pathing questions, I've done a little testing with the original Elevated HSR. At one point, I turned the DrawPaths cheat on for it, and had noticed the arrows were almost impossible to see on it. Something with the way the original models were made, combined with the color the DrawPaths cheat uses for the Monorail network seems to just make that difficult. It's a little easier to see on the curves for some reason.
One other possibility--is the GHSR network you're creating model-based (3D) or texture-based (2D)? If it's 2D, you'll want to change the GID from 0xA966883F to 0x69668828. Otherwise, the path file looks perfect to me.
Hope that helps!
-Alex (Tarkus)
Tarkus The GHSR is model based. I set the path height to 15.5 so I could see the paths but nothing happened, I also set them to 0.5 and tryed UDI and that also nothing happened.
The starter puzzle piece was really useful thanks.
Very bad news - Unfortunately my computer has stopped working, It says the the hard drive has and error and to press control alt delete I do and the process starts again. I have got linux on my pc running from the cd drive I can access the internet with it so I'm not stuck with the wii, hopefully the computer will be working properly by the end of tomorrow (24 hours from the time this was posted. /wrrd%& :'(
sorry to hear that warrior hope u get it working again
Hello
Here is the revised orthogonale and new diagonale Modelle for the el-rail (16m)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg6.myimg.de%2FBridges177ef0_thumb.jpg&hash=9b0e419410f8e3000e79ae96ecda23fd439fa0de) (http://www.myimg.de/?img=Bridges177ef0.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg6.myimg.de%2FBridges212cd0_thumb.jpg&hash=fe9ea56b0d2f1875167a2a053580d236bdbc7817) (http://www.myimg.de/?img=Bridges212cd0.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg6.myimg.de%2FBridges30a66e_thumb.jpg&hash=7f7023a0981deaf47f799625ee28dea6528451dc) (http://www.myimg.de/?img=Bridges30a66e.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg6.myimg.de%2FBridges426b73_thumb.jpg&hash=12f48eb3e690e3cb5718c19bf67192f80cd402df) (http://www.myimg.de/?img=Bridges426b73.jpg)
And here is the Bridge for the future SCS-NAM %wrd
~Testmodell~
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg6.myimg.de%2FBridges59317e_thumb.jpg&hash=161df33a245da091a0146b790499c681febe9675) (http://www.myimg.de/?img=Bridges59317e.jpg)
looks good!! :thumbsup: &apls
i can see a curve in there, and to my knowledge (limited ;) ) i dont know if it is in there %confuso
is it in there? or aint it in there? i have never used it, this may be the final psuh :thumbsup:
Those look great...a major improvement over the Maxis el-rail &apls :thumbsup:
Meastro: The curve was added in the last NAM.
Now, if we could have curves for roads... These look great, ArkenbergeJoe!
There are curves for roads they are in the latest NAM. I have been wondering however though why there aren't curves/elevated puzzle pieces for streets. Well, the road curves are pretty new anyway, but there are puzzle pieces for every network but the street network (other than the diagonal pieces).
-Charlie
Quote from: Meastro444 on August 13, 2007, 01:01:46 PM
looks good!! :thumbsup: &apls
i can see a curve in there, and to my knowledge (limited ;) ) i dont know if it is in there %confuso
is it in there? or aint it in there? i have never used it, this may be the final psuh :thumbsup:
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on August 13, 2007, 06:47:01 PM
Meastro: The curve was added in the last NAM.
Now, if we could have curves for roads... These look great, ArkenbergeJoe!
I added that curved elevated heavy rail puzzle piece to the NAM before the June/July release. It's basically a rip-off of the Maxis elevated rail curve models. I created it because I made the diagonal piece for going over blank terrain. There are missing pieces for the diagonals because I ran out of time to make them. Pieces are needed for diagonal elevated heavy rail going over diagonal networks, over orthagonal avenues, and over orthagonal ground highways.
The easy part is getting the models from the game's own files. The hard part is coding the pieces into the RUL files. I will probably never get back to the diagonal elevated heavy rail puzzle pieces since I have other projects, and now a real life job, to do.
-Swamper77
i was just wondering (earlier) if there were any, umm... expansion "packs" like the NWM or SAM available now or soon.
Dragon,
They will be ready when they are ready and not a moment before then. We are reorganizing the entire NAM ID structures for the network textures/models and rewriting the RULs to accommodate these changes. You will just have to wait patiently with everyone else until we are able to release the mods and update the NAM files to accommodate them.
-Swamper77
@Dragon.... Please refer to my post less than 48 hours ago in the RHW thread.
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=990.480http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=990.480 (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=990.480)
By that, I gather that the actual modding's done (which is probably the hard bit); the IIDs just are being reorganized. I really should get around to learning RUL overrides...
See if you can get the tutorial on how to make starter puzzle pieces, i think it's by Tarkus and memo, I got it from Jplumbley and was a great help.
ok... sorry for bothering you guys. i'll shut up now.
I would like to know if possible how the El-Rail Pylons were removed from the draggable GLR but not from the El-Rail?
Here is the Finalversion from the El-Rail-Viaduct.
Is only Modell and FSH-Files, and not Exemplar, SC4-Paths and RUL-Files is necessarily.
The File is in the Testcenter.
Es werden nur die Modell und FSH-Dateien benötigt, aber keine Änderungen an Exemplar, SC4-Paths und RUL's vorgenommen. Zumindest jetzt noch nicht. Es ist sozusagen das Starter-Paket, welche erst einmal nur die vorhandenen Modelle überschreiben sollen.
Impressionen:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg252.imageshack.us%2Fimg252%2F6938%2Fviaduktfertig1zl3.th.jpg&hash=2f5af56be6710c14c55838553c4d4bd33bf82d55) (http://img252.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktfertig1zl3.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg210.imageshack.us%2Fimg210%2F677%2Fviaduktfertig2xa1.th.jpg&hash=90add8c1b7efd340af55d8d27252eb559398e814) (http://img210.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktfertig2xa1.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg516.imageshack.us%2Fimg516%2F2291%2Fviaduktbuddycy8.th.jpg&hash=ddab172ec513c289dd717449f58fb44ea6b43662) (http://img516.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktbuddycy8.jpg)
The new Viadukt has not Conflikt with the Buddy-Bridge :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg252.imageshack.us%2Fimg252%2F6830%2Fviaduktbahnhofqi6.th.jpg&hash=53b87f2a6dbe86c8baac2fdeb5f87ce3d8eb4bba) (http://img252.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktbahnhofqi6.jpg)
:(
For the RHW-Fans
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg207.imageshack.us%2Fimg207%2F1838%2Fviaduktrwhkk2.th.jpg&hash=f2596462647e759ae5a9c6e191c3ad6f6ebb21fc) (http://img207.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktrwhkk2.jpg)
That Viadukt is looking very great! Wonderful work on it! :thumbsup:
Outstanding work, ArkenbergeJoe! It looks at least 1000 times better in an urban development than in any test city. :)
That is just sick ArkenbergeJoe!!!! :thumbsup: Great job on them. :thumbsup:
but unfortunately i doubt that the viaduct will be compatible with mIncrobals lot based mod as the models will be different shaps...
Quote from: mightygoose on September 01, 2007, 05:36:57 AM
but unfortunately i doubt that the viaduct will be compatible with mIncrobals lot based mod as the models will be different shaps...
It won't be compatible anyways since mIncrobal's mod is for elevated rail, and this mod is for elevated heavy rail.
Quotebut unfortunately i doubt that the viaduct will be compatible with mIncrobals lot based mod as the models will be different shaps...
Actually, if this was for elevated rail, it would be compatible, because he used T21s, which aren't really affected by what shape the models take.
Excellent work, ArkenbergeJoe!
ArkenbergeJoe's models are designed to be as compatible as possible. The 3D models and textures are separated into two DAT files, so you can easily change the textures to brick or something else. He also made sure that they work well with buddybud's bridges (pictured above) and similar lots. Thanks to the modular NAM, it will be possible to switch the style of those viaducts "on the fly". BATters are encouraged to create new stations for the elevated heavy rail puzzle pieces; the NAM team will provide support how to mod these stations properly. :)
I like those highways with HOV Lanes
Here's screenshot of the Draggable GLR with classic tracks.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg509.imageshack.us%2Fimg509%2F9252%2Fdraggableclassicglrmg0.th.jpg&hash=335542e77be73adc255da017d9316865bfefcac6) (http://img509.imageshack.us/my.php?image=draggableclassicglrmg0.jpg)
Rural Draggable GLR is not completed yet, I need to draw the alphamap for it.
Klasse. Good Work &apls
EDIT:
Here is the first Screen from the test with the yellow-stone Textur
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg517.imageshack.us%2Fimg517%2F7339%2Fviaduktziegelsteineez8.th.jpg&hash=1c8f2c60ed822960f4b1eb4c47430b05a5b9eb14) (http://img517.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktziegelsteineez8.jpg)
Quote from: ebina on September 04, 2007, 05:30:24 AM
Here's screenshot of the Draggable GLR with classic tracks.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg509.imageshack.us%2Fimg509%2F9252%2Fdraggableclassicglrmg0.th.jpg&hash=335542e77be73adc255da017d9316865bfefcac6) (http://img509.imageshack.us/my.php?image=draggableclassicglrmg0.jpg)
Rural Draggable GLR is not completed yet, I need to draw the alphamap for it.
Draw alphamaps? Man, that's old school. ;) What program are you using to make the pieces? I possibly could tell you a way to make the alphamaps in about 30 seconds for each piece. ;)
All I did in Photoshop was just separate the layer from the base and just made that layer have a colour map (white) on top using the Layer Effects thingie. And a black base, of course. Worked out very well for me, in fact.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on September 05, 2007, 12:22:54 AM
All I did in Photoshop was just separate the layer from the base and just made that layer have a colour map (white) on top using the Layer Effects thingie. And a black base, of course. Worked out very well for me, in fact.
Well, what I do in PSP7 (Paint Shop Pro 7) is once I have the piece finished and converted into PNG format, I reload the PNG in PSP7. Then I do a Ctrl-A to select the whole image. Then I click on the image to make it float. Then I go to the create Alpha Channel feature, Create the alpha channel, defloat the image then delete it leaving it a clean 128x128 area. Then I flood fill it with black (0,0,0). Then I go back into the Alpha Channel area and select the load feature and load the alpha map that I created earlier. Then the dancing ants show up and then I flood fill the area inside of them with white (255,255,255). Then I save it as a different file name and then I'm done. :)
Now, it may sound like it takes a long time, but once you get the hang of it, you can make the alpha image for any SC4 piece in 20-30 seconds per piece. ;) :thumbsup:
Unfortunately the tool I'm using doesn't have that kind of function &mmm
Anyway, the alpha-map for these are not too hard. Since they are almost copies of the elevated rail, outlines are very simple.
Here's a result of alpha-mapping.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg258.imageshack.us%2Fimg258%2F1949%2Fdraggableruralglrrr4.th.jpg&hash=ae53c5e693b7309ecc924d7903b5684b12c342b4) (http://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?image=draggableruralglrrr4.jpg)
And one more, Grassy GLR. This is just test version created about 3 months ago that replaces the rural GLR.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg210.imageshack.us%2Fimg210%2F520%2Fgrassyglryw9.th.jpg&hash=a3a97a06efcc34c45ca402680f5c0ca24285c611) (http://img210.imageshack.us/my.php?image=grassyglryw9.jpg)
Here is the brown stone Test-modell
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg522.imageshack.us%2Fimg522%2F8513%2Fviaduktbraunmp6.th.jpg&hash=e5f0ed65e3a156911110e5cba560671b93042ef1) (http://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktbraunmp6.jpg)
@ArkenbergeJoe: Still needs some work, obviously, but it's a nice start! (Sieht noch etwas unfertig aus, aber Du hast ja gerade erst angefangen, wie immer gute Arbeit!) :)
@ebina: I like the grassy GLR, however, I think the rails need at least something that fixes them on the ground. Here's a pic of the tram tracks in Leipzig, near the Messe Leipzig (fairground) in the outskirts of the city. Sorry for the blurry quality, is was shot from a tram that went full speed.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg471.imageshack.us%2Fimg471%2F2563%2Fleipziggrassytramyr6.jpg&hash=7618c4e1d9be655576817baf0c4018682d11591e)
As you can see, there are two concrete foundations running beneath the tracks, this should be somehow reflected in your textures. Thumbs up for the quality of your texture work, though, they're looking excellent!
Looks pretty good there, ArkenbergeJoe! What if you put the brown stone on the gray parts, too? Just a suggestion! Keep up the fantastic work!
Quote from: thundercrack83 on September 06, 2007, 09:32:55 AM
Looks pretty good there, ArkenbergeJoe! What if you put the brown stone on the gray parts, too? Just a suggestion! Keep up the fantastic work!
ArkenbergeJoe plans to do that, but just started texturing the supports, which are obiously easier to do than the arches.
Oops, I get it now! Sorry!
I've been noticing that my cities have a pervasive "high" traffic noise rating - even at the end of twisty dead end streets with 15 cars on the edge of town next to country clubs... is there something about the NAM that might be causing this? (I'm using the perfect path 5x speed 10x capacity traffic file). And if so, is there any way it could be fixed?
That's looking very nice, ArkenbergeJoe! :thumbsup:
Quote from: Andreas on September 06, 2007, 02:21:41 AM
@ebina: I like the grassy GLR, however, I think the rails need at least something that fixes them on the ground. Here's a pic of the tram tracks in Leipzig, near the Messe Leipzig (fairground) in the outskirts of the city. Sorry for the blurry quality, is was shot from a tram that went full speed.
As you can see, there are two concrete foundations running beneath the tracks, this should be somehow reflected in your textures. Thumbs up for the quality of your texture work, though, they're looking excellent!
That is exactly what I was missing. I thought that it is short of something. I will add those to textures.
I like the elevated heavy rail support mod.
Here is the red (Test) Texture for the Viadukt
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg339.imageshack.us%2Fimg339%2F6125%2Fviaduktroteroe5.th.jpg&hash=18f28d6b0c9b183ec6a7e89eb82e2c21b203aef8) (http://img339.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktroteroe5.jpg)
and brown Texture updated
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg67.imageshack.us%2Fimg67%2F6369%2Fviaduktgelberve6.th.jpg&hash=558e0331f9971d26653145ab75b96f3441eca881) (http://img67.imageshack.us/my.php?image=viaduktgelberve6.jpg)
cool. where can i learn to make path files and network models?
thanks to ArkenbergeJoe the rail viaduct is getting a shape :thumbsup:
For making paths download Daeley's Path Creator on the LEX and get the interchange tutorial, link somewhere on Simtropolis for making True3D models(puzzle pieces, interchanges, nework) and a guide on path files
Looks brilliant ArkenbergeJoe
wow what stunning projects are underway here.... i love that viaducts and the glr texture is looking real nice and congrats to both of you akenbridgejoe and ebina for your hard works - pat
Superb work, ArkenbergeJoe! Truly superb! I was playing earlier and found the perfect place for these! I can't wait to see more development!
If the HOV lane idea is put into the NAM then there MUST be a double yellow line down the middle, I think the diamond mark should be a sign just before the ramp to get onto the HOV lanes.
the Viaducts with brown Brick is finished..
Impressionen
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg204.imageshack.us%2Fimg204%2F6861%2Fbraunerviaduktkurven1ru2.th.jpg&hash=b0ea8741081a2a8109add527e6e6eb981a5c4838) (http://img204.imageshack.us/my.php?image=braunerviaduktkurven1ru2.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg218.imageshack.us%2Fimg218%2F7251%2Fbraunerviaduktbruecken1cg0.th.jpg&hash=6774da702bbe3235f23ac62e788b609439db5368) (http://img218.imageshack.us/my.php?image=braunerviaduktbruecken1cg0.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg249.imageshack.us%2Fimg249%2F6071%2Fbraunerviaduktautobahnngf8.th.jpg&hash=38d7f0deef072d648f6d72b877fbe1e32dd4ead0) (http://img249.imageshack.us/my.php?image=braunerviaduktautobahnngf8.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg8.myimg.de%2FRosenthalElRail2790d_thumb.jpg&hash=e330fc41a615f6e5c311bc009ea044110c3d54b2) (http://www.myimg.de/?img=RosenthalElRail2790d.jpg)
OMG those look really great!! :thumbsup:
ArkenbergeJoe,
Ist dieses für angehobene schwere Eisenbahnen? Es schaut sehr gut. Dieses ist etwas, das ich in meinen Städte verwenden würde. Ausgezeichnete Arbeit, bis jetzt. Ich hoffe dich der Unterhalt, der die fabelhafte Arbeit erledigt.
ArkenbergeJoe,
Is this for elevated heavy railroads? It looks very good. This is something I would use in my cities. Excellent work, so far. Keep up the fabulous work.
---Gaston
nice job those look great :p
@Gaston: Yes, this is for the elevated heavy rail ;)
Quote from: ArkenbergeJoe on September 27, 2007, 04:54:13 AM
@Gaston: Yes, this is for the elevated heavy rail ;)
Thank you for answering so quickly. I thought that it was but wasn't sure. Will you also make some stations for elevated heavy railroads as well?
---Gaston
Oh wow! That looks fantastic! Bit light for my tastes, will it be easy to darken?
A version with dark (red) brick is also in the works - and of course other developers are welcome to create additional texture sets, and esp. stations for the elevated heavy rail! Up to now, nobody ever made one, maybe because the current elevated heavy rail puzzle pieces look rather ugly and unrealistic. ;)
ArkenbergeJoe: that looks great. :thumbsup:
i really don't know if i'll use this in my cities, but i'll manage to try at least cause it looks soo good. ;)
only a suggestion/comment: the on ramp seems too steep to me, are you planning to make on slope ramps? (this is the way i manage to get smoother ramps for roads<->el-roads for example)
Wow! Stunning job, ArkenbergeJoe! The brown bricks look fantastic! I agree with our friend Andreas, too--this will make the elevated heavy rail no longer such an eyesore! Great job!
@figui: The ramp has the same characteristics as the existing puzzle piece ramp for the elevated heavy rail. This mod doesn't change the functionality, but only the graphics. Of course, there's also an update for the on-slope puzzle piece, and the good news is that you can still use third-party addon eyecandy lots, like buddybud's bridges.
Quote from: Andreas on September 27, 2007, 12:37:55 PM
there's also an update for the on-slope puzzle piece, and the good news is that you can still use third-party addon eyecandy lots, like buddybud's bridges.
that's great, thanks. btw, i don't know that lots, i should search for them ;)
I was bored one day and decided to play around with the Road Tuning Parameters.
The end result: it's much easier to make land bridges, but you can't control their height, etc.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2Fbestasicangetit.jpg&hash=b3f9756ade8a0d6eef0f7f414ccbf224cce7e4ef)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2Ffuntastic.jpg&hash=4a03fb6413b39fcf0b1c7828667c89646ee3c67d)
Something interesting that happened after futzing around with a couple of exemplars.
That's about as far as I can get it, but on the bright side, you no longer need any water. :P
Some of thoes results are freaky to say the least... how the **** did you get that road to be raised up in the middle of nowhere lol
All i can say is WOW
Joe
The first pic looks very interesting, the second one is probably a bit strange. ;) Making land bridges without the need of using the rain tool or deep gorges could come in very handy, although you still cannot cross the bridges with another network (but then again, there are the puzzle pieces that can do that :) ).
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on September 30, 2007, 03:55:43 AM
The end result: it's much easier to make land bridges, but you can't control their height, etc.
Ah... But I think you can. SC4Terraformer allows you to terraform within a city that already has development. It looks as if the bridges are fromed by going from the top of the lower hill to the tile of the same height across the way. If this is true you can control the design of your bridges by editing the terrain height in SC4Terraformer before you build the bridge.
This is very interesting indeed. Good find SA!
WOW again! &apls
There still seem to be endless possibilities with modding this game! :thumbsup:
For the first picture, I disabled the properties that control when the retaining walls and pylons appear (they appear when the network is raised above a certain point from the terrain). On the other hand, on the second picture, I disabled the properties that control the height adjustment when the network is drawn. These retaining walls won't appear on flat land, but they will appear if there's a 1m slope or more.
This means that mountain passes can literally be built aside the mountain without any changes in terrain...
However, easier to make landbridges won't work with the retaining walls, because in order for this to work, I had to disable the retaining walls. I'll release a mod soon that allows land bridges to be made easily for all networks.
QuoteIt looks as if the bridges are fromed by going from the top of the lower hill to the tile of the same height across the way. If this is true you can control the design of your bridges by editing the terrain height in SC4Terraformer before you build the bridge.
That is indeed true. In the default settings, the margin of error is set to 20m. I readjusted it to 50m to make it easier. You can use SC4T or the inbuilt mayor terraforming tools/God Mode terraforming tools (I prefer the latter in this case, because it's easier to use in this case, since it's highly unlikely that one would edit a whole region just to get a land bridge).
There's no adjustable slider for landbridges for some reason.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that this will conflict with any other slope mod because it edits the very same properties.
Hi
What is that?? ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg49.imageshack.us%2Fimg49%2F2951%2Fbraunerviaduktdiarampenek1.th.jpg&hash=f18dc1b116a9d0bf82e5a38e9eb380b97203366f) (http://img49.imageshack.us/my.php?image=braunerviaduktdiarampenek1.jpg)
WoW SA that is a intresting find indeed and ArkenbergeJoe that pic of that bridge seems a bit messed up? but the bridge its self looks real cool....
Quote from: ArkenbergeJoe on October 01, 2007, 09:23:47 AM
What is that?? ;)
It seems to be a ground heavy rail to elevated heavy rail transition using the new viaduct models...
on the diagonal!
I'm excited and cannot wait to see more. &apls
Cheers,
Kevin
Ooh, looks good. But what about the funky viaduct models? Wouldn't new ones need to be built so the transition works?
Hallo (Sorry for the German-Post)
1.)Die Modelle werden weiter umgebaut. Da ich sie selber gebaut habe, weiß ich, welche Werte geändert werden müssen.
2.)Die RUL-File ist fertig geändert, die Rampe hat die Instancen-ID 53264000 - 532645###!!
3.)SC4-Path existieren überhaupt noch nicht, sie werden erst geschrieben, wenn die Modelle fertig sind. Damit diese mit den Modellgleisen auch übereinstimmen.
Klick here for the English-Translation ;)
http://www.google.de/language_tools?hl=en
Better use your personal translator. ;)
1.) The models are still being changed. But since I created them myself, I know which values I have to change.
2.) The RUL file has been edited as well, the new ramp uses the IDs 53264000 - 532645###.
3.) There are no SC4Path files at all at the moment. They will be created once the models are ready, so they correspondend properly with the tracks.
Sounds fun. :P
Hello
The Viaduct-Modells (#BETA) is online
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg127.imageshack.us%2Fimg127%2F8913%2Fdiabrcke1pd4.th.jpg&hash=b831167e91a0ea2ea6e2b813a99a65c296adb5a8) (http://img127.imageshack.us/my.php?image=diabrcke1pd4.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg249.imageshack.us%2Fimg249%2F6071%2Fbraunerviaduktautobahnngf8.th.jpg&hash=38d7f0deef072d648f6d72b877fbe1e32dd4ead0) (http://img249.imageshack.us/my.php?image=braunerviaduktautobahnngf8.jpg)
SimCityPlaza_Railviaducte#BETA (http://www.simcityplaza.de/content/view/369/172/)
Gutten arbeit ArkenbergeJoe, danke schön (excuse my bad german :P)
The new viaducts are great, ArkenbergeJoe! Thank you for updating them.
Cheers,
Kevin
Excellent work as usual AJ :thumbsup:
Those viaducts look great! Maybe someone could make some TE shops or warehouses with jobs to fit "under the arches", which is a common sight in the UK.
I had to try it out:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi161.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft216%2FBluepelican31%2FVIADUCT.jpg&hash=7b24c74bc907ce6e8c902ceafccb30898858bbb6)
Nice!
Nice use of the Sam there, although those aren't my intersection textures... ()what()
is that for heavy rail, or light rail? I don't like the "high tech" elevated rail the game comes with, doesn't look real.
The Viaduct is for the heavy-rail. This is not compatible with the SAM-Mod, and funktions only with the separaty Puzzlepieces.
Die Viadukte sind für die "schwere" Eisenbahn. Sie ist nicht kompatibel mit dem SAM, und funktioniert nur mit separaten Puzzleteilen.
Actually it was the intersection with the road I was refering to. I can send you the files from SAM if you need to add the textures in.
Speaking of sending files, I'd still need the SAM road intersection templates, so I can create a plugin for the Euro Road Textures Mod. Of course I could extract the FSH files and edit those, but I figure that editing the templates would save some time. :)
yes it would, however my external hard drive is out of commision at the moment and has all the files on it :'(
I'm pretty sure it's a problem with the chip, and the hard drive is OK, but need to get a new one. I was going to do up the textures for you once I got the hard drive back up and running. If you have the textures for the intersections you could email them to me (I think you have my hotmail address) and I'll put it together.
Uhh, that's too bad - I hope you get the HD back up and running soon. You could try to put it in your PC case (usually, external HDs are standard IDE or S-ATA drives) and copy the data over to your internal HD. Ok, then I'll have a look which textures are needed and send you some Euro templates instead.
@Andreas Do you have an existing template for the Euro Textures? I can make overlays out of them for use with the SAM and then I can start making the Euro Textures as we go. That may be a simple way to do it and we can build it into the installer so that it is a selectable choice to have Euro Textures or Regular Textures with a radial button.
I've got a laptop, not a PC :D. In fact, the harddrive came from my last laptop which died when I threw coffee on it. &hlp
Jason: I was going to drag the textures out of the Euro Mod to do, but as above, the external drive failed this morning. Fortunatly I have sent you most of what I have done, so didn't lose too much.
Quote from: Diggis on October 05, 2007, 06:59:24 AM
I've got a laptop, not a PC :D. In fact, the harddrive came from my last laptop which died when I threw coffee on it. &hlp
Jason: I was going to drag the textures out of the Euro Mod to do, but as above, the external drive failed this morning. Fortunatly I have sent you most of what I have done, so didn't lose too much.
Thats good!! Do you think it is possible to get the PEGs Dirt Roads and Torolcas Dirt Streets, along with the SAM Euro done by the date quoted to you earlier? It gives us some time, if not we can get as far as we can on the SAM Euro done by that time and still be ready. You dont have to worry as much about the SAM Euro, it is easy for me to copy/paste the Euro overlays, but for all the new stuff you make, lets make both Euro and Regular textures for easier implementation.
As I showed in the SAM thread, I do have the Roundabouts ready, for Cobblestone, Herringbone and Aspahlt texture sets. I can send you the PSD files if you'd like to see if you can get the Gravel and Dirt ones ready. Later tonight or maybe tomorrow, I will gather everything that I have and send it to you again Diggis.
excellent. I emailed you the PNG overlays for the dirt roads, with AVE, OWR and Road intersections done. It came from work, so might be in your Junk Mail.
Luckily this is all I had done, before the hard drive stopped, so I have a copy of it. If you send me Trolcas FSH files again, i can start work in the mean time while I get the hard drive sorted.
I asked frimi about templates for the Euro textures, but he said that he doesn't have any - I guess he simply copied the same dashed white lines over and over again when new textures were out. Currently, I'm quite busy since tomorrow the local observatory (where I'm one of the staff members) celebrates the annual astronomy day and the 50th anniversary of the launch of Sputnik 1. If you want, just extract the Euro textures from the ERTM yourself; I figure that you only need a handful of textures to create some templates for the SAM (straight, T intersection, 4-way intersection etc.). I won't be home for most of the day tomorrow, but if you have any questions, post them here or fire me a mail/PM.
hey Andreas that sounds pretty cool hope ya take some pics to show if something cool comes up during the engagement :thumbsup:
Actually, I'm creating something "cool" right now - more of that later, and not in this thread. ;)
Sputnik day isn't as fun as the celebrations for Yuri's day. Less getting drunk and singing songs and more math. ^-^
...At least, that's how it was here.
Also, you promised me some textures to bang on :P
-Crissa
Alright Andreas - now you have me waiting in suspense on the latest offering for NAM
(Will it solve my crap transit problems in Solaria - who knows)
But as for the pass overs at the top of the page - yay, something a little more realistic and seen in NZ :thumbsup:
Quote from: Andreas on October 05, 2007, 01:56:35 PM
I asked frimi about templates for the Euro textures, but he said that he doesn't have any - I guess he simply copied the same dashed white lines over and over again when new textures were out. Currently, I'm quite busy since tomorrow the local observatory (where I'm one of the staff members) celebrates the annual astronomy day and the 50th anniversary of the launch of Sputnik 1. If you want, just extract the Euro textures from the ERTM yourself; I figure that you only need a handful of textures to create some templates for the SAM (straight, T intersection, 4-way intersection etc.). I won't be home for most of the day tomorrow, but if you have any questions, post them here or fire me a mail/PM.
Was it just the roads that were effected by the Mod?
Quote from: Dexter on October 03, 2007, 09:34:53 AM
Those viaducts look great! Maybe someone could make some TE shops or warehouses with jobs to fit "under the arches", which is a common sight in the UK.
Rather late to be quoting, but that's exactly what I was thinking :)
Some suggestions for puzzle peices (for purely eycandish use):
slow road markings:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.istockphoto.com%2Ffile_thumbview_approve%2F95671%2F2%2Fistockphoto_95671_slow_road.jpg&hash=288fc1aee451b19bc125b2ba4eb7dce8efdc8c9e)
(EDIT: OMG, wow its already been done, (damn welsh) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg33.imageshack.us%2Fimg33%2F4156%2Fabbeybus33pz.jpg&hash=91c8412f2bc4af769980de91d1583c218ca24224))
speed camera warnings, and full width rumble strips.
also speed bumps and road width limmiters (a curb that extends over a whole lane to stop traffic flowing one way)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hsvcity.com%2Fengineering%2FTrafficEng%2Fimages%2Fspeed%2520table.jpg&hash=d95f75ec06625b6dc10eeef976fbce0bd94f5076)
Another thing that would be marvellous would be a texture rework of some of the puzzle pieces. just because some look odd
and can you have dynamic texturing on puzzle pieces, that follow the textures of the pieces next to them IE the GLR under road doesnt follow the textures of the glr, it has grass around it even in inner city...
Joe
It should be possible, I'd think. Looks like we'll have to look into it some more.
Could you possibly divulge what could be possible?? There were more than one ideas in that post ???... lol
Joe
The SLOW lots would probably end up being transit-enabled, since they're just 1x1 lots.
The retexturing of the puzzle pieces... that is being considered and will probably be worked on soon.
Dynamic texturing: it may be possible.
Thanks, about the slow lots, i though the NAM team was dead against TE lots... lol
WOOO re texturing, that's good to here, having OCD doesn't really help
Joe
The SLOW lots probably wouldn't be made as an official part of the NAM, just like the traffic control lots by bigredfish (no trucks, no cars, etc.)
QuoteThanks, about the slow lots, i though the NAM team was dead against TE lots... lol
lol, TE lots are only for certain things.
I'd be more in favor of a puzzle piece myself. ;)
-Alex (Tarkus)
I was just starting to roll together another test plugin for more general testing, and need an opinion:
In a default game, the player is penalized whenever a Sim who prefers transit is forced to drive, and vice-versa. This is done by adding extra time to their commutes when forced to use alternate transportation.
The thing is, everyone seems to hate this aspect of the game. The player has no way to know that it is happening, and it is impossible to build healthy car-only or transit-only cities.
How do people feel about changing this part of the simulation entirely? Some Sims would still choose to drive and others to take a bus, *first*. But as long as they could get to work, somehow, they would use it and the player would not be penalized. Then the "walking-distance-to-train" city becomes possible, and the "what's a bus?" city...
Seems like trading a poorly-implemented feature, for another one that people might enjoy more. And the game would be more intuitive too. Thoughts?
I think this would be a good change. I don't like the implementation of transit preference because it seems biased towards cars as the preferred mode of transit - almost no matter what you do. I'm sure you could have a long debate about how realistic this is or is not - and the answer would depend on what part of the globe you call home.
I do have a question, though. If you remove the transit preference penalty, would the game ignore transit preference completely? Or would sims select the most efficient path first, then the preferred mode of transit if multiple paths of equal value are found?
This could add a new twist to the game, for sure.
Quote from: ScottFTL on October 22, 2007, 01:49:10 PM
If you remove the transit preference penalty, would the game ignore transit preference completely? Or would sims select the most efficient path first, then the preferred mode of transit if multiple paths of equal value are found?
Actually, they'd try to use their "preferred" transit first. If it gets them to work within their "max commute time," nothing would change from the way that the game works now. It's just when traffic congestion jams up the roads, so Sims who work far away can't get there any more by car like they wanted to, those Sims would try a mass-transit option instead, without penalty. Only if that commute also failed, would the "no-job" zot appear.
As for what the initial choice settings should be, that's up for debate. The initial settings aren't bad. At least letting them try alternate routes "for free" gives the player some time to work during a "population explosion" before the city collapses on itself (which it will anyway, eventually).
BTW, there are three "preferences" for Sims: Transit, Drive, and whatever's fastest. For each wealth level, we can set the proportions of how many prefer each. The problem with a universal "Fastest" strategy is that all the Sims always do the same exact thing, until it gets congested, and then they all do the *other* thing, and so on. Giving them preferences is a good idea.
Just wanted to let everyone know that I incorporated a lot of the ideas that have been discussed, and there's an alpha "a03" now available in my "Commute Tweking for NWM" thread.
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=2665.msg83692#msg83692
Details there. "Park-and-Ride" mod is now included as an *option* for those who wanted to try it; I have included a full set of "patched" Maxis Transit buildings needed for proper "Park and Ride" operation. These are of course optional also. Testing "Park and Ride" is best done with a SC4 Startup Manager profile and new cities; it's just like the RH expansion in that all those buildings would have to be demolished and rebuilt...
All sorts of nifty stuff in there. Have fun with it. Playing on "hard" is actually challenging and fun, rather than frustrating and impossible.
Sorry to triple-post...
While the board was down for maintenance I noticed that a lot of users would prefer not to change the existing path plugins too much. So I combed over the existing NAM plugins to see which ones that already exist are "good." That way people who prefer to stay with the familiar behavior of the "legacy" plugins could do so.
And by "good" I mean, they don't make gameplay any harder or more buggy, relative to the default. "Good" means "no damage" and that's all. The definition of "improved" is up to the player.
The purpose here, is just to report back, so users and the NAM team can make decisions. Then I'm going to step off it, and work on something else, because I've taken this issue about as far as it can go. :)
"$Deal"$ REPORT:
* The "Maxis Default" pathfinding plugin version is neutral. No problems with it.
* All the "Maxis-Speed, Maxis-Pathfinding" variations are fine too, except that the Maxis pathfinding heuristic isn't as good for gameplay as the one the "Better Pathfinding" version uses. The Maxis number makes the zone developer very conservative, so R$$$ especially is harder to grow than maybe it should be, and harder to keep from downgrading to R$$. That's a player's choice issue, though, not a technical problem per se.
* All the "Better Pathfinding, Default Speed" variations are rather good as they are. Users should see a more sane job-distance vs. commute time calculation, nothing too radical but it definitely helps compared to the default values. What's really "Better" is not the pathfinding itself, but the zone developer's estimate of the actual commute times that the pathfinder will eventually discover after Sims move into a new building. This lets the zone developer make better decisions about what to build and where. The person who made this plugin, if I understand the old threads correctly, seemed to have an intuitive sense that the solution being sought was around here somewhere.
* The ones that increase "Max Commute" also expand the "short/medim/long" commute distances that zones see. As a result, the circle in which Sims see a "short" commute gets bigger, and demand/desirability improves. The default game is very difficult in this regard, the 2x Commute helps a lot, and the 5x Commute produces the kind of (much easier) game behavior that SC3K exhibited. At 5x Commute pretty much any Sim on a large map can get anywhere else on it, and most of the map sees a short or medium commute time. The 10x Commute is pretty radical in this regard, almost everyone's commute is short, and demand/desirablity really can skyrocket. Some people might like that, and there's nothing technically wrong with doing it - this is real demand, based on how the simulators naturally react. Player's choice again.
* I looked into Capacity variations also. The amount of traffic required to annoy residents with noise and please businesses with customers, does not change when you change the capacities. There's also a limit to how bad/good the noise/customers number can get. If these variations are working for people, there's no compelling reason to change them.
CONCLUSION:
Therefore, to solve the Commute Time/Abandonment problems, without confusing and angering players with existing regions, just drop the "Radical Custom Special," and all the increased speed and "perfect pathfinding" ones from the next release. That will greatly reduce the number of plugins to support. The remainder range from neutral to beneficial in a predictable manner, and existing users will at least see names they recognize to help them migrate.
Again, just trying to sum up research to users and the Team here, so I can move on to more interesting things.
Thanks for the in-depth research, this is certainly much appreciated. :) For my personal use, I modified the "better pathfinding, Maxis speeds and capacities", where I doubled the commute time value, and I tripled the capacity of the Maxis streets. This has greatly improved my gameplay, I rarely have any abandonment anymore, but of course this also requires careful city planning, it's definitely not acting like a cheat. The tripled capacity for streets is a personal preference, since I like to use streets for low and certain mid density developments, such as row houses. It won't prevent overcrowded streets if they are used at inappropriate places, but it surely helps to reduce the overall congestion of the transportation network.
Include your pathfinding mod too. It'll give people another choice to see which one they would prefer.
Ohh. I finally found the place where you can contribute.
Quote from: Kellydale2003 on November 24, 2007, 01:48:43 PM
Ohh. I finally found the place where you can contribute.
Do you actually have something to contribute? Or are you going to show the same waste of time you sent me in PMs?
Quote from: Kellydale2003 on November 24, 2007, 01:48:43 PM
Ohh. I finally found the place where you can contribute.
Superchad? Is that you? $%Grinno$%
But seriously, show us some proof. You keep mentioning these amazing things you are doing but never show anything.
nam suggestion :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg167.imageshack.us%2Fimg167%2F4816%2Fnamsuggestunderbridgesh4.jpg&hash=fa1d8021508ab5aa38da7009f6160f5bf2b132d9)
there's 2 tile under sydney bridge.
how possible to make avenue under bridge in this 2 tile?
one more request
every bridge has no pedestrain walk way.
it might be good if you have space for people walk on the bridge over the river or canal(real canal, maxis water not plop canal).
Just an hypotesis: wouldn't be possible to use the same technology applied for the heavy rail under road puzzle pieces to make road/avenue/anything under something else ones??
t wouldn't be possible to make a road network under a different road network, say Avenue under highway becuase you would either have a low capacity highway and a high speed Avenue or a high capacity avenue and a low speed Highway. but road over road would be possible and monorail over avenue wold be possible
Nobody says that the two networks must run in parallel.
Over at the German SimForum, Nardo69 suggested more general road underpasses with NAM puzzle pieces: a Marrast ramp to go underground and NAM puzzle pieces of street/road/avenue/1way/tram-avenue below all networks (and open space).
This approach would overcome the rigidity of the popular Marrast underpasses and would be much better than the present practise of converting car (but no bus) passengers to underground passengers (as e.g., in Buddybuds underpasses and also, I believe, the Big Dig, never tested the latter one).
@Warrior, the restriction (same speed/capacity for both networks on a tile) does also apply for the Marrast underpasses. Nothing we can do about it, and no reason not to use road underpasses ...
Quotea Marrast ramp to go underground and NAM puzzle pieces of street/road/avenue/1way/tram-avenue below all networks
Ta-Dah..... Exactly what I meant ;D... Hope he'll realize them...
Right sorry &ops
So If I understand right exactly like the over passes in the NAM except they go under not over?
Quote from: Warrior on January 06, 2008, 03:44:34 AM
So If I understand right exactly like the over passes in the NAM except they go under not over?
In principle yes. In addition to the equivalents of road overpass puzzle pieces, underpass pieces would also be required below pedestrian zones and tram-in-avenue.
Thanks for clearing that up. :)
I am not 100% clear on this. But I will give my two cents anyways, so forgive my ignorance if I say something that is already said.
First off, it is IMPOSSIBLE to drag or enable a drag under any portion of a bridge. This is not a possibility. The only way possible to get "Under Bridge Scenary" is by offsetting lots.
Alrighty, the Marrast underpasses are actually an interesting thought to bring to this topic. I have never thought about implmenting a Marrast Underpass in this situation. Depending on how they work, it may just be feasible to make a "ground level" over hanging model that goes under the bridge and give us "functional" under bridge roads. But, of course this would take much experimenting and time to develope, if it is even possible.
__________________________________________________________________
Now, you guys have also brought up a question about Blahdy's Boston Big Dig and Buddybud's Underpasses. Currently, they make Road Traffic turn into Subway traffic and you must drag a subway between the two lots.
What if... What if we enabled Road Traffic to be added to the subway system?
Well, you would have two separate Traffic types on the same system which works within the issues of dual networking. Subways will never cross a 3rd party network and therefore will only ever have 2 Traffic Types on the system.
With this we will be able to keep Road traffic from the Boston Big Dig lots separate from the actual subway traffic and control the access with the Station lots. Subway traffic will only be able to leave Subway Stations, Road Traffic will only be allowed to leave through Boston Big Dig lots.
Also, this will get around the issue of Road traffic having an advantage in speed by taking the under ground "road". Currently, when converted to subway traffic the cars will be travelling at Subway speeds of 225 km/h, whereas we can set the new speed to 100 km/h equal to that of a highway.
These are the three biggest areas that make underground highways not entirely functional in game. But, with a simple update and a patch to all the Boston Big Dig and Buddybud Lots we can get under ground traffic more functional.
Now, in the experiments that Warrior and I had worked on we ran into one issue. An issue the can probably be fixed fairly easily. When we had a road moving in a parrallel fashion directly above the subway the cars would suddenly jump from underground to above ground. This would probably have to do with the pathing that we did. What we did was copy the road network paths into the subway path files and left them alone. Because the road paths were still set at height 0m then they would technically be "touching" the paths for the actualy road, this may be confusing to some, but the game would essentially see them as intersecting paths and would treat it as an intersection and allow cars to choose which path to take. We should be able to overcome this issue by setting the paths at a negative height so the paths are set underground and cannot be in contact with other surface paths.
So, technically, in a theoretical aspect. We should be able to get functional Underground highways. Which would allow for underbridge traffic... (semi dual networking aswell)...
I still have this concept in my mind of the game implementing tunnels as a sort of invisible subway for roads, highways and rail.
David
Whoa.... It's nice to see that I've begun an interesting discussion.... I hope to see the results of your works as soon as possible.... again thank you for wht you do for the game and the community.....
When preparing myself for the work on the recently published Marrast Underpasses Updated SFBT BSC (http://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=1401) I spent some time to investigate underpasses in SC4. Underpasses are mainly used for flat area, otherwise you would use tunnels or overpasses (bridges).
In summary, there exist two approaches:
1) pathed connections (the proposed NAM puzzle pieces or TE-Lots - like the updated Marrast underpasses and Jeronij's street underpass (http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=117)); and
2) ramps connected by the underground=subway system (Buddybud underpasses (http://www.savefile.com/files/78128) and the Big Dig)
The second system comes with several disadvantages:
a) They convert cars to underground, but not busses, vans and pedestrians
b) They mix normal underground with converted cars
c) Emergency vehicles (fire fighters) cannot pass
d) UDI does not work
e) Rich Sims tend to avoid public transport (the underground) - will influence the game somehow
f) Underground is much faster than road - will influence the game somehow
Due to these disadvantages, I decided myself for approach 1) last autumn and spent some time to work on the Marrast underpasses, together with Andreas and the SFBT, based on previous work by the BSC.
Of course, there are several disadvantages to approach 1 when using pathed TE-Lots:
a) TE-Lots can cause problems in the game simulations as discussed by Mott in this forum.
b) Rigidity. Each pathed TE-Lot is fixed for one certain situation, e.g., straight road under straight dual rail. The set Marrast Underpasses Updated SFBT BSC (http://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=1401) contains 13 lots (plus a MML), just for the most common underpasses.
c) The traffic simulation for cars (blue lines), calculated when playing the game, shows strange behavior in few cases. Example: Car traffic (blue lines) can jump from the road (underground) to the highway. The animations are not affected - no animated car will jump (the depth is 8 meters in the Marrast path files).
I hope / believe that pathed NAM underpass puzzle pieces can overcome these disadvantages.
It is, of course, possible to extended the Marrast underpasses for tram-in-avenues (tram=GLR) and to have four path types on one tile (car, pedestrian, tram, train):
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg257.imageshack.us%2Fimg257%2F4112%2Fc1sv6.th.jpg&hash=874f2376f5a3ccbe4a8b364b22fc3e2187d5fe5f) (http://img257.imageshack.us/my.php?image=c1sv6.jpg)
This is an unpublished functional TE-Lot. It also works for tram-in-avenue under avenue and ground highway and for street or avenue under tram-in-avenue. NAM team members who have access to the SFBT test center can download it from my subdirectory and test it, the one under the highway has a known bug that I will fix).
Being a fan of the recently published Gare du Nord of Xannepan that has twelve tracks, I extended a functional Marrast rail underpass to 8 and 12 tracks widths and posted a picture on the German SimForum
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg138.imageshack.us%2Fimg138%2F5967%2Fgaredunordunderpass8fc9.th.jpg&hash=921066789f461019b552229bbb42ebcf4ee3cb8b) (http://img138.imageshack.us/my.php?image=garedunordunderpass8fc9.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg158.imageshack.us%2Fimg158%2F7255%2Fgaredunordunderpasstg5.th.jpg&hash=f523f9375f2eed46b39c86e61a5aa3da2a2c9285) (http://img158.imageshack.us/my.php?image=garedunordunderpasstg5.jpg)
That was the moment when Nardo69 (and now Lollo) suggested more general road underpasses with NAM puzzle pieces:
a Marrast ramp to go underground and NAM puzzle pieces of street/road/avenue/1way/tram-avenue below all networks (and open space).
We may want to build an underpass under the rail tracks behind the station with one ramp parallel to the rail tracks and the other ramp perpendicular - and a non-straight underground road connection.
As Warrior pointed out, this would be quite similar to the road overpasses already existing in the NAM, therefore, I guess it should be possible to make it. A pathed connection. No TE-Lot and no rigidity anymore. :)
Simply connecting two ramps is, of course, the most appealing solution for users. jplumbley, your proposed system of enabled Road Traffic to be added to the subway system, if it works, sounds perfect. However, this is only true if it would allow emergency vehicles and UDI to pass. If not, the puzzle pieces would still be the preferable solution, at least for me. If the fire fighters cannot pass, it's no solution for me ... ;)
Sorry for the length of the posting, but it's a summary.
Please, this is a technical discussion on NAM development. If you wish to comment on the Marrast underpasses, please do so in this thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1121.0)
I love those underpasses!!! So much more realistic than the in-game tunnels. I can't wait for this to be released. Later.
I LOVE!! Crissim's approach!! Go guys.. more super work.
Thank you, but Please, this is a technical discussion on NAM development. If you wish to comment on the Marrast underpasses, please do so in this thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1121.0)
Quote from: Chrisim on January 06, 2008, 01:03:13 PM
Simply connecting two ramps is, of course, the most appealing solution for users. jplumbley, your proposed system of enabled Road Traffic to be added to the subway system, if it works, sounds perfect. However, this is only true if it would allow emergency vehicles and UDI to pass. If not, the puzzle pieces would still be the preferable solution, at least for me. If the fire fighters cannot pass, it's no solution for me ... ;)
To be totally honest, UDI is the last thing I am worried about. I care more about the accuracy of the functionality before the UDI. If it doesnt work properly, we will cause Simulator problems and if we cause Simulator problems thats the worst thing possible.
Quote from: Chrisim on January 06, 2008, 01:03:13 PM
Simply connecting two ramps is, of course, the most appealing solution for users. jplumbley, your proposed system of enabled Road Traffic to be added to the subway system, if it works, sounds perfect. However, this is only true if it would allow emergency vehicles and UDI to pass. If not, the puzzle pieces would still be the preferable solution, at least for me. If the fire fighters cannot pass, it's no solution for me ... ;)
Personally, I think that 2 ramps that could be connected by subway would make the underpasses vastly more functional and versatile than any puzzle piece system would allow. You could just base it off the same technology that blahdy uses in his Big Dig set.
The technique that me and JPlumbley are experimenting on makes it so that cars travel through the BBD lots enter the Subway as cars travel along the subway as cars and exit as cars.
I wish to encourage you to proceed with your experiments of car traffic to be added to the subway system. It sounds very appealing because of its simplicity for players. Please, can you clarify whether emergency vehicles will pass?
Yes emergency vehicules, busses and frieght trucks will pass,
But this is still highly experimently and does not function 100% correctly as JPlumbley said.
Hmm this is intresting discussion here for sure and I to would love to see how emergency vehical's can use this... I love to UDI for some strange reason lol...
Yet another random pic... ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg177.imageshack.us%2Fimg177%2F4384%2Fglrwithcatenariesav6.jpg&hash=5f5d047b9568caa18b70d69bd2abc1f258b70ffe)
Unfortunately, I can't center frogface's catenaries properly, since they are rendered off-centered (and the LE won't allow props that overlap the lot more than 50%). But maybe someone can do something about that... :)
Amazing T21 work, Andreas! :thumbsup:
Keep it up and I look forward to seeing more!
Cheers,
Kevin
Quote from: Andreas on January 18, 2008, 02:55:53 PM
Yet another random pic... ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg177.imageshack.us%2Fimg177%2F4384%2Fglrwithcatenariesav6.jpg&hash=5f5d047b9568caa18b70d69bd2abc1f258b70ffe)
Unfortunately, I can't center frogface's catenaries properly, since they are rendered off-centered (and the LE won't allow props that overlap the lot more than 50%). But maybe someone can do something about that... :)
You . . . are . . . a . . . GOD!!! All your work is awesome. Pretty soon, you'll create an add-on that just lets us think of the perfect city and it appears on the screen. I can only wait for your next great leap forward.
Hehe, thanks guys! :) And woohoo, another breakthrough - I was able to edit frogface's catenary prop manually, so I was able to place it properly:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg262.imageshack.us%2Fimg262%2F9403%2Fglrwithcatenaries2bm1.jpg&hash=cf71885c1645abb622fcd65513a31570c95a8ef7)
I . . . I click on the thread, and I start hearing chant, and then . . . then a huge shaft of light that appears to grace your total awesomeness. I have but one thing to add . . .
HALLELUJAH!!!
Oh, and you rock. ;D
this is great! i love how it looks. :thumbsup:
a pity the catenaires can't be made &mmm
mauricio.
I kind of like the SFBT catenaries better. ::)
But that's just me. :P
i meant the cables can't be made &mmm
mauricio.
Kinda agree with SA there, but this is a great development in any case.
Well, maybe Kenworth can whip up some realistic tram catenaries - so far, I'm only recycling frogface's old ones. The SFBT rail catenaries won't really fit here, since they are too massive for a tram line.
I personally think that the SFBT cantenaries with the pole in the center would look really good on a tram line, but then again, I could be wrong. It's happened before. :D
Those catenaries looks awesome!
I'm busy translating names of the Puzzlepieces from the NAM into Dutch atm. Boring work /wrrd%&
Is it okay if do not use 'puzzlepiece' (puzzelstuk) in each name, it's very hard to translate that sometimes
EDIT: Do I need to translate this:
"To me, pavement is a wonderful thing - the hard smooth surface, the extreme heat on a summers day. But it can be costly to create and maintain. If you are looking to save a few simoleons you might consider <a href="#link_id#game.tool_plop_network(network_tool_types.DIRT_ROAD)">ANT Network</a> as an alternative. There's something special about the bumpy ride and billows of dust that only an unpaved path can provide. And what a boon to our local car wash owners!"
Was this a suggestory message that the Traffic Advisor would give when Dirt Road would've been implemented by Maxis or so?
Well, seeing as it refers to the Dirt Road network, rather than the new purpose we've given the ANT... I don't think it needs to be translated.
Whew, I just finished it.
I translated both NetworkAddonMod_locale_english.dat and RuralHighwayMod_locale_english.dat.
I renamed the finished ones to
z_NetworkAddonMod_locale_Dutch.dat and z_RuralHighwayMod_locale_Dutch.dat; this should make them override the default locale.dat's, thus showing the translation, right?
Every entry in both files was translated, except ^^. Some are really fluent Dutch, others lack fluency, because some terms are hard to translate (draggable & overpass, eg.)
EDIT: It works.
EDIT2: Added .zip with the translation. Depends on you what will happen to it
caspervg, thank you so much for the translation! :thumbsup: I'm sure the Dutch users will appreciate it. :)
-Alex (Tarkus)
This is great news! Having translated the whole NAM myself, I know how tedious the work is - and you started from nothing, while I was able to do it gradually over the time.
thank you casper, much appreciated, although i reinstallend and went to the Englisch version of the game ;)
Quick question to the NAM team... Everyone is well aware of the unfortunate glitch that results in any on-slope puzzle piece to end up shaded incorrectly. It has been a personal frustration of my own for quite some time.
I've thought about it and was wondering. Is there any way to hack the model file so that you can have the pictures from two seperate models merged into one?
For instance, if we know the precise color modulation that the shadow function in SC4 produces, we can adjust the textures accordingly to produce and end-result that looks identical to the lighted sides. Then, you hack that color-modded piece in with the other pieces to give the whole model an identical texture when placed on the slope. Does that make sense?
Different models for different rotations?
One normal colour one a brighter texture?
It is possible although it would require at least twice the amount of puzzle pieces.
It's a good idea.
Quote from: Warrior on January 20, 2008, 02:25:36 PM
Different models for different rotations?
One normal colour one a brighter texture?
It is possible although it would require at least twice the amount of puzzle pieces.
It's a good idea.
Not an entire set of two separate puzzle pieces. I'm talking about dissecting and reassembling the models so that there are two individual renderings in one puzzle set piece. So, for example, you have one puzzle piece for On-Slope Roads. All the various models that reflect normal light (i.e. not shadowed) stay the same. So, lets say that the north, east and south-facing puzzle pieces all appear normal in SC4. The west-facing puzzle piece is shadowed. The shadowed piece is extracted and
replaced with the lighter textured model so that the whole set appears non-affected. Does that make sense?
Yes that does now,
I can not explain it fully as I don't have the time.
There is one main RUL section which defines everything about the puzzle piece. That section defines it without being rotated.
The other rotations are seperate puzzle piece RULs which copy the RUL section I said above but rotate it however many 90 deg is required. (rotate 90 = 1, rotate 180 (90x2) = 2, rotate 270 (90x3) = 3)
Therefore it should be possible to refer different models to different rotations but the models would have to be rotated manually, which shouldn't be a problem.
In other words it's possible and probably hasn't been done because noone has made lighter textures.
Have been thinking of making some tram catenaries myself, I just miss some good pictures of it.
Well Serkanner have provide me some, but could use some more pictures.
Quote from: Warrior on January 21, 2008, 09:20:58 AM
Yes that does now,
I can not explain it fully as I don't have the time.
There is one main RUL section which defines everything about the puzzle piece. That section defines it without being rotated.
The other rotations are seperate puzzle piece RULs which copy the RUL section I said above but rotate it however many 90 deg is required. (rotate 90 = 1, rotate 180 (90x2) = 2, rotate 270 (90x3) = 3)
Therefore it should be possible to refer different models to different rotations but the models would have to be rotated manually, which shouldn't be a problem.
In other words it's possible and probably hasn't been done because noone has made lighter textures.
Well, all we need for sure is a general idea of how the shadowing affects the color of the texture. It should be a simple formula, only moving the RGB values a bit towards the dark end of the spectrum... I could fiddle around with a picture of the lighted ramp piece to get a good guess of what needs to be done to the values to make it appear shaded.
Then, all we need to do is shift the original textures the opposite way to figure out what they need to be pre-render.
Yeah but the puzzle pieces all show it, visible only on 2 rotations. So lightening it would cause a problem on the other end... why not just remove the shadows and see if that changes something - I'd be willing to give up the shadows...
After actually looking in game haveing different textures would not work as if you rotate the camera the pieces that were previously fine now have that glitch.
Quote from: vester on January 21, 2008, 09:30:59 AM
Have been thinking of making some tram catenaries myself, I just miss some good pictures of it.
Well Serkanner have provide me some, but could use some more pictures.
I will forward your request to SimForum - there are quite a few tram nuts there. ;)
Hope is not a problem to announce this new mod i've made...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdescargas.capitalsim.net%2Fimages%2Fbat%2F882_2.jpg&hash=fceb62208a3f37e1912910f37ca27cd106b3362b)
The picture explains it ;)
I would download that in 2 seconds flat (if I could) :thumbsup:
Awesome work!
A-W-E-S-O-M-E!!! You really need to be on the NAM Team.
@ vester:
The so-called "Florianerbahn" in Upper Austria:
http://xover.mud.at/~tramway/fotokiste/image.php/Florianerbahn3.jpg?group=stadtverkehr-austria-fotos&msg=8574&att=3
1977, Vienna 2nd district:
http://www.bahnforum.info/mkportal/modules/gallery/album/a_8764.jpg
Outskirts of Vienna - 60s:
http://xover.mud.at/~tramway/fotokiste/image.php/Br%26uuml%3Bnner%20Stra%26szlig%3Be.jpg?group=stadtverkehr-austria-fotos&msg=4870&att=1
Vienna, about 1930:
http://xover.mud.at/~tramway/fotokiste/image.php/Mast%201.jpg?group=stadtverkehr-austria-fotos&msg=4871&att=2
About 1905:
http://xover.mud.at/~tramway/fotokiste/image.php/Mast%202.jpg?group=stadtverkehr-austria-fotos&msg=4871&att=1
Heblem: Fantastic work! I have been waiting for something like this for quite a while.
I REALLY like what you have done to the road tool stub (1x1). Turing it into a parking lot is very useful!
Also, the 90 degree road conner with streets intersecting, up to now, was only included with the Euro-road textures mod, and was something I always wanted with the standard road texture.
This texture fix is a work of art. All I can say about it is... WOW!
Best,
-Haljackey
Turning the 1x1 road stub into a parking lot is simply ingenious indeed. Even if it's only eyecandy, I could think of many situations where this comes in handy. Nice work on the transitions as well, the look a whole lot better than the ones by Maxis!
You know if you could make a LHD version ( the little stop lines at the + intersections) That would be more than awesome
it would indeed be more awesomerer than it already is... thats just brilliant. Thankyou
Joe
Vester, Andreas posted over at simforum.de you need some catenary pics
Here are some more tramway catenaries photos from me:
Istanbul, steel pipes:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg529.imageshack.us%2Fimg529%2F7477%2Fimg1613yn2.th.jpg&hash=62813c9291dc5317bbe1c9c04852ab89d36270e0) (http://img529.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img1613yn2.jpg)
Ettlingen, close to Karlsruhe, Germany, concrete
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg521.imageshack.us%2Fimg521%2F5605%2Fimg1030jx9.th.jpg&hash=54282daf904027edf2fc2e154c189922c403ba45) (http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img1030jx9.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg510.imageshack.us%2Fimg510%2F315%2Fimg1027hl6.th.jpg&hash=cc3f6e3850643049d18fd4596d650eb21e61c59e) (http://img510.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img1027hl6.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg514.imageshack.us%2Fimg514%2F425%2Fimg1036po6.th.jpg&hash=2919ab2a38ac33204c2146f053e48fa5bde1292b) (http://img514.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img1036po6.jpg)
In General modern tramway catenaries are similar to heavy railway catenaries. The biggest difference is that most heavy railways use high voltage AC (15-25 kV) thus have rather large isolators. Tramway catenaries and wires are rather close to housings etc. because of this they use DC with lower voltage (usually 500-1000V). Because of this they have rather small isolators.
In addition to this tramway speed in Germany is limited to 60 km/h, because of this tramway catenaries have more simple mechanical parts.
Hope I could help.
Bernhard :thumbsup:
Another link:
http://www.sedlacek-modellstrassenbahnen.at/galerie/details.php?image_id=27&sessionid=4260ff55c232d97a59748f656caa8ece
Quote from: Haljackey on January 21, 2008, 11:35:10 AM
Also, the 90 degree road conner with streets intersecting, up to now, was only included with the Euro-road textures mod, and was something I always wanted with the standard road texture.
I'd also requested that way back in the day on a ST thread. Someone posted a quick file that I'm still using, but it kind of fell off the radar. Having that included (and the rest, which are awesome work) would be great, especially if someone knocks those streetlights off and puts a stop sign on the second street. Definitely need versions for the RTLs, those yellow crosswalks are just ugly!
Well if you want that little mod you can download here:
http://descargas.capitalsim.net/?sitio=csc&descarga=882
Probably i could make more texture fixes, including to the RHW textures...
&apls
Nice work Heblem... Now do them for the SAM... :P
I would make one suggestion, and that is to edit the T21's to remove the traffic lights from the intersections where you have edited the crossing.
Quote from: Diggis on January 22, 2008, 03:26:44 AM
&apls
Nice work Heblem... Now do them for the SAM... :P
I would make one suggestion, and that is to edit the T21's to remove the traffic lights from the intersections where you have edited the crossing.
Good Idea i'll try that, thanks :thumbsup:
Quote from: Warrior on January 21, 2008, 10:46:51 AM
After actually looking in game haveing different textures would not work as if you rotate the camera the pieces that were previously fine now have that glitch.
But that's what I'm saying. You take the
one piece that looks correct and replace the
one that has the glitch in the current mod. That's why I said "hack" the models or whatever, because when you render one set, they are all bunched into one set of four views at five different zooms for a total of 20 images. You take out five from the altered model and replace the ugly ones with them.
Quote from: schm0 on January 22, 2008, 10:40:24 AM
But that's what I'm saying. You take the one piece that looks correct and replace the one that has the glitch in the current mod. That's why I said "hack" the models or whatever, because when you render one set, they are all bunched into one set of four views at five different zooms for a total of 20 images. You take out five from the altered model and replace the ugly ones with them.
I'm going to experiment with your idea a bit, to see if it will work.
Quote from: schm0 on January 22, 2008, 10:40:24 AM
But that's what I'm saying. You take the one piece that looks correct and replace the one that has the glitch in the current mod. That's why I said "hack" the models or whatever, because when you render one set, they are all bunched into one set of four views at five different zooms for a total of 20 images. You take out five from the altered model and replace the ugly ones with them.
What Warrior is alluding to is the fact that there is actually
only one model for that piece, used in all rotations and all zoom-levels, so there is, in effect, no way to fix this issue. ;)
Transit models (aside from bridges) are an entirely different beast than standard BAT models. Instead of being composed of a composite of isometric faces (which is what happens to BAT models upon render), they are true 3-dimensional models, so the same model is used in all rotations, and sometimes, all zoom levels. They exist in this form because of the way in which the game handles transit models--otherwise, they will be distorted upon rotation and have missing parts.
A lot of the pieces in the NAM aren't rendered through standard processes either (they can't be), and some of the pieces are actually generated entirely through mathematical means, from a series of coordinates entered into the "Vert" tab in the Reader.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Just a question, when you made the elevated rail station into a heavy rail station, did you purposely make the lot on the straight version 2x1?
Yes, that was done on purpose. Since the original model does not have viaduct props, plopping the lot would have created a gap in the rail viaduct with the size of the lot. Actually, the gap is still there, but only two tiles long - and hidded by the curved roof. Some custom path files ensure that the train automata doesn't "fall" down on ground level in that area, that's why you have to drag a short stretch of rail inside the station in order to activate the paths.
Ah...thanks for clearing that up. ;)
Quote from: Tarkus on January 22, 2008, 11:56:41 AM
What Warrior is alluding to is the fact that there is actually only one model for that piece, used in all rotations and all zoom-levels, so there is, in effect, no way to fix this issue. ;)
Transit models (aside from bridges) are an entirely different beast than standard BAT models. Instead of being composed of a composite of isometric faces (which is what happens to BAT models upon render), they are true 3-dimensional models, so the same model is used in all rotations, and sometimes, all zoom levels. They exist in this form because of the way in which the game handles transit models--otherwise, they will be distorted upon rotation and have missing parts.
A lot of the pieces in the NAM aren't rendered through standard processes either (they can't be), and some of the pieces are actually generated entirely through mathematical means, from a series of coordinates entered into the "Vert" tab in the Reader.
-Alex (Tarkus)
So the model can only point to one set of textures?
If the NAM transit model is merely a set of vertices that the program uses to define the area and shape of the transit piece, then a separate set of pieces altogether (with a lighter texture) might work, wouldn't it? Such a set would merely consist of on-slope and some ramped (rail to el) pieces.
Sorry, the on-ramp pieces have been a major nuisance of mine and the only true gripe I have ever had with the awesome product that is the NAM.
Quote from: schm0 on January 22, 2008, 04:36:51 PM
So the model can only point to one set of textures?
Well, the model can actually point to an infinite number of textures, but it can't change textures or where they are applied on rotation.
Quote
If the NAM transit model is merely a set of vertices that the program uses to define the area and shape of the transit piece, then a separate set of pieces altogether (with a lighter texture) might work, wouldn't it? Such a set would merely consist of on-slope and some ramped (rail to el) pieces.
Since there'd only be one model for each one of these separate sets, you'd basically just be having a different issue. If you made a version of it with a lighter texture, it would look too light on some rotations. You are correct that the pieces are a set of vertices (all models are sets of vertices), but they're sets of vertices with specific textures applied to them.
Quote
Sorry, the on-ramp pieces have been a major nuisance of mine and the only true gripe I have ever had with the awesome product that is the NAM.
It seems to be something with the game's rendering engine (an .exe issue), caused by the rather peculiar nature of the piece. If you've seen the actual model, it's just a really steep incline. When placed on-slope such that it's level, as the piece is intended, the game still thinks it's at an incline and renders shadows on it. I wish I could give you a better answer, but unfortunately, it appears there's nothing that can really be done to avoid the issue. &mmm Glad to hear everything else is "awesome", though. ;)
-Alex (Tarkus)
Quote from: Tarkus on January 22, 2008, 09:12:13 PM
Well, the model can actually point to an infinite number of textures, but it can't change textures or where they are applied on rotation.
Since there'd only be one model for each one of these separate sets, you'd basically just be having a different issue. If you made a version of it with a lighter texture, it would look too light on some rotations. You are correct that the pieces are a set of vertices (all models are sets of vertices), but they're sets of vertices with specific textures applied to them.
Of course, the lighter-textured pieces would only be used to replace the on-slope pieces that have the shading glitch. Thus, they would not be used in normal operation, but only after you build your bridge. You'd find the shadowed piece, then replace it with the lighter-textured piece. If I recall correctly, the piece stays shadowed at any angle. In other words, the same piece does not appear shaded in one camera view, and not in another. Right?
QuoteIt seems to be something with the game's rendering engine (an .exe issue), caused by the rather peculiar nature of the piece. If you've seen the actual model, it's just a really steep incline. When placed on-slope such that it's level, as the piece is intended, the game still thinks it's at an incline and renders shadows on it. I wish I could give you a better answer, but unfortunately, it appears there's nothing that can really be done to avoid the issue. &mmm Glad to hear everything else is "awesome", though. ;)
-Alex (Tarkus)
Another work-around would be to create an on-slope puzzle piece with no textures (and thus no shading) associated with it. Then, on the ground level 15m below the slope a 3-tile long puzzle piece (such as buddybud's underbridge scenery) is placed but with an "eye-candy" road along it's top, simulating the texture that would be there normally. You'd have to make sure that the top texture poked it's head just above the surface of the ground level. Would something like that work?
Actually, all rotations and camera views display the same model. And the piece that appears shaded in one camera view, appears correctly in another camera view, or even to bright in another one. So it is nearly impossible to fix this issue.
However, I just had the idea to use the "ResourceKeyType2"-Property in order to specify one model for each zoom and rotation. Unfortunately, it also turned out not to work because the assigning the models to different rotations depends on the rotation of the piece itself, but not on the rotation of the camera. The Property "ResourceKeyType1" works in a similar way. So I'm afraid, my idea is not feasible.
The only possible solution, I can think of, is indeed using props as you suggested, but that will involve certain other limitations, consequently, such as always having to use the 15-meters hole digger, and not digging 14 meters deep, for instance, so as to create a little arch, since the road surface would not be in line. &mmm
how about an over hanging puzzle piece?
It's possible to have a AutoPathBase so the paths could be implemented properly.
Quote from: memo on January 23, 2008, 07:59:11 AM
Actually, all rotations and camera views display the same model. And the piece that appears shaded in one camera view, appears correctly in another camera view, or even to bright in another one. So it is nearly impossible to fix this issue.
However, I just had the idea to use the "ResourceKeyType2"-Property in order to specify one model for each zoom and rotation. Unfortunately, it also turned out not to work because the assigning the models to different rotations depends on the rotation of the piece itself, but not on the rotation of the camera. The Property "ResourceKeyType1" works in a similar way. So I'm afraid, my idea is not feasible.
The only possible solution, I can think of, is indeed using props as you suggested, but that will involve certain other limitations, consequently, such as always having to use the 15-meters hole digger, and not digging 14 meters deep, for instance, so as to create a little arch, since the road surface would not be in line. &mmm
The on-slope puzzle pieces already demand a 15m raised slope to acheive an even surface. Unless you want to recreate Hazard County or you're making a stuntcar city, then the user already knows that 15m is the standard.
I'm wondering how long it would take me to make such a prop as you suggested in the BAT. I'm not what you would call an expert, but I might be able to whip something up really quick. All you need is a polygon 15.1 meters tall, 16 meters wide and 48 meters long to test it, really.
Quote from: Warrior on January 23, 2008, 09:41:34 AM
how about an over hanging puzzle piece?
It's possible to have a PathTileBase so the paths could be implemented properly.
This is beyond my limited scope of knowledge?
NAM gods, I summon thee!
I have run a few tests on an overhanging Onslope puzzle piece and it does eliminate the shadows although the humped bridge (where the sunk area was less than 15m) does not work now.
EDIT: This method cant be used with the T junction type because the way puzzle pieces are RULed
Here is a picture comparing the old (T-junction) with the new version (don't worry about about the wierd overlaps and sizes with the end road it can be fixed easily) I have not yet got the paths to work, but thats only because I havent tried to yet.)
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpgLink due to Image size (http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpgLink%20due%20to%20Image%20size)
EDIT: thanks Rickmastfan!
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpg (http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpg)
Quote from: Warrior on January 23, 2008, 12:14:47 PM
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpg (http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpg)
Fixed that link for ya. ;)
Quote from: Warrior on January 23, 2008, 12:14:47 PM
I have run a few tests on an overhanging Onslope puzzle piece and it does eliminate the shadows although the humped bridge (where the sunk area was less than 15m) does not work now.
EDIT: This method cant be used with the T junction type because the way puzzle pieces are RULed
Here is a picture comparing the old (T-junction) with the new version (don't worry about about the wierd overlaps and sizes with the end road it can be fixed easily) I have not yet got the paths to work, but thats only because I havent tried to yet.)
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpgLink due to Image size (http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpgLink%20due%20to%20Image%20size)
EDIT: thanks Rickmastfan!
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpg (http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa230/warriorST/newonslope.jpg)
About the RULs for the T-sections, is that because the T-sections can also turn into four-way intersections?
Keep us updated.
Tarkus, have you guys tried something like this before?
Replaced brighter road textures with darkened ones by using the same technique as the Alternate Railway Mod Expansion Pack for Overpasses. At the moment, only the Maxis' elevated networks were done except on/offramps.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg206.imageshack.us%2Fimg206%2F8760%2Forthelnwxorthrdsej6.th.jpg&hash=02c6747cb17a89a0365cc206255141e24a414ac2) (http://img206.imageshack.us/my.php?image=orthelnwxorthrdsej6.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg245.imageshack.us%2Fimg245%2F9040%2Forthelnwxdiagrdssn0.th.jpg&hash=6c7e7b66d8f1f81f2f724044b91c3ab68534a64d) (http://img245.imageshack.us/my.php?image=orthelnwxdiagrdssn0.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg245.imageshack.us%2Fimg245%2F6011%2Fdiagelnwxdiagrdswb2.th.jpg&hash=362ad0b544047368c467653c9a4907495e0dbebd) (http://img245.imageshack.us/my.php?image=diagelnwxdiagrdswb2.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg148.imageshack.us%2Fimg148%2F9199%2Fdiagelnwxorthrdsnr2.th.jpg&hash=b459cfb11fb8e34af23708fb41e745a8ab734c4d) (http://img148.imageshack.us/my.php?image=diagelnwxorthrdsnr2.jpg)
I have now added paths to the piece and it all works correctly and just like the old one did except for there are no shadow glitches. ;D
Now for someone else to work how to get rid of the shadows on the T Onslope pieces. ;)
EDIT: Ebina: Nice work looks much better, :thumbsup: , is it compatible with the US road textures?
Quote from: Warrior on January 24, 2008, 09:27:26 AM
Ebina: Nice work looks much better, :thumbsup: , is it compatible with the US road textures?
Thanks. Of course I'll make US version as well, some of it is here.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg242.imageshack.us%2Fimg242%2F1482%2Fnammodelsaq5.th.jpg&hash=28fea9249345896d05d8184426a59438ea892708) (http://img242.imageshack.us/my.php?image=nammodelsaq5.jpg)
NAM's Diagonal Street and Highway x Avenue Roundabout were done. And I've started tweaking the S3D files in NetworkAddonMod1.dat.
@Warrior: Heh, who would have thought of that? Great work!
@ebina: That looks a whole lot better indeed! I'd say the mod should be integrated into the NAM, both the standard Maxis intersections and the NAM ones. :)
Quote from: Warrior on January 24, 2008, 09:27:26 AM
I have now added paths to the piece and it all works correctly and just like the old one did except for there are no shadow glitches. ;D
Now for someone else to work how to get rid of the shadows on the T Onslope pieces. ;)
EDIT: Ebina: Nice work looks much better, :thumbsup: , is it compatible with the US road textures?
NAM Gods, once again, I summon thee! :)
If I understand, the only difference between these puzzle pieces and the current NAM ones is that they
must be off a 15m slope? Or do they merely show the same behavior as the current pieces do, where the slope of the network is ramped upwards or downwards?
To get the "humped" (the not 15m ditch) overpass you'll have to use the T Onslope piece, but this will have the shadow glitch.
The new OnSlope piece can only be used at 15m any difference and there will be a visible gap between the roads.
But the path will join up as they used to (overhanging paths are not possible, but this shouldn't effect the "normal" player) .
You know how to get rid of the T section, extend the T section one tile in both directions then delete the Stubs.?
EDIT: The new pieces have no changes to the RULs, it's just a model changed, so there is no need for a new essentials to be made.
Those textures look splendid, ebina! Fantastic job, my friend!
Quote from: Warrior on January 25, 2008, 11:41:31 AM
To get the "humped" (the not 15m ditch) overpass you'll have to use the T Onslope piece, but this will have the shadow glitch.
The new OnSlope piece can only be used at 15m any difference and there will be a visible gap between the roads.
But the path will join up as they used to (overhanging paths are not possible, but this shouldn't effect the "normal" player) .
You know how to get rid of the T section, extend the T section one tile in both directions then delete the Stubs.?
EDIT: The new pieces have no changes to the RULs, it's just a model changed, so there is no need for a new essentials to be made.
The T-section onslope piece was useful for those who wished to have roads
directly next to the bridges, but extending the 15m rise over two tiles should actually look quite nice.... Hmm.
Here's the old method, with 15m slopes, two roads along the side of the highway, and the t-section on-slope pieces.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff277%2Fschm01978%2Fnormal_15m_slopes_with_t_section-1.jpg&hash=37cf94fa7715c7148e6944b4c6ddbff1fdbeff54)
Here's what the 15m slopes look like stretched over two tiles, with two roads along the side of the highway, and straight on-slope pieces.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff277%2Fschm01978%2Falternative_15m_slopes_over_2_ti-1.jpg&hash=9e497bdd0aa850a8728d1fecf2eea5d1e6de8c49)
I hardly ever used the T-Intersection On-Slope pieces, anyways... and this shows a great example for an alternative to that. That is, until someone figures out how to pull off the T's.
I kinda like the double 7.5m sloped tiles better. A bit more realistic, I might add. Looks perfect for the underbridge scenery I have planned. :) (Frankie, where are you by the way?) The only thing that sucked was actually creating the slopes in the first place. The SC4 mayor mode terrain tools even on their lightest setting are so darn touchy. Which brings me to ask...
Anyone know how to create a slope-defining puzzle piece? I guess all I'd need to do is check out smoncrie's hole-digging lots. Just mod them and set them to 7.5 meters, then plop two of them. Has anyone created a multi-tile, multi-depth slope-defining puzzle peice? That would be great for defining a specific grade for any type of network... :)
Only 1 tile hole digging lots are possible.
I know what the T Onslope pieces are for, I'm just saying if you want a humped bridge effect then you'll have to use T Onslope pieces and remove the T section.
Quote from: Warrior on January 26, 2008, 12:08:43 AM
Only 1 tile hole digging lots are possible.
I know what the T Onslope pieces are for, I'm just saying if you want a humped bridge effect then you'll have to use T Onslope pieces and remove the T section.
Well, I just wanted to see what the slopes would look like... more out of my own curiosity than anything else.
As far as the hole-digging lots, that sucks.
Anyone have that link to the slope mods and their various values for each transit type?Never mind, found it (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=42&threadid=84518&highlight_key=y&keyword1=slope)
Personally, the shadow has never bothered me. I recommend that an optional patch be used, so users can decide if they want it or not.
Interesting use of the on-slopes pieces, schm0. It does give the walls on the sunken highway a more gradual grade. I'm curious to see how you'd connect on ramps, though! Keep up the good work, my friend!
Hoping this is the place to throw this.. ;)
I'm trying to make a lovely new cloverleaf with the new MIS, but I'm running into a few (aesthetic) issues. I'll let pictures describe..
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.exodusforums.com%2Fimages%2FCJ%2Fredriver%2Fhmm.jpg&hash=5d219d3a5abe6a662e297b57509156a205cdc8a3)
This is what I've got so far (meant to be an interchange under construction, somewhat).
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.exodusforums.com%2Fimages%2Fultimately.jpg&hash=4cf9e804b12f744f0d440feda5ce7a605bff6309)
Ultimately, this is what I'm gunning for, smooth flowing from all roads. Now, as far as I know there's no way to have the MIS flow smoothly onto roads.. and having the two offramps connecting to the road beside each other would look horribly unrealistic. ;) I'm wondering if you guys have any ideas for how to make this thing work? My brain is getting drained by this. :P
Cool detour, beebs.
I haven't gotten into the MIS/RHW world really deeply yet, but doesn't the RHW-2 have an exit/entrance ramp? You could replace the stretch of two-lane road under the bridge with RHW-2 and stagger the ramps (I don't recall seeing anything yet where the ramps diverge symmetrically on each side from RHW-2). Of course, I may just be dreaming about what I want. Also, alas, we're not quite yet to where RHW can cross over RHW on a bridge, so whatever you do it'll still be a bit kludgy for a while.
Good luck!
David
Aha, you're a genius.. I can use the RHW-2 to join up the MIS pieces and come together to make just a single intersection on the road. Not quite what I was hoping for, but still looks pretty good. ;) I also played around and discovered that the RHW-2 will connect seamlessly with roads.. so I can keep the interchange setup I have at the moment and switch to the RHW for the secondary highway! Oh happy days! ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.exodusforums.com%2Fimages%2Fhmm2.jpg&hash=deb411d6cb08e17186e2664838c5819a7f5cc99e)
Quote from: thundercrack83 on January 26, 2008, 11:12:15 AM
Interesting use of the on-slopes pieces, schm0. It does give the walls on the sunken highway a more gradual grade. I'm curious to see how you'd connect on ramps, though! Keep up the good work, my friend!
I plan on making a sunken RHW with a three-tile wide barrier on either side to test it out... getting the slopes to look just right is very difficult, though. Without making my own slope mod (which I've thought about doing) I don't think there's an easier way. I'm thinking of making something similar to this, which I found in one of Mulefisk's posts. (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=140.msg8920#msg8920)
I am also thinking about contacting Tarkus to see if it's possible to implement some sloped MIS-looking exit ramps with a sheer wall on one side, so that I can place it directly next to an existing parallel network. The RHW and NAM teams have talked about revamping the Maxis highways, which I really think would help make the NAM complete. A MIS exit ramp module for the Maxis highways would be the ultimate dream for me! :)
I would love to eventually acheive something like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff277%2Fschm01978%2Fexit_ramp_begin.jpg&hash=ae61045e3f715fb524287373c0bc9352541f4d35)
Look like the RHW exit ramp to you? :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff277%2Fschm01978%2Fexit_ramp_merge.jpg&hash=8113dc1e2534ffff25bc814b3d0ebe5dd3d87f9c)
It's this kind of connection to an existing network that I'm looking for.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi49.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff277%2Fschm01978%2Fexit_ramp_whole.jpg&hash=f2d1185a9a9c40d52ce474f00e09de97313e1833)
Here's an overall shot. This is from I-696, a local highway here in the Metro Detroit area. It's probably the fastest stretch of highway in all of metro or urban Detroit, and it's sunken, which I love. 20-30 foot walls line the sides until it pulls out of the more dense areas of the city. Eventually, it turns into something similar to the RHW-6, but it has 5 lanes on each side. :)
If I could realistically recreate that exit ramp, my life would be complete.
schm0! Wh0a!
You're a Transit G0d!
Wh0 knew?
This place is s0 great!
david
schm0: I think I understand what you're trying to do! I agree with you, too, if a way can be found to make exit ramps for sunken RHW highways, I will be a very happy person! That might actually be the only thing that's stopping me from going 100% RHW in my cities.
Quote from: dedgren on January 26, 2008, 05:41:12 PM
schm0! Wh0a!
You're a Transit G0d!
Wh0 knew?
This place is s0 great!
david
W0ah...:)
...all I did was suggest a few ideas and show what it would look like with two tiles on either side of a highway. Credit needs to be given to the NAM team, the RHW team, and most definately ebina and Warrior for their recent developments. Hopefully, Tarkus and the rest of the NAM team are looking to include such techniques in the next version. I haven't even begun developing anything... but hopefully that will soon change.
I'm excited that the texture glitch has been solved in some puzzle pieces, but to do it for all of them would be fantastic. I'll see if there's something I can throw together, but I'll warn everyone beforehand,
this is not my forte.Anyone know where I can find the textures for the RHW MIS exits?
Well, the ramp textures are all in the RuralHighwayMod.dat file, and they can be extracted fairly easily with SC4Tool. I have the non-broken up ones sitting in around as well, though James (rickmastfan67) is re-working all of my prototypes so they match up better with his fine texture set. I'm thinking of how best we could implement this sort of thing--it's possible that we could T21 a jersey barrier onto the outside shoulder of the RHW-8S. (That's one way to make an RHW look urban ;)). It can also be "wealth-enabled", such that it will appear when retaining walls are plopped, though you could also have the jersey barrier included in the retaining wall lot as well.
Is there a grade separation between the mainline and (what appears to be) the C/D lanes? We've had some requests to do a version of Ramp Style A that would have the MIS ramp starting another tile out away from the mainline, and that's something that could be implemented here for that purpose.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Quote from: dedgren on January 26, 2008, 12:37:52 PM
I haven't gotten into the MIS/RHW world really deeply yet, but doesn't the RHW-2 have an exit/entrance ramp?
Only with the MIS Splitter piece so far.
However, I do plan on getting default RHW-2 MIS Off/On ramps completed and ready for v21. ;)
Quote from: Andreas on January 25, 2008, 07:16:07 AM
@ebina: That looks a whole lot better indeed! I'd say the mod should be integrated into the NAM, both the standard Maxis intersections and the NAM ones. :)
I think so, too. I have edited about 1,000 S3D files. About 700 of those are from the NAM, integrating this to the NAM would be better to avoid a complication.
Quote from: Tarkus on January 26, 2008, 09:10:20 PM
Well, the ramp textures are all in the RuralHighwayMod.dat file, and they can be extracted fairly easily with SC4Tool. I have the non-broken up ones sitting in around as well, though James (rickmastfan67) is re-working all of my prototypes so they match up better with his fine texture set. I'm thinking of how best we could implement this sort of thing--it's possible that we could T21 a jersey barrier onto the outside shoulder of the RHW-8S. (That's one way to make an RHW look urban ;)). It can also be "wealth-enabled", such that it will appear when retaining walls are plopped, though you could also have the jersey barrier included in the retaining wall lot as well.
On the outside shoulder of the RHW-8S? Or the inside shoulder between the two opposing sides?
Is James the one responsible for tidying up the pieces graphically in all previous versions?
And Tarkus: the main question I really had was if it was possible to create a ploppable lot that is ramped and transit enabled, so that not only will it carry traffic off the RHW and onto a parallel network, but also appear in such a way?
Quote
Is there a grade separation between the mainline and (what appears to be) the C/D lanes? We've had some requests to do a version of Ramp Style A that would have the MIS ramp starting another tile out away from the mainline, and that's something that could be implemented here for that purpose.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Yes. The ramp exits to the left, and slowly inclines to the adjoining service drive. Well, "service drive" is what we call them here in Michigan.
The pictures I posted previously, being overhead shots, do not give the retaining walls of this highway justice... from the side it kinda looks like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent.answers.com%2Fmain%2Fcontent%2Fwp%2Fen%2F4%2F45%2FConestoga.jpg&hash=3a2497252a4cd6e1923796975812e420815e83c9)
The ramp itself looks something like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.static.flickr.com%2F2322%2F2215654323_e9a165f4ee.jpg%3Fv%3D0&hash=d98aeb331a044a59d4411711f551d36fdea8da4d)
(In this picture, the actual ramp is partially obscured, but the ramp on the left is what I'm aiming for. I searched for about 30 minutes before finding a picture of what I am trying to achieve.)
Something similar to this can be found on the STEX (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=17489) (but these can only be flat), or perhaps an opposite version of Marrast's M-Tel lots (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=16688)(going upwards instead of downwards.) What I'm thinking of will most certainly need to be BATed (because it's sloped, not flat) and I don't even know how you'd begin to get cars to appear on the top of it... *sigh*
Does that clear it up?
Here are the images from my file on the stex schmO has been linking to. (I am Bluepelican31 on Simtropolis). :satisfied:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi161.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft216%2FBluepelican31%2FSC4%2520Bridges%2Fviaduct%2Fviaductexample.jpg&hash=be3bac367a35a1416692a6b7129f576994d69b58)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi161.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft216%2FBluepelican31%2FSC4%2520Bridges%2Fviaduct%2Fviaductexample2.jpg&hash=d1fa8ee1c77b947750c8a65b8258fb52b2ab909f)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi161.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft216%2FBluepelican31%2FSC4%2520Bridges%2Fviaduct%2Fviaductitworks.jpg&hash=144a5ef83b7888c44c49f6fb7e4d0644e005a3b7)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi161.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft216%2FBluepelican31%2FSC4%2520Bridges%2Fviaduct%2Fviaductitworks2.jpg&hash=92d3a8e13ba6bb1645e69b4427724d7262063ce6)
Today's is not the Overpass Update Mod. Darkened the avenue curve piece's textures in same way.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg299.imageshack.us%2Fimg299%2F3042%2Fnamavecurvedarkenedlx9.th.jpg&hash=95241c55fa7632c0bf806e3b1c90ae0614fda07e) (http://img299.imageshack.us/my.php?image=namavecurvedarkenedlx9.jpg)
ebina: it's possible that I'll redo those avenue curve pieces so they look better and are of a consistent width. It shouldn't take me too long to do.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on January 28, 2008, 06:49:36 AM
ebina: it's possible that I'll redo those avenue curve pieces so they look better and are of a consistent width. It shouldn't take me too long to do.
Great work what I see here! &apls &apls One small request: is it possible with to create the curved (avenue/road) pieces in such way that a roundabout can be created with them (connecting to normal road/avenues at 4 corners where the 4 curved pieces (rotated) come together?)
Shadow Assassin: OK. I'll keep this one for my own use until your new one came out.
It should be alright for you to release the new darkened pieces, because RL is kind of getting in the way here - which means that it'll probably be a while [even though it'd take me half an hour to do both textures].
I am creating alternate textures for the road roundabouts, with the only difference being that I remove the crosswalks, as they make the roundabouts look "boxy." I have attained the IDs of four of the transit network entries. However, there are several IDs which I cannot find.
Here are the textures that I have replaced (I may improve them a bit more):
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.simtropolis.com%2Fforum%2Fattachments%2F%2Ffinished%252Epng&hash=2bff7eb818b3c8c0edcd697a9b53c9230c557d11)
And here are the ones that I need the IDs for:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.simtropolis.com%2Fforum%2Fattachments%2F%2Fneeded%252Epng&hash=786ba910cfec2131e3871bbc1c8f3fa5655f5300)
Thank you in advance.
Edit: You can not hotlink images from some sites ;) -jeronij-
Pictures did not show up for me.
neither for me siiiiiiigh...
ok here we go i gotten them figured out....
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg20.imageshack.us%2Fimg20%2F7669%2Fnewroundabout1gv6.jpg&hash=858be80570f8de66979d57a2c3804f6f5feb5169)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg239.imageshack.us%2Fimg239%2F4475%2Fnewroundaboutsq2.jpg&hash=bb1283a4df422460f70c368ab81d3c24fd637e4c)
converted to JPG and uploaded to imageshack ;)
Thanks pat ... Looking good, sffc.
Quote from: sffc on February 27, 2008, 03:56:45 PM
I am creating alternate textures for the road roundabouts, with the only difference being that I remove the crosswalks, as they make the roundabouts look "boxy." I have attained the IDs of four of the transit network entries. However, there are several IDs which I cannot find.
I think it might be easier to find the IDs if you download the Euro Road Texture Mod, then you don't have to look in various files, but only in the "zzz1_NAM_Euro_Textures_Roundabouts.dat".
Alternately, all of them are also located in the NetworkAddonMod_Roundabouts_Roads_Plugin.dat file, which should be in your Network Addon Mod\Plugins folder.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Thank you all for your quick responses, and thank you Pat for transferring the images!
Tarkus: I checked "NetworkAddonMod_Roundabouts_Roads_Plugin.dat" to get the IDs for the four I have already completed. That's why I'm confused of why I can't seem to find the textures that I have pictured (and that Pat has converted; they're on page 17 of this thread).
Andreas: Where do you get "zzz1_NAM_Euro_Textures_Roundabouts.dat"? And also, would that file contain the IDs for the one-way road entering the roundabout knowing that the regular "NetworkAddonMod_Roundabouts_Roads_Plugin.dat" does not?
Again, thank you for your responses.
Quote from: sffc on February 27, 2008, 05:06:31 PM
Andreas: Where do you get "zzz1_NAM_Euro_Textures_Roundabouts.dat"? And also, would that file contain the IDs for the one-way road entering the roundabout knowing that the regular "NetworkAddonMod_Roundabouts_Roads_Plugin.dat" does not?
The file should be contained in this download: http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=93 There are several roundabout plugins that come with the NAM, but for the ERTM, I put them into one DAT, so I thought it might be easier to look up the IDs in that file.
Good Stuff Pat, Keep those updates coming. :)
LoL all I did Starman was convert the STpng Img to Jpg and uploaded those pics from SFFC to imageshack thats all I did, but thank you for the compliment Starman...
Andreas: Thank you! I found the IDs I needed! &apls I should be posting the completed textures in the form of a mod fairly soon. Again, thanks for your advice! :)
sffc I cant wait to see the completed version!!!
Pat, great work on the round abouts and rails. Those photos look awesome! Keep those updates coming! :) :thumbsup: .
<p>I have finished! Find the
Road Roundabout Texture Mod on the STEX. If you would like me to post it on the LEX, just reply, and I can start my candidacy. Here are some pictures (the picture server is being a little sluggish, so it might take a while for them to load):</p>
<p>(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stex-server.com%2Flots%2Fsffc%2Fsffc_road%2520roundabout%2520texture%2520mod%2Fscreenshot1%252Ejpg&hash=e45af72b2aea9021f1913bea143e7ab4f69ce3b7) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stex-server.com%2Flots%2Fsffc%2Fsffc_road%2520roundabout%2520texture%2520mod%2Fscreenshot2%252Ejpg&hash=aabac10b154e1533b38048d9dfa7eb95bd782a85)</p>
Working on a couple new interchange models. Please let me know what you guys think. Also, could someone tell me what the acceptable size for a jpeg is (hosted from imageshack). I tried uploading these pictures on Simtropolis and they got deleted. Anyway, your feedback would be highly appreciated. Realism is the idea here.
First model to report is the lofthouse interchange. While it doesn't add any functionality to the game, it is my first model and really was just a practice run to get me acquainted with 3dsmax. However, I would like to eventually make it functional using that intersection guide from Redlotus.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg519.imageshack.us%2Fimg519%2F3789%2Flofthouseinterchange1bx5.th.jpg&hash=a00bd6c16da156ae819b4dc45c827bc900d31f71) (http://img519.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lofthouseinterchange1bx5.jpg)
The second model was a little easier to model simply because I knew more about what I was doing. It needs no explanation as you all have been talking about it for ever. For those who don't know, it is a trumpet interchange. This one, unlike the lofthouse interchange that I produced, will add functionality to the game as it is a diagonalxorthagonal T (or I guess y) interchange.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg186.imageshack.us%2Fimg186%2F3897%2Ftrumpetinterchangefy5.th.jpg&hash=ab0c4af186b9cdefa4e46e50237bbff928b4f9c8) (http://img186.imageshack.us/my.php?image=trumpetinterchangefy5.jpg)
Again, please let me know what you guys think. Constructive criticism is welcomed. I am done with the trumpet model and ready to cut it into cubes. The lofthouse interchange needs some work. Thanks.
Those are both very interesting.
I have something like that lofthouse interchange near me (from 4 lane to 2 lane though). heres a picture to help you, the slip roads do need to be longer :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg229.imageshack.us%2Fimg229%2F3042%2F77548036ne3.th.jpg&hash=eafa01e010e5854c44622444e1f20eafeb1a7e39) (http://img229.imageshack.us/my.php?image=77548036ne3.jpg)
A roundabout over sunken highway was somewhere on my to-do list after I made the roundabout under highway.
Awesome models andreharv, could really use them in the NAM, I think the last picture you showed has been requested since 2004/5
It's awesome to see the interchange work again ^-^
-Crissa
Quote from: andreharv on March 09, 2008, 06:24:34 PM
The second model was a little easier to model simply because I knew more about what I was doing. It needs no explanation as you all have been talking about it for ever. For those who don't know, it is a trumpet interchange. This one, unlike the lofthouse interchange that I produced, will add functionality to the game as it is a diagonalxorthagonal T (or I guess y) interchange.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg186.imageshack.us%2Fimg186%2F3897%2Ftrumpetinterchangefy5.th.jpg&hash=ab0c4af186b9cdefa4e46e50237bbff928b4f9c8) (http://img186.imageshack.us/my.php?image=trumpetinterchangefy5.jpg)
Again, please let me know what you guys think. Constructive criticism is welcomed. I am done with the trumpet model and ready to cut it into cubes. The lofthouse interchange needs some work. Thanks.
i would like to see this intechange in the mod as i have a city that needs this.
would it be possible to make one on a corner.
What do you mean? Like an orthagonal T intersection?
Quote from: andreharv on March 12, 2008, 12:26:01 PM
What do you mean? Like an orthagonal T intersection?
yes that is what i mean
edit added picture
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg215.imageshack.us%2Fimg215%2F4195%2Finterchangehk8.jpg&hash=4d3611d52e807ab43440442f1689608c05ed38b0)
By <a target="_new" href="http://profile.imageshack.us/user/graem007">graem007</a> at 2008-03-12
I'd like to see a ground, and evelvated Y intersection. I'm even willing to do the model, if it would help.
I don't understand this orth T section (I know what orth means)?
If you mean a highway Y intersection like the avenue Y intersection in the NAM at the moment all it needs is some changes to the avenue Y intersection and it becomes a ground highway Y intersection.
RebaLynnTS and Warrior:
I am going to make an elevated lofthouse Y interchange. I don't know if I can use the files already in the NAM to make a highway ground Y interchange...I guess I should try it.
Carling:
I am a bit confused by your last post. A orthagonal is simply the opposite of diagonal (it means straight). The picture that you included simply shows a curve (a junction between diagonal highway and orthagonal highway). If I can take a guess, it seems as though you want a Y interchange, which would have a highway branching out to the southeast (if we are looking at the picture you attached).
Quick update: I have cut the model into LODs and I am trying to render them in gmax. It looks like a few pieces are giving me error code=6. I know that this is a broad error but I was wondering if someone might have a valid opinion of this.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg255.imageshack.us%2Fimg255%2F2905%2Fcode6cz7.th.jpg&hash=6c28bbbd7055c6da05b609df6aaa6eb3d91902a9) (http://img255.imageshack.us/my.php?image=code6cz7.jpg)
Quote from: andreharv on March 12, 2008, 10:15:00 PM
Carling:
I am a bit confused by your last post. A orthagonal is simply the opposite of diagonal (it means straight). The picture that you included simply shows a curve (a junction between diagonal highway and orthagonal highway). If I can take a guess, it seems as though you want a Y interchange, which would have a highway branching out to the southeast (if we are looking at the picture you attached).
yes thats right but with restricted access on and off ramps like the m6 m61 interchange in the uk i have a picture if needed.
I see what you are saying now...like a highway merger piece. Well it sounds like a good idea but I think I would want to reserve that thought until they did more work with the 4 tile wide highway (if they are still working on it). The interchange you mentioned is a perfect example of this. The M6 starts out as 8 lanes but divides into the 6 lane M6 and 5 lane M61. I think the RHW team is developing a functional 8 lane highway now.
QuoteI see what you are saying now...
Glad someone does ;)
Just curious to see how a Orth T intersection is on a diagonal.
Happy Easter! ;D
Now I want to reveal some of the secretiveness of the last time by showing some of my newest additions that will hopefully be included in the NAM soon. :)
Firstly, I made some bugfixes, such as these annoying visual glitches of diagonal streets. In fact, it was already possible to avoid these issues using the diagonal street puzzle pieces. But regarding several screenshots, it seems that the users often don't make use of them. So I thought it was the time to fix that bug overall. ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg220.imageshack.us%2Fimg220%2F1301%2Fcapture20080131163315blt3.jpg&hash=6af870b083b40ae8981a8fc85b9d93803c061a6d)
Then I also improved some not so good looking (IMO) models of puzzle pieces. On the one hand, the transition between EL-Rail and GLR now has a more uniformly sloped model.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg211.imageshack.us%2Fimg211%2F4334%2Fcapture20080210000628mo4.jpg&hash=52284607ba872aabb9ca7ba8df17cb009ee38f66)
On the other hand, the EL-Rail over Road pieces got new supports.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg146.imageshack.us%2Fimg146%2F952%2Fcapture20080319170755od3.jpg&hash=88676ec6482c2d4ad754a5ffa771484fa185dbe6)
We noticed that the rail tracks were actually hovering about 3 meters above the supports before. :D
Though, you should know that these were only minor changes and weren't much work.
Finally, I even managed to make a new puzzle piece for a long GroundHighway curve. This one, however, was far more work though. Get the model and paths working etc..
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg152.imageshack.us%2Fimg152%2F7900%2Fcapture20080309180526du8.jpg&hash=1844b3468dd687374a6cf7690a094342055ecff2)
I'm sorry, this picture isn't totally up to date, but I think it will do. It's finished by now and works correctly. Now I hope we can compile a new NAM soon so as not to withhold these things from you. ;)
It all looks magnificent! &apls &apls &apls
Will there be an elevated highway curve?
Magnificent, memo! Absolutely magnificent!
Wonderful work, keep it up.
Wow, just awesome stuff memo! I especially like the ground highway curve!
I have two quick questions about it though, if you don't mind me asking:
1. Will the asphalt highway texture work on this puzzle piece? If not, may I request one?
2. Is this also possible for the elevated highway?
Thanks for your time.
Best,
-Haljackey
Abandonment Addition Proposal:
After I don't know how long, the abandonment issue has always been a problem for many many players since day 1 of SimCity. And it continues to do so.
I would like to propose a discussion here about the possibility of adding an Abandonment Plugin, most likely integrated within another Plugin/file.
Specifically: Building Development TGI ID: 6534284A / E7E2C2DB / E8DA7677 (file is currently in circulation - if anyone has any sort of list, that'd be great. I know it's currently in circulation from ST, by Ralpaels Abandonment Dilapidation Modd 1.2). And possibly, other additional files.
Despite the NAM docs pointing out that the TrafficPlugins won't remove Abandonment, users are still bent on it supposedly achieving this outcome. It's only because of a lack of understanding on players part, mainly due to the games (intended) design, that people continue to have this problem & continue to perceive that (current) NAM changes/additions is suppose to address this, when they start having abandonment problems.
So I would like to propose that we provide NAM users additional content by way of Abandonment plugin.
Any comments, feedback, pros, cons, thoughts, possible settings etc. Please feel free to fire away.
Myself personally, I use a personally modified version of the file (in conjunction with other, stuff/files). And while my playing style helps, I rarely ever have a problem.
Quote from: Tropod on March 23, 2008, 07:39:30 PM
Abandonment Addition Proposal:
After I don't know how long, the abandonment issue has always been a problem for many many players since day 1 of SimCity. And it continues to do so.
I would like to propose a discussion here about the possibility of adding an Abandonment Plugin, most likely integrated within another Plugin/file.
Specifically: Building Development TGI ID: 6534284A / E7E2C2DB / E8DA7677 (file is currently in circulation - if anyone has any sort of list, that'd be great. I know it's currently in circulation from ST, by Ralpaels Abandonment Dilapidation Modd 1.2). And possibly, other additional files.
Despite the NAM docs pointing out that the TrafficPlugins won't remove Abandonment, users are still bent on it supposedly achieving this outcome. It's only because of a lack of understanding on players part, mainly due to the games (intended) design, that people continue to have this problem & continue to perceive that (current) NAM changes/additions is suppose to address this, when they start having abandonment problems.
So I would like to propose that we provide NAM users additional content by way of Abandonment plugin.
Any comments, feedback, pros, cons, thoughts, possible settings etc. Please feel free to fire away.
Myself personally, I use a personally modified version of the file (in conjunction with other, stuff/files). And while my playing style helps, I rarely ever have a problem.
Actually... I dont think this is the greatest idea. The CAM actually addresses this and uses a modified
Ralpaels Abandonment Dilapidation Modd 1.2 if Im not mistaken. If we were to include a NAM version of this it would cause a conflicting file with the CAM one. I think Ripplejet should weigh in on this a bit more.
The thing is there is absolutely no way to prevent all abandonment. Although, if you have the CAM and one of the new Traffic Simulators by myself and Mott installed this *theoretically* should reduce the amount of abandonment in your city. But, remember alot of abandonment will have to do with the play style of the user and not the simulation of the game. We have tuned it to be the best we can in both situations.
Quote from: jplumbley on March 23, 2008, 09:12:48 PM
Actually... I dont think this is the greatest idea. The CAM actually addresses this and uses a modified Ralpaels Abandonment Dilapidation Modd 1.2 if Im not mistaken. If we were to include a NAM version of this it would cause a conflicting file with the CAM one. I think Ripplejet should weigh in on this a bit more.
CAM 1.0 does not include the Building Development Exemplar (0x6534284A, 0xE7E2C2DB, 0xE8DA7677).
However, CAM 1.1 will include it.
The reason for this is the need to increase the max value in the property Construction Resources Min/Max.
For CAM 1.1 we are currently looking at increasing this from 0x5000 to 0x6000.
CAM does not include Ralphael's Abandonment Mod where the
Lot Developer Stay New Time property has been given a value ranging between 0x016D (365 days) and 0xFFFF (65,535 days ≈ 180 years).
However, CAM does include the abandonment reduction mod by bones1 that increases the
Desirability Threshold Growth property for §§ and §§§ in the RCI Developer Exemplars (0x6534284A, 0x67CD5FA1, 0x0000____). This won't stop abandonment, but will keep higher wealth buildings from appearing in areas where the desirability only barely would support them, and thus leads to fewer abandonded or dilapidated buildings.
Since dilapidation and abandonment is the only way for a higher wealth lot to redevelop as a lower wealth lot, and since both CAM and NAM today aim at improving the simulation of real cities, I don't think Ralphael's Abandonment Mod should be included as such. At least not the 180 year version... If a version of it were to be included, it would have to be included in CAM.
However, I really don't see the need for not allowing a building to abandon if e.g. all roads to work have been cut off. In such a case abandonment is a good way of alerting the player that something is wrong, and needs the attention of the mayor...
Since Ralphael's No Dilapidation Mod (included in the Abandonment Mod) is listed as inCAMpatible, I would say the use of Ralphael's Abandonment Mod has diminished, at least among players having CAM. And so far there have been no complaints about excessive abandonment with the CAM.
Thanks for the replies guys.
After having a bit more of a think about it, yeah perhaps a Reduced Abandonment Modd (RAM/RAD) (& separate thread) ought to be made in its own right. One with ^Default/NAM/CAM/Others etc settings as applicable. Only reason I suggested adding it to NAM, was because of perceived expectations I guess :/. People still complain about it (abandonment due commute) though, here, there and everywhere :D.
^By default: here I mean non-Maxis default settings for use by players. A default version aimed solely for addressing abandonment, for those without NAM/CAM/etc.
From what *I am aware*, as it stands none of the abandonment related modds actually have both the Building Development Exemplar & the Individual R/C/I Developer Exemplars: Such a (default) modd ought to have both really, to deal with the (players) issues more appropriately. Something that players can use that is not attached to an existing modd? Again, perhaps separate thread may be more appropriate, if warranted/necessary.
I wouldn't necessarily be looking at using any of the changes as those in ADM 1.2, since it doesn't actually adjust one of the more critical aspects: The Lot Developer Occupancy Thresholds 0x47E2C401. Personally, I think the values used here are to high & to close to each other, though I guess that's open to interpretation/viewpoint. I will say though, that it's interesting the causes/affects adjustments to this can make, especially if to high. I've been using an adjusted version for some time, and as earlier mentioned, I rarely ever have a problem.
My only problem with abandonment is plopables, because even after you fix the thing that made them abandon, you sill have to replop them.
In my opinion, if you are going to take away all the challenges of the game, you might as well just paint a picture of a city on your screen. The best part of any game, is over coming the challenges, not circumventing them.
NOW .. back to our regularly scheduled program :)
Quote from: RebaLynnTS on March 24, 2008, 06:54:00 AM
My only problem with abandonment is plopables, because even after you fix the thing that made them abandon, you sill have to replop them.
In my opinion, if you are going to take away all the challenges of the game, you might as well just paint a picture of a city on your screen. The best part of any game, is over coming the challenges, not circumventing them.
NOW .. back to our regularly scheduled program :)
I would agree with that generally, however the problem is, not everyone agrees with the design on the game. That's why plugins exist for things like the commute & (especially) pathing algorithm & other various things. The game does have its inherent faults.
Quote from: Tropod on March 24, 2008, 03:59:30 AM
I wouldn't necessarily be looking at using any of the changes as those in ADM 1.2, since it doesn't actually adjust one of the more critical aspects: The Lot Developer Occupancy Thresholds 0x47E2C401. Personally, I think the values used here are to high & to close to each other, though I guess that's open to interpretation/viewpoint. I will say though, that it's interesting the causes/affects adjustments to this can make, especially if to high. I've been using an adjusted version for some time, and as earlier mentioned, I rarely ever have a problem.
I can agree with you on that! :)
Even if this property (as most Building Development properties in Ralphael's ADM) is missing in simcity_1.dat, its default values are obviously still used in the game.
The threshold for abandonment is set at an occupancy of 0.3 (30%), both in the game and by ADM.
If a building's desirability falls so low that only 30% of the maximum capacity is available, it will abandon.
The threshold for distress is set at an occupancy of 0.5 (50%) in the game and 0.45 (45%) by ADM.
If a building's desirability falls so low that only 45-50% of the maximum capacity is available, it will dilapidate.
I am a bit uncertain about what the third threshold, "renew", does though.
In the game is set at 0.68 (68%) and reduced to 0.5 (50%) in ADM.
What thresholds have you used in your adjusted version?
I could very well include reduced thresholds (even several optional ones if needed) with CAM 1.1... ::)
The Smooth Highway curve is looking good, but will there be a OWR smooth curve?
Great new work there, Memo! Looks wonderful! :thumbsup:
Withhold this from us any longer and I am going to blow. :P
:o OH NO, I'VE BLOWN! :D
Stoplight-controlled avenue intersections for the LHD version...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg235.imageshack.us%2Fimg235%2F2594%2Flhdaveintersectionsfp1.th.jpg&hash=a6b748315c506628e64ed6c6214a4fed801f02c8) (http://img235.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lhdaveintersectionsfp1.jpg)
Please ignore the stoplights that are facing to road. Those are single prop(stoplights are built-in to the pole), and there's no LHD version of it... &mmm
I'm sure all LHD players will love this. :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg291.imageshack.us%2Fimg291%2F5098%2Frotlichtverstoui3.jpg&hash=db2878d36aa7297dd4f1fb3698f632b1d3653741)
And that car in the red circle clearly ran across the red lights. ???
maybe that car was going REALLY slow? L:D
thats great, thanks ebina
Quote from: Andreas on March 28, 2008, 04:29:35 AM
And that car in the red circle clearly ran across the red lights. ???
Actually, that car came from the right side of the picture, and turned to the right. Cars stop on the red light properly.
LOL, great catch Andreas. :D
And I'm looking forward to this tweak. I recently converted to LHD and the light poles being on the wrong side is nothing short of frustrating. :angrymore:
I'm really glad to see this mod is still being worked on, for I am still addicted to SC4! I'm really hoping for another release soon!
LoL FireSka one thing we have all come to learn from NAM that a release will come when it comes lol.... Btw Welcome to Devotions!!!
ps belive I cant wait either lol ;D
Quote from: FireSka on April 21, 2008, 10:37:47 AM
I'm really glad to see this mod is still being worked on, for I am still addicted to SC4! I'm really hoping for another release soon!
I think we will always be working on this Mod. It's one of those things we keep adding to.
Quote from: FireSka on April 21, 2008, 10:37:47 AM
I'm really glad to see this mod is still being worked on, for I am still addicted to SC4! I'm really hoping for another release soon!
The NAM is the only reason why I still play SC4. If it wasn't for this mod (more like an expansion pack), I would have stopped playing this game years ago.
A BIG thanks once again to everyone that has made this brilliant mod possible!
Give yourselves a pat on the back, you deserve it! &apls
Best,
-Haljackey
The NAM is the way Rush Hour should have been.
yap, NAM is adictive and a must have it in the plugins folder.. without it, i would stop play SC4.. maybe :P
I agree. The NAM is a must have for a SC4 player. Keep on going!
The new NAM is super !!!!! :thumbsup: &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Ok, I just finished texturing the trumpet interchange. I need to make the exemplar, the path files, and I need someone to help me with the RUL. If it is indeed something I can do on my own, I would need some assistance as to how I could. Anyone's help would be much appreciated.
@Tripod: When the time comes, can I forward you the necessary info for the RUL file? If not, do you know who I could ask?
I have a request for the next NAM. Basically, could a straight ending for the EL over Road be made? What I mean is have the elevated rail simply end with the road continuing straight beyond the support structure. Ideally this would exist immediately following a station, as though the elevated rail was intended to go further but the project was never funded. There were several historical examples of this in the US, I'm not sure if any places still exist like this on the Chicago or New York elevated systems. Basically there were just large bumpers at the end of the track and crossovers to move trains from what track to the other.
If anyone interested in this needs photos I'll be more than happy to dig some up.
Thanks for all you do!
Cheers,
Kevin
I am forwarding a suggestion from the German Simforum:
There are orthogonal and diagonal puzzle pieces for the elevated road, 1way and avenue, but we miss 45 deg curves to connect orthogonal with diagonal.
I was just speaking to Alex about that. Definitely something that's needed.
...and something that should've been added long ago.
It might need a complete overhaul of the puzzle pieces though [with better models, like the viaduct project done by ArkenbergeJoe recently].
I have a request for NAM, can you make a road under EL-Highway puzzle pieces? These structures do exist in real life such as the above and ground highway that connects the distant but fast-growing Ayala district area with the rest of Taguig.
you can drag road under the highway. You don't need a puzzle piece for this.
I think miggoycor was requesting road/el-highway double-decker puzzle pieces (where both the road and the highway have the same direction).
Ahhh, ok. I apologise.
I think a Double-Height El-highway set of pieces would be nice.
Maybe also an el-rail/road double network piece T/+ intersection that only has a straight road going under it, that would be nice, too...
Unfortunately, I can't model or texture for the life of me yet, but I'm willing to try. (I don't really have Photoshop, so I'll probably have to stick with MS Paint.. maybe..) But for now I wouldn't be of much help on making pieces for them. :-\
BTw, it is not possible to havea road network under a different road network, at the moment at least.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2Fdiagorthosliplane_built.jpg&hash=180dbe3ceb31b18fad6c78e0b75258a3df9d3b1e)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2Fdiagorthosliplane.jpg&hash=b9343390cf3c09d66fa5ee48ce6c1da0cedcb895)
Diagonal/orthogonal slip lanes, SC3K style.
Remember how those sorts of intersections automatically created a slip lane in some situations? Well, this is done in SC4... and didn't take me long to do - dipping my toe in the RULs and all.
Wow, SA that's great! &apls
Ooooh, it's reminds me of SC3K! Great, SA :thumbsup:
you sir, are a GOD!! of RULife... LOL
Joe
Yeah, you would think something better in 3 would have been in 4, but no. Why would they skip out on features in a previous game? (ahem, SimCity Societies) Now if only something could be done about having the right amount of signals for these intersections.
MORE TURNING LANES!! Jeez, whaddya tryin' to do, make the game PERFECT??? I like it, can't wait for it to be released! &apls :thumbsup:
Those look incredible, SA! Absolutely incredible! Is it possible to make them for perpendicular intersections, too?
Awesome! I remember those from SC3k, and IMHO it would make it more realistic (no cars doing a sort of "inverted √" turns where it's like a 225 degree-angle turns [I forget which one it is, obtuse or acute angle, one of those I think]), if y'know what I mean... :D
They're doing turns which are <90 degrees, which is acute. In fact, I'm pretty sure that turn angle (w/o the slip lanes) is around 45 degrees, which is a hell of a turn to make. Trust me, 90 degree turns are hard enough to get right as it is!
Quote from: mrtnrln on May 09, 2008, 08:50:01 AM
Ooooh, it's reminds me of SC3K! Great, SA :thumbsup:
Yes, I agree. Nice work once again, SA!
Daniel that is just wicked cool!!!! OMG WOW!!!!!!!!
Wow! That new turning lane looks fantastic!!! &apls
I agree with everyone here, the new turning lanes are indeed fantastic SA! Keep Up The Great Work with the project!!
QuoteIs it possible to make them for perpendicular intersections, too?
Of course it is! In fact, Jason's working on them. :P
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on May 09, 2008, 09:13:16 PM
Of course it is! In fact, Jason's working on them. :P
Outstanding! You guys think of everything around here!
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on May 09, 2008, 06:04:11 AM
Diagonal/orthogonal slip lanes, SC3K style.
Remember how those sorts of intersections automatically created a slip lane in some situations? Well, this is done in SC4... and didn't take me long to do - dipping my toe in the RULs and all.
Excellent! Now if we could get a texture and prop redo for those Vanilla intersections, it would be perfect!
Kassarc
Care to exlaborate on that, as to what you have in mind?
-Swamper
To be specific, the fact that the intersections Maxis designed for those particular ones just seem wrong. Missing crosswalks and/or stop lines, and most importantly, stoplights. Not really a biggie, but I avoid using those two intersections in my game.
Texture artistry is not my strong point, so someone else will have to make the textures for the intersections.
I could fix up the intersections to include the missing stoplights, but the fix will probably end up in the NAM. I'll see if I can make the files standalone, if it is possible.
-Swamper
SA, great great work. better than great, fantastic!- that's one word SC4Devotion doesn't get every day! :thumbsup:
Good point kassarc16, I couldn't agree more. There was no reason for the developers to skip out on properly signaling and marking alot of the intersections they did, I could understand if they lost the time to correct that with the release date, but its good to hear you'll correct the acute ones Swamper, especially with the new slip lanes.
Mostly they seemed to have skimped on the diagonal intersections (though from what I've seen and heard, those seem to have lots of technical quirks.) Not just roads, but most other networks too. Swamper, I know you ran into problems back when you were attempting to put new signals on the avenue rail crossings. Those diagonals seemed to cause no small amount of grief with prop mirroring.
Kassarc,
Is this closer to what you were suggesting?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg120.imageshack.us%2Fimg120%2F8112%2Fkassarcrequestkp0.jpg&hash=3903ba133c0b74dacb3936e114ed79c7d4b74fe3)
This is one of the intersections you mentioned. I have done both the normal and the mirrored version of this intersection. However, the game only makes one pointed at the side road function when the tile is flipped. &mmm The flipped version is on the left side of the image. I tried various options, but the game absolutely refused to make the other two work when the tile was mirrored. It just may be a problem with the EXE and it's handling of mirrored tiles.
I'll work on the other intersection you pointed out another night....
-Swamper
That's indeed quite adequate on the prop side of things! Too bad the core of SC4 just refuses to allow some things to correctly work.
Good to hear that I am doing okay with the props. I wasn't sure when I started if I was doing the right thing with the props. Now I know what you're expecting and I will do the other intersection in a similar manner. I'll do it another night as it is getting rather late and I have to get up early for work. *wishes it would take less than an hour to get to work during rush hour*
-Swamper
I'm double posting, but I don't care. $%Grinno$%
Kassarc,
I fixed the other intersection that you indicated in your posts:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg170.imageshack.us%2Fimg170%2F6704%2Fkassarcrequest2fl9.jpg&hash=a26136188cc70eb386ccd6b67927353bc2b37685)
The only one stoplight doesn't work in each, but you said you could live with that as long as the props were in the right locations. For the mirrored instance of the intersection, there is a stoplight on the near side for the orthagonal road that is connecting to the diagonal road. It wouldn't work if it was placed across the intersection.
The props exhibit a bit of weird behavior on the mirrored tile. The diagonal and orthagonal signals are both in the same state, but the traffic behaviors as if they are in different cycles.
I also updated the path file for the tile. The Sims will no longer cross diagonally across the intersection and the quirky left turn from the orthagonal road onto the diagonal road has been fixed. Maxis didn't line up their coordinates up properly. The left turn finished 1.2 meters closer to the centerline compared to the traffic that was traveling on the diagonal road. The left turn now ends inline with the traffic on the diagonal road. I fixed the pathing by manually plotting the points of the paths in GMAX using lines. Then I manually copied the points back to the SC4Path file via the Reader. I have a habit of using programs for uses other than they were intended for :P
-Swamper
Thank you Swampper! Do you think the one way intersection lights are fixable?
I had an idea of making a Avenue GLR to Subway transition. The avenue would turn to normal avenue and the glr would go underground. Would making such an item violate the two network per tile rule? Where could i get the texture or FSH file that is used in the Avenue GLR transition to Avenue, and a texture for a straight tile of Avenue GLR if it is possible to make such a transistion?
Also while on the subject of Avenue GLR, would it be realistic to have a GLR station in the middle of the Avenue GLR roundabout? I tried modifying one that was alredy on the lex by making a relot with overlapping overlay textures, but the top overlay texture would disappear and show the avenue through again.
Quote from: j-dub on May 13, 2008, 07:46:12 AM
Thank you Swampper! Do you think the one way intersection lights are fixable?
The stoplights that face roads and avenues that are intersecting the one-way roads work fine for the most part (mirrored/flipped tiles being problematic, of course). Stoplights facing one-way roads will never work due to how Maxis coded the one-way roads. The main problem is the functionality of the stop points in the path files for the one-way roads. For whatever reason, they do not work on one-way roads so cars on the one-way roads don't stop at intersections or railroad crossings. This is something that Maxis/EA would have to fix, as it is an issue with the EXE.
The ANT/RHW road traffic also has the same problem as the one-way roads in regards to the stop points. It behaves like a highway by not allowing development along it, so it is probably reasonable that the traffic wouldn't stop on it. Then again, it was an unfinished network, which may also explain why traffic on the ANT/RHW doesn't use the stop points properly.
Xyloxadoria,
Such a transfer/connection will require a transit-enabled lot, much like the NDEX Rail <-> Sub connector lot and it's GLR variant. There are puzzle pieces for the Avenue GLR so you can split the Avenue and the GLR tracks apart, and you can use those to split the avenue to place a GLR <-> Subway connector lot and then rejoin the avenue on the other side with one-way roads. The split will expand the Avenue GLR to 3 tiles, so I can see your point about trying to keep it within a 2 tile wide space.
-Swamper
Quote from: Xyloxadoria on May 13, 2008, 08:38:09 AM
I had an idea of making a Avenue GLR to Subway transition. The avenue would turn to normal avenue and the glr would go underground. Would making such an item violate the two network per tile rule? Where could i get the texture or FSH file that is used in the Avenue GLR transition to Avenue, and a texture for a straight tile of Avenue GLR if it is possible to make such a transistion?
Such a tram-avenue transition to avenue and subway would be great! :) It should not violate the two network per tile rule if the transition from GLR to subway is modded to be at the border from one tile to the next tile. I could help with the modding.
The texture for the Avenue GLR transition to Avenue is attached below. It's from the NAM puzzle piece GLR-avenue to avenue and GLR turning left/right that I created.
EDIT: it's a NAM traffic (dark) texture, for a lot it would have to be a bit lighter. I could do this, after your confirmation that this is what you are looking for ...
The normal tram-avenue texture (light version for lots) is also attached, also as png file. I can easily extract or prepare more textures of this type.
A tram-avenue transition to an avenue and an elevated light railway left or right of the avenue would be great too. ;)
Quote from: Xyloxadoria on May 13, 2008, 08:38:09 AM
Also while on the subject of Avenue GLR, would it be realistic to have a GLR station in the middle of the Avenue GLR roundabout? I tried modifying one that was alredy on the lex by making a relot with overlapping overlay textures, but the top overlay texture would disappear and show the avenue through again.
We designed the NAM GLR-avenue roundabout in such a way that a station in the middle is possible. The first station that we used for testing the NAM, shown in this thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4623.msg146667#msg146667), is ready for publication as soon as the BSC will provide me with a texture range. So hopefully, you'll find it on the LEX soon. Then you can easily copy or reference the texture and path files and prepare more stations.
It is also possible to prepare a roundabout GLR station with underpasses for pedestrians. A second lot with steps to be placed next to the tram-avenue (outside the roundabout) would be necessary. I can prepare the pathing that would connect the two lots (Sims would walk down the stairs outside the roundabout and walk up the stairs inside the roundabout or vice versa).
@ Swamper77: WH0A, those traffic lights look a lot better! Too bad about the one-way roads though... The only way to get the OWR traffic lights that I can think of that may or may not work is ... dare I mention it? ... no, that probably wouldn't work ... oh, what the heck: a transit-enabled lot? (that you could rotate as needed)
I expect a lot of :o 's...
Heres an AVE GLR (or Streetcar ROW as we call them in Toronto) to subway example (again, in this case its just an underground streetcar loop.)
Example (http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=r863ft8cjnsz&style=o&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=28308357&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&where1=Toronto&encType=1)
Thats pretty much exactly what we need. If any other pictures are required I'll be glad to get them as its only a couple minutes walk from my place.
Quote from: Xyloxadoria on May 13, 2008, 08:38:09 AM
I had an idea of making a Avenue GLR to Subway transition. The avenue would turn to normal avenue and the glr would go underground. Would making such an item violate the two network per tile rule? Where could i get the texture or FSH file that is used in the Avenue GLR transition to Avenue, and a texture for a straight tile of Avenue GLR if it is possible to make such a transistion?
Also while on the subject of Avenue GLR, would it be realistic to have a GLR station in the middle of the Avenue GLR roundabout? I tried modifying one that was alredy on the lex by making a relot with overlapping overlay textures, but the top overlay texture would disappear and show the avenue through again.
If possible, I think this would be an absolutely fantastic idea,
Xyloxadoria!
while we're on the subject of GLR/El/Subway, i've been experimenting with subways and elrail to try to create express tracks (much like the ones that exist in NYC). so far the express works, even when running the 2 subway lines through a transit enabled lot which tend to mess with the pathings...i am in need of some modding help on an elrail station with 2 tracks running through it both transit enabled, and one that has 2 tracks running through it, but only one would stop...would the second station have to use overhanging lots?
also tarkus, i was wondering if the old RHW technology could be applied to the el system to create a 3 or 4 lane track structure?
Quote from: redraider147 on May 13, 2008, 01:47:36 PM
also tarkus, i was wondering if the old RHW technology could be applied to the el system to create a 3 or 4 lane track structure?
It is completely possible. It'd probably be best to do it as some sort of puzzle drag, though, similar to how the RHW-4 and RHW-6 are set up now.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Quote from: Chrisim on May 13, 2008, 12:53:49 PM
Such a tram-avenue transition to avenue and subway would be great! :) It should not violate the two network per tile rule if the transition from GLR to subway is modded to be at the border from one tile to the next tile. I could help with the modding.
The texture for the Avenue GLR transition to Avenue is attached below. It's from the NAM puzzle piece GLR-avenue to avenue and GLR turning left/right that I created.
EDIT: it's a NAM traffic (dark) texture, for a lot it would have to be a bit lighter. I could do this, after your confirmation that this is what you are looking for ...
The normal tram-avenue texture (light version for lots) is also attached, also as png file. I can easily extract or prepare more textures of this type.
A tram-avenue transition to an avenue and an elevated light railway left or right of the avenue would be great too. ;)We designed the NAM GLR-avenue roundabout in such a way that a station in the middle is possible. The first station that we used for testing the NAM, shown in this thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4623.msg146667#msg146667), is ready for publication as soon as the BSC will provide me with a texture range. So hopefully, you'll find it on the LEX soon. Then you can easily copy or reference the texture and path files and prepare more stations.
It is also possible to prepare a roundabout GLR station with underpasses for pedestrians. A second lot with steps to be placed next to the tram-avenue (outside the roundabout) would be necessary. I can prepare the pathing that would connect the two lots (Sims would walk down the stairs outside the roundabout and walk up the stairs inside the roundabout or vice versa).
Thoose are exactly what i needed. With a little bit of phtoshop work and color correction i could get the texture to work. I will make the transistion be lot based. I am planning to make a 3x1 lot and have two tiles that are avenue GLR and have the last tile just be avenue. To make the station, do i use the same networking, but change the inside to outside el rail el rail to el rail subway?
Also, does there have to be custom pats or could i just make a station without them
Ouch, Swamper... with the mirrored intersection acting that way, I think I'd stick with the Maxis one. I wonder, would overlapping props make a difference? Instead of having on light per pole, position the props so it looks like there are two lights on each?
Kassarc,
I can try that and see how it looks in the game. I'll attempt that this weekend instead of using my week nights to do my modding. I have to get up at 5:30 am to be at work by 7:30 am, Monday through Friday.
-Swamper
Oh dude, getting up at 5:30 AM is very :thumbsdown: ... I'll try to let you do your own thing, if I got up that early to do modding before I went to work the mods would SUCK and also I would be very /wrrd%& when I get to work... Hope you can get enough sleep! &mmm
I do my modding in the evenings, usually. I get up that early because it takes me an hour or so to get to work from where I live. I play with real rush hour traffic every morning and evening when I commute. Thanks for warm wishes of me getting enough sleep, though. Very much appreciated. ;)
-Swamper
Umm, if you don't mind my asking...what is that?? (I know what it is, don't answer) It looks very strange and, umm, cobbled together... I think the NAM team should give you an answer, that's just One of Those Questions that A) I cant answer or B) I don't want to think hard enough to give you a straight honest true answer for.
I finished making the model for the avenue glr to subway transition. I made special LOD's for it so that cars and trains would appear on it. I originally made the model in max, but i couldn't get the render to work. The render in gmax doesn't look as good. I don't know how to mod it to get it to work correctly, or how to make paths so that it looks like the train goes into the tunnel. anyway here is a render form max, i can attach the gmax rendered model file for you to mod if you want me to. (it doesn't look as good) Here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4720.0) is the thread i stated for my max problem, if you can help with that.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi229.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fee171%2FChrisLSimpson%2Favegrltosubway.jpg&hash=888da76ffb53ff4807a71d73d67a9ec7bd3d8465)
Also in the game, the tunnel is blocked by the ground when i use no (transparent) base textures. What do i have to use so that doesn't happen.
now thatsm something great!!! hope you can put it run ;)
:o omg that is BEAUTIFUL, i love it! I hope u can get it working!
nice... &apls now which side of the avenue will have the subway underneath... ;)
That model looks fantastic! :)
Although your rendered model is possibly not final yet, please email it and I will forward it to the NAM team for modding. If/When you will have an updated version of the model, it will be easy to insert it.
That looks excellent, but I have one thing that bugs me a little bit. The normal avenue and the GLR avenue are different widths. Could you perhaps make the change from each gauge more subtle, perhaps over 2 tiles instead of one. Only if it isn't too much bother, if it means totally redoing huge sections of it, don't change it. Sorry for being a nuisance.
Jono.
Quote from: debutterfly on May 25, 2008, 02:06:56 PM
nice... &apls now which side of the avenue will have the subway underneath... ;)
I don't know which side it will end up on. The game kind of randomly places the subway station block under one of the lot tiles. Ive even seen it on different places on the same lot before.
Quote from: jonoboo on May 25, 2008, 05:37:16 PM
That looks excellent, but I have one thing that bugs me a little bit. The normal avenue and the GLR avenue are different widths. Could you perhaps make the change from each gauge more subtle, perhaps over 2 tiles instead of one. Only if it isn't too much bother, if it means totally redoing huge sections of it, don't change it. Sorry for being a nuisance.
Jono.
I used a one tile transition because that is the texture that currently exists in the NAM. it would be easy to change if there was a two tile transition, but i didn;t find a texture for it when i searched though the nam file. (see post above, the transition is attached.) I still havent figured out my max problem yet so i could send the model file if needed (as the fence and the lampposts will have to be a t21 prop if it is part of the nam,but i think it would be better if it was a lot based station) I still have some final touches to add to the model (I need to change the lampposts they seem kind of short/small) I have a gmax file a max file and a rendered model so just pm me with a address and what you want. (if you use max i need to know which version to avoid issues)
Are you sure that this can act as a real GLR-to-subway connection, if implemented as a puzzle piece? (I mean really convert GLR<->subway traffic).
GLR (el) and subway are actually different forms of traffic (though they are both coloured the same), and as far as I know network puzzle pieces cannot perform traffic conversions (Maxis does this using a TE lot). I attempted making my RTMT set puzzle pieces; this would solve the TL textures problem as well as the no-access zots, but the game seems to ignore most properties specifying a "transport station" -only some specific properties like the park/landmark effects and the Occupant Groups appear to really work. Most importantly, I couldn't make it perform any transit switchings.
If instead, this is implemented as a TE-lot, it is quaranteed that conversions will work, but it will block access to the RCI lots facing it (and this one is quite long).
As for aesthetics, I think the network textures shouldn't be modelled, as it's very hard to make them looking the same. For network textures, as well as overlay textures for lots, this IS feasible.
Also I'm not sure if nightlighting really works for props used on networks. Look at Maxis networks, all props are unlit (the lightcones shown in streetlights are actually separate models - technically they aren't "lit" eihter).
I've got a request involving GLR over one way roads. As in street car type approach. Is there a way to overlap road and GLR(El-R) textures and mapping? I wouldn't know where to begin, or how to start.
That looks really nice Xyloxadoria
I hope it will work what with all the problems cogeo mentions
Greetings
KC
Quote from: memo on April 29, 2007, 06:33:33 AM
Post here if you want to contribute something to the NAM...
I never knew about this thread!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg511.imageshack.us%2Fimg511%2F6988%2F20080603183404vz6.th.jpg&hash=c62dba996843e796d7fbb4c5a4a3c513a4ecc37e) (http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/6988/20080603183404vz6.jpg)
Project thread:
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4777.msg154526#msg154526
Can be downloaded here:
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4847.0
You can include it in NAM if you want... I'd rather see it in NAM than as a standalone but it works fine all by itself.
:)
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on May 09, 2008, 06:04:11 AM
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2Fdiagorthosliplane_built.jpg&hash=180dbe3ceb31b18fad6c78e0b75258a3df9d3b1e)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2Fdiagorthosliplane.jpg&hash=b9343390cf3c09d66fa5ee48ce6c1da0cedcb895)
Diagonal/orthogonal slip lanes, SC3K style.
Remember how those sorts of intersections automatically created a slip lane in some situations? Well, this is done in SC4... and didn't take me long to do - dipping my toe in the RULs and all.
This would be awsome to have... :D :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2Ffull_set_of_SLs.jpg&hash=2ba6e324468b4972a29ce662873f6715631edd92)
And here's the full set done. :P
Avenue/Avenue, Road/Road, Road/Ave, Ave/Road intersections are in there. :P
And for Euro? :P
I'm working on the Euro textures right now.
Dude, you are too fast for me :P
What can I say? ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2FEuroTextureVersion.jpg&hash=8cce7ff4321ee4c1831064bb384aa44c4ca1fa15)
I'm only as fast as I can get the pictures uploaded, though... :P
Yay!
&hlp
:P
you guys are INSANE!!!!!!!!!! in the nicest possible way...
Joe
Well it all looks marvelous sa!
aweseome!
Nice, are they puzzle-pieces, so that you can chose when you would like them to be used?
That looks so nice.
What will you guys think of next?
Robin &apls
Flip that's fast.
Caspervg: No they are draggable, but you can still choose where you want them
WOW :o Nice work... what will these turn lanes be included with (released with)? And I'm not asking when they will be released. :P We all know that answer by now. ;)
don't know if this is the right place to request but will it be possible 4 for a glr in avenue bridge? &idea
It'll be more than likely the main NAM, unless SA makes up some extra modd :)
EDIT: Double decker bridges aren't possilbe
Simple, yet elegant &apls &apls
QuoteEDIT: Double decker bridges aren't possilbe
They are... They just don't work properly. :P
OMG... INSANE!
Quote
Quote
EDIT: Double decker bridges aren't possilbe
They are... They just don't work properly. Tongue
Well you could go into details.;)
The details are (i believe) that having two networks on the same bridge (or tile) make for constant high volume of traffic, or that the volumes are added together so that you get unfair congestion
Joe
@SA: Now THAT is beautiful!! Both the American and the Euro textures, that is... ;D
Awesome, SA! &apls
One word: whoa!! :o
Very good SA &apls
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on May 09, 2008, 06:04:11 AM
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi237.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fff288%2Ffoxteltv%2Fdiagorthosliplane_built.jpg&hash=180dbe3ceb31b18fad6c78e0b75258a3df9d3b1e)
The diagonal coming into the orthogonal road should be totally diagonal, and not make short turn, otherwise it makes it look like you can make a left turn onto it.
Quote from: hconline on June 20, 2008, 04:50:26 PM
The diagonal coming into the orthogonal road should be totally diagonal, and not make short turn, otherwise it makes it look like you can make a left turn onto it.
That would be Maxis' fault. SA didn't modify that part, just added the slip lane in for the tile next to the Orthogonal-Diagonal Road-T-Intersection.
I do see your point though--the texture Maxis did for that intersection has always bothered me a little.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Is there gonna be any double height pieces develop for road, avenue etc etc ?
Quote from: Kitsune on June 21, 2008, 08:50:16 PM
Is there gonna be any double height pieces develop for road, avenue etc etc ?
That would be a nice thing to have. I could certainly use them in a few places, and they'll come even more in handy once there's more RHW/MIS stuff out there. ;)
-Alex (Tarkus)
Hmm... that calls for a whole new draggable high ELR system =P
Anyway, I do have a problem with the current GLR curves... they're too tight! It'd be of best interest to develop some puzzle pieces with smooth curves so that it doesn't appear that some of our subway trains are jackknifing trying to traverse them. I know the NAM has this already for roads, railways, and avenues, but GLR pieces seem nonexistent = (
- Allan Kuan
well what have I been upto?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi293.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fmm50%2Fbighead99999%2Fdeadend.jpg&hash=eb4d98378c0dfe07694fe60d72393550a64ced94)
Great, a draggable road cul-de-sac?
sorta. really just a texture replacement with pathing. hope to do diag next.
Road cul-de-sac! I'd love that with American lines!
A cul-de-sac is just a cul-de-sac, and I didn't think they had lines. To compromise the Euro versus American thing, isn't this just a cul-de-sac in a seperate replacement dat file that doesn't require the Euro road mod?
nerdly_dood, in fact i did the maxis/American version before this euro texture.
i just didn't find time for a screenie. (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi293.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fmm50%2Fbighead99999%2Fs2.jpg&hash=d2598ba2e436aeaf7129db73841462dbf3e1ab64)
j-dub your quite right. it will function like MAS 's turning lanes-texture plugin.
unless it's combined into the nam?
That looks great.
It can be a stand-alone file, since it doesn't require anything special [eg. addition into controller files, etc].
a road cul-de-sac?? yay &hlp
Looks nice, Bighead99 :thumbsup:
Quote from: bighead99 on July 04, 2008, 04:26:19 AM
nerdly_dood, in fact i did the maxis/American version before this euro texture. i just didn't find time for a screenie.
Oh ok, cool! I did use the Euro road mod for about a month and a half but then I got bored with it... The release of RHW v.20 may have been a contributing factor - there was no Euro texture set for it then, and now I have DTP's set which I'd say gets a 9/10 on the coolness scale-it doesn't have any RHW-2 textures, and it was based on the Euro RHW texture mod which means that road intersection textures don't look quite right, but overall it's great and
I'm getting off-topic!I should stop typing irrelevant crap...
Is anyone working on 5-laned one-way roads, and 3 laned avenues. ;D
Yes, that would be the NWM project, though only 3-lane OWR's (of the 2 types of OWR you are asking about) have been finished enough to show in the sticky post.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi293.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fmm50%2Fbighead99999%2Fdeadendd.jpg&hash=aeddde60d06186ba2c6f12d694361738cba44005)
added wealth textures.
Great, this will be of use later.
That looks awesome!
Great work
Very nice work there, bighead99!
Quote from: BigSlark on April 28, 2008, 02:31:52 PM
I have a request for the next NAM. Basically, could a straight ending for the EL over Road be made? What I mean is have the elevated rail simply end with the road continuing straight beyond the support structure. Ideally this would exist immediately following a station, as though the elevated rail was intended to go further but the project was never funded. There were several historical examples of this in the US, I'm not sure if any places still exist like this on the Chicago or New York elevated systems. Basically there were just large bumpers at the end of the track and crossovers to move trains from what track to the other.
If anyone interested in this needs photos I'll be more than happy to dig some up.
Thanks for all you do!
Cheers,
Kevin
You can already do this - it just takes a little work. Here's what you do:
Plop an el over road puzzle piece, using the Corner 1 puzzle piece. Point the road under the track to the side where you want your station.
Plop the el over road station next to the puzzle piece. The road pieces should now connect up.
Bulldoze the overhanging el piece. This will also destroy the el piece adjoining the station, leaving just the truncated T piece of road.
Buldoze the last square of the road. The curved road is now just a regular road, and you have what you want. You can also do this without a station, again using the Corner 1 puzzle piece.
Hey, I suggested a good new nam idea over at simtropolis forums about intersections, the current nam junctions are great but i want something more creative and different in my city and i thought if it was possible is this: for example say you have a regular road t junction, instead of just lanes we could have a right turn lane (or 2) and a cut off piece of road for turning left with a ped island in the middle of the regular road and the cut off, it would have traffic lights too, obv! Also, to improve traffic congestion that can be caused by buses; a cut off small lane for buses at bus stops, which buses can use which crs cant, using the sma technology as sc4 bus lanes and traffic controller mods. thats all i have for now, soz for no pics but i lack photoshop and paint is useless so.....
(PS)Intersections - The Same Would Apply For 4 ways and could probably even be used in one way roads and especially avenues, too!
From what I hear you asking, some of that stuff is getting worked on. The road with the island you mentioned is part of the NWM. Right turn lanes for right hand drive for multiple networks are already in the works. The term used for the right turn lane with the island in the middle is called slip lane. I noticed traffic lights do work over the slip lanes, just as you would see in real life, but wether if those are put on slip lanes if they get released in the future is beyond me. After toying around with the current NAM, it was possible for me to split a avenue up, and due a 3 tile avenue, with the middle, not being used, and potentially a oneway as a double left turn lane. However the avenue crossing the 3 tile, I'm not so sure about. What you said about buses in that situation may be difficult. Bus stops are usally another story.
bighead99:
is there any further progress on the cul-de-sacs?
I also find the roundabout-like large street corner, present in the NAM, to have very odd-looking textures. Perhaps someone can look into redoing that texture? My redesign is below. Maybe someone can tweak it a bit before it enters the game.
- Allan Kuan
allan, in due time.
ive got a couple of batting projects going on at the moment and i have to work out the T21's so that they are working properly (so that street lights don't turn up in the middle of the culdersac).
if any one is able to help with this, it would be nice. -reader on my computer works fine, until it comes to props on network tiles.
Hi this was I have been trying to find, a highway onslope puzzle piece which is not found in the existing NAM onslope puzzle pieces. Where can I download this one. Thanks great work! Den52
Really!? The most recent one, NAM April 2008, had onslope for highway, and diagonal onslope for highway. They appear in custom interchanges from the highway menu.
I have now resumed work on my orthogonal x diagonal highway trumpet interchange. Is there anyone who is in charge of modifying the intersection RUL file?
Quote from: andreharv on August 27, 2008, 09:20:15 PM
I have now resumed work on my orthogonal x diagonal highway trumpet interchange. Is there anyone who is in charge of modifying the intersection RUL file?
Well, yes and no. The structure of the NAM Team has changed a great deal since redlotus' tutorial was written in 2004. There is no longer a "team leader", and there are actually several people now who modify the intersection RUL file (or, by "NAM slang", RUL 0x10000000). However, by and large, those folks (including myself) are either already heavily entrenched in other large projects, or are away due to RL.
If you would like to learn more about the RUL yourself, though, I would check
the NAM Inner Workings (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=5560.0) thread out. Attached to the bottom of the thread is a Network Specs document that Tropod wrote up, which describes all the RUL files, along with other transit-related files.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Why, thank you. I am currently working on paths and it would be nice to do the rul myself. I'll keep you guys posted. If I can get this interchange done in a reasonable amount of time, I will make more. Thanks for the quick reply. ;)
Quote from: andreharv on August 28, 2008, 09:58:03 AM
I am currently working on paths
I guess that you already know Daeley's SC4 Path Creator at http://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=546 (http://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=546) - saves much time when creating paths.
No...I never heard of it. I just downloaded it and already found a few bugs with my paths. Thanks a million! It's unfortunate that the program won't allow me to input all the paths at once (it crashes after I add about 15 of them). No worries though. This program will definitely help. :thumbsup:
Quote from: andreharv on August 28, 2008, 10:24:54 PM
Thanks a million!
Yes, thanks a million to Daeley for this most useful modding tool. :)
There are two ways how I use the tool. Either I generate new paths inside the tool by clicking (then, it never crashes) or I copy / paste paths from the Reader and click update (then, it may crash if a path is seriously wrong; e.g., when the number of coordinates or total number of paths is wrong)
A little side project I started on. A Road-Avenue Long Transition piece.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg98.imageshack.us%2Fimg98%2F5250%2Fnam083120081ht6.jpg&hash=9e510c54c8dcd85e166227be7f416be8b795b14c)
The colors still need a little adjusting, but it's just about there.
-Alex (Tarkus)
That would be much appreciated! Someone (was it Videosean?) made a different texture for the avenue/road transition, and it looks much better than the standard one, but it is still made for the too-short 2x2 transition; I'd be much appreciative of a longer one.
Alex, that's something I've been looking for for a long time!
Alex that is awesome! This will definately get some use. One suggestion though: Would it be possible to do a version with a median, to match the game avenues?
Oh and if you get to it, this could also serve as an excellent transition between the TLA-5 and road.
PS: nerdly, that was in fact videosean.
Tarkus, while you are visiting avenue to road transitions have you considered an avenue to one-way smooth transition? I have found some instances recently that I need to make such a transition. The non-continuing lane could u-turn back the opposite direction. See my novice photoshop:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi161.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft216%2FBluepelican31%2Fonewaytoavenuetest.jpg&hash=7f06ab82f9184c5b5968b76e7f7c80f13bc7adfb)
Hey Tarkus quick question regarding RUL. If I am making an interchange, which RULs should I modify? I know I am going to have to do something with the Intersectionordering RUL. Speaking of which, what are those 4 digit values for the rotationring and addtype? I am going to put this interchange in the custom interchange menu button and I located that in the RUL but I am not sure what those 4 digit numbers are for. Thanx.
Shiftred, that's an interesting idea there. That looks like it may make the most sense to do as a draggable thing, judging by the layout.
andreharv, to answer your question, the file you'll be looking for has an Instance ID (IID) of 0x10000000. The most recent public build of the file (from the April 2008 NAM) can be found in the NetworkAddonMod_Controller.dat file, which will be in your NAM folder. The Reader actually has a character limit, so in order to add to the file, you'll have to export it (right-click the file and select "Save decoded file" from the menu that appears) and edit it in Wordpad or Notepad.
(To import it back in with the Reader, simply right click in the area where the internal files are shown and select "Insert & compress file")
The 4-digit values are internal reference points in the file, which associate the pieces and their rotations/mirrors with the TAB Loops and Rotation Rings. The first RotationRing in a TAB Loop is always marked "RotationRing", while further ones are marked "AddTypes". I'd recommend using the range IntersectionInfo range E8A0-E8AF for your interchange, as the E8##-EB## has been designated for use for Custom Interchanges, and the E8## range still has room left and is where the existing NAM custom interchanges are, while E9## has been used for other non-interchange highway puzzle pieces (On-Slopes, etc.).
Hope that helps!
-Alex (Tarkus)
@ Shiftred: I'm absolutely certain that what you mentioned is already available with the current version of the NAM...but only as a diagonal. As an orthogonal, I'm reasonably sure that unless someone makes what you asked you will just ahve to improvise and have crosswalks and a square intersection where you don't necessarily want it. But I agree with you, and it is a great idea.
Nerdly,
I am aware that the junction of one-way and avenue functions but it looks bad so I have requested a smooth or merging lanes version. ;)
I decided to postpone modifying the RUL file until the end (if possible). Other than the 0x10000000, is there anything else that is supposed to be altered in the RUL? My other question is if you know the whereabouts of the EffDir_Trans_Template.txt file? Redlotus said that it was attached to the zip but it is nowhere to be found and I got this version of the tutorial from his yahoo briefcase. If you do not know the whereabouts, do you know of any other way that I could otherwise make the effects dir?
andreharv, that's probably a good idea with the RULs--they're usually the last thing I do when assembling a puzzle piece, though that varies from time to time. The only RUL you'll need to alter is 0x10000000, as its the only one that deals with ploppable network items (all the others deal with draggable ones).
As far as the EffDir stuff, it disappeared some time ago--the only place it is available at the moment is the private NAM exchange. However, it's quite outdated, and there are far easier ways to do it now. I've been meaning to write up a tutorial on it for some time now, since there's pretty much no documentation out there publicly right now, so this may be a good time to do it. Keep an eye on the NAM How-tos and Tutorials board. ;)
-Alex (Tarkus)
Thanks Tarkus. I am really anxious since I already spent roughly 300-500 hours working on this project and am seeing light at the end of the tunnel. This is my first bat project that I have intended to bring to completion and if it works, I am gonna be mega thrilled. With that being said, I will be looking forward to this tutorial. With this being said, is there anything else that you can think of in Redlotus's tutorial which is obsolete or otherwise would interfere with the game or the NAM? The only thing that I did differently from the tutorial was render my pieces in gmax rather than bat.
No problem, andreharv. I've also finished an EffDir Tutorial, and you can find it here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=70a930a637a84dc3c1530cbe296b0224&topic=5599.0).
As far as redlotus' tutorial goes, there are a few things that could be explained a little better. I have been working on trying to get an updated tutorial on RUL 0x10000000 done as well--that's probably the biggest thing missing from the tutorial.
With regards to rendering the pieces, when you're ultimately ready to get them all into a game-readable format, you'll want to export them using the BAT, but with the replacement BuildingMill.ms script, which you can find attached to the bottom of my Transit Model Guideline thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=70a930a637a84dc3c1530cbe296b0224&topic=3917.0). It'll render the pieces in Full-3D as opposed to reducing them to isometric faces like the normal BAT export. When you export the actual preview model, though, it won't matter if you use the script or just use normal BAT export.
Hope that helps!
-Alex (Tarkus)
Hey thanks for everything, Tarkus! I will soon reward you with a fully functional interchange lol. Well it's almost done. I plopped it yesterday for the first time and so far, I have gotten 3 of the 4 ramps to work. One of the ramps was under z=0.842 so it is essentially underground and must be redone from scratch...well almost from scratch. My last (or second to last) question is, is there any way to improve the texture quality of the pieces so that they fit more uniformly with the rest of the highway? Again thanks for your help and timely responses &apls
andreharv- wow! It would be so great to have someone back into creating interchanges for the "game" highways. I presume the one that you are completing work on now is the interchange you showed us in this post [linkie] (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1138.msg128262#msg128262).
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg338.imageshack.us%2Fimg338%2F2246%2Ftrumpetinterchangeoq6.jpg&hash=bb935ad2328f5fc8c812df10984b92ff252123e9)
This one, eh? A karma point for you up front, and there's many more where that one came from.
Thanks again.
David
I definitely think taht a new intersection like that is worth a karma point - it can be made one way or another with RHW/MIS, but the current setup with the Maxis highways is very rigid and doesn't allow for much flexibility - this interchange will definitely add some much-desired flexibility.
Hey, thanks guys. It was a long time in the making. Once I get this last onramp working, I'll humor you guys with a couple pics. Be warned, it needs to be reskinned.
Quote from: andreharv on September 04, 2008, 01:59:25 PM
Be warned, it needs to be reskinned.
Hey, that's perfectly fine. :) You've done an amazing job here, and I'm glad I could help out.
As far as the texture quality, I think it's mostly just a matter of being careful with the UV Mapping on it. It can take awhile to get that adjusted just right.
Oh, and another Karma point.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Thought I might show you my current progress before taking a much needed break (about 40 of the past 48 hours were spent working on this). To the left is a second interchange that was flipped 180...just so you know.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg526.imageshack.us%2Fimg526%2F7894%2Fdemarcodec1201122057033kv0.th.png&hash=c646a3e338f475df8c34c82d9e6043b558aaa60b) (http://img526.imageshack.us/my.php?image=demarcodec1201122057033kv0.png)
Here is the trouble spot. Suggestions would be highly welcomed. Please don't tell me it has something to do with the mirror tool. That is probably the problem though. If that is the problem, it will take me a few more days to fix.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg502.imageshack.us%2Fimg502%2F2826%2Fdemarcoapr1000122053290xi2.th.png&hash=e80612398922c5225aac408f2690836636f2671d) (http://img502.imageshack.us/my.php?image=demarcoapr1000122053290xi2.png)
Otherwise, the paths are good. Even on the broken ramp, the automata will drive through mid air to get to the other side of the ramp. Obviously UDI can't drive across it but it has no problem traversing the rest of the interchange.
andreharv, looks FANTASTIC
wow, cant wait to use this in game
Joe
That's AMAZING dude! It may not quite be release quality, but you sure are getting it done!
First I see the RHW-8 and I decide that I will soon have to toss maxis highways out the window and now I see this interchange.
Thanks for changing my mind!
Tyerel (wes.janson)
That looks sexy even with the gap on the ramp...:P
I must say that look awesome :thumbsup: &apls. I wish I could help you with your problem, but I know nothing about modding and things like that. Hopefully some of our more astute members will be able to help!
~ Dan
andreharv, that's looking fantastic! 40 of 48 hours . . . I know that feeling myself. :D
As far as the Mirror tool in the BAT goes, unfortunately, it can have cause issues on occasion--I believe redlotus recommended against using it.
-Alex (Tarkus)
OMG! That's ... AWESOME!
Wow! There hasn't been a full highway interchange made in quite some time, and this new one looks like a wonderful addition!
Good luck andreharv! It is looking wonderful!
Best,
-Haljackey
this interchange is very great &apls
Wow, andreharv- I was beginning to think I'd never see another new NAM interchange. You've made my day.
David
Wonderful, wonderful work, andreharv! I've been praying for just that interchange for such a long time! I can't wait to see more of your work!
Dustin
Andreharv, that interchange is wonderful! I don't have an idea how to solve a problem, though. &mmm I'm new to BATting, so I can't help.
Anyway, from the perspective of an ordinary SC4 player (like me), it's absolutely fabulous. I can't wait to see it in the NAM. ;) ;D
Hope you'll find a way to get rid of that ugly break in the middle of the road. :)
Piotr
Thanks guys. My head is getting big from the praises ()stsfd().
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg441.imageshack.us%2Fimg441%2F5545%2Fdemarcoaug1801122072392op5.th.png&hash=4741d86b08da1abeeda8834b12a923f74a2bded3) (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=demarcoaug1801122072392op5.png)
Well, I fixed the problem. Soon my work will be complete grmwahahahahaha!!!
......Holy Crap somebody actually did this ;D, Great Job
I'm almost crying :'(
Great job indeed! Can't wait for the release! :D
BTW, I hope that the final version will be compatible with some HW texture mods. ;D
Oooooh fewer imperfections, nice!
Extremely nice! WOW! &apls
well I was randomly surfing, (ST infact) and found this pic:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcache.boston.com%2Funiversal%2Fsite_graphics%2Fblogs%2Fbigpicture%2Flondon_08_29%2Flondon5.jpg&hash=7bd67f62031a119f1d1641d6f026f65f414ea583)
its a MAN curve! (also what about a RHW exit piece like that? :D)
So I went and looked for more
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.drr.net%2F15095709%2F3%2Fa1.l550.m1.t1%2Cq90%2F9E980F41089C3EE5D3E6EA3BCB9003D0%2F15095709-550px.jpg&hash=96ff33249c0a15c9867d95f1d3699b6cfcb822fd)
RHW-able?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.drr.net%2F12858492%2F3%2Fa1.l550.m1.t1%2Cq90%2F0EAB80159BB4435AEDFB349617800461%2F12858492-550px.jpg&hash=becddf1fc415785e0a61f6908fc32ed214ae736c)
Next project for andreharv? ;D
Joe
Well JoeST, I don't know if you had seen my other model, the lofthouse or roundabout interchange. It is similar to the last interchange that you mentioned. From the looks of it, it closest resembles a circle interchange. I can start on another interchange but the interchange must meet two criteria: 1: It has to be an interchange that doesn't already exist in the game and 2: it must add some kind of functionality to the game.
That last interchange is also the type used at the intersections of the Kennedy, Dan Ryan, and Eisenhower expressways in Chicago, among other places. I think it would be a very useful addition.
Looking fantastic there, andreharv! As has been said, already--I'm so glad you're taking this project on!
Keep up the good work!
Dustin
Anderhav, I was not implying that you should make it ;), and I also agree and understand your criteria. Was just an interesting interchange. :) I didnt particularly want it anyway heh
Joe
andreharv- One of these would make you the Interchange God for the foreseeable future.
I-294 and the East-West Tollway west. (IL)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg295.imageshack.us%2Fimg295%2F6020%2Fi294andewtollwaybs0.jpg&hash=7a1fdede6b5be1cba9f88fde3a87d706401845f9)
I-88 and IL-56 (IL)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg300.imageshack.us%2Fimg300%2F6985%2Fi88andil56dz4.jpg&hash=70f8352954b16445c0498513325f46c8a1187fa2)
I-65 and I-865 (IN)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg172.imageshack.us%2Fimg172%2F707%2Fi65andi865hz9.jpg&hash=54389ab8d5bf0c90b9e6c8cb70781a4bb7ed69c8)
US-41 and US-52 (IN)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg170.imageshack.us%2Fimg170%2F1879%2Fus41andus52pe8.jpg&hash=51393d2f6479a42e0f5505602fd8b618a589c050)
I can't think of a NAM interchange that I'd want any worse.
David
andreharv: Looking great! Glad you fixed the ramp! :thumbsup:
David (dedgren): Maybe something like this?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg25.imageshack.us%2Fimg25%2F8319%2Fave-kruizing1.jpg&hash=d778ee04b85f1ea545e181f1314e544f6a4c644b)
I remember the NAM Team was working on that years ago, back when it was at ST.
If you want to see more stuff that is/was in the works, check out my archives page. Its a fun read. You can find it here:
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4575.0 (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4575.0)
Best,
-Haljackey
Quote from: Haljackey on September 08, 2008, 02:21:40 PM
I remember the NAM Team was working on that years ago, back when it was at ST.
No, they were never working on that - it's only a photoshopped screenshot that someone posted. ;)
Quote from: Andreas on September 08, 2008, 02:42:39 PM
No, they were never working on that - it's only a photoshopped screenshot that someone posted. ;)
I stand corrected. :P
Still, its a neat concept. If I want to make a junction like that I just join the diagonal highway with a T-interchange or use the OWR-ground highway custom interchanges in the NAM. It would be much more realistic to have something like this in-game.
I am constantly amazed at the talent that you all have! Andreharv , that is one sexxxy interchange!
Quote from: dedgren on September 08, 2008, 02:07:25 PM
andreharv- One of these would make you the Interchange God for the foreseeable future.
Well I don't think it should be too hard of an interchange to make. Here's what I have so far. Will this do?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg87.imageshack.us%2Fimg87%2F2167%2Fonesidedyinterchangeux5.th.jpg&hash=c32b0d2dc45b96c7468030e7161d0e900e0c10bc) (http://img87.imageshack.us/my.php?image=onesidedyinterchangeux5.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg176.imageshack.us%2Fimg176%2F6355%2Fonesidedyinterchange2qw2.th.jpg&hash=b36a4c2707eed4442b03dbf541907584463eb9c3) (http://img176.imageshack.us/my.php?image=onesidedyinterchange2qw2.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg384.imageshack.us%2Fimg384%2F5757%2Fonesidedyinterchange3cz5.th.jpg&hash=8d53e35e6a141142b81535771220eb6636c9bed7) (http://img384.imageshack.us/my.php?image=onesidedyinterchange3cz5.jpg)
WOOPS!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg384.imageshack.us%2Fimg384%2F25%2Fsnotbombdo9.png&hash=3ad9e9501ff5f2ac3f336794117986f244c201c7)
...sorry, andreharv- just snot-bombed my monitor with the coffee I was drinking when I saw your post...
My goodness, folks- we got us a gen-yoo-wine prodigy- right here at SC4D.
Those are amazing!
EDIT: If I could presume on perfection, I'd extend the onramp merge area an extra two gridsquares or so in length one lane wide, but only if that was feasible and wouldn't hold things up too long. Again, just wow! -DE
David
It's a good thing I wasn't drinking coffee, or there'd be another splat on the screen here. Those interchanges are beautiful! So realistic looking, and so needed in this game. I'd also second dedgren's minor request, again with the same proviso he added.
You are really a interchange god, andreharv! The Y-interchange looks nice, and as far as I know, this is a common interchange. I used this as a workaround:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg152.imageshack.us%2Fimg152%2F5618%2Fhopa2a5interchangegl3.jpg&hash=bd6a3ecec37272ea773f15e77f410bfa8c8901ab)
Best,
Maarten
Quote from: dedgren on September 08, 2008, 11:58:56 PM
WOOPS!
...sorry, andreharv- just snot-bombed my monitor with the coffee I was drinking when I saw your post...
My goodness, folks- we got us a gen-yoo-wine prodigy- right here at SC4D.
Those are amazing!
EDIT: If I could presume on perfection, I'd extend the onramp merge area an extra two gridsquares or so in length one lane wide, but only if that was feasible and wouldn't hold things up too long. Again, just wow! -DE
David
Well, if you would prefer the onramp to be in line with the offramp, that should be fine. Not a problem. My only caveat is that the on/offramps are already two lanes wide. Would you rather them be 3? If that be the case, it would make for a fork in the highway rather than two(which would be a very nice touch coming to think of it). You decide ;). I guess I was trying to make the interchange as compact as possible but I would prefer to make it the interchange larger so that I can properly add the provisions that you were speaking of...I think it will make it look better.
Never try to make a line drawing with a mouse on the third cup of coffee.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg373.imageshack.us%2Fimg373%2F9109%2Fmergeareapu1.png&hash=e4f2cf655c29b136eccf366b4826b7e0f62222e0)
...note to self, buy pen input tablet...
The two lane ramps are great. There just needs to be an extended merge area located in the oval I've drawn.
Again, great work, andreharv!
David
WOW :jaw drops: you are amazing andreharv!!! Just...WOW!!!
I haven't seen many Maxis type highways like this in RL so forgive if this is wrong but,
I don't see why the slip lane that doesn't cross over the highway has to up and then down? Just wondering why...
Jonathan
great work Maarten :thumbsup:
Quote from: Warrior on September 09, 2008, 11:14:55 AM
WOW :jaw drops: you are amazing andreharv!!! Just...WOW!!!
I haven't seen many Maxis type highways like this in RL so forgive if this is wrong but,
I don't see why the slip lane that doesn't cross over the highway has to up and then down? Just wondering why...
Jonathan
Well to be totally honest with you, I cannot say that such a technique is widely used. Here is where I got the idea:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg352.imageshack.us%2Fimg352%2F9379%2F59950272uh5.jpg&hash=857975412e4aa922b7dab62785d1fcaad3eb9b39) (http://imageshack.us)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg352.imageshack.us%2Fimg352%2F59950272uh5.jpg%2F1%2Fw1024.png&hash=9bcd2204d623cf7399d4281a119adb8f6c1903d1) (http://g.imageshack.us/img352/59950272uh5.jpg/1/)
This is the entrance to the central artery tunnel in Boston, MA. I have traversed this onramp many times and it is by far my favorite. In this picture, the onramp starts at the mouth of a tunnel and travels clockwise until it hits the artery. The artery itself, is transitioning between the Zakim Bridge and the artery tunnel. Because of the limited space, you will notice that the onramp must merge before the artery hits level ground. Once merged, the driver descends into the tunnel with all other drivers from the bridge. To make a long story short, the sooner/higher I connect the onramp, the less space/tiles the onramp takes up.
When it's all said and done, though, I will enlarge the interchange (adding more lanes) so there is no need to raise it. Since I posted that picture, I have lowered the onramp considerably in order to lengthen it.
Sorry for the double post. TMI I guess. Here are the revised models. I think these are a lot more realistic. Good idea Dedren. And don't be so hard on yourself...Your drawing is marvelous :P.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg160.imageshack.us%2Fimg160%2F9104%2Fpartialyinterchange1hd8.th.jpg&hash=db1f782259633f1af0b42ebe0aadcad494bd2797) (http://img160.imageshack.us/my.php?image=partialyinterchange1hd8.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg247.imageshack.us%2Fimg247%2F4755%2Fpartialyinterchange2vd0.th.jpg&hash=3398b4f4a8583011516dba4b7164a210c800d197) (http://img247.imageshack.us/my.php?image=partialyinterchange2vd0.jpg) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg291.imageshack.us%2Fimg291%2F1918%2Fpartialyinterchange3au0.th.jpg&hash=987d7759bcebcfb01c37d9969fb3756ab88f9522) (http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=partialyinterchange3au0.jpg)
thiss is my contribution to NAM its a site that list all the interchanges for you in a top down form
http://xkcd.com/253/
@ Andreharv: When/if you release the limited-access Y-split, I will do my best to find a way to use it for a full-access 4-way interchange with the same purpose as a cloverleaf. Great job with the model!
@shadd0w09: I thought you were for real when you said that you had a contribution. I looked at that first picture and it said the same exact thing as I was thinking: Inescapable...I lost it :D.
@nerdly_dood: I pondered in my head what such a compilation of partial y interchanges would look like and it would look something like a ninja star (can't really explain any better than that). It would be a huge interchange that would span a half a mile (50 tiles) in length and width each (50 tiles). ;)
I don't care. I successfully made a 4-way interchange with the standard Maxis T interchanges, and I'll make one with your trumpets, and I'll figure out a way to make one with your y split. ;)
What about this interchange? Is this possible? It's like a four way stack, but the ramps meet at the top.
http://www.kurumi.com/roads/interchanges/spui.html#stacked_diamond (http://www.kurumi.com/roads/interchanges/spui.html#stacked_diamond)
Or this one? It's a SPUI/ Parclo combo.
http://www.kurumi.com/roads/interchanges/oddities.html (http://www.kurumi.com/roads/interchanges/oddities.html)
Edit: instead of pictures I put links.
I do believe someone has made a spui model (not sure who), but there is a pathing issue (namely the stop points) ;)
and a 4 way stack has already been made
Sorry KJ3400, those image links are broken. You have to use a web host like imageshack or something, rather than trying to host from your own hard drive. That may not be so safe as well, if you need to keep your identity secret. As for SPUI's, since I have achieved that with the RHWxOWRxAvenue intersection building, it can be done that way.
Beside the highway talk :D, let's talk about the other transportation tools, such as, subway and elevated rail....
Is it possible to make multi-track elevated rail lines, like the ones in the NYC Subway system??
Something like this (click on the link!!):
http://images.nycsubway.org/trackmap/bigbronx.png
And no, it's not a picture of the tracks, but instead, it's a track map of the Bronx part of the subway system in NYC
;) Mass
Oh, the infamous third rail. Why wouldn't this be possible. Thing is, this has been talked about eyons ago, but for this game, IF this is ever taken into consideration, could be a possible RAM team related project()what() Either way, this could still take up two tiles, unless it is possible to path 3 trains conjoined on one tile, but I have been using subs for tunnel/underpass advantages.
Quote from: MassHelper on September 22, 2008, 06:40:27 PM
Beside the highway talk :D, let's talk about the other transportation tools, such as, subway and elevated rail....
Is it possible to make multi-track elevated rail lines, like the ones in the NYC Subway system??
Something like this (click on the link!!):
http://images.nycsubway.org/trackmap/bigbronx.png
And no, it's not a picture of the tracks, but instead, it's a track map of the Bronx part of the subway system in NYC
;) Mass
yes and no...the functionality is still debatable. from my testing, to get a true express track, the whole setup would simply have to be eyecandy...that is, v^v^ would be the functionality rather than the vv^^ setup that NYC uses. (i'm not sure if seperate stop points can be implemented in the same station [alex or jonathan want to weigh in here?]) if it is not possible, then there would have to be stations created that simply have overhanging props for the second line...so it looks the way we want, even if it really isn't functioning that way. based on my testing, if the stop points are possible, then it is a very doable mod. it would likely use a side by side override. seems like a lot of extra work to me...
Of course ;), it would take 2 tiles to do the third track. But it would allow an increase in capacity by 1.5x for elevated rail (or for heavy rail :D) and lower congestion on the tracks.
In addition, this 3-track (or four) mod would allow people to be able to build almost-realistic megalopolis.
:) Mass
Hey, ya'll. I am moving to MA today and because I will be pretty busy (looking for a job, applying to schools, etc), I am going to have to put the highway interchange project on hiatus until further notice. Sorry for the short notice.
That's gonna suck... :(
will it be possible to create the tunnel exit of EL-rail and GLR?
because the subway<->el-rail/glr can not go though when playing UDI and the inside game tunnel of el-rail ang glr are just a "black area".
Hey, wong... :-[
A EL-Rail <-> subway is already available in Rush Hour, but a GLR <-> sub is not available (though heavy rail <-> subway transition is already available in ST http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/details.cfm?id=4174&v=1 (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/details.cfm?id=4174&v=1))
Also, it is not possible to do UDI for transitions because Equinox already wrote in his updated transition, saying that "you can't have one network's cars on another network".
:) Mass
actually there is a GLR to subway transition...it looks exactly the same as the heavy rail to subway...and while they technically are the same type of network and pathing, they are completely different at the same time. thus the transition lots are not transitions as the el-rail to glr transition is...they are actually transit enabled lots that convert from subway to el-rail (as el and glr are the same.) that said, the difference in the way the game handles subway vs elrail, it is impossible to be able to udi subway...there is no way around it...as far as eyecandy making express tracks on subway and on elrail and glr, it would function somewhat similar to the original rhw4 overrides.
i believe (correct me if i'm wrong) one might note though that heavy rail under road works with udi...this is because they are puzzle pieces....again it still wouldn't be possible for subways again because of the way the game handles them.
Subways and ELR (Elevated Light Rail) are not the same
Subways and GLR are not the same
ELR and GLR are the same
Heavy Rail and GLR are not the same
Heavy Rail under Road and Subway are not the same.
All networks use different paths.
"Override Networks" (GLR, RHW, SAM, GHSR, HSR and NWM) are all extensions of the networks they use to draw.
UDI is not possible on Subways, and is only possible on GLR and ELR because of the NAM.
Transitions (Like ELR to Subway) are when the sims get off the ELR Train (Tram) and get on a subway train. No matter what the model looks like. The ELR train does not use the subway lines.
Hopfully that clears things up
Jonathan
QuoteThe ELR train does not use the subway lines.
Actually, if I recall correctly, ELR and subway use the same models for their trains. But you can't UDI from ELR to sub on the other hand.
True about that ;)... I tried driving an ELR train down the sub transition in UDI and it did not work ()sad().
;) Mass
They might look the same, but they are different and run on seperate paths, which is why you can't UDI between them.
Jonathan
but elrail and grl are essentially the same...glr is simply elrail dropped to ground level. true that they are different, but at the same time they are the same...kind of like how one way roads are essentially half of an avenue, yet they aren't half of an avenue...
Plus, GLR has more complex T21s for the intersection props - like the signs at road crossings and whatnot.
Quotebut elrail and grl are essentially the same
They are the same. The only difference is one's elevated above ground and the other runs on the ground. You can UDI between both modes of transport since they're derived from the same network (El Rail)... actually, a more correct way of saying things is that they are the same network, the GLR is just a RUL override of the El Rail - they can co-exist with each other peacefully.
Quote from: Warrior on September 25, 2008, 01:12:08 PM
They might look the same, but they are different and run on seperate paths......
Yep, and the only way to get UDI to work on subway (for trains), is to add rail or Elrail paths to it. But, I tried this, and I don't see the point, since you can't actually see anything :/.
Have you guys ever thought about making triple track for elevated rail???
This would be an example:
http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=124&threadid=89836&highlight_key=y&keyword1=express%20track (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=124&threadid=89836&highlight_key=y&keyword1=express%20track)
;) Mass
how would it work?
i believe that project died out due to not being able to add true express service or capacity to the rails...i have talked with a couple of people about the feasibility and realism of possibly doing a side by side override for el-rail...the only question would be stations and stop points within. sims do like the express concept though...in my cities, i have been running a test where i place 2 stations adjoining, and then run one line express local (with stops) and one express (bypasses several local stops) and the sims seem to love the idea...the express line is heavily used as is the local line. it started when i had the local line becoming way over congested. i just built a parallel line and matched up a couple of stations and bypassed the rest. a texture override and a specially batted station and a batted overhang to match on the other side would give the appearance even if the true express lines are indeed impossible or at the very least impractical to achieve...
i'll edit this post later with some pictures if anyone wishes
Show us some pics..
TY
;) Mass
Having a triple track on a single tile would be nice, even if the capacity is not to par, it would look real, and in reality no one usually knows what capacities are of transit networks in RL.
True to that...
:) Mass
Is this development thread still active?
Well if it is, I have a question, well a request (if i am posting in the wrong thread please excuse me) buit would it be possible to create double height road, avenue, one-way road etc. puzzle pieces for making road over road over road or just dual networking like double height road over elevated road. If you get what I mean
Quote from: j-dub on October 02, 2008, 02:45:00 PM
Having a triple track on a single tile would be nice, even if the capacity is not to par, it would look real, and in reality no one usually knows what capacities are of transit networks in RL.
yeah...i have no doubt that the third track override is completely feasible visually...the problem lies within the actually getting express service...can a tile have stop points on only some of the paths and not the others? more specifically can one transit type have a stop point for one path and not for another? if so, then the express lines are completely doable...but then we would have to test and see if passing through the station even without stop points would cause the track to use the station...i'm pretty sure true express service is impossible, but a faux express by use of an overhang is definitely a possibility...
Ok back in business...After some armtwisting, I have come up with a (very) rough draft.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg222.imageshack.us%2Fimg222%2F8528%2Fdemarcojan1803122452885go7.th.png&hash=efb2a2c1986622d99ffff6594cb2b2a03fa9ac91) (http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=demarcojan1803122452885go7.png)(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg222.imageshack.us%2Fimages%2Fthpix.gif&hash=c94545f5eb1c42698c1e67bb18f6c26cc5f772b2) (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)
Yay, it's great to see you back,
If it's just a small corner, you can have a model that just goes outside the 16x16 limit. It is easier and it means trees and lots don't have to be a tile away from the interchange.
So far it looks great, seeing as it's just a rough draft, and far better than anything I could do.
Jonathan
QuoteOk back in business...After some arm-twisting, I have come up with a (very) rough draft.
Oh yes, that is going to be very nice. :thumbsup:
I've always wanted one of these! Great work andreharv!
Best,
-Haljackey
Not bad! (But of course it's imperfect... but the imperfections will fade I'm sure, as you continue to refine the model etc.) That is a much more aesthetically pleasing alternative to this one I used in a tutorial I made on how to make and use a collector/distributor highway:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi220.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd138%2Fnerdly_dood%2FNewCity-Mar2.jpg&hash=b984fb04117a55529d0d5617e847c4dd15eb7d53)
Once you've finished the interchange you're working on now, I can use it for a more complicated and improved version of the above interchange. (Yes I know that's an incomplete interchange: that's intentional)
andreharv, I like what I see for a rough draft. Looks like you put alot of your time into this. I know its rough, but my one issue is the 3 lanes immediately merging with 3 lanes, I have seen 2 merge to 3 in reality, but even that is risky alone.
Nerdly, there is another way to this type of highway interchange I use with elevated to straight oneway, but I'll post that in the intersection thread some other time.
Thanks for your comments. I should be able to perfect the textures in the coming days. Unfortunately, I am most likely going to refrain from making any changes to the model itself as this will essentially cause me to redo much of the interchange altogether.
@ j-dub: I guess what you are seeing is not too common. However, such merges/splits exist. There are several in the western suburbs of Toronto. ;)
J-Dub, andreharv is right about the highway because I live in Toronto (Yes, I do) myself and the express lanes on the 401 in Toronto goes for about 60 kilometres, somewhere from Lester P. Int'l airport to the eastern townline of Toronto and at each end of the express lane sections, there is always a merge of three lanes (express) to two (or three) lanes (collector) of the highway.
:) Mass
P.S. If I misunderstood either one of you, I am so sorry.
almost 2 weeks, so i appologize for diggin this up. I was browsing the wiki and came across something that caught my interest. I had already expressed some interest in this thru PM to a couple folks, but the answer still eludes me.
from the wiki:
"The function of the RUL File is defined by its IID. It is not possible to add new RUL Files, though it is possible to define new Bridge RULs for networks that do not already have them."
i guess my question is: how can one "define" a new bridge RUL? is the Instance ID of the RUL already designated for a particular network, or does one have to define the ID for said RUL somewhere else in the NAM?
i have tried many different ID values to get another RUL working, but I have no inside knowledge of the NAM other than what ive been able to learn by reading. instead of spinning my wheels and possibly missing something simple, i thought i would pose the question to publicly, hopefully someone may know how this is done.
i'd greatly appreciate any info or hints in the right direction. i'll gladly do the work if it means i get to see a bridge reach fruition.
thanks all! :thumbsup:
choco, to answer your question, with the Bridge RULs, there are a number of networks for which Maxis did not include RULs for. However, as Tropod figured out awhile ago with One-Way Roads (and as smoncrie and I re-discovered with the RHW), it is possible to add the missing files in. They always follow the pattern 0x0000100X, where X is the "Network ID". The Network ID corresponds to the Network IDs used for adding Transit-Enabling to Lots:
0=Road
1=Rail
2=Elevated Highway
3=Street
4=Pipe
5=Powerline
6=Avenue
7=Subway
8=Light Rail
9=Monorail
A=One-Way Road
B=RHW
C=Ground Highway
Of course, I'm not sure that making a Pipe or Powerline Bridge RUL will actually do anything worthwhile, but there's network keys for them.
It's not possible to add any other RULs, though, aside from the "missing" Bridge RULs.
Hope that clarifies it for you--an excellent question, I must say. :)
-Alex (Tarkus)
Oh, I think some people would consider the possibility of doing custom Powerline Bridges worthwhile, instead of only having Maxis Power able to cross the waves.
Quote from: j-dub on November 13, 2008, 05:14:15 PM
Oh, I think some people would consider the possibility of doing custom Powerline Bridges worthwhile, instead of only having Maxis Power able to cross the waves.
Of course, there's also the question of whether or not they'll actually do anything at all. :D
-Alex
True, but as always, why did they leave the door open?
They probably left an open hole in the wall, but there certainly never was a door in the first place. ;)
But why would we need a "powerline bridge" anyway? The in-game bridges can transmit power as well, so you don't have to use the powerlines, if you don't want to.
@Tarkus: fantastic!! i cannot thank you enough.....ooooooh, the possibilities! :thumbsup:
i suppose a powerline bridge could be used in 3rr, as metavaro(?) has been making new models for high tension lines, i believe. not sure how to 'path' a powerline bridge, but there could be some use....
Well... Don't ALL bridges carry power? If a power line bridge could be made, I don't think it would be necessary to figure out how to make ir carry power, just to make it a bridge for power lines is all.
You know, one time I wondered, "How am I going to get this line over the water?" I did manage to BAT a (still unreleased) transition [linkie] (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=2105.msg193533#msg193533) from my metal pole set to the default Maxis set, which could be used for this purpose, but now I read this. In the NAM Development thread, of all places. :D Although we don't have to use the power lines to cross the water, this discovery is great for those who do want to cross the water with their lines. Thanks, Alex, for bringing this possibility into the light. :) I'll definitely keep a closer eye on this thread to see if there are any developments, and I'll try to help where I can, although the closest thing to MODding that I've done with any success is opening the Reader to remove the base texture from a lot.
well, i can help with the modding if ya like. the only thing we'd need is an exemplar ID and the model ID's....but as far as i know, those have not been defined in the bridge controller .ini file.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi200.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa230%2FwarriorST%2FrURALPOWERLINEBRIDGE.jpg&hash=786b043cce558db4c49224d09c36407281f1f017)
This something something like you wanted? I used existing SFBT rural powerline models. It replaces the HSR bridge so you use monorail to create it(but any network could be used) and only looks right in this rotation (Because I haven't got the hang of Resouce Key properties) but it works and proves it can be done. Also I made puzzle piece that "hides" the end monorail stubs, and then used the Street crossing lot to overhang the lines over the puzzle piece.
And to prove it carries power:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi200.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa230%2FwarriorST%2FrpbOVERALL.jpg&hash=cbff74551ec33755b396442fc5096971fd108d8f)
Obviously this is not going to be released as someone (such as choco can do it better but it is just prove-of-concept)
Jonathan
Oh, my. What if custom power line bridges are released as part of the new NAM? That I just couldn't get over. $%Grinno$% Anyway, that looks good, Jonathan, even though there's an odd shadow. :thumbsup: I believe that we are one step closer to a "SAM" for power lines, at least over water. Since land bridges can be built with a little effort, it may be that these lines can be dragged over land. Of course, there are no diagonal bridges :'(, but it's a great idea otherwise.
@warrior: thanks....but i dont know much about the powerlines yet... ::) i suppose all one would need is the exemplar group ID....then anything should be possible. i may need to pick your brain a bit later though... ;D
other good news....i have a working 1008 RUL file going. not all lengths are correct, but proof of concept.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi141.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr70%2Fchoco_028%2FNS.jpg&hash=4e2fd9f713fc8d99e303527712a5c960b4a34128)
should have the 1009 working soon as well.....
Is that the Vancouver skybridge!? :o
I go over that bridge at least 3 times a week!
Should be taller though... approx. 123 metres tall. in real-life.
supposed to be...
i put it together rather quickly to start testing the RUL necessary to build that bridge correctly. i didn't invest too much time on the model as i wasn't sure (at the time) if it would be possible or not. now that i got it working, on to the actual models. unfortunately, its like #7 on the to-do list.
Is it possible if someone can create extra raised bridges for GLR and Rail?
I've had problems trying to bridge bodies of water when the land between the bridges is low and the waterway happens to be one of those ship-carrying ones. =O
- Allan Kuan
Hey guys. A request if you will, I'm recently back and want to complete my el-rail project. I would like to avoid conflicts and be able to integrate this as seamless as possible with nam and possibly sam. What i need to know is what ranges are ok to use for the following, textures, transit textures, s3d models, props, etc. I'll have a fair amount of all so i want to keep it organized and safe so to speak. I figured this would be the place to ask.
second can i control textures on an el-rail 3ds models like other network tiles. For intersections i would like the appropriate texture to appear for sidewalk and road texture. Where should i start to look for this? I am now using 3ds models as base plates under the el. They are used as props with an orient to slope property added. Can i control the texture on these also?......assign each prop make a t21 exemplar for the appropriate zone and wealth. Any overides for textures should then overwrite and be used on the model/prop. and the t21 exemplar will detect the wealth :) If it works i'll do the same for the intersection road surfaces. I'll experiment over the next day.
Cheers and thanx for any help.
Bud
Edit
well that worked. It was really easy. We can now have sidewalks that can be effected by wealth and texture mods. Here's an example. With Jrj's mod.....
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg385.imageshack.us%2Fimg385%2F3303%2Fstupidlyeasy01vw5.jpg&hash=710c3fb1a210a7be4779c12953c999d341b76649)
With out mod.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg117.imageshack.us%2Fimg117%2F6926%2Fstupidlyeasy02my9.jpg&hash=5de11dee47d66a4320097b259ec199d88f3c2758)
Basically for the intersection you need a t21 exemplar for each wealth level. On each exemplar layout you have a 3ds model with the appropriate sidewalk texture id attached to it. This model is used as a prop. The t21 detects the surrounding wealth and as long as the texture mod is loaded first the appropriate texture appears. The same for the roads as before.
Its all good except the textures are slightly lighter when used on prop models for some reason. Quite annoying. I would go so far as to suggest creating a new range of id's for these sidewalk textures since there are only a few and make appropriate variations for this use and expect others to make these new ranges for their sidewalk mod since only a couple textures are used. Anyways.....
Pm me if you need any more details.
Bud
It os well realistic!! will is there a version with roads underneath?
What Jack said. I also think this would be an awesome replacement to El-Rail over Road as well. I don't think you have to worry about overwriting something, since the DAT for this would replace the El-Rail, and existing NAM EL-Rail over Road pieces anyway. At the moment, SAM is just going to have to end before this, as people have done different not yet released replacements to some SAM networks. Not all things stay continuous for real, anyway. Looks like you'll have to discover what ranges are needed to be replaced for what crossing. I know you want to integrate as much as possible, but if you mean doing something like crossing this over a RHW 10, which is a custom network or something, then yeah that will need major discussion with Tarkus for example.
Hi j-Dub ;D
Actually i'm aware of all you mention. And you misunderstand me. But thats to be expected!!!.... First as for the el-rail mod, i'm fully aware of how to implement it and am only concerned with NEW id's i create because there will be so many. I contacted tarkus over this but have yet to here back. So no issues there. Go to my thread to check out the work. I just returned but was actually a member of nam for all of a day at one point.....then rl kicked me in the head. So the modding part isn't an issue.
Second as for the sidewalks.......ignore the el-mod. Whats done for the sidewalks could easily be done for all raised network
intersection's.....Thats right.. have functional sidewalks underneath. This could be done on elevated nam road ways or road/street under nam pieces.
Take care and nice to meet you.
cheers
bud
Hey BuddyBud,
I am curious to exactly what you have done on the sidewalk wealths , mainly since it was suggested to me for my avenue curve sidewalk mods...I just could'nt wrap my head around what needed to happen.
Jayson
No prob.
First you have to create 4 s3d files each like below but with the appropriate default sidewalk texture iid's attached. One for each wealth level. I'm not sure how to do it the Right Way, So i just used an existing model and adjusted it in the reader. If you do it that way make sure you don't invert your triangles cause the textures will be wonky.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg65.imageshack.us%2Fimg65%2F1792%2Fwhereistandpresently02tc4.jpg&hash=8bd12f4daf5a3e53d74051970d51695d550018e9)
Next you need to make a s3d prop. I used the one found in Marrasts el/sub-hill side transition lot found on the stex. Be careful since this file is unstable in reader for some reason. I had to use text edit to change the instance that points to the model and the decoded hex editor to change the name. Do not reconfig the prop file itself after manually editing it, otherwise it will become corrupted.
After making the four models you then have to make four t21 exemplars for each intersection you want to use your new sidewalks on. One exemplar for each wealth lvl.
compile your dat.
Of course these models can be reused for any orth road under an elevated or whatever. The only problem is the sheer number of intersections.
If you need more details or don't understand any of that i'll put together a simple dat minus all my other garbage. Let me know if you need more info.
Take Care :thumbsup:
bud
Yeah,I thought as much. I was pretty sure I would have to make props for all wealths , just needed some idea of how. A template .dat would definitely be great , and of course I would give credit for the help!
Jayson
Hey guys.
a little more info. It seems i was doing something i was unaware of. It turns out the 3sd prop piece i used as a template has a non standard resource key type the reader doesn't recognise. its this. "Network Model Resource Key 3" The reason i bring this up is because i've had problems implementing digaonal mirrors for this. I can get my model to show up on orth and the diagonal but on the diagonal mirror i can not get it to recogonise the wealth via a t21 like the orth and standard diagonal. No wealth do flip though(i was wrong there but fixed it)???? Any help would be appreciated since i am so close to getting this to work.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg56.imageshack.us%2Fimg56%2F448%2Fborkeddiags01mt3.jpg&hash=8b47c3e55c717adf9e9afd48c4d2a49a8e8dc646)
above you can see how the non mirror diags respond to high wealth but the mirrored ones only show my No wealth.(filler lots are there to trigger the high wealth sidewalks) The roads and sidewalks are 3sd props, no overhanging props were used. The t21's do all the work....well almost. And for further reference, i know how to mirror standard bat props on flipped t21's. but that aint working here. Ive tried using that method and the kSC4BuildingModelRotationProperty to flip it. They work but just won't acknowledge wealth......arg. Why do the No wealth road/sidewalk props work but not the others.....so close but yet so far......again i have orth and standard diag's working but not the mirror diag's. I think it's because of the "network model resource key 3" but am a bit stumped. Is there a "network meodel resource key 3xm"?????
cheers and hope to get a response to this.
edit..... I got it working. I had to do some heavy hex editing to got the 3ds props to work with the t21 exemplars. Here's a picture and i'll upload a proof of concept dat in a day or so. It does'nt rely on nam or rul's so it should work fine with both i think.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg247.imageshack.us%2Fimg247%2F1151%2Fborkeddiags02zs1.jpg&hash=6a0112bbe4e6cc453ddcdbcffab38bbcb0c0d185)
2nd edit..... After sharing my information with goa i was informed of potential problems with my excessive hacking of the exemplar file. Thankfully he shared with me the proper method for implementing this....and of coarse it works...Thanks Goa!!! But i have to redo the exemplars i created. I have great confidence in this and hope to produce some viable results that will further enhance both my mod and potentially any elevated intersection found in sc4. (with do time of course). The method seems not to be intrusive and can be easily implemented with small patches that would in theory come out over a period of time. But lets first see where this goes. I'll Post any further updates in my thread found here. http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=2913.0 (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=2913.0).
3rd edit. Beta found here..... http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=2913.msg212945#msg212945 (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=2913.msg212945#msg212945)
Cheers.
Bud
i Had a question on the 2 semi- used ,non- transit networks that have slots in the illive reader for
"capacity" and "speed".. namely the "water - pipes" and "power line" networks...
Is there any hope or chance of one day converting those into some form of a "transport network"
in the game.. Possibly by using some form of "over -ride" with them ?
Or has this already been looked into and not much you can do with them ?
Thanks Brian
Brian, good question. As far as the Water Pipes, they work kind of like the Subway network. It is possible to do some overrides on them, but there's some significant limits. Powerlines are set up kind of unusually--they're not controlled through any of the RULs, but by a small section in the Network INI file. The Powerline section in the INI is rather restrictive in what it allows, so it's not likely much can be done there.
-Alex
Well, so much for fixing the traffic simulator to allow Sims to walk to work over the power lines. ::)
But I'm really curious about the pipe network. Is it possible to use empty pipes as vehicular tunnels? The traffic simulator certainly permits any travel type in the pipe network. But I don't know if the other necessary support is there, or could be added. If so, you could have a system something like FLUPS, but with a draggable network that could also run diagonally. And you could build anything you wanted on top of it, or build your tunnels under pre-existing buildings. So, is this something that is at all possible?
We've tried making cars go on subway (actual cars not converting it Subway traffic) but they jump up or just don't work a lot. We haven't tried pipes becuase we haven't found which IID the paths should be. (Subway models IIDs begin with 06 and the paths begin with 07, pipe models begin with 07) Also overriding subway/pipes also overrides pipes/subway and the road network. It's all a bit of a mess really.
Jonathan
Yeah, I figured there was probably a reason no one had done this, but I had to ask. Too bad - you could have had tunnels with speed limits between roads and highways, and capacities in between as well. I guess it's just not to be. :-[
Quote from: z on January 07, 2009, 11:54:28 PM
Yeah, I figured there was probably a reason no one had done this, but I had to ask. Too bad - you could have had tunnels with speed limits between roads and highways, and capacities in between as well. I guess it's just not to be. :-[
I have noted recently a "under ground railroad" which can be used with a Brussels station or something. Could a underpass, much like the ones i made using subways, be bated to then be joined by the under ground railroad. Thus being able to convert truck bus and car traffic and allow it through.
I know it's not what your looking for but sometimes the illusion is just as useful for the average user????
Just a thought.
Bud
The underground rail is implemented entirely in puzzle pieces. That, along with the fact that it can't go underwater, means that it has fewer capabilities than FLUPS, even if you were somehow able to get cars onto it.
I'm new here to the forums (, and this is my first post). I would like to make a request for the NAM (, but I'm not sure if this is the right topic). I was very impressed and amazed over the El-Rail facelift mod and I wonder if it's possible to make a similair facelift for the monorail. I don't like it when there is grass under elevated networks running through Downtown. And even more disturbing: when it even isn't any sidewalk texture where the networks cross eachother. Could you please fix this ?
Well if your talking about my mod i'm working on, first it's not really a nam mod. More like a Nam Cosmetic mod. It really only changes it visually. Also many of the techniques i'm developing are somewhat new so are not fully or even close to being tested. I would expect this to take no less than 3 months to do and thats with alot of time available on my part. It's even quite possible that issues could occur that would force a whole new approach.
In short can it be done....Yes. The real question is can you find people with the know how and time to actually complete it.
As for the sidewalk issue. After 4 long years i have a working beta just put up a couple of days ago. Its a small attachment on page six of my thread. It's a test proof only and has random network props show up in the wrong place, textures don't match and still causes issues with other elrail pieces. I'm confident i can resolve it, but if your curious give it a try. There is hope.
Bud.
Don't ask "WHEN IS THIS......"etc.... or my fragile cranium shall implode from frustration.... :D
i think thiss sight will be usefull for you NAM gyes http://www.nc3d.com/ (http://www.nc3d.com/) click on transportation and broue it itg got lots of pics and image's that you might ues for ideas
That is really creepy how lifelike, realistically detailed those animations all are. Looks like it took awhile. Keep in mind this game has limitations to its shape of road surfaces, great reference, and also there is stuff in those flybys that have been already done.
Nice link there indeed and about what has been done IE HSR lol.... Now that is just creepy!!! I agree with you JD!!!!
Wow those pictures look great. Great for Cities XL that is! &idea...Also, I am still working on those interchanges if anyone was wondering.
Wondering?
Wondering???
My friend, we were getting ready to send out the bloodhounds.
Great to have you confirm that. We'll be watching...intently...for more.
David
shadd0w09, thanks for that link. Funny thing is, I recognize a few of those images under their Transportation Demo Reel (http://www.nc3d.com/transportation)--probably because the company is based in Oregon, and I actually witnessed a couple of those projects being built (#20 and #21 in particular).
And back on-topic, andreharv, that's fantastic news! I can't wait to see what you come up with. :thumbsup:
-Alex (Tarkus)
Quote from: andreharv on January 09, 2009, 07:23:41 PM
Wow those pictures look great. Great for Cities XL that is! &idea...Also, I am still working on those interchanges if anyone was wondering.
Best news I've heard all day!
Can't wait to see what you've come up with,
andreharv!Dustin
Quote from: andreharv on January 09, 2009, 07:23:41 PM
Wow those pictures look great. Great for Cities XL that is! &idea...Also, I am still working on those interchanges if anyone was wondering.
What interchanges? Anyway, anything with "I'm working on it" and "Interchanges" in one sentence can't be anything but good news!
Considering powerlines are technically a network, is it possible to add paths to them at all?
This is a question coming from someone with no experience in modding what-so-ever, so please bear with me. :)
Hi,
Is it possible to split the RHW2 and the RHW4(and further) in the menu? So puzzle pieces for RHW2 roads will be separated from 'highway' roads. I want to extend and beautify the RHW2 roads (see this topic (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=6828.0)). As i'm making progress this idea plopped up in my head. This will give an very organized look & feeling.
Just an idea... GLR-in-avenue and EL-rail-over-road and GLR-in-road have been created, why not do an el-rail over avenue? Maybe, complete with transitions to its other counterparts...
it was started by someone (was it mightygoose?), but never got very far, as he went AWOL soon after and no attempt has been made to resurect it.
Joe
Well for the record, if it were mightygoose, he's back, on ST at least. I remember seeing it too, though I can't remember who started it either.
It would be nice to see/hear the goose again, his podcast was awesome and his mod looked interesting
Are there any plans for diagonal bridges?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy199%2FNe0que%2Fsimcity%25204%2F2009-01-31_013637.jpg&hash=810f089dcefbc8c2fdee9c5101eda634ae9ff5d5)
That's a mess of paths there. ::) I can't actually figure out what you were doing. Did you just drag across?
Quote from: sim-al2 on January 30, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
That's a mess of paths there. ::) I can't actually figure out what you were doing. Did you just drag across?
Yup, diagonal
Eventually, yes. It's on the list.
-Alex (Tarkus)
I was wondering if its possible to get rid of a million puzzle pieces by making the Elevated OWR, Avenue, and Road, and Rail draggable? I figured its possible if the RHW MIS is draggable, so can the NAM elevated networks? ???
Making the Rail Viaducts draggable is on the table for the RAM, team but don't expect it any time soon,
The Draggable Road and OWR will be more difficult and the an Avenue override is a lot more complex.
Jonathan
Couldnt the straight over blank terrian elevated network pieces be made draggable so we can build bridges and hence have networks under bridge (finally)?
You mean like this?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.picvalley.net%2Fu%2F1045%2F1807980877.JPG&hash=c139cf0efb3282b9c7c9d12ac68cef9316d654e1)
Daeley made this draggable rail viaduct bridge to match and attach to rail viaduct pieces so there can finally be at least a rail bridge going over the road (or other crossing network) and water. You would still need to use the rail puzzle pieces next to the bridge for the road, or whatever crossing underneath, but it will look like its a bridge crossing over everything. I didn't need to build it over any network crossing right by the water, but I have the elevated heavy rail viaduct bridge used so the line gets across the highway you can't see on the left further, where the rail curves again. This bridge seemed to function fine, look how close I put the curves at the ends, it may be part of the RAM or something, which is why we don't hear of it. Otherwise, I don't see why not to release it. Eventually like Warrior said, the idea is for full drag-ability, but that will be a very long time.
Here's the latest little something I've been cooking up. The ramps will be one lane each as usual. Questions/comments are highly encouraged. Don't be bashful. :-[
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg10.imageshack.us%2Fimg10%2F2143%2Fyinterchangedoneog2.jpg&hash=bf1ab4db5223087e9f96e986ebea73a91a968527) (http://imageshack.us)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg10.imageshack.us%2Fimg10%2Fyinterchangedoneog2.jpg%2F1%2Fw1024.png&hash=11dedc78c05c3c20371f9d001b82b8f0ba90be8b) (http://g.imageshack.us/img10/yinterchangedoneog2.jpg/1/)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg7.imageshack.us%2Fimg7%2F7759%2Fyinterchangedone2vk0.jpg&hash=30f186a6fc1f1a40eea6f04589da19a53b05ba13) (http://imageshack.us)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg7.imageshack.us%2Fimg7%2Fyinterchangedone2vk0.jpg%2F1%2Fw1024.png&hash=e776fe73f6df4d5c9e234f6e7671566d558c63fc) (http://g.imageshack.us/img7/yinterchangedone2vk0.jpg/1/)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg160.imageshack.us%2Fimg160%2F5886%2Fyinterchangedone3fr4.jpg&hash=0fee44d9c153077c3e0846d7fbbb947d746caff8) (http://imageshack.us)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg160.imageshack.us%2Fimg160%2Fyinterchangedone3fr4.jpg%2F1%2Fw1024.png&hash=73cdaaf892808952b01df13b3413c17980855ff9) (http://g.imageshack.us/img160/yinterchangedone3fr4.jpg/1/)
Hey that looks awesome....love it so far. :thumbsup:
looks good, but It looks like the ave junction we already have.
1 lane, 3 ways... The exact same, just for highways. I'd suggest widening it to 2 lanes per ramp if possible.
Best,
-Haljackey
Wow, that looks amazing! &apls
It does look like the ave direction, but it looks a lot better imo.
Two lane ramps shouldn't be a problem. I didn't really like using the avenue Y in place of a true highway Y. I am making a new model in an attempt to make a more realistic look with better pathing...I was originally going to make it a Y lofthouse (or roundabout) interchange but I thought that was a little extensive. Thus, it will be a little of the same but I'm sure you guys will enjoy it if I can get it released. As always, if you have any requests, just ask.
&apls looking awesome!
Jayson
Quote from: andreharv on February 09, 2009, 07:42:48 PM
Two lane ramps shouldn't be a problem. I didn't really like using the avenue Y in place of a true highway Y. I am making a new model in an attempt to make a more realistic look with better pathing...
Exactly, you
can use the ave Y-interchange for your highways, but it looks odd. Even though this one is for highways and looks a lot better than the ave-Y, it is essentially the same concept. Adding another lane will make it different and look more realistic for big city commuting. If you only want one lane per ramp, then you can always use the ave-Y.
Just my two cents. You asked for feedback :P. Other than that it looks fantastic! :thumbsup:
Best,
-Haljackey
EDIT: Perhaps a visual may help. This was taken from my archives page, and was not made by me.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi267.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fii281%2Fhaljackey%2FAbovewithGrass.jpg&hash=90ccb06a5e803205c96df882858f80fdd60c6401)
Quote from: Haljackey on February 10, 2009, 08:12:33 AM
Exactly, you can use the ave Y-interchange for your highways, but it looks odd.
It doesn't look that odd to me. I think I've seen a few of these in rural areas. But you're right, for big city commuting, another lane would make it look more realistic.
Quote from: z on February 10, 2009, 11:11:44 AM
It doesn't look that odd to me. I think I've seen a few of these in rural areas. But you're right, for big city commuting, another lane would make it look more realistic.
And all the lane textures would match to boot...
Cheers,
Kevin
Here's the early result of the Y interchange modded for 2 lane ramps. As you can see, I had to employ a slight incline for the outer northbound ramp as this lane widening constricts the available space for a proper split. Long story short, there was no way around it without redoing the whole thing.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg25.imageshack.us%2Fimg25%2F2415%2Fyinterchangedraftbd7.jpg&hash=b299798ac2206baaf25f608f2a6b8b98cd2d1448) (http://imageshack.us)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg25.imageshack.us%2Fimg25%2Fyinterchangedraftbd7.jpg%2F1%2Fw1024.png&hash=7a56813163b95412a7a7b292a5aed303e10e1841) (http://g.imageshack.us/img25/yinterchangedraftbd7.jpg/1/)
WoW that is amazing there andreharv!!!!
yummy!! &apls
:thumbsup: wow keep up the good work!
Not bad, andreharv! Is there a way to gradualize the slight incline for the outer northbound ramp, or does it have to be a sharp 'bump', if you will?
Many thanks to Chrisim for giving a hint about how to do this. As I said in my showcase I expanded Replaceable Sidewalk System to elevated rail dual networking pieces.
The first picture is what you will get by default.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg511.imageshack.us%2Fimg511%2F378%2Fdualppsidewalkstandardsd8.jpg&hash=d47d5e3240a81cc90700fbaa66cc94a2cef96652)
By installing a small optional file that contains only one set of textures.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg511.imageshack.us%2Fimg511%2F5777%2Fdualppsidewalkjeronijhwzi1.jpg&hash=fe788f5423aa38681df3bab0685924bf766820f4)
You can give different sidewalk for ElRailxRoads, ElRailxStreets and U-RailxRoads if you want.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg264.imageshack.us%2Fimg264%2F486%2Fdualppsidewalkmixedea0.jpg&hash=2bab56f07ab3754428b85246cf774155e9952175)
I'll ask members to test this when I finished models for all zoom levels and previews.
wow...great idea. i never would have though of doing that. :P
bud
edit...looks good by the way and let me know if you want to try to make these into wealth responding sidewalks...I'll share that with you if you want. You know where to find me....hehe
This looks like it would fit really well into RTMT. I'll look forward to trying it out when you have it finished.
So... the final and last version of the NAM tool for the January NAM has been released for Windows:
http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=1914
The Mac version is online since last week.
The TODO list for the next version (already discussed with some users):
- making the tool compatible to the latest NAM bugfixes, enhancements and side-projects released after the Jan NAM
- creating a configuration template to load by analizing the NAM folder contents at the first start
and for near future but not the next version:
- individualization of the tunnel and slope MOD
Hi all, first time posting on this forum (And site). I am a big fan of the work that the NAM team is doing, keep up the good work.
I have had a look in this thread and I haven't seen any posts on this suggestion, if there is I apologize.
I would like to suggest a new type of roundabout design where the size is 3x4 to connect a avenue on two sides and roads on the other two side (as seen below).
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi733.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww336%2FLeeway2010%2F3x4roundabout.jpg&hash=aae058ccce77fbe9846749420af0e1c98a20ade8)
thanks.
Leeway.
OK people. Here is the rough draft of my ground highway Y interchange. I still have to make the paths and tweak skins and preview file :-[ this is what I have so far.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg25.imageshack.us%2Fimg25%2F6851%2Ftennisnov18031236080346bp9.png&hash=de5a0c420923add3ea7c55c8c2e09deccccf0952)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg13.imageshack.us%2Fimg13%2F2681%2Ftennisfeb2041236080586ht8.png&hash=96798605f4871625f7e094c189d176f5fff6b076)
That is amazing! And very useful!
Great work Andreharv :)
Very realistic looking! :thumbsup:
Quote from: Leeway on March 01, 2009, 08:14:55 AM
Hi all, first time posting on this forum (And site). I am a big fan of the work that the NAM team is doing, keep up the good work.
I have had a look in this thread and I haven't seen any posts on this suggestion, if there is I apologize.
I would like to suggest a new type of roundabout design where the size is 3x4 to connect a avenue on two sides and roads on the other two side (as seen below).
http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww336/Leeway2010/3x4roundabout.jpg
thanks.
Leeway.
Great idea!
And it should be turbo roundabout:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Turbo_roundabouts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Turbo_roundabouts)
Very nice!
Awesome &apls Awesome &apls Awesome &apls andreharv! Excellent work, looks awesome! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Quote from: Dino007 on March 03, 2009, 05:49:19 AM
Great idea!
And it should be turbo roundabout:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Turbo_roundabouts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Turbo_roundabouts)
You mean this design?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fe%2Fe4%2FTurborotonde.svg%2F437px-Turborotonde.svg.png&hash=baff59e7b4e80e150fcaaa90ba5107cb1465824f)
I've seen several of those roundabouts nearby my home, although some of them have a quite chaotic set-up(I haven no Google Maps picture of one of those, because it looks like the sattelite pictures aren't updated for at least 2 years :P)
Still it is an good idea for the next NAM.
Best,
Maarten
You can expand the designs by adding flyovers. Traffic going straght can go over the flyover and the traffic turning off can go down the sliproad to the roundabout.
One I made in the game.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi733.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww336%2FLeeway2010%2FFlyover.jpg&hash=e117ea2975aaf92ddc14e372abe559c965cc3598)
A flyover and underpass roundabout near were I work in Cardiff (Wales, UK).
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi733.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww336%2FLeeway2010%2FRoundabout.jpg&hash=4540713561b29cc9fb50d8145fd2ecb3b5498cb5)
Leeway.
andreharv, that's great work. You truly are the new 'interchange creation master' of SC4.
Heck . . . . you make 'em, I sign 'em. How's that sound? ;) :D :thumbsup:
Could I suggest some stack interchange variants be made? Being a Texan, I love me some stacks.
Quote from: Leeway on March 03, 2009, 11:51:20 AM
You can expand the designs by adding flyovers. Traffic going straght can go over the flyover and the traffic turning off can go down the sliproad to the roundabout.
One I made in the game.
That looks almost exactly like the Boston University Bridge - Memorial Drive intersection, even more than your Cardiff picture.
QuoteThat looks almost exactly like the Boston University Bridge - Memorial Drive intersection, even more than your Cardiff picture.
I should have said that the top image is not based on the bottom image, the bottom image was just to show what a real world flyover looks like. The reason I picked that one is that I drive over it every day going to work, and it was the first one that came to mind.
Leeway.
2 NAMs ago I made it so if you drag Highway over Avenue Roundabout it will be a flyover, there's also a puzzle piece version in the Avenue Roundabouts TAB Ring.
Jonathan
I'm aware of the highway over avenue (Good job on that by the way, I use them a lot in my city's). I'm talking about avenue over avenue flyovers. I use a lot of avenues to link parts of my city's together. It's cheaper than using highways, and it takes up less room to make the juctions becoase I use a lot of roundabouts.
Leeway.
The Mother of All Turbo Interchanges, of course, is the I-90/I-94/I-290 "Mixing Bowl" just west of the Chicago Loop.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg18.imageshack.us%2Fimg18%2F4681%2Fchicagomixingbowl.jpg&hash=4983cbf1a033f099ffdafc2766d7fb640b45f3c2)
Yes, it does almost completely fit within one city block. I'd hate to see the waiver of Interstate standards IDOT would have to get today from the feds if it still needed to be built. My recollection- haven't been on it for years- is that the ramp speed is 15 mph/25 kph. It was completed in the 1960s, so it will be hitting its 50 anniversary in the next couple of years.
David
You think that's bad, take a look at spaghetti junction on the M6 near Birmingham. Driver's have got completly lose, including me.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi733.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww336%2FLeeway2010%2Fspaghettijunction.jpg&hash=87518e85f207e04a1f786a251763a1947e105f98)
Leeway.
Well, there are lots of crazy interchanges, like the Sonnborner Kreuz (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonnborner_Kreuz) in Wuppertal - probably the most crazy one in Germany. It cuts the town into two halfs, and when they built it in the late 1960's, they tore down 65 buildings, including the church, and resettled more than 2000 residents. The Wupper river had to be lowered over a distance of almost 2 km, the Wuppertal Schwebebahn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuppertal_Schwebebahn) had to be raised by 2 meters over a lenght of almost 500 meters, and the complety city infrastructure (streets, pipes, cables) had to be rebuilt. For some relations, you have to do weird turns, even leave the Autobahn and use several intersections with traffic lights to get onto the desired onramp again. The construction was resposible for 50% of the overall costs of the complete autobahn A46 in Wuppertal.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg204.imageshack.us%2Fimg204%2F2403%2Fsonnbornerkreuz.jpg&hash=83d1f65f3997af76e789db891d529eab26c7cad1) (http://img204.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sonnbornerkreuz.jpg)
Quote from: Leeway on March 03, 2009, 01:51:59 PM
You think that's bad, take a look at spaghetti junction on the M6 near Birmingham. Driver's have got completly lose, including me.
Leeway.
I think Neil Gaimen and Terry Prachett allude to the M6 being built in accordance to some mark of the beast in 'Good Omens'.
Are any of these requests possible to make please? $%Grinno$%
A. Smooth curves for OWR
B. 45 curve for Elevated Road, Ave, and OWR
C. Diagonal T On-SLope pices
D. FAR Intersections
&Thk/(
Quote from: mrtnrln on March 03, 2009, 08:16:13 AM
You mean this design?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e4/Turborotonde.svg/437px-Turborotonde.svg.png
I've seen several of those roundabouts nearby my home, although some of them have a quite chaotic set-up(I haven no Google Maps picture of one of those, because it looks like the sattelite pictures aren't updated for at least 2 years :P)
Still it is an good idea for the next NAM.
Best,
Maarten
Yes, this is what I mean.
For some time now I've had the desire of being able to drive El-Rail across rivers and also send ships down the same route.
However, that's not entirely possible to do right now. For one, the El-Rail elevated bridge is somewhat low for ferries, especially at low ground levels. Even worse, the pillars aren't widely spaced apart and it requires almost exact precision just to get under if you can.
Therefore, I'm wondering if someone can take the task of making a bridge for El-Rail that would meet these requirements and let me do UDI with ease. =) This may involve two options:
- conversion of High-El-Rail to draggable technology and create a bridge with the new height.
- employ something similar to the raised road bridge and have a small section at the bridge approaches to raise the elevated rail.
As well, rail bridges tend to be good obstacles too, although the Rail FLUPs have mitigated that issue somewhat. Which also reminds me... if someone can develop GLR FLUPs that would also be a good solution to the situation that we have right now.
Thanks,
- Allan Kuan
Quote from: allan_kuan1992 on March 03, 2009, 10:55:53 PM
As well, rail bridges tend to be good obstacles too, although the Rail FLUPs have mitigated that issue somewhat.
Rail FLUPS? Did I miss something? ???
or... as it's usually called... underground rail puzzle pieses xD
Technically it's still a FLUP-type network even though it predated the road FLUPs by 6 or so months.
- Allan Kuan
Actually, underground rail has been around a lot longer than that - at least a couple of years. But it's never been able to go under water... until now. ;D Watch for the ESURE package, coming to this NAM board very soon.
As for GLR FLUPS, there's already a GLR-to-subway transition piece, so that should really be all you need.
Quote from: wes.janson on March 03, 2009, 02:19:44 PM
I think Neil Gaimen and Terry Prachett allude to the M6 being built in accordance to some mark of the beast in 'Good Omens'.
Aye, although both the demon and the angel claim credit for it I think. :D
allan: im currently working on addressing those issues.....
since most of my monorail network stuff is done, im working on ELR/GLR now. my threads a cluttered mess, but there's pics of most of them in there.....
Quote from: LE0 on March 03, 2009, 02:31:31 PM
Are any of these requests possible to make please? $%Grinno$%
A. Smooth curves for OWR
B. 45 curve for Elevated Road, Ave, and OWR
C. Diagonal T On-SLope pices
D. FAR Intersections
&Thk/(
I agree with the first two. If these were made, the connectivity of the NAM would greatly improve, because we have raised rail curves but not curves for any raised road networks. Avenue could be the exception since it is two tiles. As for OWR smooth curves, we have road and avenue, so I don't see why not have OWR as well! :P
Your other requests are useful, but I don't think they are as "urgent" as others.
Best,
-Haljackey
Hmm... i doubt that the transition is UDI-able... which is why I'm requesting that something be tried for my particular situation... who knows... it might help many others too.
- Allan Kuan
The transition lots that convert traffic to subways are indeed not UDI-able. The player's vehicle will disappear upon entering the lot or reaching the end away from the connecting network.
-Swamper
Just a status update.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg11.imageshack.us%2Fimg11%2F6096%2Ftestesjun3021236340375.th.png&hash=afac6b5ca3aeb4da834a74539ff68824e3d3d706) (http://img11.imageshack.us/my.php?image=testesjun3021236340375.png)
Pathing is now 50% complete! This interchange may be out of the oven by as early as the end of the week. Stay tuned...
yay... although the other half is a complete mess... =O
- Allan Kuan
Hey guys,
So far, so good. I am finally getting the hang of the GLR System. My city has around 80,000...hehe, and I am replacing the whole system with GLR. One thing I did notice, tho, was that only a coulple of the GRL Stattions have lights, and not many. I would like to see a station or stations that are well lit! I mean, wouldn't that be better for safety, etc.? If there is someone up to the challange, that would be great! (I would show part of my city, but I there is no way I see to upload a pic...)
TTFN :satisfied:
Which GLR stations are you using or have you tried?
Quote from: z on March 09, 2009, 12:44:49 PM
Which GLR stations are you using or have you tried?
Hi, thanks for asking. I started with shmails GRL. But the trains went up an invisible hill when entering the station, lol. So..I switched to the SFBT Tram Mod. It got confusing with red, green, etc, and they do not light up. I next got the Cogeo Semi transparent set. They look very industrial-like, but, no lights. I know, I keep looking for the "right" look for my city. I also got the cercanias, SCS, and tonkso sets. Only those 2 have a couple of light on them.
So you see...I think they all look neat, and I don't mind mixing and matching. If I knew what I was doing, I would add lights myself, lol. Does that help?
Quote from: LE0 on March 03, 2009, 02:31:31 PM
Are any of these requests possible to make please? $%Grinno$%
A. Smooth curves for OWR
&Thk/(
I also would love to see this , as I have asked around and was told that if someone made the textures , everything else is copy/paste. I have tried to do the texture , but since I am not that good (matching or making curves ), I have hit a brick wall! It would definitely make off-ramps more realistic!
On a side note , since so many projects are constantly going on , and many people are all doing something different , is there a way for those of us who are not directly associated with the NAM team and are dabbling in the NAM , RAM etc. to know if anyone else is doing the same as others? That way , we would know if anyone else was doing the same thing? I know that this is
NAM Development , but it would be useful to have a "roster" or something.
Jayson
Quote from: Sdragon3000 on March 09, 2009, 12:54:18 PM
So you see...I think they all look neat, and I don't mind mixing and matching. If I knew what I was doing, I would add lights myself, lol. Does that help?
Yes, it does. I'm considering adding street lights as an option for RTMT stations, and so I need to know if that's something that people really want.
Quote from: z on March 09, 2009, 11:35:10 PM
Yes, it does. I'm considering adding street lights as an option for RTMT stations, and so I need to know if that's something that people really want.
Thank you. I think that would be a very cool feature. I bet you'll get alot of requests for custom lighted stations, lol. Can I put in my order now, please? :thumbsup:
Quote from: Sdragon3000 on March 09, 2009, 12:54:18 PM
I next got the Cogeo Semi transparent set. They look very industrial-like, but, no lights. I know, I keep looking for the "right" look for my city.
Hey, virtually ALL my models so far do have nightlighting (with the exception of some ones that shouldn't anyway, like fences). And of course, train/GLR shelter models couldn't be an exception in any case. The semitransparent models do have nightlights at the exterior, the roof, the revolving door and the platforms. Don't you see them? Are you sure you have installed the nightlighting update for BATs? Not to mention that the lots do have lampposts at the front and the parking areas at the back.
What exactly are you looking for? If you want the automata to be lit, just like the cars passing under streetlights, this is something different, and requires special modelling and modding. It's essentially making something like a lightcone, only it shouldn't have the shape of a cone, it should be like a sheet or plane, placed above the automata routes, to imitate a lighting effect. But afaik such models (ie illuminating automata) haven't been made yet. It's quite a challenge. Not that they are especially hard to make, but they must be carefully matched with BATs, and unfortunately they will be custom to models, ie they will almost certainly have to be redone for every new model. I hope someone will take the challenge and make them anyway.
Quote from: cogeo on March 11, 2009, 01:36:54 PM
Hey, virtually ALL my models so far do have nightlighting (with the exception of some ones that shouldn't anyway, like fences). And of course, train/GLR shelter models couldn't be an exception in any case. The semitransparent models do have nightlights at the exterior, the roof, the revolving door and the platforms. Don't you see them? Are you sure you have installed the nightlighting update for BATs? Not to mention that the lots do have lampposts at the front and the parking areas at the back.
What exactly are you looking for? If you want the automata to be lit, just like the cars passing under streetlights, this is something different, and requires special modelling and modding. It's essentially making something like a lightcone, only it shouldn't have the shape of a cone, it should be like a sheet or plane, placed above the automata routes, to imitate a lighting effect. But afaik such models (ie illuminating automata) haven't been made yet. It's quite a challenge. Not that they are especially hard to make, but they must be carefully matched with BATs, and unfortunately they will be custom to models, ie they will almost certainly have to be redone for every new model. I hope someone will take the challenge and make them anyway.
Hey....
Good to hear from you! I am experimenting with new transportation now, and am using yours. :) I had to look closley, but I do see some lighting. I may have been tired or not looking at it right, so, I apologise, I did not meant to instult or say something negative. :-[
I don't know how hard it is, as I am not a modder or batter, but I can imagine all the hard work that goes into all these add ons, etc, so thank you for all that!
I guess what I am looking for is a station (or set) that has INTERIOR lighting, or more lights. There were some stops in Tacoma, WA, a few years ago, bus tranfers lots, I guess they where, and I was impressed by how much they were lit up...also, in Olympia, WA, the Main Transit center was like that too. Anyways, Is that possible? Or should I experiment with the lot program?
Thanks again....
You know, a roster of current projects and who is working on each project is a good idea....make it sticky and people can check it before they request something. You could even add in each request as it comes and whether it will be worked on, is being worked on, or is canceled.
Quote from: dragonshardz on March 11, 2009, 07:20:41 PM...You could even add in each request as it comes and whether it will be worked on, is being worked on, or is canceled.
...or is not possible due to constraints of the game, perhaps? Such as RHW showing up in region view...
Yeah, that too.
Is it possible to have curved Oo/Off one-way overpass pieces?
they were already curved I think. =O
- Allan Kuan
Hey folks i have a question for you all....
I've been playing with making new elroad nam pieces that match the default system more closely....heres what i got so far....i essentially borrowed the walls from the highways and added a bit...also made an onslope piece. These are regular 3ds network models by the way.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg217.imageshack.us%2Fimg217%2F7631%2Fnewelroad01.jpg&hash=129f74aa7c62f758fbc39c4b1dd199807471245f)
heres the problem...when i rotate the view to look at the onslope piece i get this....
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg264.imageshack.us%2Fimg264%2F7631%2Fnewelroad01.jpg&hash=9d5e220bc224f74413d176e39f451af8a8f05806)
Any idea as to the cause....any help would be appreciated.
Bud
Those are looking great buddybud! Just add some support pillars and they'd be perfect!
That darkening there is a known bug, I don't think there's any way to fix it. &mmm
thanks nerdly.....ya supports and shadow....agreed
I'll try using 3ds network props for the onslope piece....i can do that easily enough....now i won't go crazy looking for an unknown solution!! &hlp.
Bud
There is a way of fixing this, I'm not sure on the details.
But I think it involves, using a different Resource Key number in the model's exemplar, and setting a different model for each rotation of the camera.
Then in some rotations the textures is lighter than the others, so it balances out.
Smoncrie developed this, and used it for the highway Onslope pieces, so take a look at those.
I'd use 3D network models (not props and the boxes generated by BAT, as much as possible on networks as there is more detail in the closest zoom on them, as they don't go all pixelated.
Jonathan
thanks warrior...i saw that on the onslope highway pieces...i can just study those...thanx for the info...and thanks for smoncrie paving the way. :thumbsup:
Edit...oh goody resource key 2...i always wondered what that was for....i shall report back!
Bud
by the way the props i suggested would be 3ds props not bat props....they are identical in resolution......cheers.
Buddybud . . . . . Now THAT's a highway overpass piece!
Nice work!
buddybud, those pieces look fantastic! I like what you've done there. :thumbsup:
-Alex
thanks Tarkus !
just to illustrate the potential of 3ds props for warrior i'd like to show the same thing but with a combination of network props and network model.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg253.imageshack.us%2Fimg253%2F8605%2Fnewelroad03.jpg&hash=af0fda188bba2969c28611b4ebc3f630f8b8f3b2)
the road in the above on slope piece is a network model as before...but now the structure for the on slope piece is a prop....as you can see the resolution is the same.....however...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg253.imageshack.us%2Fimg253%2F127%2Fnewelroad04.jpg&hash=557c3af1f8cf591c9548bcd59901b62c3754b81c)
you can see when we rotate it....it becomes brighter!!!!.....argh.
the prop is made using the rarely used "Network Model Resource Key"....info and an example can be found here. http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=6956.0 (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=6956.0)
Anyways...if anyone has knowledge of resource key 2 or how smoncrie did the highway pieces i would be happy (already messaged him).... or even just the location of the rul files for the on slope highway pieces.....any thing would help....
Cheers.
0x523ff000
0x5a131000
are the auto tile base
i think they are the id's for the onslope (just had a look at the controller) find the exemplar then that will give the id's of the model. not sure if it's t21?¿
hope this helps
looking good. is this a new project by any chance? :)
edit: reading the comments 'so a different autotile base is used for each rotation' well i'm not 100% sure at all &Thk/( which way this is done.
thanks for the info bighead :thumbsup:
new project no....just wanted something special for the challenge and had the idea bouncing around in my head for awhile!!!
but who knows....lol
Bud
No I don't think it is a different AutoTileBase for each rotation.
Because each rotation is actually a separate puzzle piece, so when you rotate the camera, it does not use the AutoTileBase from the RUL file, but if you rotate the puzzle piece before plopping then it does (Hopefully you understand my rubbish explaination)
When you make a BAT then there is a model for each rotation of the camera, (and zoom but that doesn't matter) So you need to make 4 models, identical is shape and size, but 4 textures some lighter than others. Then apply the lightest texture to the rotation with the darkest shadow problem and etc.
Then using the right Model Res Key you set each model(with different lighteness of texture) to each rotation.
I think that is what you wanted?
And for got to post before, the models look great :thumbsup:
Jonathan
so is there no elegant solution to this problem, or is there only this brute force fix???
warrior....hey thanks...i understand all that
my question is that the on slope piece for the elroad has one exemplar where as the highway on slope has four seperate for each rotation.....when i make the three additional exemplars how are they referenced...ie how does the game know how to use them. But i'll give it a shot regardless....
mighty goose.... hopefully not...lol
Bud
I have a request for NAM: Double height puzzle pieces for the el h-rail and el road and probably ploppable el light rail/monorail so that one could make dynamic and complex systems on water.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg441.imageshack.us%2Fimg441%2F3394%2Fundresspassagejan103512.png&hash=314b66fc8d2a5d96f2fedb5401c32baa291d51ac)
^ The reason for double height puzzle pieces.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg164.imageshack.us%2Fimg164%2F1969%2Fundresspassagejan835123.png&hash=aedf132ac747454dd5f22b8c279f08c84fde8d12)
^ And it would be cool if monorail and light rail could make complex routes like turns on water (complex compared to just strait) and diagonal bridges.
Well... if you used the raised road bridge it'd work... although there is no diagonal usage allowed (such as what you need in your case).
Now... for the rail... I think some extra rail FLUPs will help (UDI capability is needed and ESURE does not allow that).
- Allan Kuan
Quote from: allan_kuan1992 on April 04, 2009, 08:05:28 AM
Now... for the rail... I think some extra rail FLUPs will help (UDI capability is needed and ESURE does not allow that).
We are working on that very issue. The plan is to convert underwater crossings to puzzle pieces, FLUPS-style, which will allow UDI compatibility.
hello all, just started playing a month or so ago. i noticed that i could not find any over tunnel peices so i decided to try and make some as a good way to start making things. i'm going to try and make the rest of the transit, but don't know if i should post them on stex or not. but here pics of what i got so far.
i don't know who to ask if i should post these as lots or if NAM wants to makes these into puzzle peices would be cool. But if someone from NAM pm me about about this that would be great.
four 1x3 lots for roads going over single tile tunnel
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg136.imageshack.us%2Fimg136%2F6084%2Fnewcityjul1001239247377.jpg&hash=7f3405b40ab5c13ba6e44b515a2939a9116c9696)
four 1x4 lots for roads going over double tile tunnel
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg136.imageshack.us%2Fimg136%2F2636%2Fnewcityaug1800123924559.jpg&hash=7e6fa175cfa7cd4ae852b5d6a25c0022c0ba943f)
i want to make up lots for the rest of the transit for over tunnels,but right now i'm stuck on how to get a new SC4path file to work with the lot. for like GHSR and GLR
just like other games i have played i try to figure it all out cuase well thats the fun part for me lol thanks
Hello everyone.
I've started working with NAMs el-rail over road however I noticed there are some very useful puzzle pieces that are missing. The pieces are Elevated rail T over straight road and Elevated rail L over + road. Here's what they should look like in-game:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi483.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Frr194%2FRings_of_Saturn%2FBATsuggestions.jpg&hash=eb4aa1a3fbee8d44669b5cfaef087148d35007f2)
I really apreciated if someone could make them or teach me how to it so I can do them myself. ;)
Thanks :)
Since you have ingame pictures, doesn't that mean that you haven't already created them? I can understand that you made the T piece by potoshoping, but how have you made that pic of the L-Curve across road?
Hello there.. since a long time I don't request nothing ^^
I've being wondering, and as we know there are some mods to allow people to have sidewalks on the gentle curves for avenues and roads (specially made by Sithlord)
the issue is that those models (is what they are after all right?) don't fit places where we don't have development. a road with a large sidewalk and trees in a no man land? don't fit! By now you should be saing "then remove the mod! duh! /wrrd%&" but the issue is when you want both things on one city at the same time! in the middle of the city\town curves with sidewalks, in the wilds with no sidewalk.. &Thk/(
so? what I sugest\request? two models, or better, the same model(for each piece) but twice. so one would be free to be targeted by mods (like Sithlord's) to have sidewalks while the other remain untouched. ;D
Hope you get the point %confuso "$Deal"$
Quote from: gn_leugim on April 12, 2009, 06:32:47 AM
I've being wondering, and as we know there are some mods to allow people to have sidewalks on the gentle curves for avenues and roads (specially made by Sithlord)
the issue is that those models (is what they are after all right?) don't fit places where we don't have development. a road with a large sidewalk and trees in a no man land? don't fit! By now you should be saing "then remove the mod! duh! /wrrd%&" but the issue is when you want both things on one city at the same time! in the middle of the city\town curves with sidewalks, in the wilds with no sidewalk.. &Thk/(
so? what I sugest\request? two models, or better, the same model(for each piece) but twice. so one would be free to be targeted by mods (like Sithlord's) to have sidewalks while the other remain untouched. ;D
Hope you get the point %confuso "$Deal"$
Agreed. I use smooth curves at rural area's, but not in cities, because they don't fit in cities, because they are missing sidewalks. It would be nice to have both options available.
Best,
Maarten
Hi!
I got tired of the standard ugly Maxis avenue/road transition, so I've made some textures for a avenue-to-road-puzzle piece. Since I'm not very good at making puzzle pieces I thought it would be best to share it here. It's 2x4, Euro style and I think it looks pretty good, but it might need some finishing touches.
The NAM Team or anyone willing to make the puzzle piece are free to use and modify the texture :)
If anyone wants the PSD file, PM me and I'll post it!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag.png&hash=519f428c9fa6052428ee5f3aa523c970bb57855a)
-riiga
riiga: I like that texture. Please do not hesitate to make more :D
I believe Tarkus has made an American style one, hasn't he?
Yeah, Alex started an American version of that as a puzzle-piece a little while ago. Haven't heard anything about it in a few weeks though.
But those are nice textures!
That piece could be NWM development. If I recall, I think the avenue to road piece is 4 tiles long, so that should be the right scale, but we will have to wait for confirmation.
Well, I've had some spare time today and made a North American one too. I made two, with different arrows, so please tell me wich one you like best :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag-us1.png&hash=0d1e5dbf39c80f0fd1c2f25ce1de4f7eefda5500)(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag-us2.png&hash=0558e01080487ed2e0a9bce6d1c1dc6b5c684341)
- riiga
That's beautiful, riiga :thumbsup: &apls &apls &apls
I hope that you will succeed to make that piece.
I have a few suggestions I would make about that, but the textures are really nice! The arrows on the left look good, but the line on the inside of each direction should be yellow. Just some tips on making them look more North American. ;)
But those are still some really good textures. &apls
Around here the center chevrons are only V-shaped for diverging/merging traffic going in the same direction; otherwise (like here) they're straight. But they're pointing the wrong way - just reverse them and they'll be perfect. (Maybe make them wider, too?)
The arrows on the left are best IMO.
One last suggestion: If the three short-dashed lines where the dashed line ends on either side were removed I think that would be another improvement but it's not necessary.
Still though, don't mind me, i'm just a bit picky about stuff like this :D so it's no big deal. Great work overall though!
Sorry, nerdly's right about the chevrons... I knew that... :D The lines are supposed to guide traffic, pointing in the proper direction.
I've edited the texture now. How'd you like this version?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag-us3.png&hash=5861ed15426e15a54f0524b0f711b739f97fa7d9) vs. (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag-us1.png&hash=0d1e5dbf39c80f0fd1c2f25ce1de4f7eefda5500)
- riiga
The first version looks more like what I'm used to seeing. Of course, that's in the U.S...
Since I'm from Europe I like the european version.
Yeah, first version. :thumbsup:
Riiga, I have driven on this!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg123.imageshack.us%2Fimg123%2F6263%2Friigatextureedit.jpg&hash=5526abf5238a008224abf1a4139dca34cb15129d) (http://img123.imageshack.us/my.php?image=riigatextureedit.jpg)
(http://g.imageshack.us/img123/riigatextureedit.jpg/1/)
This one is your US merging texture I have seen in reality. I would go with this if you were going to go US. Nice texture work.
Right idea with the arrows, but not the right ones. Let me find those for you.
Here: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2003r1r2/ch3.pdf
Page 40 of 72, designated Page 3B-32 - Part F (Lane Reduction Arrow).
I've now edited the texture according to what j-dub and burgsabre87 said. The result is below:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag-us4.png&hash=0d88c3c05b033f885673f0d5091330954d57e215)
Looking better?
- riiga
You still need to make the lines along the median yellow (yellow on left, white on right), and I think the center lines need to be angled up a little more, other than that, it is looking good.
I think the lines' angle is fine, but the shorter lines are usually restricted to protected turn lanes, rather than a lane ending or beginning. The standard dashed line stops cold usually, without ending in a different set of lines to show that the lane ends or that another begins. This one below from your post at the top of this page shows that perfectly - that would be perfect once you turn the inside shoulder line yellow. (Our lane-ends arrow is like how you have it in your latest version, but I think the one in the image below looks better)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag-us3.png&hash=5861ed15426e15a54f0524b0f711b739f97fa7d9)
Ok, now I've made the inner line yellow and removed the short lines. Results below:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag-us5.png&hash=bdb2063c1d6690106ad1ac1fd096222fa5e17131) vs. (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-till-vag-us6-pil.png&hash=d62ae53bf32dda2f5362a5ff79e7f1ef964cd25f)
- riiga
Perfection!
&apls
For those of you wondering, yes, I did indeed do a smooth Road/Avenue transition about 7 months ago. Had it mostly working except it didn't have pedestrian pathing yet and the CheckTypes in the RUL were acting up a little.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg524.imageshack.us%2Fimg524%2F9297%2Fnam083120081.jpg&hash=00320cad79d909b2f6df11fa1ec2ffe62e930dcc)
The dimensions are the exact same as riiga has done above . . . which, I should add, look fantastic! The only suggestion I have is to actually take the arrows off the texture.
Arrows/stop lines, unless they're clearly denoting some sort of special functionality (turn lanes) can become problematic in mirroring the piece or making LHD versions, so I'd recommend adding them on using a flat model with a T21 exemplar, rather than building them into the actual texture.
Otherwise, excellent work!
-Alex
To summarize this, these are final textures I came up with :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-final-euro.png&hash=b1ddfae7500689d1ffb46c87357b8256db926d35)(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froxazer.homelinux.com%2Fshells%2Friiga%2Fpics%2FAveny-final-us.png&hash=16920668559db349b5a9232f3f0da52c0a0e4a6c)
As Alex stated, it would probably be better to add the arrows some other way. Then you'll be able to chose what type of arrow you'd like.
- riiga
Am I glad I decided to check this thread.
Great job on those textures, they look superb. :thumbsup:
Very well done on those textures! :thumbsup:
Riiga, that's perfection.
Alex, good point about the arrows.
Well done all around. :)
Good. &apls I would say Alex's texture still is necessary for road to TLA, and Riiga's final texture result is looking good for the Avenues, especially with that mod that makes the avenue median lines yellow.
Quote from: mrtnrln on April 12, 2009, 09:22:02 AM
Agreed. I use smooth curves at rural area's, but not in cities, because they don't fit in cities, because they are missing sidewalks. It would be nice to have both options available.
Best,
Maarten
If I didn't have Vista and could use the Reader I would teach myself T21's and do the wealth levels myself, because I feel the same way. I absolutely love the smooth curve and FAR T21's by sithlrd but it's inflexible with just an on or off option.
I would also remove a few of the trees, it's a little busy for me. Then again, you can't intersect it so I kind of like the extreme level of foliage, it looks nice in dense or suburban areas. Can you T21 by density? Hell, I can't do it anyway, right?
Is there anything a Vista user can do? &mmm
Quote from: delta9 on April 15, 2009, 10:07:02 PM
If I didn't have Vista and could use the Reader I would teach myself T21's and do the wealth levels myself, because I feel the same way. I absolutely love the smooth curve and FAR T21's by sithlrd but it's inflexible with just an on or off option. I would also remove a few of the trees, it's a little busy for me. Then again, you can't intersect it so I kind of like the extreme level of foliage, it looks nice in dense or suburban areas. Can you T21 by density? Hell, I can't do it anyway, right?
Is there anything a Vista user can do? &mmm
Strange... I use Vista and the Reader works flawlessly.
Quote from: riiga on April 15, 2009, 11:20:51 PM
Strange... I use Vista and the Reader works flawlessly.
Oops... I got it mixed up with another program or two... SC4Tool I think, and the terrain programs. Yeah, oops. I never seriously considered modding stuff until very recently so you'll have to forgive me for not knowing my stuff ()stsfd()
Well then, what's stopping me? Those tutorials looked easy enough, if I could learn C++ and Java in high school I can do this... right? :D... hmm sounds fun ;D
If we had high res props with these arrows, arrows on asphalt wouldn't be necessary.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.transportstyrelsen.se%2FVagmarken%2FLokaliseringsmarken_for_vagvisning%2FF16%2FF16-1%2FF16-1.jpg&hash=6813c615986abee1df3e5caac1d9d28d100f5cb4) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.transportstyrelsen.se%2FVagmarken%2FLokaliseringsmarken_for_vagvisning%2FF17%2FF17-1%2FF17-1.jpg&hash=92bd2eac38bc79b53931594f88ae6d8cc615a806)
These are taken from the Swedish road department's website. There's some good stuff that could do for textures at http://www.transportstyrelsen.se/sv/Vag/Trafikregler-vagmarken/Vagmarken/ (in Swedish though)
Quote from: delta9 on April 15, 2009, 10:07:02 PM
If I didn't have Vista and could use the Reader I would teach myself T21's and do the wealth levels myself, because I feel the same way. I absolutely love the smooth curve and FAR T21's by sithlrd but it's inflexible with just an on or off option. I would also remove a few of the trees, it's a little busy for me. Then again, you can't intersect it so I kind of like the extreme level of foliage, it looks nice in dense or suburban areas. Can you T21 by density? Hell, I can't do it anyway, right?
Is there anything a Vista user can do? &mmm
the point is not the t21.. although they don't look good on the wilds\rural areas, I meant to add a alternative to the sidewalks! one model be able to have custom sidewalks and other don't
Quote from: delta9 on April 15, 2009, 10:07:02 PM
If I didn't have Vista and could use the Reader I would teach myself T21's and do the wealth levels myself, because I feel the same way. I absolutely love the smooth curve and FAR T21's by sithlrd but it's inflexible with just an on or off option. I would also remove a few of the trees, it's a little busy for me. Then again, you can't intersect it so I kind of like the extreme level of foliage, it looks nice in dense or suburban areas. Can you T21 by density? Hell, I can't do it anyway, right?
Is there anything a Vista user can do? &mmm
QuoteQuote from: mrtnrln on April 12, 2009, 12:22:02 PM
Agreed. I use smooth curves at rural area's, but not in cities, because they don't fit in cities, because they are missing sidewalks. It would be nice to have both options available.
Best,
Maarten
If I had more time to re-do them , I would as I agree that I went a little prop happy , but at the same time I can't stand blank sidewalks!
To modify the curves , whether it be the avenue or the road curves , I kinda had a small pattern....if there was a big spot of blank,it got more props! ;D
To help anyone who is trying to figure out what is what , since I had to change the IIds of the props ,
[tabular type=3]
[row][head]
Maxis Prop IID[/head][head]
Prop[/head][head]
New IID[/head][/row]
[row][data]
2b1a0000[/data][data]
Flora 10x10x15_$$$ no-tp-tree7 [/data][data]
56884d9f[/data][/row]
[row][data]
2a8a0000[/data][data]
Street2x2x1_Dirt circle [/data][data]
b68498dc[/data][/row]
[row][data]
2a590000[/data][data]
Streetlight1x1x11_$$$Streetlight[/data][data]
56884db7[/data][/row]
[row][data]
2a5a0000[/data][data]
Streetlight 1x1x11_$$$Streetlightbanner1[/data][data]
76885191[/data][/row]
[row][data]
2abb0000[/data][data]
Streetlight 1x1x11_$$$Streetlightdiag[/data][data]
56885184[/data][/row]
[/tabular]
Maybe this will help , maybe not....
Jayson
EditI have started writing a tutorial for anyone who wants to make their own T-21 curve mods How to T-21 the Avenue and Road curves (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=7600.msg239528#msg239528)
now that I think better, is it possible to make the sidewalks as props, so we would have it changeing acourding to the welath\zone on that piece of road? :) &idea
Short answer, yes.T-21 ing textured props is what Buddybud is doing on his EL rail project. I keep thinking about trying to see if I could do it , I just don't have enough time right now.
Jayson
Quote from: gn_leugim on May 10, 2009, 02:46:10 AM
now that I think better, is it possible to make the sidewalks as props, so we would have it changeing acourding to the welath\zone on that piece of road? :) &idea
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=2913.msg215805#msg215805
thats a link to my sidewalk beta at the bottom of that post... it uses 3ds props and models that are textured with iid's. It's quite promising. As sithlrd98 said i am also incorporating those methods into my elrail mod also.
Cheers.
edit... Also Ebina seems to be doing much the same thing though i'm not sure of how they have implemented their solution. I have yet to try their beta or see how it works. But it seems closer to completion then mine.
those are good news :)
thank you for your work :D
Might as well let this cat out of the bag . . . some of you may have already seen these . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg151.imageshack.us%2Fimg151%2F1092%2Fnam051820091.jpg&hash=27e108e439fc6dada7a0763f3cc4cea78ab9e7c8)
They still need a little tweaking before they're ready, though.
-Alex
Wide radius OWR? I bet haljackey will be pretty happy with these.
These are great and will be really useful! :thumbsup:
Teasing, yet pleasing! ()stsfd() I'm positive that I will use this when it's ready. Good job, Alex!
:thumbsup:
Very nice. &apls
*drool*
Where's that drooling smiley? Ah, found one!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi258.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh245%2FRebaLynnTS%2FDrool.jpg&hash=fa2bc68a616550653ed98f258d80c4e339147c58)
(It's too big, could someone who knows how to resize it to a better size please do so?)
EDIT: Thanks Becca, though not exactly what I was asking for....there's this funky code you can put in your image tags to resize images, but I've never gotten the hang of it.
How's this?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi258.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh245%2FRebaLynnTS%2FDrool.jpg&hash=fa2bc68a616550653ed98f258d80c4e339147c58)
A real NAM-feature that was missing all the time.
Great work, Alex!
Very nice Alex! These will be very handy... &apls
dragonshardz: [IMG width=xxx height=xxx]URL[/IMG]
Thanks DTP.
Quote from: Korot on June 06, 2009, 02:09:35 PM
I bet haljackey will be pretty happy with these.
Indeed I am. I have been waiting a long time for these. They look great!
Hi everyone!
I was wondering if it would be possible to do a facelift mod for monorail, elevated roads and avenues e rail viaducts. Like the El-Rail facelift mod.
Would it be possible. Or would it involve to much work to be done in the near future?
Mad_genius:
Yes it is possible, but the work is advanced, and time consuming, for some, sometimes frustrating.
Actually Marrten (mrtnrln) is in the middle of doing a facelift mod for just that. He is working on a major facelift mod for the El/El-Over Road. He also changed alot of Maxis elevated network viaducts to have the sidewalk, and median props for avenues to actually stay under the viaduct. Marrten's mod is a High Def texture replacement mod that replaces the track, but so far does not work with a the el-rail facelift mod, which adds city props underneath.
As for monorail, if you were looking for a similar el-rail facelift ground package for that, I don't recall something like that existing currently.
Quote from: j-dub on June 30, 2009, 09:34:34 AM
Mad_genius:
Yes it is possible, but the work is advanced, and time consuming, for some, sometimes frustrating.
Actually Marrten (mrtnrln) is in the middle of doing a facelift mod for just that. He is working on a major facelift mod for the El/El-Over Road. He also changed alot of Maxis elevated network viaducts to have the sidewalk, and median props for avenues to actually stay under the viaduct. Marrten's mod is a High Def texture replacement mod that replaces the track, but so far does not work with a the el-rail facelift mod, which adds city props underneath.
As for monorail, if you were looking for a similar el-rail facelift ground package for that, I don't recall something like that existing currently.
Really? I was only doing the Highways and I just started a project to make a new Avenue network (which is in a very early stage). The rest, unfortunately, isn't true, I believe. There must be some kind of missunderstanding.
Best,
Maarten
Yeah,I thought that looked odd! I believe he meant BuddyBud.
Jayson
Do'h! Whoops, yeah my by bad, I meant BuddyBud was doing a texture replacement for the El. Thats what I get for staying up to 1 in the morning.
I updated the NAM 2x2 roundabout textures so that they will now work with sidewalk mods. Basically I just made a proper alpha for them. I uploaded the fix to the Stex [Link (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/details.cfm?id=21972)]. Feel free to include this in the next NAM if you like.
They look great in my city! Thanks!
More progress on the Elevated Road/OWR/Avenue model facelift, using Jan (Swamper77)'s models with some modifications:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg195.imageshack.us%2Fimg195%2F9894%2Fnam081520091.jpg&hash=9515671bfb0897a5ca2b9c3fb8272dff2d52dfb8)
Yes, I know I need to remove the streetlight T21 out of the middle there. :D
-Alex
that is awesome Tarkus...now is it going to be draggable? LOL
Do you know if there is a puzzle piece for RAIL over AVENUE with GLR? This piece may not be possible? This is for the old fashioned "underpass" method made with sunken Ave + rail pieces. Rail seems to go over/under most everything except the GLR items (with the exception of straight rail over GLR (the narrow "rural" GLR)
Wow! These pieces are great! &apls
Quote from: SC4BOY on August 16, 2009, 03:48:34 AM
Do you know if there is a puzzle piece for RAIL over AVENUE with GLR?
There's already one in the GLR on Avenue menu ;)
Instead of a lot/BAT, I made a script for installing the Network Addon Mod on a Macintosh.
ST thread (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=105&threadid=109000&enterthread=y)
STEX (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/details.cfm?id=22278)
MediaFire (http://www.mediafire.com/file/iwnbzyk5ti2/NAM-Mac-Install-Script.zip)
It is a terminal script and should be run from the terminal. I don't own a Mac, but since Macs and Linux both support bash scripting, it was tested on Fedora 11. No, GUI support is not expected any time in the future (unless you download Zenity (http://zenity.darwinports.com/) and DarwinPorts (http://darwinports.com), but I won't do that to you unless you really want me to). Download the NAM for Mac (http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=852) archive and put it in the same folder as the installer.
Open up a terminal and run these commands:
cd ~/Downloads [assuming it's in your Downloads folder]
chmod 777 NAM-Install
./NAM-Install
Feel free to redistribute it as long as credit is given (CC-BY-NC-SA (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/)). The last found error is stored in the install.log files scattered in each folder the installer works in for some odd reason.
Love the new look of the overpass! That looks much more appealing.
Jayson
I really like the overpass, and it matches the ones in the RHW, which has to be a good thing :). Are these going to replace the overpass puzzle-pieces, or be draggable like the ones in the RHW mod.
I prefer the puzzle-piece method myself, as the problem with the draggable ones is that they require a 1 tile gap between the on-slope piece and the ground network, which the puzzle piece based ones do not. Is this something that can't be fixed, or is it already on the cards ;)?
I seem to remember that the current overpass pieces were made by Redlotus around 5 years ago, and were supposed to be temporary until better ones were made. What happened to Redlotus and The7Trumpets anyway? They used to be very involved with the NAM a few years back.
Quote from: Tarkus on August 16, 2009, 12:40:56 AM
More progress on the Elevated Road/OWR/Avenue model facelift, using Jan (Swamper77)'s models with some modifications
Two words: Awe Some! Holding my breath for more! &apls
Thanks for the kind words, guys!
Quote from: Dexter on August 16, 2009, 02:23:44 PM
Are these going to replace the overpass puzzle-pieces, or be draggable like the ones in the RHW mod.
Right now, I'm just replacing the existing puzzle piece models with new ones. I did work up a crude prototype for a draggable Elevated Road setup awhile back, and probably down the road, both systems will exist.
Quote from: Dexter on August 16, 2009, 02:23:44 PM
the problem with the draggable ones is that they require a 1 tile gap between the on-slope piece and the ground network, which the puzzle piece based ones do not. Is this something that can't be fixed, or is it already on the cards ;)?
All I can say on that front is that it's being looked into.
Quote from: Dexter on August 16, 2009, 02:23:44 PM
I seem to remember that the current overpass pieces were made by Redlotus around 5 years ago, and were supposed to be temporary until better ones were made. What happened to Redlotus and The7Trumpets anyway? They used to be very involved with the NAM a few years back.
redlotus and
the7trumpets seem to have more or less vanished.
the7trumpets was kind of still around when I first showed up in the community, in early 2006, but hasn't been heard from since.
redlotus' well-known Yahoo Briefcase, containing the old Interchange Tutorial, has also gone missing as of late. I know
Tropod was involved in making those models as well. He's relatively inactive these days, but I've bumped into him in ST Chat a few times in the past couple months.
-Alex
actually... Alex, you could just put a small concrete base around that streetlight... and maybe a single row of concrete barrier in the middle too.
- Allan Kuan
There are diagonal-orthogonal transitions for these models, aren't there? So does that mean... 45 degree curves!
On the topic of the elevated roads - personally, I prefer the model with the round pillar - any chance this could be left as an option?
I had forgotten that Alex (Tarkus) had said that he was going to work on some of the old elevated puzzle piece models, and I started to work on my own version. When I saw his pictures, I decided to finish mine. They still do need a few finishing touches, but here they are:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi291.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fll299%2Fsmoncrie%2FRoadViaduct.jpg&hash=dbbe0cacca24f97f315acb2fa5b5dddf4f5fe818)
:o I LOVE THOSE!!!! When your finished can you send them to me?
We really need a drool smiley! Those are amazing! I like both Jans props and yours, but I think yours are better suited for commercial areas where as Jans would fit a more rural/highway type of usage.I think it would be great if somehow both could be used , but I am sure that would prove to be a pain to implement.
Jayson
Quote from: io_bg on August 16, 2009, 04:01:31 AM
Wow! These pieces are great! &aplsThere's already one in the GLR on Avenue menu ;)
Hmm.. well it was a bit of a pain to get it to work.. I assume you mean the one labeled "GLR under VIADUCT"? I did make the underpass and it worked ok.. thanks.. :)
I've moved a message to here.. I think I put it on the wrong forum.. sorry.. anyway here it is:
I would like to request one added puzzle piece for tram-in-avenue. This piece is rather awkward to program around without it. That is the simple case of the AVENUE taking a turn (right or left, right angled) while the GLR continues straight. I realize that it CAN be done by using a "crossing" piece T or X intersection, then going from that, but it looks pretty bad that way and introduces an intersection where one should not be needed... I know this is a rather minor detail, but I thought I'd bring it up.. I hope this is an ok place to post this.. if not feel free to move it.. Thanks. The "GLR on ROAD" has these pieces, but not the Avenue (unless I've missed it again )
Here's the idea:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg193.imageshack.us%2Fimg193%2F4197%2Ftramcurve.jpg&hash=b67aca189ac12c5302bf65d3f442e0a65e07392a)
That doesn't look safe...there'd have to be a VERY sharp s-curve in the middle of the turn for the GLR to be sitting on one tile. Wouldn't it work just as well to have the GLR split from the curve before the curve?
I don't think it would be sharp if it were created like a diagonal transition Shifting slightly that way then lining up. Then again I am not that keen on dinamics, but at least it would look nice in game done that way. :)
So in a way it would start to separate from the avenue before the turn. It is an idea to go about it, but I am not sure if it can be programed to do something like that, pathing-wise. Don't know much about the subject personally. Just a thought, but an interesting idea for an addition.
Quote from: dragonshardzthere'd have to be a VERY sharp s-curve in the middle of the turn for the GLR to be sitting on one tile.
@SC4BOY:
Not that this is real, this is not a real piece, but just the fact that there is the amount of room to do it in the SC4 world, the tracks could be straight on the curve, but to go all directions, the switch would have to be in the middle of the road, and signals would be needed, then the rails would have to cross curved over the asphalt. See attachment below
Good day,
I'm from the German form www.simforum.de (http://www.simforum.de) .
I also had some time ago "Chrisim" these textures as PNG files are available:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FouiNuhxCQ%2Fimg%2F225KreuztT-RAM.PNG&hash=b8536a5bb6a4436f2eb8161ffce38d2054017a63)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FBXKPJISl%2Fimg%2FAllee45Kurve-DiogonaleTram-DiagonaleTramaufahrt.PNG&hash=39b74aedec5d3fadbf46b20e39aee71a6c88f5f0)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FdlCOKI4r%2Fimg%2FAllee45Kurve-DiogonaleTram-GradeTramaufahrt.PNG&hash=48af578cf5afde5d559ef9f5b4adfc8ba8efa4d4)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2Fc0hsgUnH7J%2Fimg%2FAllee45Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version1.PNG&hash=545ca6777439022ab9be354b53905c44260059ec)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2F1I0JugAs%2Fimg%2FAllee45Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version2.PNG&hash=49a934c0c07fc8999ddb1404c1ce5c8a69aab7a8)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FSJzKbCm2%2Fimg%2FAllee90Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version1.PNG&hash=6cff3c5a9be8342c1a7db04df5ae2e9440577b2a)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FASM1qKpkAei%2Fimg%2FAllee90Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version2.PNG&hash=0ab32e97f2702818cf7f7845e2e31f8ec86c57f3)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FaWtttWjr%2Fimg%2FAllee90Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version3.PNG&hash=be94d62f94cd740b74c94d2006ac5d83146b0080)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FFLgCF4Av%2Fimg%2FAllee90Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version4.PNG&hash=281717a83e8a3a64a6277109213be057a89d452d)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2F2T1ZAQ018%2Fimg%2FDiagonaleAllee-DiagonaleTram-GradeTramausfahrt.PNG&hash=860fe9b956c0cad48f1657dbcc0e685ef4889fd5)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2Fg63DGddCCP%2Fimg%2FDiagonaleAllee-DiagonaleTram-WeichenausfahrtGrade.PNG&hash=fa5d4f8eec95eb3f16da96e6a02bfd9c9d9681b8)
I hope you like the textures.
Greeting DJPTiger
Google-English
Those are very good. I especially like the FAR-GLR crossing. :thumbsup:
Quote from: dragonshardz on August 19, 2009, 08:37:53 PM
That doesn't look safe...there'd have to be a VERY sharp s-curve in the middle of the turn for the GLR to be sitting on one tile. Wouldn't it work just as well to have the GLR split from the curve before the curve?
No less safe than any of the other dozen or so "intersections" .. recall that the El-RAIL (GLR) and the avenue traffic don't really intersect at all. ;) To split it out before the intersection certainly works (and is one of the ways I "solved" the issue) But of course it blocks all C,R,I access in that stretch, plus it either takes significant space or involves considerable demolition of buildings in the area .. and after all one of the STRONG motivations of GLR at all is space-conserving construction.
Quote from: j-dub on August 19, 2009, 10:09:48 PM
@SC4BOY:
Not that this is real, this is not a real piece, but just the fact that there is the amount of room to do it in the SC4 world, the tracks could be straight on the curve, but to go all directions, the switch would have to be in the middle of the road, and signals would be needed, then the rails would have to cross curved over the asphalt. See attachment below
hehe.. well while the statement is true, it wasn't a problem on the other 15 or 20 GLR on AVE puzzle pieces.. I mean its easy to get tied up in details that are only visible from the closest views.. I mean the very GLR in AVE is "wrong" because the cars and the GLR (which really is elevated rail, remember? :) ) don't interact at all..
Quote from: DJPTiger on August 20, 2009, 06:27:51 AM
Good day,
I'm from the German form www.simforum.de (http://www.simforum.de) .
I also had some time ago "Chrisim" these textures as PNG files are available:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FSJzKbCm2%2Fimg%2FAllee90Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version1.PNG&hash=6cff3c5a9be8342c1a7db04df5ae2e9440577b2a)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FASM1qKpkAei%2Fimg%2FAllee90Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version2.PNG&hash=0ab32e97f2702818cf7f7845e2e31f8ec86c57f3)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FaWtttWjr%2Fimg%2FAllee90Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version3.PNG&hash=be94d62f94cd740b74c94d2006ac5d83146b0080)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.picfront.org%2Fpicture%2FFLgCF4Av%2Fimg%2FAllee90Kurve-GradeTram-GradeTramaufahrt-Version4.PNG&hash=281717a83e8a3a64a6277109213be057a89d452d)
That's perfect IMO.. those aren't available pieces on the released NAM items that I have available.. thanks for the pics. That illustrates just what I was talking about.. in fact I don't even care if all 4 aren't available .. any one would be workable to me
Greatttttttttt ! &apls :thumbsup:
I have a question that may or may not have been asked by some after STR first came out. Are plans for Single Track GLR in the works for the NAM in the future? I was looking at some interesting pictures of some Grass GLR lines in Europe and saw some wonder single track GLR lines that ran through woodsey areas that looked almost like parks. So I thought about how wonderful it would look if we were able to recreate that look via Single Track GLR.
Moved over to NAM: Development, as this is more related to new features than tech support. -Alex/Tarkus, Admin
SimNation, to answer your question, at the moment, there are no plans for a Single-Track GLR, though we've had a few people request it recently. The main issue is textures. The existing GLR RULs could be ported over without much difficulty, and the paths could be borrowed from STR with only slight modification, so if someone were to supply textures, it would be a relatively feasible undertaking.
-Alex
sorry if this is a dumb question, but couldn't you just use the existing GLR textures and cut away one track? (ofcourse additional textures need to be made, but I mean as a basis)
Quote from: WC_EEND on December 26, 2009, 03:09:19 PM
sorry if this is a dumb question, but couldn't you just use the existing GLR textures and cut away one track? (ofcourse additional textures need to be made, but I mean as a basis)
You could sort of get away with that on the orthogonal end, but diagonals, curves, junctions and intersections would require a fair amount of work.
-Alex
I dunno if this question has been asked before but is anyone able to develop raised road lots for curved roads, one way roads and avenues (i.e. orthogonal to diagonal or FAR))
To answer your question, JBSimio has been working on what's called "FAB", short for "Fractional Angle Buildings".
Any questions should be directed his way.
plz visit my new project
i made a new road layout
i need help to finish it
tnx :)
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=9966.msg302888#msg302888
First prototypes of Asymmetrical Dual Networking Avenue, U-RailxAvenue and ElRailxAvenue.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg694.imageshack.us%2Fimg694%2F1874%2Fadna1i.jpg&hash=947bf292db076eb0eb47d23a3e138d0bffcda3c1)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg31.imageshack.us%2Fimg31%2F8554%2Fadna2.jpg&hash=a005dc01f3eaade08a8e562dc3f6db6f194184fb)
Some people would prefer symmetrical versions but I wanted to have asymmetrical version which allows two kinds of trains to run on the same width.
Thank God that EL above Ave is a prototype. I spy with my eyes a traffic light problem with the ped-crossing! Why not placing 2 single pole traffic lights on both sides of the side the El-Track is above?
??? :o &apls
Congratulations on this achievement, it adds an amazing new layer of possibility to the game. I really like the idea of this asymmetrical network!
@
Monorail Master and
Battlecat: Thank you.
Quote from: Monorail Master on January 22, 2010, 03:11:18 PM
I spy with my eyes a traffic light problem with the ped-crossing! Why not placing 2 single pole traffic lights on both sides of the side the El-Track is above?
I simply imported the prop layout from Swamper's lot. I'll take your suggestion into account next time I edit the T21.
Quote from: ebina on January 22, 2010, 10:39:26 PM
@Monorail Master and Battlecat: Thank you.
I simply imported the prop layout from Swamper's lot. I'll take your suggestion into account next time I edit the T21.
Ebina, if you'd like, I can send you my HAWK (High Awareness Crosswalk) model to use there.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg268.imageshack.us%2Fimg268%2F9133%2F11710hawk.png&hash=d4a48d3b1cf5ce97b5a5871d3146b7379d3d8d8b)
Quote from: Ryan B. on January 23, 2010, 08:35:41 AM
Ebina, if you'd like, I can send you my HAWK (High Awareness Crosswalk) model to use there.
Thank you for your offer. Since stoplights won't be animated on railway based networks I was going to remove them. Your sign will be very nice replacement.
May I request some additional models?
- LHD version. Not every LHD user likes to install pillars onto medians (using rotated RHD prop), I guess.
- Signs without pillar that can be attached to bottom of el-rail floor.
If you need to see the height of el-rail floor please take a look at S3D of IID 0x5326380x or 0x532CF70x in the NetworkAddonMod_Light_URail_Puzzle_Plugin.dat. ElRailxAvenue piece uses the same model but different roadway texture.
By the way, when I'll edit T21 where should I install the signs? Right above the pedestrian crossing, or a few meters before?
Quote from: ebina on January 25, 2010, 02:32:36 AM
Thank you for your offer. Since stoplights won't be animated on railway based networks I was going to remove them. Your sign will be very nice replacement.
May I request some additional models?
- LHD version. Not every LHD user likes to install pillars onto medians (using rotated RHD prop), I guess.
- Signs without pillar that can be attached to bottom of el-rail floor.
If you need to see the height of el-rail floor please take a look at S3D of IID 0x5326380x or 0x532CF70x in the NetworkAddonMod_Light_URail_Puzzle_Plugin.dat. ElRailxAvenue piece uses the same model but different roadway texture.
By the way, when I'll edit T21 where should I install the signs? Right above the pedestrian crossing, or a few meters before?
In the picture I showed, I have the assemblies mounted a few meters on the "far" side of the crosswalk.
I am curious though... It has been such a long time since I have heard of any updates (messages, uploads, or otherwise) about the NAM. I know that the NAM has no release schedule, but it seems that development is becoming sort of... stale as of late. I mean it's been almost a year since the last release. Perhaps I'm coming off as impatient, but having to wait this long is starting to get to me in a bad way.
Don't worry, a new version is definitely in the works. Please keep in mind that we're all doing this in our free time, and transit modding definitely is one of the more advanced modding types, so some things might take quite a bit of time until they are ready.
I hope this is the right thread, but I was wondering if it wouldn't be too much trouble to include a one-way version of the Euro-style RIRO freeway ramps in a future NAM update, similar to the image below:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi919.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fad38%2Fcrocodileguy%2Fidea.png&hash=3a2470905be009cea0a2183d602ce430c38f328b)
This design is really space efficient, and I like to make my freeways as compact as possible. This would really help for quick 90-degree freeway access, and is a design frequently found in California.
ETA: I just screencapped the standard 2-way ramp and edited it quickly in MS Paint.
Interesting crocodileguy... could be a very useful addition.
Welcome to SC4D by the way!
Thanks, I've been a registered member on here for forever, just never posted anything. Love the NAM, and the great work everyone has done here...really amped up the quality of my cities.
I don't know if this has been asked yet, but how about a cloverleaf interchange for Ground/Elevated Highway and Avenue?
I'm not sure if this is in the works for V4.0, but I would personally love to see RHW FAR (maybe FARHW?) - using FAR in suburban areas usually hampers the ability to create tightly packed houses and businesses, but RHW doesn't have these restrictions.... What do you think?
Quote from: ShultzCity on April 28, 2010, 03:18:01 PM
I'm not sure if this is in the works for V4.0, but I would personally love to see RHW FAR (maybe FARHW?) - using FAR in suburban areas usually hampers the ability to create tightly packed houses and businesses, but RHW doesn't have these restrictions.... What do you think?
It is indeed in the works for Version 4.0 . . . the RHW-2, RHW-4, RHW-6S and MIS Ramps will all have some form of Fractional Angle pieces.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on April 28, 2010, 03:54:04 PM
It is indeed in the works for Version 4.0 . . . the RHW-2, RHW-4, RHW-6S and MIS Ramps will all have some form of Fractional Angle pieces.
That really is good news. It will make it possible to create highways which conform to the landscape and where the road system at highway intersections doesn't have to be contorted to fit it with orthogonal or diagonal limitations.
Quote from: Tarkus on April 28, 2010, 03:54:04 PM
It is indeed in the works for Version 4.0 . . . the RHW-2, RHW-4, RHW-6S and MIS Ramps will all have some form of Fractional Angle pieces.
-Alex
excellent news!!
mauricio.
Why can i not download the file? There is no link for download
http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=853
http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=851
Neither of those pages have a link for a download.. I really want this.. can anyone please help me?????
You have to register on the LEX to download.
I was wondering if there will ever be any wide radius curves for the one-way roads? I have a situation were I want them for my harbor tunnel exit/entrance, simple left or right curves on the one ways just don't look good especially for real life traffic situations, this is a test area with the wide radius road curves and FLUP's that I created to show you what why I think there would be good for the game...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Finlinethumb12.webshots.com%2F20235%2F2221187940053958490S600x600Q85.jpg&hash=970a60c05e4e0c2cd43d2e58f9f95206d97a3e05) (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2221187940053958490QhaapF)
Thank You ;D
Quote from: jpj_starfleet on May 22, 2010, 10:25:39 PM
I was wondering if there will ever be any wide radius curves for the one-way roads?
Yes, eventually. I had been working on some awhile ago but ran into some issues with the OneWayDir commands in the RUL and had a bunch of other stuff going on, so I shelved them for awhile (and similarly shelved the OWR-1 and OWR-3 Wide-Radius Curves for the NWM). I plan on getting back to them relatively soon, however.
-Alex
Quote from: SC4BOY on August 17, 2009, 10:04:23 PM
Hmm.. well it was a bit of a pain to get it to work.. I assume you mean the one labeled "GLR under VIADUCT"? I did make the underpass and it worked ok.. thanks.. :)
I've moved a message to here.. I think I put it on the wrong forum.. sorry.. anyway here it is:
I would like to request one added puzzle piece for tram-in-avenue. This piece is rather awkward to program around without it. That is the simple case of the AVENUE taking a turn (right or left, right angled) while the GLR continues straight. I realize that it CAN be done by using a "crossing" piece T or X intersection, then going from that, but it looks pretty bad that way and introduces an intersection where one should not be needed... I know this is a rather minor detail, but I thought I'd bring it up.. I hope this is an ok place to post this.. if not feel free to move it.. Thanks. The "GLR on ROAD" has these pieces, but not the Avenue (unless I've missed it again )
Here's the idea:
...example...
On the whole, this is a great idea! :thumbsup: Once, I create such a puzzle piece.
How do you like that? :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fcbef2ec915151fc6d058bd87936d424f.png&hash=c9fd4f638f32e9984d3547af627edc9fb10b9cd1) (http://www.ld-host.de/)
It is an example.... ;)
Quote from: RogerRon91 on May 24, 2010, 09:01:15 AM
On the whole, this is a great idea! :thumbsup: Once, I create such a puzzle piece.
How do you like that? :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fcbef2ec915151fc6d058bd87936d424f.png&hash=c9fd4f638f32e9984d3547af627edc9fb10b9cd1) (http://www.ld-host.de/)
Looks fine to me. I'm not very hard to please. :)
Any chance of a 30m El Rail to Subway conversion in a future version?
Hello guys, I just have a short question.
In case of the pedmall pieces, all the different pedmall puzzle pieces use just one path file.
I looked for the piece's ID in the puzzle piece Exemplar files, but i couldn't find it.
How does a puzzle piece know which path file it has to use?
The Path ID is defined in the controller. The ID of the pedmall pieces is 0x55267100
Okay, thank you.
I could use some geometry help from the NAM folks.
I'm developing some new props for use with sunken highways (an old project recently revived) and I can't seem to get a handle on the geometry specifics for the ortho to diag transition pieces.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg823.imageshack.us%2Fimg823%2F5613%2Fjsortho2diaghelp.jpg&hash=bc0ef58e2732ead9e6aaeb6279bd9f75c824fb92)
I've got the distances to the edge of the highway pretty close so the width of the concrete drainage area covers the ground terrain but I'm not sure about the curvature section. It looks like the ortho section extends a bit (the width of the ortho drainage area) before it begins to arc into the diagonal but I'm not sure how much and I don't know the radius of the arc once the curvature starts.
I would guess the NAM developers have this information and I would really appreciate it if someone could share it. I'd really like to make these pieces fit perfectly.
Also, my best estimate for width drainage areas is 4.7 meters for ortho and 6.627 meters for the diag. Could someone confirm these values or provide the correct ones ? The correct values would give me two points the arc would need to intersect but three points are needed to uniquely define the circle arc or two points and the radius.
Help would be greatly appreciated.
So read elsewhere (NWM) there was some trick learned about road capacities. Does this mean that Overpasses will now have no network effect and the double-layer tile (the part where both networks are crossing) won't have volume and congestion issues anymore? Was this a known issue?
Quote from: MutantPlatypus on August 07, 2010, 07:57:04 PM
So read elsewhere (NWM) there was some trick learned about road capacities. Does this mean that Overpasses will now have no network effect and the double-layer tile (the part where both networks are crossing) won't have volume and congestion issues anymore? Was this a known issue?
These are known issues, but unfortunately they're built deep into the game, and the new flexibility with road capacities won't have an on them.
Hello there NAM team, my heroes! ;)
I have a small wish/suggestion/reminder/contribution/correction to make.
Maxis in their eternal wisdom chose to forget to add night lights to el trains, even though the required textures and models are present in the game. The Nam team then UDI enabled el trains and corrected some minor maxis errors, but did not add the lights.
Since this absence of lights is easily corrected (and because it carries over to trams) I would like to propose to do so in the next NAM release, whenever that may be.
Meanwhile I attach the exemplars from NetworkAddonMod1.dat that have the el train lights enabled (this file also works as a standalone el train light fix if you dont use the NAM, but then why are you reading this thread?).
Alternatively you can download NetworkAddonMod1_vil.dat (http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/2/19/793716/NetworkAddonMod1_vil.dat) which you can then simply use to replace NetworkAddonMod1.dat in your NAM folder.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa.imageshack.us%2Fimg16%2F7665%2Fvilel.th.jpg&hash=342ac8a115f31e72196a93dd40538a98ef860315) (http://img16.imageshack.us/i/vilel.jpg/)
Possible doublepost warning!
::)
The other thing I wanted to mention is this: when you place NAM pieces, previews often get hidden by terrain or buildings. Disabling the "depth test" in the materials setting of the preview models´ S3Ds like so:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa.imageshack.us%2Fimg517%2F439%2Fvilwendeschleife.th.jpg&hash=2224f5e3078696f54bec991aa0ba3a2805065794) (http://img517.imageshack.us/i/vilwendeschleife.jpg/)
does this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa.imageshack.us%2Fimg714%2F2502%2Fvilprw1.th.jpg&hash=c6f94d2ab1c4258f23f7eefbc49cc390a1736e4d) (http://img714.imageshack.us/i/vilprw1.jpg/)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa.imageshack.us%2Fimg132%2F6314%2Fvilprw2.th.jpg&hash=7e0efd94e7bc097c96bdcdb0b23f958063642500) (http://img132.imageshack.us/i/vilprw2.jpg/)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa.imageshack.us%2Fimg228%2F3566%2Fvilprw3.th.jpg&hash=30215826a4a35ddb28274f37b5cf422b2ee9dfcd) (http://img228.imageshack.us/i/vilprw3.jpg/)
I like the effect of that, however I am not sure it will work for everybody, if you want to try it out, I made the changes for the wide radius road curves plugin and the Ground Light Rail Plugin only (files replace those in your NAM/Plugins folder that have the same name) vil NAM Plugins.zip (http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/2/19/793716/vil%20NAM%20Plugins.zip)
Try tabbing through the GLR pieces over a city.
vil, thanks for sharing! The Depth Test thing will prove very useful--certainly more so than raising the model, which has been the practice for awhile now. :thumbsup: And with your permission, I can incorporate the El-Rail lighting into this upcoming release.
-Alex
thank you :thumbsup:
I am not sure if this is the right place for this, but, would it be possible to make a el-railXelevated heavy rail piece. I could do with it :)
this wouldnt be a NAM thing,someone would have to make a TE lot that would allow it, since it would have to convert traffic from el-rail to rail and back again, its probably already existing somewhere on the stex
Quote from: darraghf on August 30, 2010, 03:25:02 AM
I am not sure if this is the right place for this, but, would it be possible to make a el-railXelevated heavy rail piece. I could do with it :)
It is actually already possible by using el-rail on-slope pieces and just the standard heavy rail viaduct pieces. The same way you can also make GLRxheavy rail connections. Works at least for me. Can't right now remeber how it is specifically done, but you could just try plopping and bulldozing certain sections of the on-slope piece and then plop the heavy rail viaduct piece next to it like it would be just the viaduct.
Quote from: darraghf on August 30, 2010, 03:25:02 AM
I am not sure if this is the right place for this, but, would it be possible to make a el-railXelevated heavy rail piece. I could do with it :)
Do you mean Elevated Heavy Rail perpendicular to Elevated Rail?
ll
= = Like This? or did you mean Like This? Heavy Elevated Rail => Elevated Rail
ll
A Perpendicular Puzzle piece would be useful.
I meant like Heavy Elevated rail => Elevated rail:
===----
=== El Heavy Rail
--- Normal El Rail
I guess i could look into how i did it and post here, when i have more time.
I also have an request or a question:
Would it be possible to make a 90 degrees (and 45 degrees also) flexfly Elevated heavy rail piece for some NAM release. I would find this very useful as it would take much less space to build if some roads are blocking the way for normal turns.
I had a thought earlier today, have you guys thought of creating FlexFly for every elevated network? Like instead of having the normal puzzle pieces, you just plop down a straight FlexFly piece to cross rail and other ground netowkrs. These pieces could come in 1x1 and 1x2 maybe. I know there would be a lot of coding and stuff but it would drastically reduce the number of puzzle pieces and thus make it quicker and easier to build elevated networks.
Just an idea. :thumbsup:
Jayster
Quote from: Gamma4815 on August 30, 2010, 05:09:48 PM
Do you mean Elevated Heavy Rail perpendicular to Elevated Rail?
ll
= = Like This? or did you mean Like This? Heavy Elevated Rail => Elevated Rail
ll
A Perpendicular Puzzle piece would be useful.
ll
= = I mean this instance
ll
Quote from: darraghf on September 01, 2010, 01:25:20 PM
ll
= = I mean this instance
ll
Oh, i misunderstood you, sorry. :)
Quote from: Jayster on September 01, 2010, 12:46:16 PM
I had a thought earlier today, have you guys thought of creating FlexFly for every elevated network? Like instead of having the normal puzzle pieces, you just plop down a straight FlexFly piece to cross rail and other ground netowkrs. These pieces could come in 1x1 and 1x2 maybe. I know there would be a lot of coding and stuff but it would drastically reduce the number of puzzle pieces and thus make it quicker and easier to build elevated networks.
I had this idea a while ago and bought it up in the RHW thread only to be spectacularly shot down and come crashing down in a fireball thanks to a NAM member who shall remain unnamed.
FLEXfly is planned for many of the RHW wide curves, but I'm not aware of any plans to adapt any other pieces (like the wide 45 degree Heavy Rail viaduct) for FLEXfly.
The way it was worded it is that it's either not possible, too much work, or no.
Darn, I thought it would make life so much easier. But yah, all the coding would be killer. Oh well.
Actually, at that point, it would probably make more sense just to make the elevated networks draggable, which has been under discussion for probably about 3 years or so, and probably will happen . . . eventually (I swear that's becoming my new "catchphrase" :D).
The main problem with the Rail curves is that they're just so huge. The 90-degree curve is a 9x9 behemoth. The number of moving (overrideable) parts that would be required is quite staggering--and would number in the hundreds.
-Alex
Somewhere around 11 positions (and 11 mirrors, total of 22 positions - that already overwhelms the IID addressing system that I can use that makes sense), with... lets see:
Road
Avenue 1
Avenue 2
OWR
Street
Rail-2
Rail-1
GLR Urban
GLR Rural
All the RHW networks
All the NWM networks
All the SAM networks
GHSR
There's just too much, a the amount of RUL for that one single piece would be somewhere around 18000 lines, a little less than than 3 times the amount that FLEXFly sits at right now (6904 lines)
hi,
i think this is the best place to make an idea public:
i have a small theory about the path files and the tunnels at SC4. &idea
i think the lots give the path files only a offset where to place the paths files.
eg: if a lot is at location 100/ 50 than the path file start at the offset 100/50/(height of the terrain where the lot(puzzle piece is placed).
But at the tunnels it make a direct path connection between the tunnel entrances and this explain why the RHW tunnels don't work.
this explain also why the cars appear in UDI when a deeper location is between the entrance from the tunnel.
meister
EDIT: i want to show a picture to show what i mean:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi825.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fzz180%2Fmeister1235%2FPATHTEST-8Jan111284406633.png&hash=9b20f76b1bc8c0a5796fa1f8e703782e92143b9d)
The reason the RHW tunnel paths are not showing up is not because they aren't there--it's because there isn't a proper exemplar to refer to the tunnel for that network (which is also why no model appears). Adding an exemplar at the proper Network Specific Group ID (NSGID), 0x6BE08658, at the same IID as the Road tunnel (0x0AD00000) causes it to appear and like the other tunnels that do work, the paths will show up "stretched out". I've attached the appropriate exemplar below so you can see for yourself.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg706.imageshack.us%2Fimg706%2F3803%2Frhw091320101.jpg&hash=2de58f2572d893408f2a026a1d3aa0e14dad5879)
However, even with the paths and the proper model in place and everything looking like it should actually work, the game is unable to recognize it as a viable path for traffic, and as such, it will go completely unused. UDI vehicles can go through it, but actual traffic cannot, unfortunately. I've experimented with it off-and-on for the past 2-3 years to no avail, as have several other NAMites--everything seems to point to the .exe controlling the viability of the tunnel.
-Alex
Quote from: ebina on January 22, 2010, 04:24:07 AM
First prototypes of Asymmetrical Dual Networking Avenue, U-RailxAvenue and ElRailxAvenue.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg694.imageshack.us%2Fimg694%2F1874%2Fadna1i.jpg&hash=947bf292db076eb0eb47d23a3e138d0bffcda3c1)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg31.imageshack.us%2Fimg31%2F8554%2Fadna2.jpg&hash=a005dc01f3eaade08a8e562dc3f6db6f194184fb)
Some people would prefer symmetrical versions but I wanted to have asymmetrical version which allows two kinds of trains to run on the same width.
Just wanna ask how is this project going? I am very interested in it lol
Quote from: hhf_05 on September 14, 2010, 12:13:47 AM
Just wanna ask how is this project going? I am very interested in it lol
ADNA pieces will be very very delayed. I was focusing on basic interface pieces for Underground Rail than ADNA recently. And this. (http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/6679/pseudohwyxave.jpg)
Quote
URail x Elevated highway pieces, added into URail x Maxis Roadways button. I disabled the backface culling option to take the screenshots. URail base texture is replaced with Jeronij's high wealth sidewalk.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg682.imageshack.us%2Fimg682%2F4751%2Furailxelhwy.th.jpg&hash=21619ad760a21298c2d56746e73cf0d691194f54) (http://img682.imageshack.us/i/urailxelhwy.jpg/)
Interface pieces for DTR, DTR viaduct, STR, ELR, High ELR, Monorail, High Monorail, GHSR and HSR. Can be selected from a new URail x Railways button.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg243.imageshack.us%2Fimg243%2F5741%2Furailxrail.th.jpg&hash=939613bf78b0cf92e39bf6ef03364144a301760d) (http://img243.imageshack.us/i/urailxrail.jpg/) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg715.imageshack.us%2Fimg715%2F4282%2Furailxelrail.th.jpg&hash=00b8ad05f51bd8a2dcd6dac28f2f20d9279d4936) (http://img715.imageshack.us/i/urailxelrail.jpg/) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg26.imageshack.us%2Fimg26%2F7052%2Furailxmonorail.th.jpg&hash=d3003c5a65d85393eb62ed71aa07c0a81d38d78b) (http://img26.imageshack.us/i/urailxmonorail.jpg/) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg844.imageshack.us%2Fimg844%2F2123%2Furailxhsr.th.jpg&hash=6d22c334188fa3e227f17d5fbe880f8fa5661106) (http://img844.imageshack.us/i/urailxhsr.jpg/)
Interface pieces for urban GLR, rural GLR, Tram-on-Street and Tram-in-Avenue. These are separated from railways button and added into URail x Tramways button.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg820.imageshack.us%2Fimg820%2F285%2Furailxtram1.th.jpg&hash=e3886a22f7698a2e3ff852858027a03cd4be03da) (http://img820.imageshack.us/i/urailxtram1.jpg/) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg820.imageshack.us%2Fimg820%2F2773%2Furailxtram2.th.jpg&hash=379247830a37a7f9a644ba733d15d04ef5474ec8) (http://img820.imageshack.us/i/urailxtram2.jpg/)
Quote from: ebina on September 14, 2010, 02:49:17 AM
And this. (http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/6679/pseudohwyxave.jpg)
Oh my god, are my eyes lying?? That is so awesome!
I also like the Underground Rail, it is very useful in many places as it can act as a subway, shame that it hasn't got many stations around. ADNA also looks very nice!
Quote from: Ciuu96 on September 14, 2010, 05:16:21 AM
Oh my god, are my eyes lying?? That is so awesome!
Yes, Ebina san has been very busy. ;D And that's not even all the pieces. $%Grinno$% There are a few more that have been added since those pictures were made.
QuoteI also like the Underground Rail, it is very useful in many places as it can act as a subway, shame that it hasn't got many stations around.
I agree, which is why the next release of RTMT, currently in beta testing and due out this fall, will have more than 50 new stations that support Underground Rail intersections. The release after that will have a few dozen more stations for Underground Rail; these will be inline stations for the network itself.
Hello NAM experts ...
Who knows the exact width of the Maxis Highway road surface? And what is the width of the road barriers? I can probably figure it out but am hoping that someone has that information and I'll be saved some trial and error time.
Thanks in advance.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2FBridgeElement.jpg&hash=89aef39b4acf2f39d1d9e3b714013af6e92e0a68)
jmyers2043- That highway look good, I hope to see them soon to replace the maxis highways. :thumbsup:
Quote from: jmyers2043 on October 02, 2010, 11:58:17 AM
Hello NAM experts ...
Who knows the exact width of the Maxis Highway road surface? And what is the width of the road barriers? I can probably figure it out but am hoping that someone has that information and I'll be saved some trial and error time.
Thanks in advance.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2FBridgeElement.jpg&hash=89aef39b4acf2f39d1d9e3b714013af6e92e0a68)
To answer your question:
Barrier width: 0.7m
Barrier height: 2.8m
Surface width: 9,7m (3,23m per lane)
Surface height: 0.783m
Your Maxis Freeway model is looking very good :thumbsup:
Best,
Maarten
Quote from: jmyers2043 on October 02, 2010, 11:58:17 AM
Hello NAM experts ...
Who knows the exact width of the Maxis Highway road surface? And what is the width of the road barriers? I can probably figure it out but am hoping that someone has that information and I'll be saved some trial and error time.
Thanks in advance.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi148.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs26%2Fjmyers2043%2FBridgeElement.jpg&hash=89aef39b4acf2f39d1d9e3b714013af6e92e0a68)
Very nice! Will it be used for a MOD?
Well, I'd use that very real looking viaduct. My only concern is the drop in the number of bridges it would cause. But, that comes with using a realistic thing like that.
Quote from: ebina on September 14, 2010, 02:49:17 AM
ADNA pieces will be very very delayed. I was focusing on basic interface pieces for Underground Rail than ADNA recently. And this. (http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/6679/pseudohwyxave.jpg)
you are so cool! Great work!
Hey Maarten
Thank you for the information. Let's see if I understand correctly. The maxis highway has three lanes. Each lane is 3.23 meters. So (3.23)(6) = 19.38 meters wide.
Adding in the two outside barrier walls is 19.38 + .7 + .7 = 20.78 total width of the outside dimensions of this highway bridge segment.
My question is ... Why is road thickenss important? Is that the TOTAL dimension from top to bottom e.g. tip top of the barrier to the underside of the road?
- Jim
Well, the road thickness is the distance between the ground and the road surface. The surface of the Maxis Freeways are "floating" above the ground, 0.783m to be exact. Some Maxis Freeway Bridges don't connect that well, because they forgot the 0.783m road thickness of the Maxis Freeways. The dimensions of the barriers are also measured from the ground.
And by the way, don't you forget to add the dimensions of the inner barriers? (.7m x 2) Just mentioning it ;)
Best,
Maarten
The Elevated Road/OWR/Avenue model revamp has been going well . . . and along the way, I've added a piece or two--including a proper Orthogonal-to-Diagonal transition for the Elevated Avenue. (The Road has one as of NAM Version 28 last year, which has been revamped to match the new models . . . the OWR will be getting one in short order.)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg183.imageshack.us%2Fimg183%2F5591%2Fnam102820101.jpg&hash=533b84d1f175de6e78ad1d959cfc65b0cc05e16f)
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on October 28, 2010, 02:07:23 PM
The Elevated Road/OWR/Avenue model revamp has been going well . . . and along the way, I've added a piece or two--including a proper Orthogonal-to-Diagonal transition for the Elevated Avenue. (The Road has one as of NAM Version 28 last year, which has been revamped to match the new models . . . the OWR will be getting one in short order.)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg183.imageshack.us%2Fimg183%2F5591%2Fnam102820101.jpg&hash=533b84d1f175de6e78ad1d959cfc65b0cc05e16f)
-Alex
Nice work. ;D
still waiting for 7.5m elevated networks XDXDXD
Quote from: Tarkus on October 28, 2010, 02:07:23 PM
The Elevated Road/OWR/Avenue model revamp has been going well . . . and along the way, I've added a piece or two--including a proper Orthogonal-to-Diagonal transition for the Elevated Avenue. (The Road has one as of NAM Version 28 last year, which has been revamped to match the new models . . . the OWR will be getting one in short order.)
-Alex
Great as always, Alex! Can't wait to see what the next round of NAM updates bring!
in addition (post copied from interchange guide)
well i wanted to have ago at a diverging windmill and a diverging stack ( you don't list this but its incredible, it only requires two bridges (opposing carriageways of one of the highways) (four if you grade separate the weave) but i didnt realise that there was not a carriageway weave that doesnt have those ramps attached.
however since they are i managed to build a diverging cloverleaf..... can you tell me whats wrong with this picture :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmightygoose%2FNAM%2Fdiverging_cloverleaf.jpg&hash=cbbc22cc1e319230fa63197b50fbf248c1c350d9)
anyway more experimentation later.
so pieces i now wish to request.
an avenue at grade lane weave (no ramps)
an RHW4 grade separated lane weave (one elevated)(no ramps)
OWR wide radius curves.... (to be honest i am sure they are in there i just couldnt find them.)
a RHW4/RHW2 SPUI
done.
You should of used RHW-4 instead of OWR, because it don't look pathed right, but that's just me.
Quote from: mightygoose on October 28, 2010, 04:43:33 PM
still waiting for 7.5m elevated networks XDXDXD
Join the club.
And that DDI makes no sense. :P
One thing future NAMs should consider:
Quote from: mightygoose on November 03, 2010, 10:05:42 AM
OK more legitimate threadomancy here....
NAM facelift mod!
[linkie] (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhide-inoki.com%2Fbbs%2Fphpbb2%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ft%3D818)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhide-inoki.com%2Fbbs%2Fphpbb2%2Ffiles%2Fsoverpass_ss02.jpg&hash=869233aa72806cebb649ca4144c9447239efcec3)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhide-inoki.com%2Fbbs%2Fphpbb2%2Ffiles%2Fsoverpass_ss01.jpg&hash=4f1914ed017977275de4aae348f409b7e4b4a699)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmightygoose%2FNAM%2Foverpass_ss03.jpg&hash=741ccdc2f3419112a24fdb19006bcfa79ca56c68)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmightygoose%2FNAM%2Foverpass_ss04.jpg&hash=7348242da1fc7364a745bfaf97ee08165ae057d2)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmightygoose%2FNAM%2Foverpass_ss05.jpg&hash=3a28c57d99292a00a26ff950515d5daf06e583d5)
OK this mod basically tweaks the new NAM overpasses, i do not know how extensive it is or which networks it covers but it was released today and looks superb.
DOWNLOAD: [liNKIE] (http://hide-inoki.com/bbs/phpbb2/download.php?id=1339&sid=770839efe35c23b7a170d8ef73efaf79)
original description.
and the readme translation
hope this helps.
Tried it out myself and it's simply amazing. Still a few hicks with it, which is why I think it should be included in the NAM. That way all the dings can be hammered out and compatibility issues solved before each release.
indeed, I am using it as well and its freakin fantastic,i havent noticed a single overpass piece that hasnt been updated
Coincidentally, I've finished up the set I did (as shown on the last page) as well. Good things come in twos, I suppose--
NekoPanch always does fine work. :)
Quote from: travismking on November 07, 2010, 07:14:46 PM
i havent noticed a single overpass piece that hasnt been updated
That won't be true for much longer, however. :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg35.imageshack.us%2Fimg35%2F5996%2Fnam110720102.jpg&hash=87d3201fa106c7b8e32e95cd01b900f38a672753)
Note what that's going under . . . ::)
It's also draggable . . .
-Alex
Quote from: mightygoose on October 28, 2010, 04:43:33 PM
still waiting for 7.5m elevated networks XDXDXD
Quote from: Haljackey on November 07, 2010, 07:01:43 PM
Join the club.
Make that three, Hal... Goose... XD
Hmm,... It always seems that our friends over in Japan always seem to make some incredible aesthetic mods and such. I'm gonna give the recent mod a try... It's clear to say that all the puzzle pieces and elevated networks (El Rail and Monorail/BTM/HSR) blatantly leave the land bare on the bottom. NAM functionality: Amazing. But default aesthetics,... Not so great...
And, Tarkus,... Unless my eyes and/or glasses are installed wrong, I think that right there is the half-height piece that the Half-Height Network Club is looking for...
:thumbsup: &apls ;D
Quote from: Tarkus on November 07, 2010, 07:42:29 PMNote what that's going under . . . ::)
It's also draggable . . .
Wait, what.... how did.... that doesn't seem... wow!
I can't wait to see the updated El-roads. Though, will we ever see base "textures" underneath? I'd choose a medium-wealth grass meself.
Wow dude! Those japanese remodded overpasses look awesome!
I've been recently working with maxis highways... and there are some custom interchanges that could be useful...
- Ground Highway Parclos (adjacent and opposite)
- Elevated Highway wide curves
Quote from: el_cozu on November 15, 2010, 09:08:57 AM
- Elevated Highway wide curves
Given that there's already some ground ones, there's a chance of this one, as it'd just require raising the models and stretching the supports.
Quote from: el_cozu on November 15, 2010, 09:08:57 AM
- Ground Highway Parclos (adjacent and opposite)
Making any sort of interchange for Maxis Highways is a very time-consuming task, and the one person who had the interest and skills to do it,
andreharv, has been inactive for a long time. The likelihood of this request (or any other request involving Maxis Highway interchanges) coming to fruition is pretty much nil at this point.
-Alex
Wow that (draggable) 7.5m elevated road looks great!!! &apls Can't wait to see more. The elevated road/OWR/ave facelift project is looking awesome too :thumbsup:
Just wanted to make a request. First off, wonderful mod and each of you guys deserve a round of applause. Thanks!
Alright, I just wanted to make a note about On-Off ramps. Here in the U.S, our ramps are connected to roads and streets more often than individual highways. In the game, however, in order to make a connecting ramp, I have to create a whole new highway. Could it be possible to integrate roads, streets, avenues and such into MIS ramps? For example, instead of having to create a whole new RH2 highway, I'd simply like to be able to have an off-ramp or on-ramp connect to one of my roads. Right now, the whole ramp system is super complicated.
To help explain what I mean, let's look at Norfolk, VA; my hometown.
http://maps.google.com/maps?um=1&hl=en&q=map+norfolk&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Norfolk,+VA&gl=us&ei=mPDjTITFD8OAlAeQkpG6Dg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBoQ8gEwAA
The on and off ramps all lead to streets and roads, not seperate individual highways. Say I have a interstate running through my city over a crowed avenue. I want to be able to make a on and off ramp on both sides of the highway allowing traffic to easily merge onto and off of the highway. Currently, however, I can't do that with the RealHighway pieces; well, I could, but it would take me countless hours and frustration. Then I could use the Maxis pieces; but I really do like the RealHighway interstates and I want to be able to use various types of transitions and overpasses. Right now, the only thing I can do is create something like over in Suffolk (if you browse to there on the map) on Route 58 and 460 (after I-264 and I-664 merge).
Hopefully, you can see what I mean here. I really love this mod and I applaud you on a job well done, but I really wish I could have those ramps transition with my current side streets, roads and avenues. Thanks again on a wonderful mod.
For connection to road, if you want real on- and off-ramps, you'll have to transition to RHW-2, which doesn't take up that much space. As for avenue/OWR, this is in development:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi705.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww55%2Fanonymson%2Fcoola_grejer.jpg&hash=10d2661acec720c475598751d4916b2f98e0596e)
;)
Nice work, riiga!
Both the 7.5 m overpasses and the ramps for avenue are great work! Well done!
Quote from: Ryan B. on November 17, 2010, 09:50:11 AM
Nice work, riiga!
Erm, actually I made those pieces, along with some other pieces:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg8.imageshack.us%2Fimg8%2F6277%2Fpiecesnorm.jpg&hash=9287b43f22bea35729ea1ec4ed251e3bcdfa22e0)
Riiga is just showing them to the public. ;)
A little teaser for all you guys who are desperately waiting for more elevations in RHW
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg543.imageshack.us%2Fimg543%2F4371%2F99057974.jpg&hash=e6acc509eeb758140f1ff98642a71d31e1db4134)
Half height and double height... wow.
Looks absolutely awesome! Except for the lack of pillars on some places $%Grinno$%
Quote from: carkid1998 on November 17, 2010, 01:52:14 PM
Half height and double height... wow.
And one-and-a-half height. ;) It's going to be a 5-level system: Ground, 7.5m, 15m, 22.5m and 30m.
-Alex
it's still in development that's why there are still pillars missing. But I wanted to show it to you guys anyway ;)
Looks like one of those impossible shapes without pylons to say where the ground stops :P
Looks great so far!
Once again,... Surprised.
No-height, Half-height, Full-height, Three-halves Height, and Double Height MIS... That'd make some even more realistic interchanges (And multi-level stacks); Currently I'm appalled by the 15M system... I'm saying it right now: Half-height is better than the full-height, especially for the Puzzle pieces and Viaduct pieces. Unless you're going over something else that's also half-height. (But we're still missing half-height ground lifters, but that's a task for later...)
I'm just scared now, since how are we gonna implement specialised ramps and transitions? Many transitions (from one height to a higher height) would have to be WAVERide, by my predictions... Wait,... If we have Diagonal Street that can be placed the same way like the FLEXFly, why not elevated diagonal one-tile RHW networks (ERHW-4 and EMIS)? Another alternative to using those diagonal fillers, and would theoretically work for crossing elevated diagonal stuff over two-tile and three-tile orthogonal ground RHW networks. (This is something for the RHW thread; I just know it... I KNOW I'm gonna have to draw this out also...)
I also wanted to ask about half-height Elevated Rail and Monorail, but I thought it'd be unnecessary...
How much further 'til we can achieve something like the High Five Interchange...?
Maarten, I remember your set of curves and ramps and transitions... The parallel curves (I call them PARACurves) gave me one other idea: To do the same for FARHW Curves. (Once again,... RHW Thread...)
Whoops . . . . . . sorry, Maarten! :thumbsup:
All that stuff looks really, really great!
Quote from: mtg on November 17, 2010, 01:44:05 PM
A little teaser for all you guys who are desperately waiting for more elevations in RHW
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg543.imageshack.us%2Fimg543%2F4371%2F99057974.jpg&hash=e6acc509eeb758140f1ff98642a71d31e1db4134)
Quote from: Tarkus on November 17, 2010, 01:55:51 PM
And one-and-a-half height. ;) It's going to be a 5-level system: Ground, 7.5m, 15m, 22.5m and 30m.
-Alex
But the ultimate question is can we "stack" these on top of eachother? Right now in the picture I only see them pass over one network. Maybe in a future release?
Perhaps puzzle pieces can fix this issue? Only time will tell. Great work guys! :)
A W E S O M E !
mauricio.
QuoteBut the ultimate question is can we "stack" these on top of eachother? Right now in the picture I only see them pass over one network. Maybe in a future release
It will be done with pp I think didn't got that far jet ;D
Is it gonna be only puzzle pieces, or would it be a draggable system
I'm guessing they'll be draggable, like all other RHW networks.
it is dragable
This looks great &apls Multi-level elevated pieces are going to rock! Especially the 7.5m
Thanks for all your hard work :thumbsup:
as tarkus will tell you i have been badgering him for half elevated bits for maybe 3.5 years now... ( basically since buddybud used half height (well 8m) for his onslope underpasses. please tell me now the 7.5 will get expanded to include other networks... it means we can have more realistic bridges all around.
i would like to point out however i got up and did a little dance around my room when i saw that picture...
Awesome work with the different height levels. But also a bit confusing in the pic. :P
I remember early discussions from a few years ago about half height puzzle pieces. I always thought those would be much better for overpasses. 15 meters is just too high and always looks strange to me.
I'm under the impression that horizontal distance in the game is in meters but vertical is in feet...
Quote from: sim-al2 on November 22, 2010, 05:32:41 PM
I'm under the impression that horizontal distance in the game is in meters but vertical is in feet...
If so, there wouldn't be enough clearance for cars going under half-height networks!!! (7.5 feet?!!) :D
Seriously though, there's far too much clearance for cars going under the 15M networks. (That's about 49 feet.) The current elevated networks are far too tall, and the need for half-height networks is pretty apparent. It's hard to tell by just looking at a 15M elevated network with respect to the ground network, but if you compare them with cars, you'll see that another level could comfortably fit between the ground level and the 15M level.
Plus, the road deck itself is rather thick in real life. Getting a little more elaborate here,... Five-level stack interchanges (EG, the High Five Interchange) are more than 100 feet high (120 feet, to be exact for the High Five), and the double height MIS is about 30M high, which is about 98 feet. That's as close to realistic as the NAM team can get for elevated networks (And I got some RL data to back it up, too.).
GDO29Anagram is right about the clearance.
The standard clearance in German (and Europe I think) is 4,50m (even street, no slopes, no change in slopes) plus 0,20m additional height for repairing the streets by just putting new asphalt on the old surfaces, prolongs the lifespan of asphalt street and decreases the maintenance costs significantly by only small increase in the construction costs). Usual reinforced concrete beams have a hight of appr. 1,50m so we get an overall height difference between the two road surfaces of 4,50+0,20+1,50 = 6,20m.
I am not a BATter but AFAIK height are always increases by 30% with would resulr in a "SC4 height" of 8,06m.
So the half-height network's height of 7,50m is lying perfectly between 100% and 130% of "RL height". :)
benard, i love you a little bit right now. it is nice to see others on the bandwagon.
as long as we don't forget the shadows :P 7.5m sounds interesting
So I was tinkering around until I did this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg192.imageshack.us%2Fimg192%2F7933%2Fhaltonhillsfeb920129403.jpg&hash=b10fe0ef3ee6d8bb9ad64dcfa93f9262311b4aa2)
Are road-avenue roundabout connectors possible?
Quote from: Haljackey on January 05, 2011, 07:50:03 PM
Are road-avenue roundabout connectors possible?
If coding and textures were in place, yes, it would be possible to connect a Road directly into the center of an Avenue Roundabout. Ditto with OWRs and RHWs.
-Alex
Hmm, wonder how the finished result of that would look, because using those old road to avenue textures for this RHW situation looks like it makes sense, I like how that slant works here, the direct road to center avenue. How exactly would a straight connection work, because even now it seems kind of sharp, but in my RL, I have only seen the road get divided just like what Haljackey showed before touching the avenue roundabout.
Oh, and to the public, if you have not done what Haljackey just did, just try it, and see what happens as of now.
Quote(But we're still missing half-height ground lifters, but that's a task for later...)
8m ground lifters work very well for 7.5m pieces - my ground lifter and sinker lots have a 8m piece. Modding a 7.5m, due to the nature of the ground lifter lots, is sadly impossible because it only uses a hexadecimal integer value. Besides, 7.5m, 8m, what's the difference? It's not obvious at all.
Quote from: Haljackey on January 05, 2011, 07:50:03 PM
So I was tinkering around until I did this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg192.imageshack.us%2Fimg192%2F7933%2Fhaltonhillsfeb920129403.jpg&hash=b10fe0ef3ee6d8bb9ad64dcfa93f9262311b4aa2)
Are road-avenue roundabout connectors possible?
Quote from: j-dub on January 05, 2011, 08:38:20 PM
Hmm, wonder how the finished result of that would look, because using those old road to avenue textures for this RHW situation looks like it makes sense, I like how that slant works here, the direct road to center avenue. How exactly would a straight connection work, because even now it seems kind of sharp]
Having the extra tile for the road-avenue transition allows the straight connection to be smoother.
If a piece were to be made without this tile, the curve would indeed be sharp.
Perhaps a puzzle piece could be made for this transition. We already have an additional avenue roundabout piece for avenues junctioning with it at odd angles, so why not make another one allowing for easier turns to and/or from a road?
Just thinking out loud here. If you fiddle around with networks enough in SC4, the results can make you wonder.
Heh, looks like I answered a completely different question. ::) :D That one I'll have to take a look into.
-Alex
Awesome work guys, fantastic stuff even though I dont play anymore >.<
Quote
8m ground lifters work very well for 7.5m pieces - my ground lifter and sinker lots have a 8m piece. Modding a 7.5m, due to the nature of the ground lifter lots, is sadly impossible because it only uses a hexadecimal integer value. Besides, 7.5m, 8m, what's the difference? It's not obvious at all.
Haven't tried 0x00078000 (7 ~8/16 -> 7.5)? Positions are handled rather literally in LotConfig XYZ lines, as 0x00080000 is 8.0m, or center of the lot.
Are double-deck bridges possible? I.e. el-rail over road bridge, 2-deck avenue bridge, rail/road 2-deck bridge, etc. (although with the bridges you would have to make double-deck roads and avenues)
That would be awesome.
Also GLR/road bridges (both tram-in and tram-on road)?
-Gooper1
Gooper1:
Look at this thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4879.msg304076#msg304076). Choco has been incommunicado for a while, so I advise against demanding for release or making requests.
Quote from: jdenm8 on January 27, 2011, 05:19:47 PM
Gooper1:
Look at this thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4879.msg304076#msg304076). Choco has been incommunicado for a while, so I advise against demanding for release or making requests.
Thanks!
We are pleased to announce the long-awaited release of the NAM Retexture and Cosmetic Mod (North American Version 1) on the LEX.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi293.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fmm50%2Fbighead99999%2Fnamretexturecosmeticmod.jpg&hash=46bec9c8f8c94fdfda03da74af71c877b1b40002)
You can pick it up here:
Windows (http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=2589)
MacOS (http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=2590)
Enjoy!
-Alex
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: &apls &apls
Thank you all!!! ;D
thanks to you and the NAM Team ;)
Great! Going to try it out now, although I'm a Euro-texture user ;D Speaking of Euro textures, will there be any for this mod?
Can't wait the euro one ! &apls
Quote from: io_bg on February 04, 2011, 01:59:38 PM
Great! Going to try it out now, although I'm a Euro-texture user ;D Speaking of Euro textures, will there be any for this mod?
Short answer: yes. :)
-Alex
Thanks guys -NAMTeam, its all good :thumbsup: really appreciated :)
Quote from: Jack_wilds on February 04, 2011, 02:13:35 PM
Thanks guys -NAMTeam, its all good :thumbsup: really appreciated :)
no, thank you ()stsfd()
-dave
Quote from: superhands on February 04, 2011, 07:41:20 PM
no, thank you ()stsfd()
-dave
Actually, thank you, Dave, for again working your textural magic and making this mod possible! :thumbsup:
-Alex
Fantastic, although I think I will wait for the Euro textures to come out (if they do) as I prefer them :)
Going to install it for a test run and see how they look at least, maybe ill like them. Nevertheless, personal preferences aside, The textures look fantastic and you guys did a GREAT job
Quote from: io_bg on February 04, 2011, 01:59:38 PM
Great! Going to try it out now, although I'm a Euro-texture user ;D Speaking of Euro textures, will there be any for this mod?
Quote from: Tarkus on February 04, 2011, 02:10:40 PM
Short answer: yes. :)
-Alex
keep on waiting for Euro mod ...
Why Europe is still the last in Development progress ? :'( :angrymore:
[ joking , not complaining ]
I believe some things aren't ready for the Euro version, like the Readme, installers and maybe some testing. But trust me, most stuff is done. I've done the Euro version of this mod, which is a bit different compared to SFBT's Euro Textures. Here are some teaser shots and note the differences:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg264.imageshack.us%2Fimg264%2F4277%2Frtl01.jpg&hash=6bc455b1a483334c7bf77cc54c614863a132ce93)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg200.imageshack.us%2Fimg200%2F7193%2Fnieuwestad22jan00128811.png&hash=46588cbded8e16adcc34fd2565280f174450c51e)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg268.imageshack.us%2Fimg268%2F8253%2Fguilliano29jul138128811.png&hash=294324972499e32bab2a47e0fc7eeee632beb92e)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg214.imageshack.us%2Fimg214%2F7755%2Frtl05.jpg&hash=5d462a03ba0c5412430addc99416b51ec082425c)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg109.imageshack.us%2Fimg109%2F2589%2Frtl03.jpg&hash=804cc9f4616cc2516c79d8c0733210247f36d8ba)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg138.imageshack.us%2Fimg138%2F4017%2Feurotextures02.jpg&hash=41ae4cd299d8ccfe7e47f5774f5d4b4e13f34573)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg205.imageshack.us%2Fimg205%2F6469%2Feurotextures01.jpg&hash=cd8e08a96cc01cc7cfdc78f5e151d113aaf9b35c)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg833.imageshack.us%2Fimg833%2F7145%2Ffelixruhevonalphainplat.jpg&hash=ec681baf6ad71058402e3ef485a35e13f1a620fc)
Just giving you the idea ;)
Best,
Maarten
Awesome! I just love those rounded corners, something I (used to) hate in the original SC4 :P
So, we can expect this mod out pretty soon, right? ::)
As far as I know: yes, quite soon!
Quote from: mrtnrln on February 06, 2011, 08:08:59 AM
( Euro Mod )
As far as I know: yes, quite soon!
Very good news !!! :thumbsup:
Very beautiful indeed! (Are the Euro road curves made using the same technique as Dedgren's RealRoads markers?)
Looks very good, Maarten!
As said above, nice rounded corners.
Can't wait to use this :P
Quote from: Tracker on February 06, 2011, 08:31:37 AM
Very beautiful indeed! (Are the Euro road curves made using the same technique as Dedgren's RealRoads markers?)
Nope. It's just some basic texture modding. No tricky RUL-modding involved as in case of the RealRoads...
really neat stuff Maarten :thumbsup:
it makes want to use it for awhile for something different... :P ::) :D my straight faces aren't so &mmm -just teasing...
I like the road line work particularly and brick texture choice... I think some anticipated LEX watching will be in order
Jack
I'm waiting for some pictures of these multi level RHW's I keep hearing about it. ()what()
You're more likely to see RHW pictures in the RHW development tread ::)
Additionally, as it's one of those "in progress" things that is not going to be included in the next RHW version, we're probably going to refrain from showing any multi-level ERHW progress until we're beginning to work on the release in which it'll be included.
-Alex
First of all I want to thank the NAM team for the cornerstone mod of SC4.
I have a problem encountered while modelling the real city of Portland, Oregon on a scale region map. The central business district of Portland is tilted on an angle which is quite close to the FAR street tiles, close enough that the FAR angles will work for modelling. However, the city blocks in Portland are quite small compared to almost every other city. In SC4 they come to exactly 4 tiles on an orthogonal grid. This means that using FAR intersection tiles to produce a realistic reproduction of the downtown (SW) Portland grid is not possible, since the smallest possible FAR grid which matches the model is closer to 6 tiles on a side. The backstory is that the original city planners of Portland decided they didn't like alleyways, and laid the CBD out without them (many downtown sidewalks still contain lifts to basements for freight delivery, in the past coal delivery as well).
Has this problem been addressed in the past? I realize it's almost unique to this project, and that there are limitations due to the 2x3 tile size for ploppable straight FAR sections, etc. Anyway, I am comfortable using mod tools to solve the problem myself for my project with customized NAM content, if the NAM architects think it's possible. Seems like a solution might involve larger ploppables, perhaps of an L shaped configuration spanning half a (Portland) block.
Any and all clues welcome, as without a solution I may end up having to fudge an entire area of the model in a highly non accurate fashion. (The only other accuracy issue that has come up is Diagonal Bridges, hehe). If you need pictures I'd be happy to post them.
Thanks in advance!
I think you're asking for a 2x2 FAR piece that's still on the same angle as current.
2x2 FAR pieces have been shown previously, but they're on a different angle.
Why this is is because for the road to match properly (and easily) between each piece, a 2x3 area is required. If it's either shorter or longer, then it becomes a real headache.
Quote from: CascadiaTinker on March 12, 2011, 11:01:30 PM
First of all I want to thank the NAM team for the cornerstone mod of SC4.
On behalf of the team, you're most welcome. :)
I've actually toyed around with the idea of "semi-recreating" Portland as well myself, being quite familiar with it (grew up in Washington County and went to PSU my junior year of undergrad), and I kind of was torn with how to deal with the angles on southwest part of downtown as well. The angle on the streets is just about 21 degrees, which is indeed quite close to the 18.4-degree angle of the FAR pieces.
The current FAR/FAR intersection pieces allow for intersections with a 2-tile spacing and a 3-tile spacing, but not a 4-tile spacing. I've been examining the existing pieces since seeing this post and taking some measurements, and am trying to figure out the geometry that would be needed. Looking over things, a 4x4 setup might be possible if a couple more pieces were made--a partial FAR piece and a FAR/FAR intersection that has been shifted one tile over toward the edge.
We've also discussed going to a FLEXFly-style helper piece setup or some sort of draggable system, which also might make this sort of thing a bit more feasible, though with as much as is going on developmentally at the moment, I don't anticipate it'll be for awhile.
-Alex
"Looking over things, a 4x4 setup might be possible if a couple more pieces were made--a partial FAR piece and a FAR/FAR intersection that has been shifted one tile over toward the edge."
Can you elaborate on this? Is this something that you or other NAM team members are already interested in taking on, or is it limited interest for projects such as mine? Without modesty, I have 20 years of experience hacking various software systems and would be happy to contribute for this small portion to make my project happen.
Thanks so much for your prompt response. It's amazing to me that the exact problem has already been encountered for modeling this particular locale - what an amazing and universal tool we have here at our disposal.
eta: I'm reading http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=11023.0 which I assume is the relevant tutorial.
Hi..
I have a suggestion for next NAM (maybe NWM):
A typical avenue with narrow barrier like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi25.servimg.com%2Fu%2Ff25%2F15%2F75%2F40%2F01%2Fdsc04915.jpg&hash=57219b34572c2ec59239f3ac47434624aab20fc4)
it's should be different with either MAVE 4 or AVE 4 so I hope someone create network like this..
Actually, one could just make a T21 mod, something similar to this (http://www.simcity.cn/viewthread.php?tid=83513&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D11), but just replace the fences with that kind of barrier. No need to create a new network this way ;)
EDIT: The barriers couldn't still be very big, obviously.
Well, if the T21 object was about 4 pixel spaces, no more then 6, I don't see why that would not work out.
which network should it be??
I would say Mave-4, because motor bikes can pass around cars on that.
Are there plans to make the straight ave, one way and road on slope pieces two tiles instead of the current three?
Quote from: Kitsune on April 17, 2011, 11:43:49 AM
Are there plans to make the straight ave, one way and road on slope pieces two tiles instead of the current three?
We tried that with the ERHW-2 On-Slope . . . it didn't work and basically screwed up the rotation ring, so unfortunately, the standard ones will be staying at 3 tiles, the only way to pull off something like that is by using the T OnSlopes.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on April 17, 2011, 02:59:01 PM
We tried that with the ERHW-2 On-Slope . . . it didn't work and basically screwed up the rotation ring, so unfortunately, the standard ones will be staying at 3 tiles, the only way to pull off something like that is by using the T OnSlopes.
-Alex
Yes - and the T acts odd too. It works fine for road, but for one way destroying a tile beside it causes the entire thing to be destroyed, and the T for avenue only alloows roads and nothing else.
There already are two-tile versions, the T pieces.
Why there isn't a normal road stub on the end (ala RHW) is because of technical difficulties. The RHW can do it because there is technically an intersection at both ends, but base networks cannot. RHW-2/ERHW-2 will will have the same problem when it's released.
Hey, mrtnrln!
The effort you have put into retexturing transit networks and creating euro alternatives is incredible. I was looking at some of your MD pictures and noticed the different sidewalk textures. When the NAM euro cosmetic mod is released will Sithlrd98's asphalt textures be an option as with Andreas' euro road textures?
Also, your GLR/GLR-in-road/GLR-in-avenue puzzle pieces appear to use the chosen sidewalk texture, not the standard Maxis texture. Could this apply to RTMT stations and FLUPS?
Thanks for your hard work! Can't wait for this to be released!
-Blade
I have a mac, and I'm tired of manually adding in addons. I have a NAM mac installer.
werl.me/NAM%20Installer.dmg (http://werl.me/NAM%20Installer.dmg)
I have tested it and works fine. please concider putting this up for mac users.
I was experimenting in-game and discovered that RHW-Ground connectivity is *almost* there. Just as an example:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi134.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq103%2FTwyla_Naythias%2FARtest02.jpg&hash=f37f657ba7cb3da882570f256d3b3af7ae1f8a4d)
As you can see, beginning or ending an access road (including NWM-variants) is readily accomplished - it's the connections between existing Ground (RCI-capable) and RHW which is lacking.
I made the second one by dragging RHW to form MIS. It seems to be functional as-is, though I don't have the knowledge or resources to confirm this (apart from showing as a valid traffic path).
Still, it just goes to show how a little thing can add a *LOAD* of functionality to RHW.
I believe that "messy" Ortho-Diag OWR2xMIS* intersection has been around for, about, forever. No RULs made for them, so the end result are broken overrides and an intersection made from their respective base networks; A RHW2-OWR2 intersection now. Is it worth completing? I'm personally not sure (dragability-wise), but I'd recommend a puzzle-based version. But the broken one works. (It's been "almost there" for years...)
This is exactly why I would consider OWR-MIS ramps to be built: For a proper frontage road connection, and to more or less accompany the AVE-MIS ramps in development.
NWM is about a year old now (but it took three years to develop); I would say it's still taking its first baby steps; RHW? About five times older. That's why no complex NWM-RHW interfacing has been developed (EG, MIS to OWR1); NWM is just too young.
There's one method to get a proper connection with MIS and OWR, with OWR2, at least, but it involves TuLEPs, and something Haljackey and Blue Lightning separately came up with...
Have you ever tried to solve a 1000-piece jigsaw puzzle, and found two sky pieces, and desperately tried to slam them, just to get them to fit together? I wouldn't be surprised if that's how people feel about the NWM and RHW. If you're like Ryan or myself, you'll try this, and will sometimes magically get those two sky pieces to fit exactly. Or almost exactly.
* - I was referring to the OWR3's base network: OWR2.
Actually, back in RHW 3.2, most of those intersections actually worked, but they seem broken in RHW 4.1. I don't know if it's been fixed in RHW 4.2, I don't use them very often.
The only one I ever remember officially working are the ones involving Roads. OWR/MIS intersections involving diagonals have never been officially enabled, though it's possible I might have accidentally had them in 3.2 (they would have been without paths if that were the case), and they just didn't get included when I did a major revamp of the entire override code for 4.0.
There's been no work on any new diagonal MIS intersections (for OWRs, Avenues, etc.) done so far for Version 4.2. It's unknown whether or not that'll change . . . I'll have a better idea when I'm back to modding sometime around June or July. Surprisingly, they haven't been a common request.
I'd also tend to agree with GDO29Anagram on the puzzle piece front . . . the geometry of a straight-up draggable one like that would be not particularly optimal, most likely, though we'll see.
-Alex
Yeah, it was in for roads... sort of.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg11.imageshack.us%2Fimg11%2F820%2Fmosiacfinal03.jpg&hash=529c85aafd300844f44dac17b239f3f2647260ba).
Over on the far left.
I thought I had tried the rest, but I mustn't have.
On the puzzle piece front, not all implementations of that draggable intersection would apply to Frontage roads. A Parclo with a wide median would use that draggable intersection since traffic generally doesn't merge, it stops.
I don't think a ramp interface would go astray, but I don't think the draggable should be neglected either.
If there were FlUP-under-ERHW pieces available, this interchange would be fully functional:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi134.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq103%2FTwyla_Naythias%2FIntersection027.jpg&hash=93981b4b0453118095feccc38195c89bae9f227d)
(Used the RHW-2 FlUPs, though the OWR ones would work until there are RHW-4s available)
On a separate note, has anyone else noticed the issue with Maxis Avenues being choked, glorified (and worthless) roads? Even with the NAM Controller, there's nothing to justify their upkeep expense - the NWM MAVE-4 has twice the capacity at one-fifth the maintenance costs.
Not 100% sure if it's merely a typo in the NAM docs but - even in vanilla SC4 - a pair of OWRs has far fewer traffic problems than a single AVE. Maybe the next NAM Controller can bump their capacity (and perhaps lower their upkeep) to make them worthwhile?
Quote from: Twyla on May 04, 2011, 07:50:56 PM
Not 100% sure if it's merely a typo in the NAM docs but - even in vanilla SC4 - a pair of OWRs has far fewer traffic problems than a single AVE. Maybe the next NAM Controller can bump their capacity (and perhaps lower their upkeep) to make them worthwhile?
The Avenue capacities listed are per-tile, while the NWM capacities are for the full width of the network, so to compare, you'd either need to double the Avenue capacity or halve the NWM capacity. The MAVE-4 has the same capacity as the default Avenue. MAVE-6 and TLA-5 have a slightly higher capacity.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on May 04, 2011, 08:01:40 PM
The Avenue capacities listed are per-tile, while the NWM capacities are for the full width of the network, so to compare, you'd either need to double the Avenue capacity or halve the NWM capacity. The MAVE-4 has the same capacity as the default Avenue. MAVE-6 and TLA-5 have a slightly higher capacity.
-Alex
Might consider revising that -
ALL other NAM traffic stats (NWM, RHW, etc) in the documentation are listed for the networks rather than per-tile. RHW docs even specifically state that the figures are for the
network:
Quote(note that these are for full double carriageways on all networks except the RHW-2 and MIS Ramps)
(The 'exceptions' listed are somewhat redundant - RHW-2 has both carriageways on the same tile, and MIS is essentially a OWR.)
Quote from: Twyla on May 04, 2011, 09:30:03 PM
(The 'exceptions' listed are somewhat redundant - RHW-2 has both carriageways on the same tile, and MIS is essentially a OWR.)
Try to think of the capacity numbers in the readme this way: Total capacity for both directions of traffic. If you're measuring by just one direction of traffic as if it were a one-way road, you'd have to cut the numbers in half, assuming you could do the same for RHW2. Remember: Just because network "X" has "Y" amount of capacity, doesn't mean it's all in one direction; If the amount of traffic in each direction is the same (on either RHW2, Road, or Street), you could completely cut the numbers in the readme in half, to simulate a by-lane capacity system. (If only the game would allow that... ::) One could dream, though... Or at least do some math...)
MIS and OWR1 can't have their capacities downgraded, unless it's made from another low-capacity network, so considering the game's by-tile capacity system, it wouldn't make much mathematical sense to go from RHW2C (RHW2) to RHW2S (MIS). Besides, MIS's job is to bring traffic from one highway to another; It's probably uncommon to use it like an "RHW2S" setup for long stretches of highway, though it was tried once as a primitive AVE2. Unless you DO want the RHW equivalent to an AVE2. (Wide RHW2; Actually in development, as a puzzle-based setup.)
MIS is like a one-way road - and you could say the same for all the S-type RHWs - , but it's functionally different (It's all controlled-access, after all...). The C-type RHWs could then be considered as oversized variants of the RHW2 in the sense that in order to determine full capacity of one direction of a 6C, for example, you'd have to cut the number given in the readme in half.
Quote from: Ciuu96 on April 15, 2011, 01:19:58 PM
Actually, one could just make a T21 mod, something similar to this (http://www.simcity.cn/viewthread.php?tid=83513&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D11), but just replace the fences with that kind of barrier. No need to create a new network this way ;)
EDIT: The barriers couldn't still be very big, obviously.
how it work and who would create it?
i saw the underground way.... but i find it very difficult to create one ...i can only do rail underways..... so i thought that if it possible to make lots that are used like a metro(subway) to create underground way without taking ground level tiles.... this could save a lot of plopable things for each kind of road and it probably make problems if create connection to real subway but the subway is very easy to maneuver
but i think it would be super hard to create that stuff soon (probably not until next summer at least)....
in conclusion : it would be easy for use but very hard to be created.
------------sorry about the poor dictionary i have any the many repetitions of the words ----------------------
Ran across this (http://www.youtube.com/user/jjborms#g/a) on Youtube. Have I been missing something, or have these not been implemented yet?
Quote from: kassarc16 on May 31, 2011, 06:53:31 PM
Ran across this (http://www.youtube.com/user/jjborms#g/a) on Youtube. Have I been missing something, or have these not been implemented yet?
The current version of the NAM just has the Draggable FAR and Draggable GLR in Road (And a few Draggable Rail items). Though with the Draggable GLR in Road, you don't need to plop the GLR starter; Just click on a stretch of Road using El Rail.
Actually, Draggable FAR was (at least in large part) taken out in Version 29 due to the discovery that it was the culprit behind the Maxis Car Ferry CTDs. Draggable FARR I think is still in, though I've heard there were also some similar issues there, so it will probably be removed. I think the best potential with that technology going forward would be a "FlexFAR" system.
The draggable T-RAM involves the same setup as the draggable ElRail-over-Road Dual Network, so the two conflict, and only one was able to be implemented.
As all the development on that front was done before the Car Ferry issue, we've been quite cautious about implementing more AutoPlace puzzle piece setups like that.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on May 31, 2011, 07:16:47 PM
Actually, Draggable FAR was (at least in large part) taken out in Version 29 due to the discovery that it was the culprit behind the Maxis Car Ferry CTDs. Draggable FARR I think is still in, though I've heard there were also some similar issues there, so it will probably be removed. I think the best potential with that technology going forward would be a "FlexFAR" system.
-Alex
You're correct, Draggable FARR is still in the game. I just used it the other night while building a stretch of FARR, and I have the most recent public releases of everything.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a puzzle piece cannot touch a TE lot of the same network under any circumstances. This was due to a lack of testing on EA's behalf, since TE lots were added at the last second (Rush Hour has three, one of which is physically impossible to access without cheats)
Quote from: Wiimeiser on May 31, 2011, 11:51:03 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a puzzle piece cannot touch a TE lot of the same network under any circumstances. This was due to a lack of testing on EA's behalf, since TE lots were added at the last second (Rush Hour has three, one of which is physically impossible to access without cheats)
In almost all cases, yes. There are a few that Maxis/EA designed that don't suffer this issue, but any custom one will.
The "AutoPlace"-implemented Draggable FAR system triggered this glitch, as the underlying TE setup underneath the Car Ferry matched the CheckType setup of the FAR puzzle piece. When one would place the Car Ferry, the game would then try to initiate the AutoPlace on the FAR puzzle piece, triggering the TE CTD.
-Alex
Which ones don't suffer the issue?
Why don't you just change the TE setup of FAR?
As double-decker RHW is in development; why don't you make double-decker roads (more specifically, 2 OWRs-1 per deck-going in opposite directions), and El Hwy over Avenue pieces? Is it possible?
-Gooper1
Merged two posts. There's no need to double-post with two questions in a 4 minute timeframe. -Admin
Quote from: gooper1 on June 15, 2011, 01:24:25 PM
Why don't you just change the TE setup of FAR?
If we changed the RUL CheckType setup underlaying FAR, its usefulness in producing this draggable AutoPlace system would be eliminated. It would effectively be moot.
Quote from: gooper1 on June 15, 2011, 01:24:25 PM
As double-decker RHW is in development; why don't you make double-decker roads (more specifically, 2 OWRs-1 per deck-going in opposite directions), and El Hwy over Avenue pieces? Is it possible?
Those items are more specialized--there's not as much utility for them as there is for just a general double-decker highway, so I'd say the chances there are much slimmer.
-Alex
@gooper1 About Maxis default networks and double deck possibility: Not too long ago, shortly before double-decker RHW was displayed, someone who was in the NAM team, had experimented with that last part you mentioned, exploring the Elevated Maxis Highway over Avenues. I have seen nothing else found of that, I don't even know if it was draggable like double-decker RHW is. Car paths the same direction at different height, would not stop the cars jumping between levels, and that is not exactly pleasant to watch. You may know that it took a long time for double-decker RHW. The whole thing is with RHW, the Maxis highway has no more development that I know of.
Quote from: j-dub on June 15, 2011, 02:11:03 PM
About Maxis default networks and double decks: Not too long ago, shortly before double-decker RHW was displayed, someone who was in the NAM team, had experimented with that last part you mentioned, exploring the Elevated Maxis Highway over Avenues.
That was Ebina; He retired from transit modding, if I remember correctly. I don't know much about MHW over AVE-4, either, but I believe it was puzzle-based (and would make better sense if it were, too).
Yeah, those were made by Ebina. The NAM team has some very early prototypes, but Ebina never gave anybody what he was working on when he left, so all the work has been lost.
Quote from: Tarkus on June 15, 2011, 01:58:04 PM
Those items are more specialized--there's not as much utility for them as there is for just a general double-decker highway, so I'd say the chances there are much slimmer.
What do you mean, "there's not as much utility for them"? Downtown Chicago has multilevel streets all over the place!
And with the double-decker MHY (i.e. GMHY over L1 EMHY, or L2 and L3 EMHY), is it possible?
-Gooper1
Quote from: gooper1 on June 16, 2011, 04:31:40 PM
What do you mean, "there's not as much utility for them"? Downtown Chicago has multilevel streets all over the place!
And with the double-decker MHY (i.e. GMHY over L1 EMHY, or L2 and L3 EMHY), is it possible?
-Gooper1
Where are they
other than Chicago?
This is also my argument for not making OWR-8, because it only exists in Moscow.
It should be noted that additional development involving MHW is strictly limited to "gap-filling" (EG, EMHW diamond interchanges with AVE-6).
Quote from: Tarkus
http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/topic/42711-is-there-going-to-be-any-more-development-of-the-maxis-highways/page__view__findpost__p__1143390
Unless andreharv reappears or someone new steps up who has the time and energy to devote to the long-term, highly-intensive process of creating new Maxis Highway interchanges and the like, the most you'll really see coming out of the transit modding community is some smaller "gap-fill" Maxis Highway items along the lines of what Chrisim created. The Ground and Elevated Highways are basically in a state close to what the software development world would call "maintenance mode".
It takes a long time to work with MHW, due to their complicated models, and even if someone took the time to create an MHW equivalent of DDRHW,...
Quote from: Tarkus on June 05, 2011, 11:42:15 PM
Why 15m and 22.5m for the two decks? Will there be additional heights?
In RL, most double-decker highways are elevated substantially and usually pass over any potential obstacles. Setting the bottom deck at 15m (or Level 2/L2 as it will be known when we get closer to RHW 5.0) means that both ground-level and future 7.5m (Level 1/L1) networks can pass under it. 22.5m (Level 3/L3) for the top deck means that in the rarer instances in which a network needs to pass over top, the future 30m (Level 4/L4) networks can do the job.
Thus, this deck arrangement appears to be the most practical and realistic.
It's locked to L3 over L2.
Plus, Gooper1, can you provide a link about the multi-level streets you're talking about? Just saying they exist somewhere doesn't provide enough information (especially when you're desperately combing through Google Maps).
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on June 16, 2011, 05:10:19 PM
Plus, Gooper1, can you provide a link about the multi-level streets you're talking about? Just saying they exist somewhere doesn't provide enough information (especially when you're desperately combing through Google Maps).
As a native Chicagoan, I can testify to the profusion of multi-level streets throughout downtown. Many streets, including Wacker Drive, have three levels. Better yet, I can give you the link you're looking for - it's the
Multilevel streets in Chicago (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilevel_streets_in_Chicago) article in Wikipedia. It comes complete with a history of how these streets developed, and even a
color-coded map (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chicago_top_down_view.png), as well as various external references. Many of these streets, such as
Wacker Drive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wacker_Drive_%28Chicago%29), have articles of their own, which are referenced in the main article.
Wow, I never actually realized there were streets like that in Chicago... that's kinda awesome...
Quote from: kassarc16 on June 16, 2011, 06:08:27 PM
Wow, I never actually realized there were streets like that in Chicago... that's kinda awesome...
I never thought there would be such streets, either, but the lower decks feel like they're underground. I thought the decks would be thoroughly exposed, but when you cover them up with the sides of tall buildings, it starts to feel more like an underground parking garage.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on June 16, 2011, 06:30:12 PM
I never thought there would be such streets, either, but the lower decks feel like they're underground.
They are now, although they weren't originally.
QuoteI thought the decks would be thoroughly exposed, but when you cover them up with the sides of tall buildings, it starts to feel more like an underground parking garage.
Not when you drive through them. There's actually an underground city down there. Many of the main buildings downtown have entrances at all street levels. Some buildings use the lower level(s) for shipping and receiving entrances. But there are also whole streets of shops that exist only underground. For example, the famous Billy Goat Tavern exists on the lower level of Michigan Avenue.
And then there are the double decker streets that cross the Chicago River as double decker bridges. Some of the multi-level streets then continue on the north side of the river; these aren't shown in the picture I referenced.
Oh yes - there are also the little underground trains that used to run under the lowest level of every downtown street - even the single level ones. But you don't really want to know about those, do you?
Might I just add that there is a section of the M4 in Brentford, West London which is built on top of the A4 (Great West Road), a photo:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.geograph.org.uk%2Fphotos%2F74%2F19%2F741937_a08be250.jpg&hash=252ed048c250941617f5ce888c9c31392772e171)
(and yes I also think it's odd that both the motorway and duel carrageway have a 40mph speed limit),
John
That one's technically Motorway over Road, which doesn't really count because it's not possible.
Quote from: jdenm8 on June 17, 2011, 07:46:45 AM
That one's technically Motorway over Road
?
but there are two paved two-lane-wide carrageways in each direction physically separated, isn't it more like avenue?
the planners of the Great West road, who also designed London parts of the A40, A12, A1 and A10 in the late 1920s, made something of much more resemblance to the maxis avenue in sc4
Ack, more of my RL speech leaking over (unless it's a Motorway, it's generally referred to as a Road here :P )
The issue is that two levels of traffic are flowing in the same direction. That confuses the pathfinder because it only looks at distances left and right, not up and down, meaning that a jump 7.5m into the air is not illegal (It sees it as another lane exiting on the same side).
DDERHW-4 works by devoting one deck to one direction and the other deck to the opposite direction. This does not confuse the pathfinder as it does see the other lane, but it writes it off as going in the wrong direction.
Every picture of the Highway-Over-Avenue I've seen has a very suspicious row of plazas next to it. My conclusion is that the Highway over 'Avenue' is puzzle-piece based highway, but with the paths and models shifted 16m toward the centre of the Avenue to make it look like it's on top of the Avenue. As the pathfinder thinks it's in the tile beside the avenue +19m (for argument's sake) in one direction, it doesn't see the paths on the Avenue as the traffic isn't actually travelling through the same tiles as the Avenue.
sorry for the misunderstanding, i also saw the photos, and tbh i was a little supprised given that i had read so much about it not being possible, it looks an interesting concept, however i personally doubt i would ever be in need of such a network, so not really botherd about any development, but thanks for the replies!
Minutia question: are the revamped elevated road and avenue overpasses part of NAM 30?
Quote from: Tracker on June 17, 2011, 12:18:38 PM
Minutia question: are the revamped elevated road and avenue overpasses part of NAM 30?
To sum it up in one word, yes. :)
Another example of Highway-Over-Avenue: Gardiner Expressway through parts of downtown Toronto. It runs over Lake Shore Blvd., and frequently uses it like a "service road" (although Lake Shore is a major thoroughfare)-providng ramps to and from the Lake Shore to access nearby streets. Creates a bit of congestion on Lake Shore, though.
All the same, MHW-over-Avenue can't be made properly in SC4. As others have said, the traffic simulator doesn't know that the paths are at different heights, so you'll always end up with unrealistic jumps between levels where there ought not to be any. Therefore, the NAM Team isn't going to make it.
Can RHW transmit power, like power lines? If not all, then how about just elevated RHW. This would make lighting up RHW out of town much easier. (RHW with USL looks amazing)
I think this has been gone over a lot before and the answer was no.
The easiest way I know of to accomplish what you want is to put a little strip of park squares alongside your RHW. Subways may not transmit electricity (after all, they're steam powered), but park squares do.
I thought when you hold control down, and drag the industrial zoning parallel into RHW, but pull it into the RHW, there will be invisible zoning alongside the RHW. I may be wrong, but I thought this works if the invisible zones go back for miles, and touch a development back a distance that does have power. All I know is, I have been using a No-Road required battery shed, that blends in, and generates power for quite a radius.
I would like to see double-decker highways in the future regardless of the way the game reacts to it. In some cities that I have built I've needed some double decker highways even if its just for eye-candy purpose, I usually build better alternate routes to counterattack the situation. And honestly the cities I build are merely for eye-candy purposes I hardly worry about traffic flow, residents, commercial, I just worry that It looks like the city im trying to recreate. And in many cases the city I try to recreate haa double-decker highways, just do it for eye-candy, worry later how the simulator reacts to it, It actually looks uglier how I have to deal with the non double decker puzzle pieces.
Quote from: da4gotten on June 25, 2011, 11:48:10 AM
I would like to see double-decker highways in the future regardless of the way the game reacts to it.
It's already a work in progress (Have you not visited the RHW Development Thread recently?), and they're 100% functional, not eyecandy. You just can't have the decks in the same direction, though; Only in opposite directions.
I just had a quick question. Why are street/road roundabout's not wealth Dependant? SAM roundabouts, however, are. (Seems a little backwards :P)Those bright grasses in all of my zones, even unzoned bugs me. Any chance of getting to this?
,marsh
Quote from: marsh on June 27, 2011, 11:39:01 AM
Why are street/road roundabout's not wealth Dependant?
I guess the best way to describe that is that the grass and sidewalk textures are pretty much baked right in. For the Street RA, it may be a bit redundant, but for the Road RA, it's probably so that if you have a "Magic RA", you don't have chunks of bare ground that can't touch any zoning. Probably not something that would be rectified any time soon...
Moonlight made a mod over at his website that remedied that I think.
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ja&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://blog.livedoor.jp/moonlinght/archives/cat_59226.html&usg=ALkJrhj8yb2J1y0SpF8Wxh-q0OeOWePesA
I think it also makes them compliant with Sidewalk mods.
Well, if you can't have MHW-over-Avenue, why not have ERHW (or DDRHW)-over-Avenue/OWR?
(I know this kinda belongs in the RHW development thread, but...)
-Gooper1
Quote from: gooper1 on July 10, 2011, 09:43:37 AM
Well, if you can't have MHW-over-Avenue, why not have ERHW (or DDRHW)-over-Avenue/OWR?
(I know this kinda belongs in the RHW development thread, but...)
-Gooper1
Let me spell this concept out one more time.
The game CANNOT distinguish between parallel paths of the same travel type at different heights. It is hardcoded into the game and we CANNOT change it. There will NEVER be MHW over Avenue, ERHW over Avenue or any other sort of car network parallel over other car network. It CANNOT function properly in game.
PLEASE STOP ASKING./rant
Will this (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/topic/4458-show-us-your-suburbs/page__view__findpost__p__1168745) be in NAM 30? (Almost nobody at SC4D has seen it, but it must be true...)
Fractional Angle Avenues will indeed be in NAM Version 30.
-Alex
Noticed a texture bug today.
Anyone else see this before?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg197.imageshack.us%2Fimg197%2F6758%2Fimg0057so.jpg&hash=9804cdbcec962fd591924391f12c631c3459bbe0)
Does it occur only at that zoom?
It only appears in zoom 2, and I think zoom 1. It appears at every rotation. I'm guessing it's just a mistake made while editing the fsh.'s
Actually, it's probably a MAT issue with the S3Ds (referencing the wrong FSH).
It was most likely picked up and fixed on the lower rotations, but not the upper ones.
Actually, I've found it, and it is a UV-mapping issue on the Zoom 2 S3D--0x5046A021. Try the following attached below and see if it works for you. I've already gotten it fixed in the NAM Version 30 working files.
-Alex
Thank you tarkus. Glad you got it fixed so fast. :)
,marsh
Wouldn't it be possible to have a puzzle piece based highway over avenue with puzzle pieces, where the upper deck is actually converted to another transit type when it's up there? That way you can still have intersections at the bottom, and the top would never really have many anyway, and the ones that it does have, you could make out of basic puzzle pieces. I've never done any of this before, but from what I know, I think that could work.
Quote from: pimmapman on July 19, 2011, 09:24:34 AM
Wouldn't it be possible to have a puzzle piece based highway over avenue with puzzle pieces, where the upper deck is actually converted to another transit type when it's up there? That way you can still have intersections at the bottom, and the top would never really have many anyway, and the ones that it does have, you could make out of basic puzzle pieces. I've never done any of this before, but from what I know, I think that could work.
Both of the decks would still have car paths. It's not a matter of what network they're based on, but what transit type is using them that affects deck-jumping. Sorry, but same-direction double-decks just aren't going to happen.
-Alex
Not really an issue but a question. Why are puzzle pieces different then draggable textures? Probably have already answered this before but I'm just curious. :P
,marsh
Quote from: marsh on July 24, 2011, 10:33:32 AM
Not really an issue but a question. Why are puzzle pieces different then draggable textures? Probably have already answered this before but I'm just curious. :P
,marsh
Are you referring to the difference between textures used on puzzle piece and those on draggable items? That has to do with the fact that puzzle pieces have to be model-based items, and the game's lighting engine handles models differently. Actually, the game slightly darkens textures on draggable network items, and renders them identically to the source on models. Typically, though, the procedure is to darken textures applied to models so they match with the draggables.
If you're referring to their implementation, puzzle pieces are handled entirely by RUL0, while all other non-bridge RUL file (RUL1, RUL2, all IndRULs) deal with draggable networks.
-Alex
Hello all here.
I want to ask a question interesting to me and I will be happy if someone tell me in detail. I always wondered how who gathered the NAM team, who gave the idea, what were the original objectives, what improvements have been made in version 1 of NAM? How do you understand the mechanisms for working with networks and so on. I would be interested to be told this exciting story of the most popular Sim City team.
Regards,
Ivo
Ah, I see. Thank you for explaining that. :)
Quote from: ivo_su on July 24, 2011, 11:54:53 AM
I want to ask a question interesting to me and I will be happy if someone tell me in detail. I always wondered how who gathered the NAM team, who gave the idea, what were the original objectives, what improvements have been made in version 1 of NAM? How do you understand the mechanisms for working with networks and so on. I would be interested to be told this exciting story of the most popular Sim City team.
Have a look at the "Credits" and "History" files of the NAM Readme. They tell you who the founders of the NAM were, and which were the first additions to this mod. Over the years, the NAM Team has recruited a lot of talented people who were interested in transit modding and posted their works in one of the popular SC4 forums. In some cases, they offered to include their works into the NAM, in other cases, the NAM Team asked if they may include their work. Any SC4 modding is based on in-depth research and lots of trial & error, for which people spent countless hours, days, months, or even years, looking at existing files (with the Reader mostly), trying to understand the file structure, and how the individual files are set up.
I found this on Tout SimCites. It was part of a readme for the file in the link. I have no idea where to find the darkened puzzle piece. Is it from NAM? If not, is there any idea where it can be found?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi54.tinypic.com%2F23scca9.jpg&hash=623bc77e5721b6d9ab1777b7ac7b6518c1a62e45)
http://www.toutsimcities.com/downloads.php?view=1713
It was a puzzle piece that manchou (who is a NAM Team member) developed some time ago. The piece does work and we have the RUL entries and everything, but it currently doesn't have any North American textures, which it'd need before release.
-Alex
Thank you! &apls It's great to know the answer now. Is it known whether it will be included in NAM v. 30?
QuoteIs it known whether it will be included in NAM v. 30?
Even if it isn't included now, it's a very simple matter to reactivate the piece (as we have everything we need, it just needs textures and these are easy to do!).
So, chances are, it could be included in NAM v.30.
Last time, I was building roads, I got an idea. I'm not sure, where to ask, so I'm wirting here.
Wouldn't it be possible to make Euro textures for roads, but with double solid line, instead of single solid line dividing opposite directions? Just like in maxis US version, but white instead of yellow?
QuoteWouldn't it be possible to make Euro textures for roads, but with double solid line, instead of single solid line dividing opposite directions? Just like in maxis US version, but white instead of yellow?
What, like Australian style? :P
Yeah, it's possible, but someone actually has to do it. ;)
Like Australian and like Polish also :P
It was an idea, if texture mods would be edited, or some new ones would be make.
Well, I could offer myself just to edit graphics - I don't have any knowlege about modding - but I guess that making them with high quality needs something else than simple photoshop edition.
Really, all you need is Photoshop and a FSH export/import plugin, the latter of which is available on the LEX.
You also need to know the IDs you're editing.
It's a fairly simple job, but it is quite tedious.
Hello.
I hope to write a good topic. NAM is a great addition to SC4, but I have a few questions and suggestions.
1st.
Is it possible to create such smooth corners, etc. for one-way roads. The entire set as all two-way for roads. It would be a great diversion, and certainly it would be a lot of takers. Gave to this game even more realistic.
2nd.
The next question is which rises from me, or on gentle curves would be able to create intersections? For example, road 3x3 arc turns. Is it possible to go away from that path. Something like the picture shown below?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg7.imageshack.us%2Fimg7%2F3843%2Ffoto123.png&hash=8935e0d4f16bfe08cd7cd923dff81b285bff74e1)
And in both cases that such one-way or two-way roads could also create an intersection of the street?
3rd.
Another question. Whose would be able to vary the texture of the GLR tracks, in addition to the standard, you can lay tracks on a substrate such as grass, as is the alley? And to make it possible to change, depending on your needs, or would the game have several choices of ground tracks.
4th.
Another issue also relates GLR track. It is possible to lay the tracks, without widening the roadway on one type of cobblestones. Can I create the same opportunity to other textures of the streets.
5th.
One last thing associated with the GLR tracks. In Poland, though perhaps in other countries also, quite often you can meet single GLR track, running one lane, the direction of the right-hand or left hand. Would such a possibility, such a solution would also add to the puzzles NAM?
In addition, if is technically feasible, to diversify the intersection of roads, streets and avenues of different variant of the GLR track.
I hope that such solutions are feasible and will meet all the normal functions of the game. It would be a lot more possibilities.
Yours sincerely. And I hope that for some time to live to see such an addition to upgrade NAM.
Quote from: DaveN on August 17, 2011, 12:13:29 PM
Hello.
I hope to write a good topic. NAM is a great addition to SC4, but I have a few questions and suggestions.
1st.
Is it possible to create such smooth corners, etc. for one-way roads. The entire set as all two-way for roads. It would be a great diversion, and certainly it would be a lot of takers. Gave to this game even more realistic.
I think OWR doesn't have pieces like the other networks due to the complexity of OWR puzzle pieces (At present, I think there's only about 9 in the developmental build, all to do with Trams.
Quote from: DaveN on August 17, 2011, 12:13:29 PM
2nd.
The next question is which rises from me, or on gentle curves would be able to create intersections? For example, road 3x3 arc turns. Is it possible to go away from that path. Something like the picture shown below?
And in both cases that such one-way or two-way roads could also create an intersection of the street?
If the curves are converted over the WaveRIDE, then it's likley. Until then (if it does happen) it won't.
Quote from: DaveN on August 17, 2011, 12:13:29 PM
3rd.
Another question. Whose would be able to vary the texture of the GLR tracks, in addition to the standard, you can lay tracks on a substrate such as grass, as is the alley? And to make it possible to change, depending on your needs, or would the game have several choices of ground tracks.
We may have something up our sleeves for this one... :D
Quote from: DaveN on August 17, 2011, 12:13:29 PM
4th.
Another issue also relates GLR track. It is possible to lay the tracks, without widening the roadway on one type of cobblestones. Can I create the same opportunity to other textures of the streets.
It's a good idea and something I've tried before (Changing them to asphalt), but it's difficult as I don't have the original PSDs (or vectors) and those that do tend to be more interested in expansion than diversification.
Quote from: DaveN on August 17, 2011, 12:13:29 PM
5th.
One last thing associated with the GLR tracks. In Poland, though perhaps in other countries also, quite often you can meet single GLR track, running one lane, the direction of the right-hand or left hand. Would such a possibility, such a solution would also add to the puzzles NAM?
I think it was discussed a while ago but I can't remember the outcome. I think it was 'maybe but not soon'.
I started working on some OWR curves a couple years ago, but I didn't have the paths working quite the way I wanted, and kind of got lost in the shuffle over time, so they've never been finished. They'll come to fruition eventually. When "eventually" is, I'm not certain.
-Alex
With the 'i-word' -imminent, release of NAM 30, RHW 5,0. NWM 2.0 on the horizon... %confuso I have a wondering to share concerning "NAM-Day"... Will it be "NAM Day" on the soft release of these versions or will the Official NAM-Day be a later date after the soft-release ()what() its just a wondering, I recon that you guys got it all figured out... ;)
There's never a "soft release" planned for the NAM; there's a single release, at which point the new NAM has been thoroughly tested and the NAM Team thinks it's quite solid. Occasionally, in the general release a problem or two may turn up that did not show up in earlier testing. In this case, a patched release may be issued. But these cases are not very common, and the NAM is never released containing bugs that we know will need to be fixed shortly thereafter.
Quote from: z on September 09, 2011, 06:17:47 PM
There's never a "soft release" planned for the NAM; there's a single release,
Pardon me "Z", as I used the term incorrectly then... my meaning was concerning "NAM Day" as in a certain day "set aside" to 'celebrate' the new 2011 NAM releases... as in -officially speaking, 'nam day' would be the day of release or would there be a time period [the time period I was calling a 'soft release'], between release and the official day to be recognized as the official "NAM-Day"... that is all, it was never my intent to accuse NAM of releasing anything less than thoroughly tested and solid to go... sorry about using the term incorrectly...
Jack i get what u meant. But in order to be loud requires a megaphone and making your ears ring. Its not like we can scream in a forum. Thus the softening of texting. As always NAM core NWM and RHW will be done when its done a piece each for free and as individual DLC.
People often ask me the question: "Where did you get your GLR catenaries?" Well, I have developed them my own and now I release a testing version of what I've got now (see attachment). It contains T21'd catenaries for the following pieces:
- Draggable GLR straight sections (orthogonal and diagonal)
- Draggable GLR curves (90 degree and 45 degree)
- Draggable GLR intersections (OxO X-ing and T-intersection)
- T-RAM straight sections (Orthogonal Only, Regular and Grass)
- Tram-In-Avenue straight sections (Orthogonal Only, Regular and Grass)
- GLR Loop pieces.
Note that this is only a test version. Most pieces are not T21'd.
Best,
Maarten
Quote from: mrtnrln on September 17, 2011, 11:25:31 AM
People often ask me the question: "Where did you get your GLR catenaries?" Well, I have developed them my own and now I release a testing version of what I've got now (see attachment). It contains T21'd catenaries for the following pieces:
Lol. I tried to make this a small while ago but gave up. :P Thank you so much. :)
The Nam Intersections are nice alternatives to the cloverleaf, however they are not the most space efficient. I was on youtube and found an awesome, space saving, Urban Intersection. It's called the Pinavia 70. There is also just the Pinavia. Watch both videos at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDDmE4qoCns&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDDmE4qoCns&feature=related) and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38mEuxZnvAA&feature=related. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38mEuxZnvAA&feature=related.). Also go to the website pinavia.com (http://pinavia.com) So, Nam Team, what do you think.
We've seen the Pinavia videos before and people have made RHW versions of it.
Now, I think you're asking for a Maxis Highway version. That won't happen due to the amount of time needed to create one, it just isn't worth the effort.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F2f6c18a4404a6436131b738631d3e442.jpg&hash=85f1b27a7562cab025d225aa0fd6fcd1b4fd3182)
Thoughts?
What about.... awesome ? Was about time to replace these 45°-like overpass! $%Grinno$% $%Grinno$%
Looks amazing SA! :)
fantabulous :o
What in the world?
Wow SA that's amazing. Never liked those steep slopes and in the RHW forum there was talk of even the ramps to elevated RHW too steep so that really good
Wow that smooth ramp! I don't use the current ramps because i don't find it realistic. That new one look so cool i saw deferential use them :thumbsup:
Awesome! Can we expect the same for rail, too? The current rail -> el (heavy) rail transition is way too steep.
It would also be nice if there were smoother wide road curves :P
Hi, this is a beautiful ramp. &apls
I have just one comment: I think the first three tiles on both sides should not look like a bridge in the air, but like a massive concrete block or a grass ramp. This is maybe just because of my Dutch background, but a bridge is more expensive than a ramp, so when the elevation is not yet much it's cheaper to do it by an earth ramp or a massive block.
That is absolutely awesome. I have wanted something like that for a long time....much more realistic.
I must agree with FrankU, it would be nice if several of the tile under the over pass had a concrete base, maybe all except for the center three tiles.
My two cents,
Robin
Very nice! &apls
Those super-steep transitions have always driven me crazy! Ultimately L1, 7.5m roads would be more realistic though.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F5fdaf75c264dd491288eaf9c037e60d0.jpg&hash=0a88fde6cdff9870f10ebc94ac898bcb27772cb5)
And with that, time to call it a night.
Awwwwww
Please just one more hour! /wrrd%&
Lol :D $%Grinno$%
Anyway that lookes AWESOME!!!
Gotta get round to doin those FAR pieces eh? ;)
Edit
Welcome to page 55
That's truly incredible!!!I always found those ramp too steep...these one are much more realistic!having such kid of ramps for RHW would be fantastic...even for heavy rail it would be nice and very realistic...I would use more the rail/e-rail transition than I do at moment because I find the current one very unrealistic(if you have a slope mod it looks evident that the ramp is too steep)
Good job SA &apls
Gugu3
Awesome!
No more meticulously sloping bridge approaches to get them to look good! This addition will save a whole wack of time! Great job SA!
Quote from: Paul 999 on January 22, 2012, 05:14:43 AM
Wow that smooth ramp! I don't use the current ramps because i don't find it realistic. That new one look so cool i saw deferential use them :thumbsup:
Believe it or not, I have bridges in my area that have a steep incline like what is in SC4
In fact, one bridge, the highest point of the bridge, isn't even the actual bridge itself, but part of the road. They had to build it that way to save money and also because the state tried to steal a farmers land adjacent to the bridge, and a state court found that the state's appraisers deliberately under valued the land in an attempt to steal it, thus the state refused to pay fair market value of the land needed to build thew bridge they way they intended, thus came up with the steep incline design they ended up using.
It replaced a wooden one lane bridge that had plagued traffic flow in the area for decades(which I do miss driving that old rickety thing, it was a right of passage when learning to drive if the parents trusted you enough to drive over it lol)
Is that FlexSPUI-XL or something? I'm loving the new ramps! &apls &apls &apls
Quote from: DAB_City on January 22, 2012, 12:23:36 PM
Is that FlexSPUI-XL or something?
No. Just an elongated L2 EAVE-4 transition ramp, and that's the only new piece.
Basically, it's the first step towards expanding the flexibility of the existing Elevated viaduct models. One will be done for rail later, but the model is more complex and as I'm not familiar with the Rail models (compared to the RHW/el-road ones anyway). RHW will get the same treatment, it's a quick and painless process. The avenue model on the previous page actually still needs further model tweaks (such as removing extra triangles not needed).
Those ramps are great SA! &apls Can't wait to see what else is in the works.
Quote from: FrankU on January 22, 2012, 05:44:41 AM
I have just one comment: I think the first three tiles on both sides should not look like a bridge in the air, but like a massive concrete block or a grass ramp. This is maybe just because of my Dutch background, but a bridge is more expensive than a ramp, so when the elevation is not yet much it's cheaper to do it by an earth ramp or a massive block.
I would say no more than two or three tiles of concrete block. I don't like the look of enormous blocks of concrete, and you can do an earthen embankment with a slope mod. Here in the southern US they often use viaducts from close to the ground, but in the north, where it snows, they tend to use earthworks and concrete abutments more. I'm sure there are a lot of factors, but I know that elevated viaducts get icy much easier than surface pavement and I believe that's why you see more viaducts down here. And since it never snows in Sim City... ;)
Anyway, I like the look of the elevated viaducts, but in the real world there is usually pavement or gravel below them, not grass. I don't know how that would look in the game though, especially with different terrain mods.
Quote from: ZenMonster on January 23, 2012, 04:28:49 PM
I would say no more than two or three tiles of concrete block. I don't like the look of enormous blocks of concrete, and you can do an earthen embankment with a slope mod. Here in the southern US they often use viaducts from close to the ground, but in the north, where it snows, they tend to use earthworks and concrete abutments more. I'm sure there are a lot of factors, but I know that elevated viaducts get icy much easier than surface pavement and I believe that's why you see more viaducts down here. And since it never snows in Sim City... ;)
Anyway, I like the look of the elevated viaducts, but in the real world there is usually pavement or gravel below them, not grass. I don't know how that would look in the game though, especially with different terrain mods.
Aesthetics, aesthetics,...
Functionality ALWAYS comes first.Also, that's L2, or 15 meters. L1, or 7.5 meters, is planned later on, and it's not as tall, so you can imagine what its ramps would look like.
Yup, they are functional. Plus, the viaduct models are designed such that they can have additional T21 models to decorate them. The NAM team hasn't really done anything along those lines (except for BL's RHW viaduct mod, which proves that it can be done) because there are more important things (like gap-filling with various networks) to do.
[edit]
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fa77bd268ed2c47781d7ecb3b21007322.jpg&hash=e9f60a5be9bedf9e5a1570361a34b0acca289602)
Ooh, that's nice! &apls A very, very useful piece!
A night's work has led to this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Ff94e18b0b9a5b81981d002395b89014e.jpg&hash=bc2a3daa3c4e8d82e99b2a7f584651c713190ea9)
Woo! Can't wait to get my hands on those myself.
Is that what I think it is? No, it can't be.... Woo indeed &dance
Are my eyes seeing the L1 overpasses? :o
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.rcgroups.net%2Fforums%2Fattachments%2F2%2F0%2F4%2F6%2F9%2Fa3212205-145-drool.big.gif%3Fd%3D1272478541&hash=96d346b67b037454cfd9b6dccd1b386ee6def2b5)
Wow, nice to see some developments here :)
Just an idea. there is a Japonese Mod that fills the space bellow the viaducts, acording to the wealth/zone of the adjacent cells. Could that be done by the NAM team itself, so all (old and new) pieces would be restyled that way?
Quote from: gn_leugim on January 24, 2012, 02:33:45 PM
Could that be done by the NAM team itself, so all (old and new) pieces would be restyled that way?
Not likely; Functionality is higher priority than aesthetics. A NAMite could theoretically do just that, but it would need to be separate and, in this case, one would need permission from the mod maker to do that.
Otherwise, you'd need to somehow consult the maker of that specific mod to see if they're catching up.
I see smoke. SA must be on fire with all of that development! There will be real diagonal on-slopes and L1 overpasses at last. Way to go!
:thumbsup:
Quote from: metarvo on January 26, 2012, 06:12:20 AM
I see smoke. SA must be on fire with all of that development! There will be real diagonal on-slopes and L1 overpasses at last. Way to go!
:thumbsup:
Nope, just a lot of time on my hands and a very efficient workflow. :)
Quote from: gn_leugim on January 24, 2012, 02:33:45 PM
Wow, nice to see some developments here :)
Just an idea. there is a Japonese Mod that fills the space bellow the viaducts, acording to the wealth/zone of the adjacent cells. Could that be done by the NAM team itself, so all (old and new) pieces would be restyled that way?
ok, ty for the reply :)
Bravo &apls
Great job. When these come out, I'll sure be using them alot more than the L2 15m ones. They're too tall and don't always look good. Can't wait for L3 and L4 although I would wonder why anyone would need 30m tall roads...
I think the current plan is to only have L3 and L4 for the MIS, RHW-4 and RHW-6S on the RealHighway side . . . and maybe slightly expand the existing L4 ("High Elevated") El-Rail/Monorail stuff. Everything else will be kept to just L1 and L2.
-Alex
Quote from: sepen77 on January 27, 2012, 02:12:06 PM
Bravo &apls
Great job. When these come out, I'll sure be using them alot more than the L2 15m ones. They're too tall and don't always look good. Can't wait for L3 and L4 although I would wonder why anyone would need 30m tall roads...
Because in some cities, they have bridges over bridges where multiple highways intersect each other
And making off 3- and 4 level stack junctions ;) That will be so cool :thumbsup:
There won't be 22.5m and 30m roads.
However, there will be RHW equivalents, so it should still be quite adequate for our interchange needs.
Nice job SA! Now even avenue stacks will be easy!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fabd51e795024075b529e3fe2b7f0f80c.jpg&hash=d052efcc01b90e8f06788a0544be2656e0fac1c4)
Diagonal avenue on-slope is done.
Awesome work &apls &apls That'll be very useful!
Great job. This is one of my most anticipated puzzle pieces.
I suspect I know the answer to this, but you know you can draw road over existing rail/street/oneway(?)/etc, is there any way of modifying what this does? and is there any way of adding a `draw x over y` functionality? Or is all that stuff locked in the EXE?
If that stuff is mod-able, how likely is it that you could add a drag-able el-rail/glr on/in road?
Quote from: JoeST on February 02, 2012, 10:46:15 AM
I suspect I know the answer to this, but you know you can draw road over existing rail/street/oneway(?)/etc, is there any way of modifying what this does? and is there any way of adding a `draw x over y` functionality? Or is all that stuff locked in the EXE?
If that stuff is mod-able, how likely is it that you could add a drag-able el-rail/glr on/in road?
Technically, you can define a setup like that in RUL1, which defines intersections between two different base networks. However, specifying dual-network orthogonal setups like that has generally proven fruitless in all the experiments that we've done with it.
daeley did manage a setup to sort of drag them, but it involved the same AutoPlace technique that caused the infamous Maxis Car Ferry CTD (and could cause issues with stations instantly CTDing in the same way), and it's also unable to distinguish between Tram-in-Road, Tram-on-Road and El-Rail-over-Road, as it's effectively placing puzzle pieces by dragging, and isn't overrideable as such, making its utility somewhat limited (particularly with intersections involving any sort of "crosslink".
There are other possibilities, all of which have drawbacks:
- RUL1 trickery involving an "all-way stub" (the little piece you get when you simply plop one tile of a network and don't connect it to anything). This, however, would end up flattening any land the dual network is placed on. Intersections can also become a bit problematic.
- Creating a single-network starter piece that has both transit types pathed on it. This has theoretically worked with bridges, as demonstrated by xannepan's Tram-in-Road bridges, and the technique also has precedent with the Rail-based DDRHW-4. It's still a bit of an unknown, however, especially on the Tram-in-Avenue side. (The T-RAM design specifications forbid splitting Tram-in-Avenue setups in half, due to the liability of people trying to use them as fake Tram-in-OWR pieces.) As it would likely have to be El-Rail based due to the way the game handles the path files (this is how xannepan's bridges were set up), this could cause some complications as well, particularly with any sort of T-intersection.
- A WAVERide setup using a RUL1 false intersection, though this wouldn't actually be draggable and likely wouldn't offer much of an advantage over the current puzzle piece setup.
In short, it's not particularly likely at this juncture.
-Alex
Aye I thought as much, just wanted clarification. Thanks :D
Joe
I'm so excited to hear about adding more levels to RHW, it should make intersections so much easier. Keep up the great work.
I don't know if this was mentioned before but I was just wondering if there were any plans to make it possible for double-decked highways to have exits and entrances all on one side (like for example the Alaskan Way Viaduct) rather than the traditional always enter/exit from the right side of travel. I'm sure there's going to be all kinds of changes but I really like the idea of double-decked highways going through downtown cores to minimize disturbance but I am finding them a bit annoying to work with (I also can't find a way to let GLR travel under them without it converting to a subway temporarily). Maybe these can by thing you incorporate into your reboot of sorts for the RHW mod?
Keep up the good work!
Quote from: auandi@gmail.com on February 08, 2012, 08:09:10 PM
I don't know if this was mentioned before but I was just wondering if there were any plans to make it possible for double-decked highways to have exits and entrances all on one side (like for example the Alaskan Way Viaduct) rather than the traditional always enter/exit from the right side of travel.
You're in luck. Left exits (right exits for the LHD users among us) are indeed planned for the DDRHW system.
Quote from: auandi@gmail.com on February 08, 2012, 08:09:10 PM
I'm sure there's going to be all kinds of changes but I really like the idea of double-decked highways going through downtown cores to minimize disturbance but I am finding them a bit annoying to work with (I also can't find a way to let GLR travel under them without it converting to a subway temporarily). Maybe these can by thing you incorporate into your reboot of sorts for the RHW mod?
Are you talking about a situation like this?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg707.imageshack.us%2Fimg707%2F4130%2Frhw020920121.jpg&hash=7e806cf071442670e399f138aa3143318d35ad72)
You need to be using Draggable GLR and not the GLR Puzzle Pieces. The GLR Puzzle Pieces are essentially a "deprecated" feature since Draggable GLR was introduced in June 2007, and as such, will generally not be gaining any new functionality.
-Alex
I for one am hoping for some more Monorail/HSR capabilities in the Monolithic NAM, like High Monorail over RHW and some way for the monorail to interact with the DDRHW, as I love using
the high monorail / el rail should be able over to go over ddrhw as both are 30m vs 22.5m for ddrhw...
Quote from: Kitsune on February 09, 2012, 05:41:17 PM
the high monorail / el rail should be able over to go over ddrhw as both are 30m vs 22.5m for ddrhw...
Technically, the High Monorail/El-Rail are at 30.5m.
The main reason we haven't really done much with the High Monorail/El-Rail systems is that they we haven't really decided the future of that functionality, whether to keep making puzzle pieces or bite the bullet and go draggable. There's some potential issues with draggability that would need to be sorted due to how those base networks work.
The DDRHW does, if I'm not mistaken, support GHSR underneath it, however.
-Alex
Are you talking about a situation like this?
You need to be using Draggable GLR and not the GLR Puzzle Pieces. The GLR Puzzle Pieces are essentially a "deprecated" feature since Draggable GLR was introduced in June 2007, and as such, will generally not be gaining any new functionality.
-Alex
[/quote]
I didn't (though it is good to know about Draggable GLR) I actually mis-typed and meant to say Tram-in-Avenue and Tram-in-road. Unless I'm missing something that isn't draggable is it? It's about all I use so I just think of it as glr in my mixed up mind.
I'm liking the improved stability that I see in the latest development pic. I have to wonder about that L2-RHW x Monorail at-grade crossing, though. $%Grinno$%
Quote from: auandi@gmail.com on February 09, 2012, 09:29:13 PM
I didn't (though it is good to know about Draggable GLR) I actually mis-typed and meant to say Tram-in-Avenue and Tram-in-road. Unless I'm missing something that isn't draggable is it? It's about all I use so I just think of it as glr in my mixed up mind.
You're correct that neither Tram-in-Avenue or Tram-in-Road are draggable (and due to the logistics of implementation, most likely won't be), and that neither currently has any RHW crosslinks. That is planned to be corrected with the next release, however.
Quote from: metarvo on February 10, 2012, 05:25:53 AM
I'm liking the improved stability that I see in the latest development pic. I have to wonder about that L2-RHW x Monorail at-grade crossing, though. $%Grinno$%
Actually that pic is pretty old . . . June 2, 2011, a little over 3 months before RHW 5.0 was released. ;) The L2 RHW x Monorail crossing, if you look closely, is basically kind of a dead-end, with the RHW interrupting the Monorail line. The reason that crossing has to exist is because it's a crossing involving a base network, and it eases the job of allowing GHSR-under-L2 RHW. The same thing exists with Elevated Light Rail, too, to allow GLR under L2 RHW.
-Alex
In a little spree I'm having on the wiki lately, I added an article which might be useful to some people: The NAM glossary (http://wiki.sc4devotion.com/index.php?title=NAM/glossary).
It basically lists all the acronyms, initialisms and abbreviations that the NAM use.
Part of the upcoming 7.5m content for Maxis-over-other-networks includes Maxis-over-RHW:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Ffe41207ad33d473b97ef77834d61eedb.jpg&hash=ccb5f8a4fcd1c8bcf306fd4be795aff722ad4852)
ohhh I love those exit ramps
Wow! I love the surprises you guys keep giving us! &apls &apls &apls
Awesome!!!! &apls And a perfectly-constructed interchange I may add :thumbsup:
gorgeous!
My only criticism is that this and far too many other interchanges use a LOT of real estate. Too many times i hafta wipe out entire neighborhoods just to set up a simple but cramped ramp system for a new interchange in an already developed area. I hope the next version of NAM has smaller and more complete ramp curves to allow for new urban interchanges...
Deal with it! Interchanges in real life are also big. In fact, the standard interchanges from the Maxis Highway are way to small (factor 2 to 4)
Quote from: nathkel on March 09, 2012, 09:48:25 AM
My only criticism is that this and far too many other interchanges use a LOT of real estate. Too many times i hafta wipe out entire neighborhoods just to set up a simple but cramped ramp system for a new interchange in an already developed area. I hope the next version of NAM has smaller and more complete ramp curves to allow for new urban interchanges...
I think a lot of people have that reaction at first--if you're used to the Maxis interchanges, which as Maarten stated are very, very under-scaled, then RHW will seem very big. The reality though is that in real life when you try to send a freeway through an already developed area is does require a LOT of demolition--and that's why it doesn't really happen anymore. RHW is about realism and flexibility and realistic sized interchanges take up a lot of space. Don't resist it, embrace it ;D
Quote from: nathkel on March 09, 2012, 09:48:25 AM
My only criticism is that this and far too many other interchanges use a LOT of real estate. Too many times i hafta wipe out entire neighborhoods just to set up a simple but cramped ramp system for a new interchange in an already developed area. I hope the next version of NAM has smaller and more complete ramp curves to allow for new urban interchanges...
When they add new interchanges to already existing highways, 90% of the time they already have development around. Indiana recently added a new exit to crown point off of I-65, and that took up a lot of space for it. They want to put another one in Merrillville just south of US-30 to try and funnel traffic off of US-30, but both roads that are proposed for a new interchange have development around them, thus need to be demolished(which the owners are fighting).
Also remember, most interstate highway off ramps are designed to keep the flow of traffic moving at speeds relative to the roads they leading to(unless they have stop signals at the end), and if going from interstate to interstate, they are designed to get the vehicle entering up to highway speed prior to merging onto the highway, something that cannot be done if they have a 90 degree turn on the off ramp(which they will use to slow down traffic in some parts)
I should add--going to a 7.5m (Level 1, or L1) setup like that is making it more compact. There's not as much altitude gain involved, and thus, a small scale is achieved while maintaining realism.
There already are ways to make some pretty compact things with the RHW, and it'll get more so as we add more L1 content.
-Alex
Regarding the space in terms of real world design, the only other option, if you don't want to knock residences down, (which IDK why this exists in my surroundings) is that side streets immediately are used as conjoining highway on and off ramps in front of people's houses. This brings all sorts of congestion into your neighborhood, and guarentees your street in front of your house is not a safe street no more, can't forget the truck traffic now, that will wear the street down a lot faster. I have noticed in terms of reality, that the wealth of the residences in one area can alter the outcome of certain road/highway proposals. I have seen a new highway knock out all the rural residence around it. The other issue is, if those ramps were closer though, it restricts the turn lane distance, and my real life also has those traffic nightmares, because the turn lane distance was too short.
Now if there is a criticism, mine will be that I have not seen this new setup in action, to see how vehicles behave on it, don't know if there will be a YT demo for that.
The Demolition aspect is why Melbourne's ring road still isn't finished. The original route would've cut right through "downtown" Greensborough and the current Bulleen link isn't really any better. It would honestly be cheaper to build through Kangaroo Ground and link it up to the Healesville Freeway at Coldstream. There would still need to be a tunnel here (http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&ll=-37.68146,145.146089&spn=0.012889,0.01929&t=h&z=16), (though the space above would suggest otherwise), It would, for the most part, follow the power lines. Where it crosses the main road at Kangaroo Ground is a small gully (http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&ll=-37.693414,145.215268&spn=0.012887,0.01929&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=-37.693498,145.215261&panoid=pLzi5iZyO08qGTnHwuiWSg&cbp=12,288.32,,0,38.04), which could be exploited for an interchange.
imo, the problem with interchanges in sc4+rhw is not the scale of them, but the fact that you have to fit it in a city tile, when sometimes one would prefer to split the interchange to build it just over the neighbor limit, which is not possible.
mauricio.
Quote from: figui on March 11, 2012, 05:49:08 AM
imo, the problem with interchanges in sc4+rhw is not the scale of them, but the fact that you have to fit it in a city tile, when sometimes one would prefer to split the interchange to build it just over the neighbor limit, which is not possible.
mauricio.
There are neighbor connection mis connectors that you can use to build neighbor connections with to make interchanges go into other cities. I one had a city where a cloverleaf was split between two cities and I didn't intend for it to happen that way, but the usage demanded an upgrade.
I've finally returned after a long, long hiatus. Been hearing about "Monolithic NAM" and "Project 0E".
Can someone please tell me what these are, or where to go to find out more about them?
Quote from: dragonshardz on May 31, 2012, 06:21:02 PM
I've finally returned after a long, long hiatus. Been hearing about "Monolithic NAM" and "Project 0E".
Monolithic NAM: Essentially the NAM and all of its plugins (RHW, NWM, SAM, etc) combined into one package. Will go into place starting with NAM 31.
Project 0E, renamed P57: Essentially reorganising and moving the RHW RUL scheme to be more organised, as well as adding additional stability. Also allows easy addition of more RHW heights; See the RHW Dev thread for more.
After several months' hiatus, I've done more viaduct-related work.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F6a002f894ac5e10d9855bc2e550b7aa8.jpg&hash=2c9080957e682633e7db4f64d32b8f5e15bdb797)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F11fd7d559270da3c44be890788e1ce9d.jpg&hash=09e1973691674040615f1736e13db11a4615e4ee)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F119760b17211843bf2d133f29d0d88cb.jpg&hash=1b2e0ee16f3ae3147ccc0338a9ee83649963c769)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F793d534cd3c806ba02527832d69ccd07.jpg&hash=28bf0c0fc7d1387e9d6ee30dbb7d6b643d173781)
MIS, 6C, 8S, 8C and 10S will come shortly.
That's what we need. And it shouldn't be hard to tweak the models to use OWR or Avenue
Maxis' offerings on the new SimCity bored me. So I did this.
Basses are much cooler than guitars.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fjdenm8%2Fother%2FFASTStuff%2F2012-09-05_00004.jpg&hash=224f57374548cf059131e6fb0b74f3c897705705)
Shadow: That is awesome news :D
jdenm8: Omg! that is just amazing :DD "rock an' roll babe!" :D
Quote from: jdenm8 on September 05, 2012, 01:30:45 AM
Maxis' offerings on the new SimCity bored me. So I did this.
Basses are much cooler than guitars.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fjdenm8%2Fother%2FFASTStuff%2F2012-09-05_00004.jpg&hash=224f57374548cf059131e6fb0b74f3c897705705)
Hilarious!!!
Awesome overpasses SA, I can't believe I missed those before &apls &apls
I don't see anything new, unless I'm missing something? Was that diagonal avenue terminus/four way intersection always in SC4?
Quote from: Wiimeiser on September 05, 2012, 05:20:10 PM
I don't see anything new, unless I'm missing something? Was that diagonal avenue terminus/four way intersection always in SC4?
Yeah, you're missing something, as always.
In fact, everyone's is overlooking something quite obvious about the guitar, and it's not because it's a guitar. It's what the guitar is made from...
Look closer...
I see what jdenm8 did there...
But now, whom do I have to thank for this new FAR2? And is this our fist look at the previously foreshadowed (pun very much intended) WaveFAR?
Quote from: woodb3kmaster on September 05, 2012, 05:34:29 PM
And is this our fist look at the previously foreshadowed (pun very much intended) WaveFAR?
You're about 22.5° off there :P
No, it isn't, but it's similar. We're currently assessing the feasibility and expandability of this very new implementation in favour of WaveFAR. If this one doesn't work out for some reason, WaveFAR wouldn't be that FAR off.
Did you DRIve FAr to come to the new idea? Or is that idea dead for good? Or is it an incredible diag/FA sidewalk mod?
Mind if I crop this pic into a FB profile pic?
Somepony didn't receive the memo, didn't they?
I should mention, though, that DRI is specific to RHW: Draggable Ramp Interface. Unless it's a pattern for the C1 ramp, it wouldn't have anything to do with Fractional-Angle Roads, or Fractional-Angle anything.
Here's a math question riddle for you guys: What's the arctangent of 1/2?
Ah, teasing season, how I've missed thee.
-Alex
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on September 05, 2012, 05:26:53 PM
In fact, everyone's is overlooking something quite obvious about the guitar, and it's not because it's a guitar. It's what the guitar is made from...
In fact, it's not a guitar, as jdenm8 has said. :P
arctan 1/2 = arctan 1 - arctan 1/3.
I'll keep quiet here... :D
I think I spotted a diagonal smooth 90° road curve just next to the guitar... ::)
And I thought that memo's equation had given it away completely.
OK, I'll keep quiet for good now. :-X
Quote from: io_bg on September 06, 2012, 01:40:44 AM
I think I spotted a diagonal smooth 90° road curve just next to the guitar... ::)
only that? XD All I see is smooth curves :D
I haven't seen this mentioned but if it has I apologize...
Is there a FLUP set to go under DDRHW coming? I mean something to allow a FLUP to extend under a DDRHW? I know the DDRHW sets have special considerations and all but is it possible?
Quote from: NorthStarDC4M on September 12, 2012, 08:52:09 AM
I know the DDRHW sets have special considerations and all but is it possible?
Yes and no.
Yes, it's possible. No, because the current DDRHW's going away and being replaced with a different implementation and there's a different master plan behind FLUPs that would make it redundant in the end.
gyes iv just got sim city4 on steam any alt-tab is linket to steam chat so pleasr try no to hid any nam stuff in an alt+tab link please
Quote from: shadd0w09 on September 12, 2012, 02:09:45 PM
gyes iv just got sim city4 on steam any alt-tab is linket to steam chat so pleasr try no to hid any nam stuff in an alt+tab link please
Please use a proper English. ;)
Also I have the game via steam and everything works fine for the alt tab maneuvers.
Translation:
Quote from: shadd0w09 on September 12, 2012, 02:09:45 PM
Hi guys, I recently purchased SimCity 4 on Steam. I have however noticed that the key combination to move backwards through a tab loop, Shift-Tab, is also used by the Steam Overlay. Could you please see if you could assign a different combination?
Any key combinations we use are completely static. We have absolutely no control over them, they're all statically defined in the Executable. You will need to change the key combination that you use to open the Steam overlay.
I use Left Control-Tab in lieu of Shift-Tab for example.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on September 12, 2012, 12:38:47 PM
Quote from: NorthStarDC4M on September 12, 2012, 08:52:09 AM
I know the DDRHW sets have special considerations and all but is it possible?
Yes and no.
Yes, it's possible. No, because the current DDRHW's going away and being replaced with a different implementation and there's a different master plan behind FLUPs that would make it redundant in the end.
Nice to know, thank you, looking forward to it, I'll just continue working around it for now :)
Perhaps it's time that I've spilled the beans...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg14.imageshack.us%2Fimg14%2F4241%2Fcapturefa2dev.jpg&hash=21fffb852ff8168b711dcf20bb628e9d47a0f87b)
Here are the transit tiles involved in the creation of last week's bass guitar.
Now, as you all know, wealthification of puzzle pieces is extremely tricky to do, unless an advanced T21 is used instead, which is a drag, of course, but hopefully, this will be enough that will draw people into using these pieces.
These are FAR-2 pieces, in case you were wondering, and no, Daniel wasn't involved this time (Shadow Assassin). Mostly Memo with the implementation, and myself with testing its scrutiny. Since the creation of said guitar, a few other intersections have been coded in, with similar crossings being added for FAR-3.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg546.imageshack.us%2Fimg546%2F2306%2Fcapturefa2stuff.jpg&hash=a0da27c77f138c1294e38270fea37dad0d4f2cdf)
May the droolfest begin.
I knew it! Those look pretty awesome.
off the grid we go :D &apls
I am currently working on correcting the road-onslope-puzzle-pieces' colour bug that would occur in one of their rotations. This was a problem with every onslope puzzle piece, until smoncrie came up with a way to fix it. The uncorrected version of the highway onslope piece can still be seen at the first page of this thread. I simply adopted smoncrie's method, and thanks to BarbyW's/gascooker's colour calibrating tutorial, I was able to create this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F0b153859ae1937d7bc9cbabebb81d680.jpg&hash=902155bef7976f535f23f87e9dbc14d7497eb3c7) (http://www.ld-host.de/)
The left piece has been placed prior to the fix.
It's still not the exact same white, but still fantastic! &apls
Awesome work memo &apls
And great work to you and Ganaram on the new FA stuff &apls &apls &apls Really great to have and I meant to say something before.
You are right. Unfortunately, it is not possible to get the exact white. This is because, as you can see, the onslope puzzle piece is considerably darkened in the game. To circumvent this, the puzzle piece's texture must be brightened a lot. However, those parts of the texture which had already been white before, cannot be brightened, but are darkened in the game.
This is the actual texture I used:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F79e0f4cb20f767fcab7c8e97228af100.png&hash=2b25fedcc9e263203c97ddf90c9e157b5c243503) (http://www.ld-host.de/)
As opposed to the usual one:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F39a4748d730e5074010df6fb1a5511ec.png&hash=2540c79778d303238b465d8b70ffe5da397af109) (http://www.ld-host.de/)
Even though it can't be made perfect, this makes the darkening effect much less noticeable. In fact, I don't think most people would see it unless they knew what to look for or were comparing the textures side-by-side. Great job!
Quote from: Wthrwyz on September 22, 2012, 08:39:21 PM
Even though it can't be made perfect, this makes the darkening effect much less noticeable. In fact, I don't think most people would see it unless they knew what to look for or were comparing the textures side-by-side.
Some of us can't see it even when we look for it. $%Grinno$% ::) :thumbsup:
Quote from: z on September 22, 2012, 10:09:12 PM
Quote from: Wthrwyz on September 22, 2012, 08:39:21 PM
Even though it can't be made perfect, this makes the darkening effect much less noticeable. In fact, I don't think most people would see it unless they knew what to look for or were comparing the textures side-by-side.
Some of us can't see it even when we look for it. $%Grinno$% ::) :thumbsup:
Exactly. I honestly would never have noticed it if it had not been pointed out
What surprises me is the lack of alternate texture packs. Just the Euro textures? I understand they're one of the hardest things to make (Esp. MHW) But you'd think more people would be trying to make them. We need more fantasy texture packs. How about pink asphalt, purple concrete, blue inner(yellow in US) lines, green outer/middle(white in US) lines and gold sidewalks?
Well, the thing is that it's not so hard to make, but there are just so many textures involved. We are speaking about thousands of individual textures. It's a daunting task to tackle them all (and I have my experience: I've done it myself too with Eurofying the textures). You really need to invest the time and effort in these packs...
very good job, very hard to tell apart :)
The avenue and one-way road onslope pieces are done now, too.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fa5e011892e84f4eea51680254361830b.jpg&hash=48132e6a814b33e0cafda8dee4ecf9a2d2e15651) (http://www.ld-host.de/)
Well, that's more than good memo, you really did a chudestna work and I admire this, but I mourn the old models of EAVE-4, maybe I'm conservative and difficult getting used to the new, but I do not like no barrier between the boards.
That's really nice memo! Just last week I noticed the same effect for the onlope el-rail and heavy rail pieces and figured it must be the shadows or something. Good to know that isn't the case and a solution is being worked on! :thumbsup:
Ah very nice!
Anyway the issue with the straight on-slope pieces can be resolved? (Can't drag from the first tile, but you can on the on-slope T-intersection if you drag and remove the stubs from said intersection.)
Quote from: ivo_su on September 23, 2012, 01:18:35 PM
but I mourn the old models of EAVE-4, maybe I'm conservative and difficult getting used to the new, but I do not like no barrier between the boards.
If you're wanting a barrier, Maarten's NAM Euro Cosmetic and Retexture Mod includes the proper textures for that. The old models pre-NAM 30 weren't even really designed for Avenues--they were basically two ERoad models glued together with a different Road texture.
Quote from: Haljackey on September 23, 2012, 02:08:19 PM
Anyway the issue with the straight on-slope pieces can be resolved? (Can't drag from the first tile, but you can on the on-slope T-intersection if you drag and remove the stubs from said intersection.)
We have . . . interesting . . . things planned for the On-Slopes. ;)
-Alex
Well, as with the on-slope pieces, I can still see a difference between the modified onslope piece and the elevated piece, but it's really subtle, so it pretty much gets the job done.
As of the change of models, the old ones really were archaic and would have been visually incompatible with future developments, such as elevated NWM networks, and I honestly like the new ones anyway.
Still want a separation? The Euro Cosmetic & Retexture Mod does the same, but if you still want a physical barrier and not just concrete, just sandwich two OWRs together, because that's how the old EAVE pieces were, anyway.
Woo this is amazing Alex, all networks will have you on-slope/FlexFlay pieces?
As models of Maxis's network, and I liked the structure of OWR and AVE and their cylindrical columns (you told me that this mod is T21) but anyway memo had done a magnificent job, unfortunately you overshadowed it.
Quote from: vortext on September 23, 2012, 01:29:48 PM
Just last week I noticed the same effect for the onlope el-rail and heavy rail pieces and figured it must be the shadows or something. Good to know that isn't the case and a solution is being worked on! :thumbsup:
Actually, the el-rail onslope piece has been colour corrected since 2007. ;) It is one of smoncrie's pieces. Essentially, almost all onslope puzzle pieces had initially been created by smoncrie, but the ones I have been working on this day are from 2004 and 2005. I did not even know how to spell "SimCity" back then. :D And indeed, it really is the shadows causing the glitch.
So, last but not least.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fec87e106b116c4099d71f2b562b95fc4.jpg&hash=9560a50fb52d447ade4e0ef67bdbd5f6fc17b7ab) (http://www.ld-host.de/)
I am somewhat surprised myself that all the colour-correction worked out that well.
Quote from: memo on September 23, 2012, 04:07:28 PM
Actually, the el-rail onslope piece has been colour corrected since 2007.
Yeah, been messing with bridges & slopes these days and couldn't remember which of the two it actually was. ::) :D
Anyhow, pretty neat this is taken care off. ()stsfd()
I guess what I'm trying to say is, we need more unrealistic stuff in the game. As said before:
Quotepink asphalt, purple concrete, blue inner(yellow in US) lines, green outer/middle(white in US) lines and gold sidewalks?
There's not a lot of "fantasy" stuff that isn't "medieval Tolkein fantasy". Car Jumps, Loop-the-Loop and a candy rock mod are about all I can think of...
Quote from: Wiimeiser on September 23, 2012, 07:01:20 PM
I guess what I'm trying to say is, we need more unrealistic stuff in the game.
Realistic or not, you STILL have to create a bajillion textures to pull it off.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on September 23, 2012, 07:15:53 PM
Realistic or not, you STILL have to create a bajillion textures to pull it off.
Indeed. I started working on US-style textures for the T-RAM pieces a while ago and pretty much gave up before I even started once I realized just
how many textures there are...and that's just a small subset of what would be needed for a complete re-texture. :o
Question: Are alternate FlexSPUI sizes, 1-ramp FlexSPUI and additional DDI pieces(like FlexDDI) planned? Not necessarily for this version, but do you have them in mind?
Different FlexSPUI variants are planned . . . not this release, and I don't know about 1-ramp versions. Any future DDIs are probably going to be tied in with TuLEPs, so I don't see much being gained by making a Flex version, but we'll see when those get revisited further.
-Alex
Why isn't there any road textures that show road improvements, we've all driven on roads and seen new asphalt laid down and the patchwork of grey black and something In between. Why doesn't anyone make something like this? It could be like the avenue tree mod but with various road maintenance features. It would make for a very realistic experience! (I don't see any perfect roads where I live unless they are under 3 years old)
That's because:
1. For the NAM, it's functionality first. Cosmetics should be done by third party modders
2. It's hard to implement such feature, especially because it's based upon the age of the road, of which there are no properties available in the game coding.
Quote from: Piteri on December 23, 2012, 02:25:00 AM
Why isn't there any road textures that show road improvements, we've all driven on roads and seen new asphalt laid down and the patchwork of grey black and something In between. Why doesn't anyone make something like this? It could be like the avenue tree mod but with various road maintenance features. It would make for a very realistic experience! (I don't see any perfect roads where I live unless they are under 3 years old).
There are such construction lots available on the STEX.
Will the Road/Avenue/OWR viaducts be draggable next release or NAM 32? :)
The honest answer is that we don't know that at this point. You can plan a lot of things, but the realisation often shows that things turn out differently than expected...
And for those who haven't seen yet . . . we can officially confirm this functionality for NAM 31.
Thanks to memo for another huge modding breakthrough, and to MandelSoft for the video.
https://www.youtube.com/v/YJIhHF7mwoc
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on January 09, 2013, 11:23:43 AM
And for those who haven't seen yet . . . we can officially confirm this functionality for NAM 31.
Thanks to memo for another huge modding breakthrough, and to MandelSoft for the video.
OMG. I just died. FINALLY! YAY! ;D
Although I can't wait for the Euro Texture Mod for the new dragable FAR :P
Great job everyone! I love it!
Just when I think the NAM Team's played its entire hand, they pull an ace out their sleeve...
I might just be inclined to use FAR a lot more often now. :P
That's awesome &apls &apls
Wow wow wow! I now cannot wait for the new NAM ;D
??? was in ST before but anyway a big joke on top of the guitar (6:00) ... curious to see what will be commented in the official site about it!
If there is no censorship (EA) of course!
Great work there! Making FAR-roads is so much easier now. :)
-Matthijs
&apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
:o I watched the video and the first thing that came to my mind is the old Steppenwolf Song "Get your motor runnin' .. Head out on the highway" :) I'm ready for adventure with the new NAM.
Thanks for sharing - Jim
This is just amazing!!! No need for SimCity2013, the NAM Team has made SimCity5 posible ;)
I use FAR a lot, not it will be easier :O
will streers get the same treatment? :p it would be a shame only roads to be like this.. image old downtowns or rural areas with dragfar streets :o
Quote from: gn_leugim on January 09, 2013, 01:04:26 PM
will streers get the same treatment?
Problem with Streets is something called Autoconnect, so the footprints chosen for draggable FAR (or INRUL-based FAR) won't be very helpful. However, a similar development related to this, in case you weren't paying close attention to Maarten's farming zones in the vid...
A few months ago, I had announced a few new FAR pieces involving Street connections...
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on September 16, 2012, 09:05:44 AM
Perhaps it's time that I've spilled the beans...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg14.imageshack.us%2Fimg14%2F4241%2Fcapturefa2dev.jpg&hash=21fffb852ff8168b711dcf20bb628e9d47a0f87b)
Here are the transit tiles involved in the creation of last week's bass guitar.
Now, as you all know, wealthification of puzzle pieces is extremely tricky to do, unless an advanced T21 is used instead, which is a drag, of course, but hopefully, this will be enough that will draw people into using these pieces.
These are FAR-2 pieces, in case you were wondering, and no, Daniel wasn't involved this time (Shadow Assassin). Mostly Memo with the implementation, and myself with testing its scrutiny. Since the creation of said guitar, a few other intersections have been coded in, with similar crossings being added for FAR-3.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg546.imageshack.us%2Fimg546%2F2306%2Fcapturefa2stuff.jpg&hash=a0da27c77f138c1294e38270fea37dad0d4f2cdf)
May the droolfest begin.
I "lied". They're also draggable. (Note that I never said puzzle piece, and also take note the choice of words I used.)
For the record, Autoconnect is also a problem with FARHW.
With this, FAR will finally get the use it deserves. Thanks so much for this. :thumbsup:
You guys are crazy !
Thanks for the hard work and sharing
This really is impressive. It is going to be well worth learning to use. I will be able to draw roads without having to think about about any real limits on direction. I know that there is still a grid somewhere in the game, and that will still shape lots, but no longer the road layout.
kudos to memo and the entire NAM Team for such a invaluable functional improvement... :thumbsup: &apls
I am glad the idea of draggable FAR goes down that well. ;D But be warned, I imagine, if you have not dragged as many fractionally angled roads as I have, getting used to it may take some time at the beginning.
Fractional Streets are currently not planned. However, there will be 45° and 90° curves.
Also, special thanks to Ganaram and the rest of the team for constant feedback and testing.
Brilliant work with the draggable FAR-2 and FAR-3 &apls I can imagine the amount of work going into this - and more importantly, we can be somewhat independent of filler pieces for FARs as weathification is supported.
Out of curiousity, how does this version of draggable FAR avoid the Maxis Car Ferry crash that beleaguered the previous incarnation of draggable FAR? I'm a little interested in the mechanics behind it.
I'm not sure what you mean, but I can affirm that you will still be able to use the Maxis Car Ferry without any impacts.
It pretty much works similar to diagonal streets. For diagonal streets, you drag a zig-zag pattern which then converts to diagonal streets. For FAR, it is the same technique, just with a different pattern.
The old version, which caused the Car Ferry crash, basically just added an AutoPlace line to the existing FAR puzzle pieces. The puzzle piece would get automatically placed whenever that particular setup was built with the Road network. Because the underlying TE setup under the Car Ferry matched the setup that triggered the puzzle piece to be placed, the game would try to place the puzzle piece over the ferry terminal (a TE Lot), instantly causing a CTD.
The new version is based entirely from INRULs and RUL2 overrides. Rather than being a puzzle piece that is placed through draggable means, it's a full-on draggable network item. That also means it's overrideable.
-Alex
that is amazing... making far more user friendly .. great !
Quote from: memo on January 09, 2013, 03:45:27 PM
I'm not sure what you mean, but I can affirm that you will still be able to use the Maxis Car Ferry without any impacts.
It pretty much works similar to diagonal streets. For diagonal streets, you drag a zig-zag pattern which then converts to diagonal streets. For FAR, it is the same technique, just with a different pattern.
I'm sorry if I didn't make my question clearer - actually I got a little confused the second time reading it, too :P I get the diagonal street analogy, like what Tarkus has mentioned (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1138.msg444984#msg444984) :) so basically it's no longer a puzzle piece (which I suppose why weathification is possible... no?)
Nonetheless, amazing work again :) You guys have to pop a bottle of champagne, or something! ()stsfd()
WOW! You have just made SC13 irrelevant. &apls
One question regarding the wealth textures... will they be compatible with the current wealth textures? In other words, will Paengs sandstone override work with these FAR textures?
The wealthification is designed to use either the default or whatever sidewalk mod you might have, and will change based on the type of zoning adjacent to it, just like the default orthogonal and diagonal networks.
-Alex
You've just added 10 more years onto SC4s shelf life. :thumbsup:
Quote from: NCGAIO on January 09, 2013, 12:02:42 PM
??? was in ST before but anyway a big joke on top of the guitar (6:00) ... curious to see what will be commented in the official site about it!
I was actually the one who made the guitar (I was kinda sick of them posting robots and crap) and there was no official recognition from what I can tell. Though, they did stop posting novelty cities for a while.
this is a great addition to the game! it's great that wealthification or whatever you call it is included. i always enjoy using FAR pieces but having so many open spaces next to them took away from the effect. it's also great to see the ability to connect streets and roads. well done!
will there be any FAR upgrades for avenues?
Quote from: jmdude1 on January 09, 2013, 08:45:49 PM
will there be any FAR upgrades for avenues?
There are a few problems with using the Avenue network, and it goes beyond its funny zoning property that wealthifies the entire AVE and not the adjacent tiles. It would entail dragging AVEs into one another in an awkward way, and demolishing it would demolish more than it's supposed to.
Oh, and the proper name is FA-3 AVE-4, not FAAVE-4.
Will the Draggable FAR pieces have the ability to intergrate to the SAM and The single railroad mod? Will it also have the capability to work with the NWM and the RHW? IM just as curious to know what will happen with the great work you guys do.
Quote from: fifteenrocket on January 09, 2013, 09:38:04 PM
Will the Draggable FAR pieces have the ability to intergrate to the SAM and The single railroad mod? Will it also have the capability to work with the NWM and the RHW? IM just as curious to know what will happen with the great work you guys do.
I had already answered two of those questions a page ago: No for Street (that also means SAM) and RHW. The reason is Autoconnect, and a lot of experimentation still needs to see if it can be safe to even port the code over for both networks.
RAM and NWM is quite possible, but there aren't any plans for either. Either way, there aren't any concrete plans for all of them yet.
Adding SAM support should be as simple as adding textures for the networks and writing code to override the base Street intersection. It's perfectly possible, but whether it'll be done by release is uncertain. The same goes for STR, although I think that textures for the STR intersections have already been made, which would increase the chances of their inclusion.
Impressive video of Maarten and I mean great return memo. He definitely came in with a bang and fired NAM to new heights. Thanks to him we have a very simple method for creating FAR textures. I wonder whether there will be NAM 31 full FANWM or will be delayed for expansive NWM 3.0(NAM32)
Quote from: ivo_su on January 10, 2013, 02:59:11 AM
I wonder whether there will be NAM 31 full FANWM or will be delayed for expansive NWM 3.0(NAM32)
I'll only give you this:
Quote from: Tarkus on January 09, 2013, 03:45:44 PM
The new version is based entirely from INRULs and RUL2 overrides. Rather than being a puzzle piece that is placed through draggable means, it's a full-on draggable network item. That also means it's overrideable.
Does that mean that now compiling these pieces will be twice as easy? However, Rule-2 was considered a blight on the team and only Alex, Vince and memo could work with him. Now with INRULs this process should be available to the team and FANWM compilation of songs is much easier and attainable. And the question is surely not whether but when it will happen.
I don't believe that RUL2 is a blight. It's a hard concept to wrap your head around, but it's proven incredibly useful so far.
As for FANWM, while the base overrides that we would override are largely in place, FANWM is not on the roadmap for NAM31. It's possible that it may be included in NAM32 or NAM33 however.
So, according to what I saw in the video, there will be draggable FAR intersections. On top of that, it looks like the intersections can be dragged across any tile of the FAR segment (as opposed to the fixed FAR intersections currently available on the center tiles). For that matter, there don't seem to be any FAR segments anymore, as the stretch of FAR can now end abruptly.
As far as the Streets go, I've already grown accustomed to using Roads when I feel the need for FAR segments, so it's not that big of a deal for now. For the RHW, I'm more than willing to continue using the FARHW puzzle pieces that are currently available if they remain available.
Good work, NAM Team! :thumbsup:
Quote from: metarvo on January 10, 2013, 05:20:34 PM
So, according to what I saw in the video, there will be draggable FAR intersections. On top of that, it looks like the intersections can be dragged across any tile of the FAR segment (as opposed to the fixed FAR intersections currently available on the center tiles).
This is true. At least for intersections with orthogonal roads or streets. For the time being, there will be only one FAR-3 x FAR-3 intersection, which has the same footprint as its puzzle piece counterpart.
Quote from: metarvo on January 10, 2013, 05:20:34 PM
For that matter, there don't seem to be any FAR segments anymore, as the stretch of FAR can now end abruptly.
Note sure, if I got exactly what you mean. You still need to think of the underlying 2x3 segments (or for FAR-2 it would be 2x2), for instance the FAR-3 short curve can only be built on one out of three tiles (two respectively). It is however indeed possible, to end FAR in a blended T-intersection on any tile.
What a great innovation guy's! The new NAM will be spectacular.
Keep up the work :thumbsup:
Quote from: metarvo on January 10, 2013, 05:20:34 PM
On top of that, it looks like the intersections can be dragged across any tile of the FAR segment (as opposed to the fixed FAR intersections currently available on the center tiles).
Orthogonal sections, yes. Other FAR intersections, no. They're basically limited to the existing puzzle piece, like Markus said, so you still need to "calculate" where to let two FARs intersect. Complete freedom isn't there yet - you'll still need to use the footprint sheet as reference in the beginning to learn its usage.
If I'm right, however, there is ample room for future expansion on that front to eleminate or at least severely reduce that kind of thing.
Cheers
Willy
If anyone can refresh my memory on draggable viaducts, that would be awesome. ;)
I had to watch the video twice because I could not believe what I saw. &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
And now I am going to watch it a third time.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on January 09, 2013, 01:35:18 PM
I "lied". They're also draggable. (Note that I never said puzzle piece, and also take note the choice of words I used.)
Trickster! Scoundrel! No, that is actually pretty funny. Of course, from here on out we're all going to read into your posts far deeper than you ever intended.
Quote from: Tarkus on January 09, 2013, 03:45:44 PM
The new version is based entirely from INRULs and RUL2 overrides. Rather than being a puzzle piece that is placed through draggable means, it's a full-on draggable network item. That also means it's overrideable.
-Alex
Overrideable? I'm... I think I'm humping the air. That sounds a lot like FANWM.
You guys are ridiculous, and I mean that in the best way possible. The hard work, dedication, but most of all, the ingenuity. Great googley moogley.
So did the draggable FAR make it to the NAM 31 release? I can't find anything but puzzle pieces.
It did for roads, as far as I know. You have to, er, drag it.
Are you sure you installed the component? It's a separate checkbox that normally is checked by default, but maybe you missed it.
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: solovinodelmal on March 04, 2013, 01:37:47 PM
So did the draggable FAR make it to the NAM 31 release? I can't find anything but puzzle pieces.
You may want to have a look at the Documentation's ContentsFile, Section 11, in order to find out how to use it.
Quote from: memo on March 04, 2013, 02:11:06 PM
Quote from: solovinodelmal on March 04, 2013, 01:37:47 PM
So did the draggable FAR make it to the NAM 31 release? I can't find anything but puzzle pieces.
You may want to have a look at the Documentation's ContentsFile, Section 11, in order to find out how to use it.
Thanks, I found it, it's really cool, kinda tricky at first but I'm getting there, so technically you could make a 16-sided polygon between orthogonal, diagonal and the new FAR-2 and FAR-3 right? That is awesome! $%Grinno$%
Quote from: solovinodelmal on March 06, 2013, 06:55:25 AM
...so technically you could make a 16-sided polygon between orthogonal, diagonal and the new FAR-2 and FAR-3 right?...
Actually, you can even make a 24-sided polygon. ;) Here is another picture showing the different angles.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fe98796b57e1717b7bf19cf2dcdb7ee97.jpg&hash=195a7865f6aa3e910b1b22707b6df9e0b3a0843a)
I cannot believe it is already 6 months old.
I finally got around to downloading this wonderfully huge file (although I had to do it during the night to compensate for connection speed). Despite all of the bug reports, I must say I haven't found anything that wrong with it, other than the lack of RHW fillers (the only decrease in functionality I've found so far, but still only a minor one). You should have heard the gasp I made when I first saw street lights show up on the draggable FAR. I just about leapt out of my skin! :shocked2: One nice bonus about the draggable FAR is the fact that FAR neighbor connections are now draggable as well, no longer requiring my favorite workaround. I have had to consult the trusty Readme to figure out the draggable FAR curves, but I've caught on to the point that I only have to check back for some of them now. Additionally, it's so nice to see wealth textures on FAR and WC segments. I won't have to waste as much space on transparent filler lots now.
Great job NAM Team! You've earned four thumbs up (and I supposedly only have two)!
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Quote from: MetarvoGreat job NAM Team! You've earned four thumbs up (and I supposedly only have two)!
Yeah sure, uh-huh. All of SC4D knows how the two big guys up front can pop up alone without the others following after. (or what is known as toe thumb)
And thus is the reason why you have 4 thumbs up on your part! &dd
But I'm glad I got to hear such praise coming from you. The one thing I now hear in the backroom from them good ol' boys is: "dear princess celestia, today I learned why NAM originally did not have a release date" ()what() I have no clue what to make of that statement, but my guess is the decission is final to no longer pick a due date anymore after this, which is why, it's So nice to hear such praise to the team about the good ol' 31st.
I just wish I can get Camstudio to work for me again. The only issue is that I can't record sound at the moment, so instead, I tried a different recorder.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TXByD0XOe8
Here's the thing, Fraps is the only one it seems that everyone can confirm gets the sound, but it takes too much memory, the higher the quality, which is vital for the viewer reading what the user is reading when their playing SC4, IDK how these other guys do it, CS has been known about that sound thing.
After seeing some YT accounts starting to get content notices, since now EA added SC4 content to the YT detection library system, my personal attitude is maybe don't record sound, and especially maybe not even SC4's soundtrack now, so maybe just stick to what you know and continue use of Camstudio, and just audioswap for a soundtrack, or talk over the video?
I use FFSplit to record my videos. FFSplit has the following very useful functions:
- Separate control over game volume and mic volume.
- Pretty fast and good compression. No lagging during recordings (that was different when using Fraps or Hypercam).
- Ability to only record a part of the screen.
- Ability to stream via Twitch.tv (but recording things to hard drive is also OK).
Quote from: j-dub on March 07, 2013, 11:03:57 PM
After seeing some YT accounts starting to get content notices, since now EA added SC4 content to the YT detection library system, my personal attitude is maybe don't record sound, and especially maybe not even SC4's soundtrack now, so maybe just stick to what you know and continue use of Camstudio, and just audioswap for a soundtrack, or talk over the video?
They're trying to block all the previous Simcity games so everyone has to play the current disasterpiece? I swear, I can smell The Simpsons Game 2 coming from my studio...
If I had one...
I'm pretty sure EA is afraid of the NAM and the NAM Team. Although I never really wanted a release date, I think it was worth releasing it during SC2013's release and early days just to remind them that SimCity belongs to the players. Without the players, games wouldn't sell and the developers would go out of business. When I look at some of the positively dazzling content that has been released in the past few days (draggable FAR and WC sections, and MHW that actually resembles what it should have been in the beginning), I can see why they would be scared into trying to stop SC4 from being showcased. What will this do to the MD's that use YT videos?
Quote from: metarvo on March 08, 2013, 06:08:03 AM
I'm pretty sure EA is afraid of the NAM and the NAM Team. Although I never really wanted a release date, I think it was worth releasing it during SC2013's release and early days just to remind them that SimCity belongs to the players. Without the players, games wouldn't sell and the developers would go out of business. When I look at some of the positively dazzling content that has been released in the past few days (draggable FAR and WC sections, and MHW that actually resembles what it should have been in the beginning), I can see why they would be scared into trying to stop SC4 from being showcased. What will this do to the MD's that use YT videos?
Many developers have a huge amount of respect for the NAM. I had a chat with a lot of Maxis staff during SC13's development beta and they are extremely impressed with this mod (among others, like SimMars and SPAM). I recall after telling Ocean Quigley that I'm on the NAM Team, he wanted the team to weigh my transportation suggestions more heavily. He called the NAM Team
"Freaking intimidating" :D.
I use Xsplit, Fraps and Sony Vegas to do my video/streaming work.
@Wiimeiser, IDK what EA was trying to say exactly with the last Simpson's game on the mainline consoles, during the level where you had to defeat "Will Wright" creator of "Sim Sandwich" which is a parady, because it looks like the SimCity 4 box, but in reality, that sandwich title in itself, EA holds the rights to, but they never took use to it. These day's it's just Spore, My Sims, the Sims, and SimCity, in the past you had other Sim TM'ed titles like Sim Ant or Sim Copter, but that was then, this is now. The only other reference about SimCity on the Simpsons was the use of T21 in that episode where the bots sacrifice themselves when Homer is crossing the road, but considering the circumstance, I guess this is popular enough to be reference to that show, but I still don't get the motive where you had to fight Will.
Quote from: j-dub on March 07, 2013, 11:03:57 PM
Here's the thing, Fraps is the only one it seems that everyone can confirm gets the sound, but it takes too much memory, the higher the quality, which is vital for the viewer reading what the user is reading when their playing SC4, IDK how these other guys do it, CS has been known about that sound thing.
After seeing some YT accounts starting to get content notices, since now EA added SC4 content to the YT detection library system, my personal attitude is maybe don't record sound, and especially maybe not even SC4's soundtrack now, so maybe just stick to what you know and continue use of Camstudio, and just audioswap for a soundtrack, or talk over the video?
There doing that to all the EA games , and I think its due to people remembering a time when EA actually made good games and choosing to stay away from the current crap they put out.
I'm past the stage of test driving the new NAM and I've incorporated it into my normal Plugin folder in place of the old NAM. It has dawned on me that the street lights on FAR segments of roads are separate from those on orthogonal and diagonal roads, as evidenced by using the USL. FAR-2 and FAR-3 lights had the Maxis light cones, while ortho and diag §§ lights carried the USL cones that I had selected.
So, does this mean what I think it does? In theory, could existing streetlight mods (Cogeo's mod, LRM, USL, etc.) or new mods include FAR lights to provide different light cones (or at least light cones matching ortho and diag lights for said mods) for those segments? It looks promising. ;D Even if the answer is no, it's nice nonetheless to have the Maxis light cones reincorporated into a Plugins folder which might not use them otherwise.
The street lights used on FAR-2 and -3 are copies of the corresponding Maxis street light props. They have a new IID so as to avoid prop pox, because I had modded them in a way such that they can be flipped. This was not necessary for the flora, so the trees that appear are actually those of your tree replacement mod.
Since only draggable FAR makes use of these new props, it is indeed possible to replace them by ones that are specifically for FAR-2 and FAR-3. At least this would make sense for the lamp posts – not so much for the light cones.
Regarding Prop Pox, do you only need the affected prop in your plugins for it to occur or do you actually need to plop a lot into the city? And how are the folks at SimPeg handling it? Still same old same old?
Quote from: Wiimeiser on March 10, 2013, 05:03:41 PM
Regarding Prop Pox, do you only need the affected prop in your plugins for it to occur or do you actually need to plop a lot into the city?
It has to be plopped in the city in at least one place.
QuoteAnd how are the folks at SimPeg handling it? Still same old same old?
I haven't heard anything new on this issue from them. But that's just me.
Quote from: z on March 10, 2013, 05:59:21 PM
Quote from: Wiimeiser on March 10, 2013, 05:03:41 PM
Regarding Prop Pox, do you only need the affected prop in your plugins for it to occur or do you actually need to plop a lot into the city?
It has to be plopped in the city in at least one place.
QuoteAnd how are the folks at SimPeg handling it? Still same old same old?
I haven't heard anything new on this issue from them. But that's just me.
IIRC Peg's stance that it's a conspiracy to discredit him and his refusal to do anything to fix it hasn't changed. What's more, I believe he's out of the modding scene entirely and just keeping the site running.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on March 10, 2013, 05:03:41 PM
Regarding Prop Pox, do you only need the affected prop in your plugins for it to occur or do you actually need to plop a lot into the city? And how are the folks at SimPeg handling it? Still same old same old?
The prop has to appear in your city and also be removed from your city at least once. The issue with the modded umbrella prop is that the prop is used on many of the default Maxis low wealth residential lots. These will have been grown early is a cities life and replaced early on in almost every city. I think that is why it was the first (and only confirmed) prop to cause issues, because of it's heavy use by Maxis.
Theoretically, if you have a prop in the plugins right from the start of the city it shouldn't be an issue, but I'm not sure that's been confirmed.
Happy draggable Easter everyone ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FVarious2%2Feaster_streets.jpg&hash=837a15547e2f33df6aee4da4cbe885c7fa69ca57)
Cheers
Willy
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7PF4g8e.jpg&hash=541f9edfc57c4827ba9784fb38ce4318d3c6a974)
Nice work, Willy! Smooth curved streets will be very useful indeed.
As a matter of fact, it's also my 21st Birthday today
Happy Easter to you too Willy! Outstanding work &apls
Ganaram, you're far too funny :p
Happy birthday Maarten :party:
awesome XD &apls &apls
happy Easter all of you :)
Happy birthday, Maarten, and happy Easter to all. :)
Nice Easter card, Willy. Are those street S-Curves?
Happy Easter everyone ;D
Happy birthday, Maarten :) Best wishes from Norway &dance :party:
Gelukkige verjaardag Maarten!
---
I'd better let the cat out of the bag and show some new street functionality. Indeed Metarvo, an s-curve:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fstreet_s-curve2.jpg&hash=99a014b06f029224c2c00dec403c9394413b955a)
But there's more. I've tentatively called these curve intersections.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fstreet_short_curve_intersections.jpg&hash=38c1d9bdb02890c7d526458bebcb72d73b876597)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fstreet_long_curve_inner_intersections.jpg&hash=49e6ed1cd13d38aeee9048c6c9fc100f1e7efb04)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fstreet_long_curve_outer_intersections.jpg&hash=b6b1750b90d615d8bfb5e6a0fbac6913003d3a74)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fstreet_long_curve_outer-inner_intersections.jpg&hash=cbfa46b3da23ecd5fa3a504827ea6bd3c173ffb8)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fstreet_s-curve_intersections.jpg&hash=0607e8ba278a6bb769761bc17a4ebc8743b81f4c)
Cheers
Willy
If only you could sneak these into 31.1 — these are awesome!
MandelSoft: Happy birthday &apls &apls (sorry only now I noticed it)
SwordMaster: please, and please say it:
"these are dragable" %BUd% %BUd% %BUd%
I really like the way the sidewalks follow the curve in the picture of the S-Curve.
Quote from: gn_leugim on March 31, 2013, 01:06:36 PM
MandelSoft: Happy birthday &apls &apls (sorry only now I noticed it)
SwordMaster: please, and please say it:
"these are dragable" %BUd% %BUd% %BUd%
They are ;)
Cheers
Willy
The curves are dragable? Or the intersections?
Everything is draggable.
(The large and small 90° curves were already included with NAM 31 as draggable features. This is an expansion of it.)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fcurve_intersections_sidewalks.jpg&hash=b33a520c644bc1cd3afe3211c64972c2cad724b1)
Cheers
Willy
Kicking the new SimCity's butt all day! That looks awesome!
So, this means no more hard choices between intersections or wide curves. Good work! :thumbsup:
Great work on those curves.
Would they work with the old SAM ?
I'm curious, because with the current, it is not possible to create driveways like with the old one.
If you don't know what I mean, it's the way u can use a SAM starter piece and delete half of it to get this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FDEojhigl.jpg&hash=87e843dfd61fdcffe543eaf1ebf9b6482946aa8e) (http://imgur.com/DEojhig)
Please make it possible again. :)
Here are some neat examples of its usage:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F2NKzVRGl.jpg%3F1&hash=a5b70e833a3f57ff87c48b6a5959761e156cbf70) (http://imgur.com/2NKzVRG)(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FADMlt4Cl.jpg&hash=c0279ed14574e72274a313d838dc78eef4a4c787) (http://imgur.com/ADMlt4C)
It is still possible, but the method is different. Spot, try dragging a 2-tile stretch of Street with one end one tile in from where you want the driveway (it would be directly over the zoning arrow in your first picture). Place the blank tile of the SAM starter over one of the resulting Street ends to delete it. You may have to replace some zones, though.
Alternately, you can use the method of creating a single, open-ended Street tile found in Steps 1.05-1.07 of this tutorial (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=7350.0). You can use it as-is for two driveways across from each other, or you can drag and bulldoze a Street from one end to turn it into a single driveway.
Thanks metarvo, but the problem with these methods is that you can't cross right over the remaining street. :(
Well, well, well, what do we have here?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmrtnrln%2FSimCity4-Stuff%2Fturborab_02.png&hash=6215f23dd423974fafd53b16dea1800f71fad4dc)
Best,
Maarten
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg703.imageshack.us%2Fimg703%2F9421%2Fdrivewayt.jpg&hash=fe7e4d73f71daef74aee215d94d75266671854b9)
Spot, you should still be able to do so following this four-step quick tutorial I threw together. Once you create a street stub, you should be able to drag a road or street through it with no problem.
:shocked2:
A multi-lane roundabout? On top of that, it looks like it works with AVE-4 and ARD-3. Nice. :thumbsup:
Turboroundabout! It only lacks cycle lanes! :D
Quote from: MandelSoft on April 01, 2013, 06:09:08 AM
Well, well, well, what do we have here?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmrtnrln%2FSimCity4-Stuff%2Fturborab_02.png&hash=6215f23dd423974fafd53b16dea1800f71fad4dc)
An accident waiting to happen? (Sorry, I live in Southern CA. People drive poorly enough around here without having to attempt to negotiates a roundabout with other drivers)
Looks fun though, and would be a very nice feature in the game.
-Matt
Quote from: threestooges on April 01, 2013, 10:51:33 AM
Quote from: MandelSoft on April 01, 2013, 06:09:08 AM
Well, well, well, what do we have here?
An accident waiting to happen? (Sorry, I live in Southern CA. People drive poorly enough around here without having to attempt to negotiates a roundabout with other drivers)
Looks fun though, and would be a very nice feature in the game.
-Matt
No way ;D a roundabout that allows symmetrical interfacing between single and dual-tiled networks &apls
You just made my Easter Holiday.
Looks good, now if we also had the option to not have the cut-outs, so it was circular (which is how they have done similar roundabouts in Washington) that would be great.
TEG
Quote from: MandelSoft on April 01, 2013, 06:09:08 AM
Well, well, well, what do we have here?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmrtnrln%2FSimCity4-Stuff%2Fturborab_02.png&hash=6215f23dd423974fafd53b16dea1800f71fad4dc)
Best,
Maarten
:o :o :o :o I?m looking for something soft where I can faint into... &apls &apls &apls
I'd have to agree with Matt. While these look incredible--no doubt when they are released I will use them--I would say that roundabouts in Southern California are generally a pain to drive through (We're used to slip lanes, not yielding). The only one I can think of that's not antagonizing is one in Orange, CA, and I think it's because it's in a relatively low-traffic city. This design at least allows for driver destination indicators by having the designated turn lanes, so that problem is solve. What is the base network for this roundabout, anyway?
Quote from: MandelSoft on April 01, 2013, 06:09:08 AM
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmrtnrln%2FSimCity4-Stuff%2Fturborab_02.png&hash=6215f23dd423974fafd53b16dea1800f71fad4dc)
The only issue I have is the hard angle on the inner part - maybe it could do with a more gradual transition?
That's actually part of the design. It's a Dutch Turbo Roundabout (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_roundabout#Turbo_roundabouts).
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.tinypic.com%2Fxm8k1w.jpg&hash=6c9fc0b6dc752b723b15a5e73175a0c853a9a548)
-Alex
Great and Powerful Mandel, I hope this is not an April Fools joke. EA did the worst thing today by confirming their trolling attitude on facebook, but I won't go there.
That exists in the US, with half those arrows like the European original, I've been on one, and I still am a little confused. Without the arrows may have been better, IDK.
The big question, of course, is how do you drive on it? I'm quite certain I'd end up in the wrong lane.
And some people think driving a train is complicated :D
Cheers
Willy
While we don't have such roundabouts here, this looks pretty cool!
Quote from: dragonshardz on April 01, 2013, 06:32:37 PM
The only issue I have is the hard angle on the inner part - maybe it could do with a more gradual transition?
My thoughts exactly! The inner lane starts too "abruptly".
Look man, I've had a lecture from the man who came up with the whole design concept and he explained his whole concept. Some things came out of research:
- There are slightly raised kerbs between the lanes on the roundabout, low enough for long trucks to go over them them slowly, but high enough to prevent the rest of the traffic from switching lanes. This is not only safer for car traffic (no weaving), but also safer for motorcyclists.
- The center is partioally paved to allow long trucks with large turn radii to use the roundabout
- Arrow markings on the roundabout had no significant effect. Arrows in advance of the roundabout are very important on the contrary, and so is clear signage in advance of the roundabout.
- You need large signs in the center on eye-height to "block off the horizon". This way, people notice the roundabout earlier.
- The first designs had more gradual lane entrances, like the one Tarkus showed. The problem of those was that some people driving on the roundabout thought their lane continued on the left instead of the right. Therefore, new designs have a more right angle, so you can clearly see a discontinuity of a starting lane.
Personally, I've had no problems driving on these roundabouts, and all of them seem to work very smoothly. Trust me, they look more confusing when you view them from up above than when you're actually drive on one. It's just like those Spaghetti-interchanges, which are harder to comprehend their design than actually using them.
Best,
Maarten
Hey Maarten,
Don't get angry! You did a fantastic job on this roundabout (and on the streetstuff on the previous pages by the way).
On the other hand I can understand the crityicizm, because the thing looks confusing and I must admit that I find them indeed confusing in real life. I drive them regularly, but often enough I fear that I am doing something wrong. Somehow they are intended so that more drivers can use them at the same time, but I fear often enought that I overlook someone and then we all end up in a crash. But let's face it: that is not the issue here. As long as someone makes the pathing for this SC4 roundabout we will have the experience of cars disappearing just in time so that they won't crash.
A big &apls
Frank
Quote from: Tarkus on April 01, 2013, 09:23:07 PM
That's actually part of the design. It's a Dutch Turbo Roundabout (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_roundabout#Turbo_roundabouts).
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.tinypic.com%2Fxm8k1w.jpg&hash=6c9fc0b6dc752b723b15a5e73175a0c853a9a548)
-Alex
Even so, comparing the RL version to the ingame one makes it clear - to me, at least - that those transitions to where it is 2 lanes are abominably sharp for a turbo roundabout, which I assume is to be used at a relatively high speed.
On the contrary, the are intended to be used at speeds of about 40 km/h
Wow, great work Maarten. I also wish it wasn't just a joke :)
In my opinion such roundabouts are very good solution. For me it's easier to drive on such one than on the traditional ones, where many drivers use outer lane ever (in order to turn right, left, or to go straight on), while inner one stays empty. On turbine roundabout you are able to choose the correct lane before entering the intersection (instead of changing it later).
Additionally the more "complicated" and "unusual" road is, the safer it is, because drivers slow down and pay bigger attention.
Moreover roundabouts are great, because they physically force to drive with lower speed.
Thanks for showing it :thumbsup:
That's great, finally a roundabout that interferes between a two- and a four-lane road &apls Imho, the sharp edge is OK, because it forces you to realize that you have to yield and that your lane does not simply continue...
I think there's been a slight misunderstanding. I meant that the inner curve where the new lane starts is a bit sharp (and Patrick probably meant the same as well) as encircled here:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FKX4gCCI.jpg&hash=1251d2d2aa7f00a13301d0f4fc47f09f93e4ea11)
It just could be smoothed (is this the correct form of the verb? ;D) a tad.
It's great either way though and I look forward to seing more roundabouts from you guys :thumbsup:
As neat as they look, there are precious few roundabouts in my area. It's been noted that some of the drivers here don't know what Yield signs mean, and therefore they would be hopeless in roundabouts.
Quote from: io_bg on April 02, 2013, 04:38:32 AM
I think there's been a slight misunderstanding. I meant that the inner curve where the new lane starts is a bit sharp (and Patrick probably meant the same as well) as encircled here:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FKX4gCCI.jpg&hash=1251d2d2aa7f00a13301d0f4fc47f09f93e4ea11)
It just could be smoothed (is this the correct form of the verb? ;D) a tad.
It's great either way though and I look forward to seing more roundabouts from you guys :thumbsup:
This. Those curbs are awfully sharp even for a corner being taken at 25mph (~40kmh) and could really do with some smoothing out.
Well, nothing hinders drivers from driving in a more fluent curve. But look at this image from the Netherlands:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F3378913dd67c141abf6b8cdd47024cbd.jpg&hash=dda300f984b64c0ada4e78e4c4c547cdd1eddb65) (http://www.ld-host.de/)
Source: Google Earth, Street View.
@io_bg: No, this is not a misunderstanding. I've stated the reason for this already in my elaborate post above:
Quote from: MandelSoft on April 02, 2013, 01:20:08 AM
- The first designs had more gradual lane entrances, like the one Tarkus showed. The problem of those was that some people driving on the roundabout thought their lane continued on the left instead of the right. Therefore, new designs have a more right angle, so you can clearly see a discontinuity of a starting lane.
I've done a bit of research and came across this dutch publication of ir. L.G.H. Fortuijn (http://www.turbotrafficsolutions.nl/dissertatie/turborotonde_en_turboplein.pdf) about the whole development process of the turbo roundabout. This image explains the possible confusion:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmrtnrln%2FSimCity4-Stuff%2Fturborotonde_fout.jpg&hash=e9c36999ca7ffc8d2d7724aedda6dccbf575b204)
Fig.3.5-7 Aknowledged misunderstanding when entering the roundabout on the right lane.
"The driver at this location expects the other driver on the roundabout to follow the inner lane (a wrong assumption)."
With a right angle, chances for this type of confusion are way less. Compare these two images from the same publication as above:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fmrtnrln%2FSimCity4-Stuff%2Fturborotonde_goed.jpg&hash=e0adcfb471bfd5dec37cd1215d58e927c2cf37f6)
Some professional examples showing the right angles:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dirkdebaan.nl%2Fuploads%2F1%2F0%2F0%2F5%2F10059444%2F6711542_orig.jpg%3F286&hash=4260c3fc1822cbd7ed907a3c93592a213b5c766e)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dirkdebaan.nl%2Fuploads%2F1%2F0%2F0%2F5%2F10059444%2F9532903_orig.jpg%3F401&hash=44402e7d58ee54a1f6704ff90aca841ab9b110b8)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dirkdebaan.nl%2Fuploads%2F1%2F0%2F0%2F5%2F10059444%2F3637900.jpg%3F257&hash=6ff67bf323c289f24a01578c919edcf73ad72da2)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tcnijlan.nl%2Fj15%2Fnijlan%2Fimages%2Ffoto%2520rotonde%2520tennisclub.jpg&hash=b7c4e9e837e20adbaa77bdf75550b3bed1e6e128)
And Flatron, that's a very good example of a newer design ;)
For those who are curious, here are all locations of currently realized turbo roundabouts: http://www.dirkdebaan.nl/locaties.html
Best,
Maarten
Perhaps the problem isn't so much the hard angle in the curb than it is the hard angle in the weathering line?
just for curiosity, have you made the same* for roads or plan to do so? :p
*the whirly curves with intersections
I haven't. It's complicated by the NWM mod, so I'll see if I can tackle it while that part of the NAM is overhauled sometime in the future. It's certainly planned.
Cheers
Willy
Maarten that turborotonde is just asom!
Thanks for this dutch addition at the game!
Hi Maarten and all others,
Maybe a bit late to add my comment here, but yesterday afternoon I checked some turbo roundabouts and they looked exactly like Maarten has made for us.
They do not show up in Googel maps yet (too new), so I cannot give an image.
Only one picky remark maybe: the pavement in the inner circle looks like sidewalks and that is not accurate. I guess in most cases there is some kind of pavement that is different and that is a bit bumpy in order to discourage drivers to use this pavement. The pavement is still there in order to give long trucks the opportunity to take the roundabout without damaging the greenery.
Again: &apls
Quote from: MandelSoft on April 02, 2013, 08:29:07 AM
@io_bg: No, this is not a misunderstanding. I've stated the reason for this already in my elaborate post above:
Quote from: MandelSoft on April 02, 2013, 01:20:08 AM
- The first designs had more gradual lane entrances, like the one Tarkus showed. The problem of those was that some people driving on the roundabout thought their lane continued on the left instead of the right. Therefore, new designs have a more right angle, so you can clearly see a discontinuity of a starting lane.
Well, okay then. I guess it's just me liking smoothness everywhere in SC4 $%Grinno$%
Quote from: Swordmaster on April 02, 2013, 12:14:17 PM
I haven't. It's complicated by the NWM mod, so I'll see if I can tackle it while that part of the NAM is overhauled sometime in the future. It's certainly planned.
Cheers
Willy
I'll be looking forward for it :)
It's that time again . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fxq54KAc.jpg&hash=d9d37259820bba35a987f4315c33404e89b4e7ce)
-Alex
question: are the street S curves available in nam 31.1 and if yes, how do you lay them?
I tried to edit the readme file but ran out of time before we went live. So the picture is in the folder, but not in the readme. It's in Documentation -> images -> street s-curve_footprint.jpg.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fstreet_s-curve_footprint.jpg&hash=19fcd82cf063658ec2a78a3f85f2d737ec7a4a1e)
Cheers
Willy
We can't build intersections with the curves in this version, can we? I remember seeing a teaser pic recently.
Why don't you try it? ;)
I'm not much of a teasing person; I only show stuff that has been added ;) So yes, you can. Apologies for lack of documentation again. I haven't had access to Maarten's stuff to add anything.
Cheers
Willy
I can't try it because Alex locked it. Only a handful of people have it right now. (If someone maybe wants to send me the current, slightly bugged version, that would be great. PM me)
ahhhh I missed that combo. I tried so many I was like "maybe not this time, it's for the next release" XD
thanks for your info and work :D
So yeah, this happened.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fl7SWVAk.jpg&hash=a6227aa223b6c889930229f24de4fb6553e37a6f)
Took a bit of finagling and trickery (with some input from my good friend and colleague memo), but it looks like draggable viaducts with FLEX-OST are a go. And before the Pylon Police show up to cite me, we're still a long way from T21s.
-Alex
That's great. Can an intersection on the single road tile before the transition be made? Just wondering.
Amazing stuff Alex!
all draggable? great job ;D
Quote from: gn_leugim on July 29, 2013, 05:40:03 AM
all draggable? great job ;D
It also looks like it's 7.5m high. &hlp
Is 7.5m road/avenue overpasses for RHW going to be available any time soon?
Quote from: spot on August 06, 2013, 12:56:29 AM
Quote from: gn_leugim on July 29, 2013, 05:40:03 AM
all draggable? great job ;D
It also looks like it's 7.5m high. &hlp
Is 7.5m road/avenue overpasses for RHW going to be available any time soon?
It is indeed 7.5m high, and yes, it means 7.5m content will have a lot more options in terms of crossing. All this new stuff will be added in draggable form. There will be no new puzzle pieces, aside from FLEX pieces to start the drag.
For those of you thinking "oh, but FLEXTrans pieces like to deconvert, and we're going to need fillers", you're not going to need fillers. The FLEXTrans pieces were still in a bit of an unstable state for the NAM 31.x releases, but that was mostly just so there was at least some method to transition between all the different RHW heights on our deadline-crunched release. There's been improvements, and there will continue to be improvements, so it doesn't make much sense to make the (literally) hundreds of pieces that would be required. Additionally, fewer overrides are involved with Road, AVE and OWR FLEXTrans, being base networks (see the relative stability of RHW-2 FLEXTrans vs. those of other RHW networks), so there's less work involved.
-Alex
I'd like to see Road FlexRamps and the MIS-Road transitions I mentioned earlier sometime soon. Just sayin'.
such good news Tarkus! great work all of you! :) :thumbsup:
Good work! :thumbsup: This will save a little space, and it will be good to have overpasses over the NWM. Maybe there should be no release date of any kind this time, since it caused a rush last time. Just my §0.02.
Great work to finally have NWM overpasses! :D
Quote from: metarvo on August 08, 2013, 09:28:10 AM
Maybe there should be no release date of any kind this time, since it caused a rush last time.
The release date was a one-time thing under special circumstances, and I think it definitively proved why you don't do release dates for the NAM. We're not going there again. :D
-Alex
Somewhere we are going, however . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZfP7GB8.jpg&hash=031b93ab4f7489762bd911c1e0256b04fa5b37df)
-Alex
Great work! Good to finally see NWM compatibility. :)
Thanks, RepublicMaster! :thumbsup:
And now that the NWM stuff's in place, it's time for the RHW side of things:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fu9XUQEV.jpg&hash=fc9c769e974baaf84d4f1e3b29626a070bb659b4)
-Alex
Now looking forward to the FlexRamps...
This is so cool!
you are working fast ein? maybe too fast, you should take some time to sleep aswell ;) :P
Thanks, everyone, for the support! :thumbsup:
Quote from: gn_leugim on August 13, 2013, 11:11:22 AM
you are working fast ein? maybe too fast, you should take some time to sleep aswell ;) :P
Actually, I'm working what seems to be a bit slower than usual, but "slow" might be relative, particularly after the breakneck pace of the NAM 31.x releases.
Taking things to a new level . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fz6qNeM5.jpg&hash=5e997eaf1da328dd1aa66bcbc7a3a3ca42d9e094)
With the exception of situations involving dual-networking, the entire ortho over/under setup is basically in place for the L1 Road Viaducts. I'm trying to decide which direction to go next, either toward the other L1 networks (OWR and AVE--Rail is RRW territory), up to L2 Road, or to covering select diagonal situations.
-Alex
Do a few of the diagonals first, to further complete the template for later. Then focus on L1 AVE and OWR, that way we have support for NWM crossings next version. Then do L2 last, the current ploppable pieces, though a bit limited, aren't really broken in any way.
well, as an outsider I dont know how much work that takes to do, I only judge by the speed you post these (awesome) pics.
I agree with Wiimeiser, I would go for all the L1 road cases, from where I would have a base to move into other networks and then L2 netws.
Well, development continues on the viaducts. I got the OXO L1 Road really solid, then got the same amount on the L2 Road solid, and now . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FHsqUIPS.jpg&hash=38892e482f98c18f9b26894aeedc2415cb4e414f)
-Alex
Awesome work.
Are you planning on creating NWM overpasses too ?
Gorgeous!
Quote from: spot on August 20, 2013, 12:17:30 AM
Awesome work.
Are you planning on creating NWM overpasses too ?
Thanks! :thumbsup: And to answer your question, yes, absolutely. That's actually part of the method behind the madness of going draggable. But the Elevated NWM side of things probably won't happen until after NAM 32.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on August 20, 2013, 12:25:24 AM
Quote from: spot on August 20, 2013, 12:17:30 AM
Awesome work.
Are you planning on creating NWM overpasses too ?
Thanks! :thumbsup: And to answer your question, yes, absolutely. That's actually part of the method behind the madness of going draggable. But the Elevated NWM side of things probably won't happen until after NAM 32.
-Alex
Sounds good. I'd rather have what you have made so far than wait for the entire NWM to be ready before releasing everything at once.
Quote from: spot on August 20, 2013, 12:47:45 AM
Sounds good. I'd rather have what you have made so far than wait for the entire NWM to be ready before releasing everything at once.
And having just gone through the marathon 31.x series, the idea of a more modest project is quite appealing right now. :)
This was a particular pain, as I ran into interference from the Avenue Turning Lanes. They put up less of a fight than the old automatic Road Turning Lanes, but it still took me awhile to get the two to stop clashing.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7ESody5.jpg&hash=2c45071138ea8bf25d69ae7652594aec27ae70a7)
And the over-NWM setups are going into place:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbNFN6iu.jpg&hash=9c4ef689d003b8c9f824f2c7c0aac89c1c8b91e6)
-Alex
that in't modest project, is usefull and very good :D and your work so far looks good :)
Well done Alex!this is gonna be nice!
But wait, there's more . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FVkWXHfZ.jpg&hash=19ab4552bcf514fba4919f06bab180ed8151afdd)
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on August 24, 2013, 02:05:24 PM
But wait, there's more . . .
-Alex
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fxs-sniper.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F12%2Fbillymays2.png&hash=660a4827325e55e107e9e38960ca29bf1dee1bce)
Are there any plans for ortho bridges using the DBE technology? It would allow for neighbour connection bridges...
Absolutely outstanding work Alex &apls &apls These L1 draggable viaducts will be of huge utility.
@ Kitsune: I'm a bit out of the loop at the moment but there's been talk for some time of at least having basic ortho DBE-based stuff where the bridge would be the same look as a viaduct.
Is that what I think it is? It looks like a draggable L1 AVE-4 curve, similar to the draggable L1 RHW-8S and RHW-10 curves. Nice job!
&apls
Such ability would also make useful land bridges over valleys and canyons.
Yes, you can drag an L1 MIS directly through one of these things . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FMTpYZms.jpg&hash=6b8c2f568552ed493ae73045d67d82bd954cf3ee)
-Alex
??? I dunno... can ya ()what() ... :P :thumbsup: :)
:satisfied:
Ooh, that will be incredibly useful!
Useful indeed. I just wonder since its all draggable, would u be able to drag the road thru an MIS starting piece ?
Quote from: spot on September 07, 2013, 03:16:14 PM
would u be able to drag the road thru an MIS starting piece ?
The MIS starter piece has a false intersection on it, so you'd need to be able to have three networks on one tile, which isn't possible.
-Alex
Amazing! This is one of the intersections needed for interchanges.
Amazing stuff Alex! &apls
Thanks, guys! And I'm back with its Avenue brethren . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fda0YM0r.jpg&hash=23a997fdc26fa16098bedfb6079bd28a517b0a51)
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on September 14, 2013, 01:18:53 AM
Thanks, guys! And I'm back with its Avenue brethren . . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fda0YM0r.jpg&hash=23a997fdc26fa16098bedfb6079bd28a517b0a51)
-Alex
O.o
This will make things so much easier
&apls
Not bad, not bad. But where are the diagonals? $%Grinno$%
I remember reading that the 45 degree Avenue FLEXCurves had a secret ability months ago. What is that ability? I've used them all the time and I still do not know it.
I created that puzzle piece, but don't know about the secret ability either. Maybe it's that it allows for wealthified sidewalks? Maybe, what you mean is that you can demolish the two tiles of the inner curve that are almost void, without breaking the curve apart from the pedestrian paths?
There really isn't anything else I can think of that is secret about it. ;)
I would love to see flux underpasses for Monorail and Elevated rail. I understand they are meant for underpasses, but many people use them for underground roads, so it is impossible to make them go under these pieces.
The post I remembered is this one (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15481.msg452798#msg452798). It merely refers to a goody with avenue curves. I guess I mistakenly remembered that there was something special about the curve when the goody is the curve itself.
Yes, indeed, I was just referring to the new 45° curve itself. ;)
Coming up. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Ffa-dia-ave.jpg&hash=021be269382eceabfafdc8679e9fc4cfc7d24696)
Cheers
Willy
What's new Willy? ()what()
Quote from: Gugu3 on December 03, 2013, 08:57:42 AM
What's new Willy? ()what()
Diagonal to FA-Avenue
If I'm not mistaking.
Oh yeah you might be right Arthur!
Exactly ;)
Cheers
Willy
Oh my gosh there were plenty of times I needed that piece so badly. I love it!
nice!! :thumbsup:
I wonder, is there any possibility that ave-far will ever be draggable? :p like roads are now
I have heard that as part of the next NAM Moonlights ELR and Monorail Mod is being completed; meaning that ELR and Monorail will be able to cross RHW etc and keep its texturing. Is this correct?
Quote from: gn_leugim on December 04, 2013, 04:26:41 AM
nice!! :thumbsup:
I wonder, is there any possibility that ave-far will ever be draggable? :p like roads are now
Hard to do because of the double-tile nature. It's more likely that all the pieces will eventually be FLEXed.
Quote from: eugenelavery on December 07, 2013, 11:00:35 AM
I have heard that as part of the next NAM Moonlights ELR and Monorail Mod is being completed; meaning that ELR and Monorail will be able to cross RHW etc and keep its texturing. Is this correct?
We've been working on it (I started on it,
droric has taken over), but it's a surprisingly insane amount of work, and we can't make any guarantees. If we assemble things the way
Moonlinght did, we're talking about
thousands of models. The over-RHW models in the existing mods are pretty much useless as far as building compatibility with the newer RHW specs.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on December 07, 2013, 11:50:25 AM
Quote from: eugenelavery on December 07, 2013, 11:00:35 AM
I have heard that as part of the next NAM Moonlights ELR and Monorail Mod is being completed; meaning that ELR and Monorail will be able to cross RHW etc and keep its texturing. Is this correct?
We've been working on it (I started on it, droric has taken over), but it's a surprisingly insane amount of work, and we can't make any guarantees. If we assemble things the way Moonlinght did, we're talking about thousands of models. The over-RHW models in the existing mods are pretty much useless as far as building compatibility with the newer RHW specs.
-Alex
Thanks for the update and all of yours and droric's work. I never would have imagined it would be thousands of models!
Quote from: Indiana Joe on December 07, 2013, 11:46:10 AM
Quote from: gn_leugim on December 04, 2013, 04:26:41 AM
nice!! :thumbsup:
I wonder, is there any possibility that ave-far will ever be draggable? :p like roads are now
Hard to do because of the double-tile nature. It's more likely that all the pieces will eventually be FLEXed.
and therefore will have wealth textures right? :thumbsup:
Quote from: gn_leugim on December 09, 2013, 03:11:33 AM
Quote from: Indiana Joe on December 07, 2013, 11:46:10 AM
Quote from: gn_leugim on December 04, 2013, 04:26:41 AM
nice!! :thumbsup:
I wonder, is there any possibility that ave-far will ever be draggable? :p like roads are now
Hard to do because of the double-tile nature. It's more likely that all the pieces will eventually be FLEXed.
and therefore will have wealth textures right? :thumbsup:
If it's FLEXed, then the game sees it at least partially as a draggable item once it's placed, so yes. Another benefit to getting away from static PPs. There was an attempt awhile ago to actually make FA-AVE draggable, but it was quite awkward to use (and the AVE Turning Lanes were playing interrupting cow with it).
-Alex
Do you have anything you could put into a new "secret weapon" video? Because it's about time, unless you plan to release before Christmas...
That's not a question we can answer. $%#Ninj2
-Alex
Quote from: Wiimeiser on December 09, 2013, 09:51:39 PM
Do you have anything you could put into a new "secret weapon" video? Because it's about time, unless you plan to release before Christmas...
lol :D don't ask, just wait :thumbsup:
Quote from: Tarkus on December 09, 2013, 05:17:52 PM
If it's FLEXed, then the game sees it at least partially as a draggable item once it's placed, so yes. Another benefit to getting away from static PPs. There was an attempt awhile ago to actually make FA-AVE draggable, but it was quite awkward to use (and the AVE Turning Lanes were playing interrupting cow with it).
-Alex
Nice to know :) :thumbsup: what are the other benefits by the way? :-[
just curious, if FA AVEs are FLEXed, would we be able to intersect/cross them with other networks like streets, roads, and aves?
Quote from: gn_leugim on December 10, 2013, 02:55:02 AM
what are the other benefits by the way? :-[
and
Quote from: jmdude1 on December 10, 2013, 05:31:35 AM
just curious, if FA AVEs are FLEXed, would we be able to intersect/cross them with other networks like streets, roads, and aves?
If they are FLEXed or draggable, another advantage over static puzzle pieces is exactly this. You could build your FAAVEs first and later connect other intersecting networks (that is, eventually, when it gets implemented). If they were puzzle pieces, you would always have to demolish the previous puzzle piece, if you decide to build an intersection at some later point. It's similar as with draggable FAR. When it was introduced, it immediately supported everything that was possible with FAR puzzle pieces, and beyond that a variety of other intersections between FAR and Road or Street.
roger roger! understood :thumbsup:
I know it's already been months since anyone posted any comment or reaction on this thread but I just wanted to ask something regarding the "Transit stations" part of the NAM package. I was wondering why this El-R on Road Station...
http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/12345-nam-elevated-rail-station/
... didn't make the cut? I know according to most of the comments on the download page that it causes CTDs, but can't you guys SLURP it up?
Quote from: CahosRahneVeloza on April 13, 2014, 02:18:47 AM
I was wondering why this El-R on Road Station...
http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/12345-nam-elevated-rail-station/
... didn't make the cut?
No particular reason; there are just a lot of stations out there. Eventually, we'll SLURP them all. But right now, there's only one SLURPer; that's me, and I've got to get an RTMT release out before I can get back to SLURPing.
QuoteI know according to most of the comments on the download page that it causes CTDs, but can't you guys SLURP it up?
Certainly. Since there are so many stations that need SLURPing. when I get going again in this department, I'll probably set up a request thread for stations that people want to have SLURPed, and those will have the highest priority.
Quote from: z on April 13, 2014, 04:51:55 AM
Certainly. Since there are so many stations that need SLURPing. when I get going again in this department, I'll probably set up a request thread for stations that people want to have SLURPed, and those will have the highest priority.
That'd be fantastic. I'll definitely be watching out for such a thread then :thumbsup:
Thanks for the FAR-2 system and the new intersections for all FAR, in update 31 - they solved one of the last problems remaining for modeling some cities.
Can someone point me location (file) and TGI of exemplars for puzzle pieces from rul0:
0x0504 to 0x0516 (advanced tuleps)
0x0B00 to 0x0B0F (glr in road)
0x1000 to 0x3030 (elevated highway-road)
0x1010 to 0x3130 (ground highway-road)
0x4023 to 0x4033 (str fa3 orthogonal rail)
(there are more but I will just stick for this list for the moment)
I don't know if correct is assumption that every puzzle piece listed in rul0 can be placed in game, I'm trying to add NAM support in my program (damn manager) but I was unable to locate some exemplars for entries above - I was trying to find exemplars in all files within NAM installation folder by ID 0x6a470000+value, by Piece ID, AutoTileBase - no luck, it is like there was entry but element to place is missing.
Can someone help ?
Any RUL0 entry preceded by a ; is commented out and generally only present for H3ID reservation purposes. Generally the files for these pieces, if they exist, are not in the public release of the NAM.
Quote from: jdenm8 on April 18, 2014, 08:10:31 PM
Any RUL0 entry preceded by a ; is commented out and generally only present for H3ID reservation purposes. Generally the files for these pieces, if they exist, are not in the public release of the NAM.
I'm not talking about obvious things, entries above are not commented (disabled).
Right sorry :-[
The 0500 Tab Ring's files aren't in the Public NAM. It's skipped by the game because the Button Exemplar files are missing.
Same goes for the 0B00 Ring, but I don't know if these exist at all. Looks like something that should be revisited.
I don't know what's up with those Highway Ramps in the 1000 Range. If you have Project Symphony installed, the ring may be disabled.
The 4023 Ring is in the same state as the 0500 ring. The files for these do exist, but are incomplete.
Ok, thanks, any branch for which exemplar 0x6A470000 + value doesn't exist is 'hidden' from the users and shouldn't be available for use.
I might have some questions later ;)
Edit: THAT WOULD BE TO EASY TO BE TRUE!!! :'(
ok, just one example: 0x400 branch (basic tuleps):
if we assume as above this branch is invisible... but if we look closer we will find that exemplar 0x6534284a, 0x2a3858e4, 0x6a4704e0 is one holding 'item button id' prop with value 0x6a470400
04e0 is not even in rotationring :P
so now... now to retrieve all branches visible for 'public' I must search for any exemplar within 0x6a47000 and 0x6a47fff range, check if it holds 'item button id' property... damn... this will increase scanning time significantly :/
Edit2: ok... its not that time consuming than I anticipated ;)
found 79 exemplars within 0x6a47000-0x6a47fff range
of which 77 items have 'button id property'
0x6a472000 and 0x6a472010 overrides T intersections buttons from simcity_1.dat
Have we heard anything about smooth curves for El-Rail / GLR?
Would go great with a new El-Rail car design that I'm working on, it's one longer car that doesn't work well with the sharp curves :/ Also, the unrealistic sharp curves for the 90 degree puzzle pieces are.... unrealistic! :D
Are you talking about the curves on the new ElRail over Avenue/RD-4 pieces? Because they're exactly the same diameter as the tight curves on Chicago's El Network.
Quote from: jdenm8 on April 27, 2014, 12:24:15 AM
Are you talking about the curves on the new ElRail over Avenue/RD-4 pieces? Because they're exactly the same diameter as the tight curves on Chicago's El Network.
Yes, I can still hear that screeching now... ::)
Quote from: jdenm8 on April 27, 2014, 12:24:15 AM
Are you talking about the curves on the new ElRail over Avenue/RD-4 pieces? Because they're exactly the same diameter as the tight curves on Chicago's El Network.
Possibly. I'd have been referring to the actual GLR 90
o puzzle piece, though (if it was me), since that piece is very sharp, the dual 45
o method is generally unsatisfactory, and it's be kind of nice to even have a 2x2 smooth curve piece as that would at least present some uniformity among the various rail networks. From what I understand it's easier to implement this with the GLR, though certainly now that the 3d files have been made (for el-rail) maybe it would make a RRW-like effort on the 90
o curves much easier...maybe a simple porting of the model, and a shift of the path files (those are referenced by x,y,z coords, right?) would be all that's necessary? I'm not sure of the coding necessary to replace the 45
o curves by a new reference for two of them together, though...
I was thinking more of like a puzzle piece for the normal El-Rail / GLR. Not in street / avenue or over street / avenue.
Quote from: APSMS on April 27, 2014, 12:52:30 AM
Quote from: jdenm8 on April 27, 2014, 12:24:15 AM
Are you talking about the curves on the new ElRail over Avenue/RD-4 pieces? Because they're exactly the same diameter as the tight curves on Chicago's El Network.
Possibly. I'd have been referring to the actual GLR 90o puzzle piece, though (if it was me), since that piece is very sharp, the dual 45o method is generally unsatisfactory, and it's be kind of nice to even have a 2x2 smooth curve piece as that would at least present some uniformity among the various rail networks. From what I understand it's easier to implement this with the GLR, though certainly now that the 3d files have been made (for el-rail) maybe it would make a RRW-like effort on the 90o curves much easier...maybe a simple porting of the model, and a shift of the path files (those are referenced by x,y,z coords, right?) would be all that's necessary? I'm not sure of the coding necessary to replace the 45o curves by a new reference for two of them together, though...
Yes almost exactly, kinda like the smooth curves for Rail except a bit more compact for use in cities.
Quote from: APSMS on April 27, 2014, 12:52:30 AM
Possibly. I'd have been referring to the actual GLR 90o puzzle piece, though (if it was me), since that piece is very sharp, the dual 45o method is generally unsatisfactory, and it's be kind of nice to even have a 2x2 smooth curve piece as that would at least present some uniformity among the various rail networks. From what I understand it's easier to implement this with the GLR, though certainly now that the 3d files have been made (for el-rail) maybe it would make a RRW-like effort on the 90o curves much easier...maybe a simple porting of the model, and a shift of the path files (those are referenced by x,y,z coords, right?) would be all that's necessary? I'm not sure of the coding necessary to replace the 45o curves by a new reference for two of them together, though...
This has been planned – however, ensuring compatibility with draggable GLR makes this a not at all that trivial project. If this gets implemented at some point, it is likely that the entire lightrail network needs to be given an overhaul, like what the RRW is doing for the rail network.
You did a great job with new NAM but, in my opinion, it have a "problem" if we can call like that:
May I suggest to drop down the brightness of euro textures?they appear too much clean and bright than American's ones
Quote from: z on April 13, 2014, 04:51:55 AM
No particular reason; there are just a lot of stations out there. Eventually, we'll SLURP them all. But right now, there's only one SLURPer; that's me, and I've got to get an RTMT release out before I can get back to SLURPing.
QuoteI know according to most of the comments on the download page that it causes CTDs, but can't you guys SLURP it up?
Certainly. Since there are so many stations that need SLURPing. when I get going again in this department, I'll probably set up a request thread for stations that people want to have SLURPed, and those will have the highest priority.
What the deuce is SLURP?
SLURP is the Station Locator, Updater, and Reconstruction Project. The term is used to refer to modified settings for third-party transit stations, designed to meet with NAM standards, as produced by the NAM Team's Mass Transit Authority (MTA) group. Since NAM 32, the NAM installer will detect third-party stations in your plugins folder, and, if a SLURP update is available, it'll install it for you.
Our process of upgrading a station to these new standards is referred to in verb form as "SLURPing".
-Alex
Any plans to expand FAR and FARR in the future to include more and more angles? Is there a limitation? Am I hoping for too much?
Currently there is FAR 2 which shifts 1 tile every 2 tiles and FAR 3 which shifts 1 tile every 3 tiles. I extensively use the step method in my cities and it would be great to someday be able to shift to FAR for these roads but often my steps are not FAR 2 or FAR 3, but more like FAR 4, FAR 5, FAR 10. Is it possible? Could a new FAR angle be introduced each version?
I ask only because I know you guys are SUPER AMAZING and it seems like every day more and more is possible.
Anyway, that is one thing I would love to see in the future of FAR.
Quote from: packersfan on September 22, 2014, 10:44:26 PM
Currently there is FAR 2 which shifts 1 tile every 2 tiles and FAR 3 which shifts 1 tile every 3 tiles. I extensively use the step method in my cities and it would be great to someday be able to shift to FAR for these roads but often my steps are not FAR 2 or FAR 3, but more like FAR 4, FAR 5, FAR 10. Is it possible? Could a new FAR angle be introduced each version?
There's a bit of math involved with what FA2 and FA3 even mean.
First of all, the bigger the number in FA(x) is, the longer each successive FA straight piece needs to be. On the other hand, the closer the number in FA(x) is to 1, the smaller each section is, but also, the closer each section is to 45 degrees. Plus, we can't do anything like FAR-5 because not only the angles would be too obscure but the pieces are just too big to make.
Second, we already have a plan on long-term FANdev: it's called the Nine Degree Plan. All Fractionally Angled Networks shall be limited to the following angles:
FA6 - Representative of 9 and 81 degrees; sections have a rise/run of 1/6 and 6/1
FA3 - Representative of 18 and 72 degrees; sections have a rise/run of 1/3 and 3/1
FA2 - Representative of 27 and 63 degrees; sections have a rise/run of 1/2 and 2/1
FA1.5 - Representative of 36 and 54 degrees; sections have a rise/run of 2/3 and 3/2
In addition to that, you have FA1 and FA0
FA1 - Representative of 45 degrees; section have a rise/run of 1/1 and 1/1; also known as diagonal.
FA0 - Representative of 0 and 90 degrees; sections have a rise/run of 0 and undefined; also known as orthogonal.
If you plotted all of those onto a graph and put a circle in the middle, you'd get a circle with 36 slices, each one being ~9 degrees. This is the Nine Degree Plan, or rather the full extent of the 9 Degree Plan.
I apologise for the hasty reply; I had a diagram for this but it turns out I lost it.
Bummer. Can't wait to see FAR-6 and FAR-1.5, though.
Quote from: memo on April 27, 2014, 03:01:01 AM
If this gets implemented at some point, it is likely that the entire lightrail network needs to be given an overhaul, like what the RRW is doing for the rail network.
That would be very exciting!
It would be fantastic to see light rail enhanced and developed with features such as overhead cables. The work being done on RRW is magnificent.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on September 22, 2014, 11:15:04 PM
FA1.5 - Representative of 36 and 54 degrees; sections have a rise/run of 2/3 and 3/2
Pardon the nitpicking, but technically, FA1.5 would be closer to 34° and 56°, going by the arctangents of those rise/run figures. To get closer to the intended 36° and 54°, the rise/runs would have to be 3/4 and 4/3, which would really make it FA1.333... (or perhaps FA1.3 for brevity's sake).
Of course, given that the difference between FA1.5 and FA1.333 is very small, it might just be acceptable, especially when the more accurate pieces would have to be larger.
Quote from: woodb3kmaster on September 24, 2014, 06:36:33 PM
Pardon the nitpicking, but technically, FA1.5 would be closer to 34° and 56°, going by the arctangents of those rise/run figures. To get closer to the intended 36° and 54°, the rise/runs would have to be 3/4 and 4/3, which would really make it FA1.333... (or perhaps FA1.3 for brevity's sake).
Of course, given that the difference between FA1.5 and FA1.333 is very small, it might just be acceptable, especially when the more accurate pieces would have to be larger.
Yeah, I know; I brought it up with the others ages ago that FA1.3 would be more accurate, but the consensus was to stick with FA1.5.
I wished that some NWM road pieces got a bit of attention on the NAM release after finishing up the RHW development because there are some bugs on it that breaks my heart, making impossible to use some nice roads styles in a nice way in some ocasions (I'm not talking about the elevated roads, I'm talking about some NWM roads tile reverting back to the odd maxis road style, mainly at crossroads) T_T
At least the researches that the NAM team is doing with RHW may help developing NWM draggable pieces in the future :)
EDIT: I'm pumped for the NAM 33.0, nice job NAM team, may the new RHW-2 draggable pieces reduces the mental fatigue that I get everytime I need to build a cloverleaf interchange :D &apls &apls &apls
Quote from: fefenc on December 09, 2014, 06:46:21 PM
I wished that some NWM road pieces got a bit of attention on the NAM release after finishing up the RHW development because there are some bugs on it that breaks my heart, making impossible to use some nice roads styles in a nice way in some ocasions (I'm not talking about the elevated roads, I'm talking about some NWM roads tile reverting back to the odd maxis road style, mainly at crossroads) T_T
At least the researches that the NAM team is doing with RHW may help developing NWM draggable pieces in the future :)
EDIT: I'm pumped for the NAM 33.0, nice job NAM team, may the new RHW-2 draggable pieces reduces the mental fatigue that I get everytime I need to build a cloverleaf interchange :D &apls &apls &apls
NWM intersections saw some work a few months back. There might be some things that make it into v33.
Quote from: fefenc on December 09, 2014, 06:46:21 PM
I wished that some NWM road pieces got a bit of attention on the NAM release after finishing up the RHW development
We don't go "That's the RHW done, time to release!"
We work on what we want to work on. That generally involves improving the RHW's stability and ease of use. Most of the time we just pick a date then try to get the bugs out of whatever we've made by that date. The little attention the NWM has received is mostly because Tarkus has been busy with IRL stuff.
Quote from: fefenc on December 09, 2014, 06:46:21 PM
I wished that some NWM road pieces got a bit of attention on the NAM release after finishing up the RHW development because there are some bugs on it that breaks my heart
Quote from: jdenm8 on December 09, 2014, 09:21:31 PM
We work on what we want to work on. That generally involves improving the RHW's stability and ease of use. Most of the time we just pick a date then try to get the bugs out of whatever we've made by that date. The little attention the NWM has received is mostly because Tarkus has been busy with IRL stuff.
You've to also add to the fact that there's a massive rebasing of a lot of the main NWM networks, so practically all of the NWM bugs you're seeing now will not be fixed without remaking the entire NWM from scratch, and that's not an easy task since, not only many of us are busy, but we haven't come to a consensus on what the future NWM plans will be, and with a lot of us being busy, it's gonna be even harder to come to a consensus.
Also, that's also dependent, as mentioned, on what we want to work on. My priorities are still very high on decomissioning nearly all of the RHW puzzle pieces, and that's a task that can't be completed within one dev cycle, but would take many dev cycles, and I don't wanna just switch projects and leave something unfinished.
Yeah, there's a bajillion more projects in the NAM that deserve attention, but not only are they projects that would deserve to be redone entirely in the Flex paradigm, there's simply no physical way to do so without it running into our own personal lives.
Also, RHW development will never really be "finished", per se. Of course, neither will NWM development or any other NAM project that we haven't officially ceased.
As Ganaram mentioned, there's some major structural stuff we have to figure out with the NWM before we return to activity on it, as far as the IID scheme and implementation. When you're referring to NWM networks "reverting back to the odd maxis road style, mainly at crossroads", to which crossroads do you refer? From our discussions, the big thing the NWM lacks presently is intersections involving diagonals, and those are going to be very difficult, and pose a lot of issues, They become extremely difficult when one starts discussing T-intersections involving diagonal NWM networks.
-Alex
Well, a orthogonal NWM crossroads that involves 1 road piece and 1 street piece making a crossroad "+" and some roads like ave-6 reverting back to the maxis road when I cross 3 railroads on it (only the pieces at the second railroad reverts back to the maxis road).
I can understand all your points, since the members are saying that they would need to redo all entire NWM from scratch, it would be a ton of work that would require a lot of planning to do at only one release. RHW is being dev'd for years and we can feel that it has things to improve like the easily draggable pieces feature that someone here is already doing.
I enjoy the organization of the NAM team :)
Quote from: fefenc on December 10, 2014, 05:12:30 AM
Well, a orthogonal NWM crossroads that involves 1 road piece and 1 street piece making a crossroad "+" and some roads like ave-6 reverting back to the maxis road when I cross 3 railroads on it (only the pieces at the second railroad reverts back to the maxis road).
We never really included those types of intersections in the NWM plans, thinking that people would just extend the normal Road out another tile (which often happens with such roads in widening projects).
-Alex
Quote from: Indiana Joe on December 09, 2014, 09:11:36 PM
NWM intersections saw some work a few months back. There might be some things that make it into v33.
Oh this is incredible news!!!! &apls &apls &apls :bnn: :thumbsup:
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on December 09, 2014, 09:56:54 PM
Also, that's also dependent, as mentioned, on what we want to work on. My priorities are still very high on decomissioning nearly all of the RHW puzzle pieces, and that's a task that can't be completed within one dev cycle, but would take many dev cycles, and I don't wanna just switch projects and leave something unfinished.
I would love to help...Can you post a tutorial on decomissioning on YouTube?
Thanks,
Dan
Quote from: roadgeek on January 08, 2015, 08:52:18 PM
I would love to help...Can you post a tutorial on decomissioning on YouTube?
There's not much to explain about it: remove the entries for the puzzle pieces from the tab rings so to stop people from seeing them, possibly reassign those entries for new pieces so as to discourage people from reassigning them to the old pieces or even remove the button entirely, and if possible, wait a few years and reuse the old IIDs for new projects.
Decommissioning's happened before with the RHW overpass puzzle pieces and the old SPUI piece, and user education should be able to teach people why we want to decommission those features.
Quote from: Indiana Joe on December 09, 2014, 09:11:36 PM
NWM intersections saw some work a few months back. There might be some things that make it into v33.
Would like to see some pics. I cleaned up the last slobber, and I am ready to drool some more.
There was only a little bit, and it was way back in July of last year . . . it's going to remain under wraps mainly as we don't want to falsely raise anyone's hopes at this point, especially as none of it will make it into NAM 33.
The main focus right now is getting NAM 33 up to pre-release state. There's been a lot of RL, a lot of minor technical things, and a few hurdles with our file depository systems. The only real big thing I'm interested in doing RHW-wise going forward is getting the FLEXWidth Transitions and a few minor things in place, and I'll be pivoting more toward the NWM, Draggable Road Viaducts, and (the successor to) TuLEPs.
-Alex
Do you think that we can expect the pre-release to be ready in a month or so? I won't really hold you to it, but I just want to get a general idea of how close NAM 33 is to being ready.
It's been a really weird development cycle, especially as much RL as there has been on the team since NAM 32, which makes it hard to really say (perhaps even more so than usual). There's one little file architecture thing to figure out, pertaining to the INRUL compilation, we're looking to nuke the 32-bit boot.ini prompts that are in the installer, and there was the hope that we'd be able to do a little internal testing once the installer was buildable, to knock out any last obvious stupid things (to avoid the 5-minutes-after buzzkill).
-Alex
Long time no post here.
These will make it into a future NAM!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMRC%2520Road%2520Better_zpsbuoyxmqj.jpg&hash=84fa5dd29bbd2b8d44e11ea209e65d5b19a26bb0) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/MRC%20Road%20Better_zpsbuoyxmqj.jpg.html)
They are FlexCurves for the Road tool which will form the basis of new NWM curves. By nature they will have the capacity to be overridden so the NWM networks will be able to take advantage of the new curves.
Keen to see what people make of these ;D
-eggman121
Whoa! :o Awesome!!! :D I could really use these because I often like having really smooth 45-degree curves. I usually have the road transition from ortho to FA-2 to diagonal to achieve a wider curve radius.
Two thumbs up! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: And... &apls
Wow!Eggman that is fantastic!it will be a grwat addition...did you get inspired making those wide radius curves for RRW? :P
Thanks for the compliments! :thumbsup:
Well the textures are not final but I was able to whip this up in less than an hour ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FAve4%2520to%2520Road%2520Transition_zps5n8p6at6.jpg&hash=b22a7637a872c666ee856a4aaf30806ddeadd75d) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Ave4%20to%20Road%20Transition_zps5n8p6at6.jpg.html)
NWM Transtions from single to dual tile anyone ::)
-eggman121
Ooooh! Like, maybe NRD-4 to Avenue? :popcorn:
Nice new piece here! I'm sure we could all make good use of such a thing!
Quote from: APSMS on October 28, 2015, 08:39:15 AM
Ooooh! Like, maybe NRD-4 to Avenue? :popcorn:
Yes, I second that! Currently, that really is a missing feature IMO. Also, a TLA-3 to TLA-5 transition would be nice as well.
Eggman121,
FANTASTIC and GREAT to see further development. Thank you for all you creativity and hard contribution. Something I have ALWAYS been wishing for is AVE6/7 Gentle Curves so we do not have to use RHW6C FAR pieces. My point is would be nice to show on the Transit Mode the same color for ALL Avenues (WHITE) even with the curves.
dyoungyn
Is that built from the one Tarkus made before? Also, a NRD-4 to Ave would be great as previously stated.
Quote from: j-dub on October 28, 2015, 07:37:19 PM
Is that built from the one Tarkus made before? Also, a NRD-4 to Ave would be great as previously stated.
Nah, I made the textures from scratch ;D
With
Rivit's Texture bender,
GIMP and
Paint.net (The tools I use) I can pretty much make any transit texture. So the sky is the limit for me! :D
There will be more on this front so I will keep everyone posted. :thumbsup:
-eggman121
You are so talented!
WOW!!! So is it possible to make FAR/Curves for AVE 6/7 gentle curves that will show up as Avenues in the transit mode?
Quote from: eggman121 on October 28, 2015, 09:13:28 PM
Quote from: j-dub on October 28, 2015, 07:37:19 PM
Is that built from the one Tarkus made before? Also, a NRD-4 to Ave would be great as previously stated.
Nah, I made the textures from scratch ;D
With Rivit's Texture bender, GIMP and Paint.net (The tools I use) I can pretty much make any transit texture. So the sky is the limit for me! :D
There will be more on this front so I will keep everyone posted. :thumbsup:
-eggman121
The recent developments in the RHW thread have infiltrated the Elevated Road Viaducts . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/via-12062015-1.jpg)
-Alex
Getting better and better... :P
Is anyone working on an equivalent to the B2 and A2 turnout puzzle pieces for viaduct rail? They're the one real shortfallings in the viaduct rail offerings....
Hi jessilaurn!
Think they are going to be taken care of at some point!I remember seeing a post in the RRW thread a while ago...
For this kind of questions on RRW I suggest you write in that thread which is specifically focused on rails :thumbsup:
Quote from: jessilaurn on December 09, 2015, 08:06:32 AM
Is anyone working on an equivalent to the B2 and A2 turnout puzzle pieces for viaduct rail? They're the one real shortfallings in the viaduct rail offerings....
These pieces will be altered to adjust the turning radius. In the interim, replacement RRW textures are included in Rivit's RUM for RRW package.
Thank you both, Gugu3 and mgb204. :)
Next query: bridges, HSR, and BTM.
There's a plethora of HSR bridges... rather nice ones, in fact. But it's also understood that HSR is developmentally dead, in favour of BTM (a bit of a shame that, for a variety of reasons, but that's another matter). Is there any possibility that the NAM Team would be willing to retexture some of these bridges for BTM?
As a side note: the Putrajaya Monorail Bridge does retexture for BTM... except for a 10-meter segment at the anchorage, which remains stubbornly monorail. Just a note for the developers.
BTM development is mostly limited to compensating for the liability of it being designed to pre-P57 specs with its RHW crossings. I don't think there's much planned for it besides that. The whole Monorail/HSRP/BTM situation is still unsettled, though there had been recent plans for an RRW-spec HSRP, called RHSR (Real High Speed Rail).
-Alex
I should probably have a word here.
There are plans to make the monorail network a higher speed rail network.
As with most of the NAM I think what we are trying to implement is some form of simplification of standards so new members can make content with available resources.
The Real High Speed Rail will basically be a higher speed version of the RRW and will be cross compatible in the future since monorail traffic can run on the rail network but not the other way around.
The textures and turnouts will be easy but many users would like catenaries but they are hard to make and T21. In short I can't do it alone. I don't have that much time.
The RHSR will be defaulted to L0 and overrides will be implemented for L1 and L2 networks.
Hopefully that clears up some of the confusion with the whole monorail/BTM/RHSR network.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on January 18, 2016, 01:29:53 PM
As with most of the NAM I think what we are trying to implement is some form of simplification of standards so new members can make content with available resources.
The Real High Speed Rail will basically be a higher speed version of the RRW and will be cross compatible in the future since monorail traffic can run on the rail network but not the other way around.
The textures and turnouts will be easy but many users would like catenaries but they are hard to make and T21. In short I can't do it alone. I don't have that much time.
Since it's still in the planning stages, there is an obvious solution to many of these problems. If you look at the ID scheme for SAM for example, each of the SAM networks use the same IDs with one digit defining the particular SAM network. Should a similar thing occur for any RRW based monorail implementation, crossover of T21s and the like would be a breeze, little more than re-numbering the IDs from RRW in a logical fashion. How possible this would be, I can't say, especially considering that required overhauling the original IDs in use.
However, I do like the idea of Monorail being able to run alongside rail, with similar textures and the option to share stations with regular lines. Such crossover would finally enable the monorail/HSR to work in tandem with rail, whilst having dedicated high speed lines for the faster trains only. This would be much more similar to how these things work in the real world.
And then, of course there's Tokyo... where you can find conventional rail, high-speed rail, *and* monorail. Funny old world....
Just a few things I am working on ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FeeG9LQI.jpg&hash=93f8214d56965e48bb34d924843d60296cd0e186)
OWR Cloverleaf Interchange
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FFt8hH6i.jpg&hash=2b0af65b355565b40e842d2df5018f00123d047c)
Road to Avenue Extended Transition
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGh76Gg4.jpg&hash=d04a3f10e8050a383ed57422eb454f5c04822b0c)
NWM FlexCurves
-eggman121
Eggman121,
Simply WOW :thumbsup: Is the first image truly One Way Roads? Even so, then are are the ramps just the same, one way roads? For the "FlexCurves", is it possible the same for AVE6/7? Finally what about making the AVE6/7 look better in region view and growable on both sides for diagonals with AVE4/5.
The region view stuff can't be adjusted. We're really limited on what we can do with it.
-Alex
Nice 4 leaf clover Eggman!
You must have St. Pattys day on the mind :party:
Wow, that's awesome!!!
I'm running out of words to describe these updates. NAM 35 is going to be phenomenal. &apls
Incredible stuff! &apls
Eggman 121,
What will you one way road cloverleaf interchange look like in the region view? Will it be white as with one way roads? My main concern is the ramps! ()what()
Quote from: eggman121 on March 21, 2016, 03:00:35 PM
Just a few things I am working on ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FeeG9LQI.jpg&hash=93f8214d56965e48bb34d924843d60296cd0e186)
OWR Cloverleaf Interchange
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FFt8hH6i.jpg&hash=2b0af65b355565b40e842d2df5018f00123d047c)
Road to Avenue Extended Transition
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGh76Gg4.jpg&hash=d04a3f10e8050a383ed57422eb454f5c04822b0c)
NWM FlexCurves
-eggman121
Hi dyoungyn
The Ramps should look fine in the Region view IIRC
But as Alex alluded too earlier there is not much we can do with the Region view. Most of it is hard coded. The only main thing that we achieved was Jondor's work on the RHW transport view. Apart from that I don't see much on the horizon in that space.
Hope that clarifies things.
-eggman121
Eggman121,
Thank you for the reply. I do understand the limitations with additions to the HARD CODED game that is over 12 years young and getting older.
So far, thanks so heartily to the entire NAM Team, everything is working as it should with some minor hiccups. I feel pretty confident that your marvelous one way road cloverleaf interchange with as thus far one way roads identified, as white will lead to more possibilities; which is something that I have been wishing for years as I use AVE4 (white) as my state highways and FINALLY with possible one way road interchange possibilities that far exceeds what Cities Skylines could every do.
Thank you again and I and sure all of us hard card players so dearly appreciate.
dyounyn
I love the new stuff shown.. my only question for now would be.. what things will be included in NAM 35 out of all these great examples?
We haven't quite reached feature freeze yet, so it's not certain what all will make this release.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on March 23, 2016, 09:22:35 PM
We haven't quite reached feature freeze yet, so it's not certain what all will make this release.
-Alex
Ooohh!!! I can hardly wait!
You'll probably have quite awhile to wait, unfortunately. Most of the development team (myself included) has been occupied with RL for the past couple months, and that's going to be the case for awhile still.
-Alex
I for one am also looking forward to NAM v35... it ought to some sort of milestone when its released...
I hope U Tarkus and the fellow NAM Team and even RRW will somehow inspite of, or despite RL can and will make things work... towards finding ways to getting this out, at the very least, this will be released for Christmas '16...
here's hoping and watching
:popcorn:
like the progress a great deal very promising on many fronts :thumbsup:
the SC4D players owe so much to the NAM Team and the RRW team now for doing all they have done here... it has done a wonder to a tired old game for frustrated model railroaders and civil techs -engineers to, a place to sand box stuff...
NAM Day will be a big deal :thumbsup: &apls
I am not ken on the NAM Team plans (or RL schedule), but even with that I think I can safely say that the NAM team would very much like to push out v35 well before Christmas.
Ideally the end of summer at the latest, even with everyone's RL schedule. I doubt Alex and Stephen want to hold on to their goodies that long, and some field testing of Willy and Stephen's work on draggable ERRW should be immensely helpful as well. I can't recall is Robin has been working on anything in particular, but he always seems to fill in the gaps, which is just as useful anyways when it comes to NAM releases and the inevitable bugs that accompany new versions.
But again, I don't actually know what they have going on, and speak with absolutely no authority when I say this. Remember that the NAM team likes to surprise people, and I expect to be fully surprised when they announce it (ok, maybe only partially since I'm a NAM associate, but you get the idea).
Quote from: APSMS on May 01, 2016, 10:06:42 PM
I am not ken on the NAM Team plans (or RL schedule), but even with that I think I can safely say that the NAM team would very much like to push out v35 well before Christmas.
Ideally the end of summer at the latest, even with everyone's RL schedule. I doubt Alex and Stephen want to hold on to their goodies that long, and some field testing of Willy and Stephen's work on draggable ERRW should be immensely helpful as well. I can't recall is Robin has been working on anything in particular, but he always seems to fill in the gaps, which is just as useful anyways when it comes to NAM releases and the inevitable bugs that accompany new versions.
But again, I don't actually know what they have going on, and speak with absolutely no authority when I say this. Remember that the NAM team likes to surprise people, and I expect to be fully surprised when they announce it (ok, maybe only partially since I'm a NAM associate, but you get the idea).
Yeah there are not really that many people that have spare time at the moment. We definitely want to release sooner but time is a limiting factor. We have to contend with RL because that is what pays the bills. Working on the NAM and all the associated parts can be tedious at times as well. Really we are a collection of people from literally around the globe trying to co ordinate a program. Chuck in RL and there will be down periods. I can't say at the moment what will make it into NAM 35 but it will be worth the wait.
One idea that has crossed my mind is placing tutorials in the public space on how new content is made these days. The old way was churning out puzzle pieces but that became impractical when you consider all the functionality that has to be incorporated. One person that has been my mentor, inspiration and has led the way in the tools he has created is
Memo who sadly has been inactive for quite a while. I have picked up many skills and would like to pass down his teachings in the NAM world. I wonder if that is an Idea that would interest anyone?
So all I can say is hold tight for the moment. We do want to release but RL has to take precedence. That is all I can say for now.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on May 01, 2016, 10:54:53 PM[...]
One idea that has crossed my mind is placing tutorials in the public space on how new content is made these days. The old way was churning out puzzle pieces but that became impractical when you consider all the functionality that has to be incorporated. One person that has been my mentor, inspiration and has led the way in the tools he has created is Memo who sadly has been inactive for quite a while. I have picked up many skills and would like to pass down his teachings in the NAM world. I wonder if that is an Idea that would interest anyone?
[...]
I for one would love to have some modding tutorials to learn how to make draggables. There are good puzzle piece tutorials out there, but they are really limited since many of the online tools have gone down. I can't promise any great products, but I'd love to use some tutorials to try out making draggable things.
Haven't checked in while in the NAM stuff- odd when your an associate- looking forward to my part- the testing.
Quote from: Themistokles on May 02, 2016, 02:21:12 AM
Quote from: eggman121 on May 01, 2016, 10:54:53 PM[...]
One idea that has crossed my mind is placing tutorials in the public space on how new content is made these days. The old way was churning out puzzle pieces but that became impractical when you consider all the functionality that has to be incorporated. One person that has been my mentor, inspiration and has led the way in the tools he has created is Memo who sadly has been inactive for quite a while. I have picked up many skills and would like to pass down his teachings in the NAM world. I wonder if that is an Idea that would interest anyone?
[...]
I for one would love to have some modding tutorials to learn how to make draggables. There are good puzzle piece tutorials out there, but they are really limited since many of the online tools have gone down. I can't promise any great products, but I'd love to use some tutorials to try out making draggable things.
I second that motion. All in favor, ....
Me! I can't imagine what designs others have got going on in their heads.
I definitely think it would be great to have a tutorial that covers all the minutiae of coding in RUL1, RUL2, INRULs, etc. - essentially, everything we use to make draggable content these days. A nod to newer dev tools wouldn't go amiss, either.
I would like to show my sincere appreciation for all those marvelous imaginative creators out there that has made and and continues to do so in SC4 that really energizes and makes me want to continue playing SC4. I have personally put in over 13 years of SC4 playing and hard to hang the hat. THANK YOU again coming from the bottom of my heart for keeping the game alive and well. Really excited to see the future teases for the game which again really makes SC4 the TOP city building game out there.
yes, I can second that! thx
I realize it has been a little bit of while since the last post, but I just want to thank the entire NAM Team for creating this beautiful gentle curve. Without you all's creative thinking, this would have NEVER been possible. Thank you again. BTW, all draggable ;D
dyoungyn
A recent RHW-related project went a little tangential, and turned into some updates for the draggable Elevated Road/One-Way Road/Avenue Viaducts.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/nam-09222016-1.jpg)
-Alex
WOW!
very exciting! :thumbsup:
Agreed, amazing; and wow, what can be done with this 13 year old game that was once thought impossible. My only complaint about "Elevated AVEs/roads/oneways always looks funny in the region view. Understand about the limitations of the Region capabilities. This is the reason, I have been very selective on the use of "Elevated NAM components.
Draggable viaducts are looking great :thumbsup: &apls
Thanks, Gugu, gn_leugim, dyoungyn, and Noah! Here's a little more where that came from, with a look at the Road/OWR viaduct intersections:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/nam-09242016-1.jpg)
-Alex
yeay! &apls
this almost makes me ask when will the next nam version will come out $%Grinno$% $%Grinno$% :P
Quote from: gn_leugim on September 26, 2016, 06:52:09 AM
this almost makes me ask when will the next nam version will come out $%Grinno$% $%Grinno$% :P
shhh... If you say it out loud, the dream won't come true... :D
Quote from: Seaman on September 26, 2016, 09:25:20 AM
Quote from: gn_leugim on September 26, 2016, 06:52:09 AM
this almost makes me ask when will the next nam version will come out $%Grinno$% $%Grinno$% :P
shhh... If you say it out loud, the dream won't come true... :D
but did I say something?? :P $%Grinno$% ;)
We all know that the new NAM will come "soon", while "soon" might vary between 14 days and 14 months or so. ;)
The correct answer is always "The next NAM release is imminent." :P
Quote from: Andreas on September 27, 2016, 03:16:36 PM
We all know that the new NAM will come "soon", while "soon" might vary between 14 days and 14 months or so. ;)
So the number to know here is 14..hmmm :p
Jokes aside, I know very well the policy of NAM release dates, so let's wait :)
Hello!
After MGB made his RRW tunnels (the DTR and now the STR version too) a thought came into my mind. When I installed the NAM last time (and probably into some previous versions too) I saw the option between CAN-AM with SimGoober canals OR SG-CAL canals. At this moment the whole CAN-AM thing is important to me due to the canal FLUP pieces. I was wondering how about other canal types? Like PPond/PEG Pond or Paeng's Urban Recreational Canals (URC) etc... I know the whole FLUP system will be revisited at some point in the far future (because all of them Puzzle Piece based and that technology obsolate), but would it be hard work to make some under canal transitions for URC and/or PPond? (oh and I know, there's some custom flup piece for PEG Streams made by the SFBT Team, I guess.)
Thank you for any answere in advance!
- Tibi
It's totally possible to create overrides for pretty much any of the canal/water systems that include both a canal edge 1x1 piece and a 1x1 water piece. To see this in action, I'd check out Moonlights CAN-AM compatible Canal system.
However, there are two problems with including such additions into the NAM installer. The first one is simply that we may need permission to re-use resources from those canal/water sets. In many cases these may simply be unavailable or the creator is no longer around to ask. The second one is that CAN-AM has never really been very popular, so after the original release, there was no further development of this mod. I think in some part that this is related to the limitation of using perfectly flat land to make canals.
In any case, I wouldn't hold my breath for any changes to happen. NAM 35 should extend support to both the MHO and Moonlights El-Rail for the first time, but that's the most development it's seen since it's inception.
Those custom FLUPs pieces are probably your best solution by the sounds of things. There are 6 of them you can customise, in this case you'd need to use a T21 to place the canal/waterway models onto the requisite FLUP.
Imminent . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/nam35a01-installer.jpg)
It's now in the hands of the NAM Team and Associates.
-Alex
Ooh! I'm getting excited now!
%BUd% %BUd% %BUd% :bnn: :bnn: :D
Good luck with Your work NAM 35 :thumbsup:
(https://media.giphy.com/media/CNiqT2kbLkovK/giphy.gif)
Great news!!
Ditto &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls Only hope that the NAM35 Alpha NAM Team works out the unknown bugs before official release which I hope will be seamless. :thumbsup:
Awesome! Thank you very much, for all of your huge work &apls
I was wondering if i could make some cosmetic pieces for the network widening mod and how i would go about getting the required files to do so.
will there be a NAM v35 beta public release?... %confuso
will nam day be on the beta release day or on hold for the official full public release... ???
and then, to celebrate nam day if there are any batters and lotters with a project to offer would be great... :)
:satisfied:
Quote from: superfrenchtoast2 on October 23, 2016, 11:46:19 PM
I was wondering if i could make some cosmetic pieces for the network widening mod and how i would go about getting the required files to do so.
The base ortho textures for all the NWM networks can be found attached here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1200.msg512738#msg512738). That would at least get you started on the texture side. Cosmetic piece implementation is somewhat in the air at the moment, as we have been steadily moving away from static puzzle pieces, though with the large number of cosmetic setups that were created on the RHW side, it may be the one holdout. The process of making static puzzle pieces is detailed here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=11023.0), though unfortunately, the rather handy webtools that the tutorial links to are no longer available.
Quote from: Jack_wilds on October 24, 2016, 05:32:21 PM
will there be a NAM v35 beta public release?... %confuso
will nam day be on the beta release day or on hold for the official full public release... ???
and then, to celebrate nam day if there are any batters and lotters with a project to offer would be great... :)
:satisfied:
The plan at the moment is to skip having a "pre-release" and just go for the full release, though that is not set in stone. It will ultimately depend on how testing goes. Technically, the NAM is always at least partially in a "beta" state, as we're always improving and adding to it.
-Alex
To my knowledge, there are no plans for a public beta. Hopefully the team will not encounter any major problems and we'll be able to bring the release to everyone shortly.
Quote from: superfrenchtoast2 on October 23, 2016, 11:46:19 PM
I was wondering if i could make some cosmetic pieces for the network widening mod and how i would go about getting the required files to do so.
It might be helpful if you start a new thread under the NAM forum, showcasing your ideas and any progress. That would give us the chance to see exactly what you had in mind and provide some advice. A lot of tutorials exist to explain common tasks, but in the first instance if you can explain you ideas in more detail, we can target any advice better.
As for including such mods in the NAM, which would be necessary to distribute them. That's certainly a possibility, but really depends on how far you can get with things.
:thumbsup: &apls Yea! I've been reading, though school takes up more time lately. I can't wait till NAM 35 comes out.
Now that NAM 35 is out it is time to look further afield...
https://www.youtube.com/v/vvAvHZSrdik
Still a bit of work to do but Current testing shows that the code base is pretty stable
Hope you enjoy!
-eggman121
hurray!! Secret weapons are back! I loved the teasers for NAM 33 (I'm still wondering what the mystery feature actually is ()what()). Keep it up, eggman121!!
and diagonal ramps! Thats going to bring a lot of new interchanges to the realm of feasibility. awesome! :bnn:
you have me on the edge of my seat since Feb 2016 ;D
Quote from: eggman121 on February 25, 2016, 04:56:21 PM
Spot the new Piece ::)
[...]
-eggman121
Quote from: Seaman on February 02, 2017, 03:30:26 PM
I'm still wondering what the mystery feature actually is ()what()).
RHW Disconnector :)
The other thing those videos hinted at, which sadly has yet to materialise is the drag width/height transitions.
that is incredible!!! thank you for sharing your progress. my jaw just dropped I am ...wow
O.M.G.! :O
I've noticed that Draggable Elevated Avenue glitches up (http://imgur.com/OTZ4kM7) if you drag it into elevated RHW or MHW. How easy would it be to fix this? I assume for the L2 Avenue Viaduct to Elevated Highway without the override you can just reuse the model of the existing static puzzle piece, though said puzzle piece is visually broken with the MHO installed (http://imgur.com/D3rLjLk).
Quote from: Wiimeiser on April 28, 2017, 07:30:36 PM
I've noticed that Draggable Elevated Avenue glitches up (http://imgur.com/OTZ4kM7) if you drag it into elevated RHW or MHW. How easy would it be to fix this? I assume for the L2 Avenue Viaduct to Elevated Highway without the override you can just reuse the model of the existing static puzzle piece, though said puzzle piece is visually broken with the MHO installed (http://imgur.com/D3rLjLk).
Probably just a case of adding the necessary code, but less simple for the L1 variant, although I'm guessing most of the original model is probably good for re-using there too.
For the "broken" piece, which is actually just missing a texture,
I uploaded a patch (http://community.simtropolis.com/forums/topic/65756-nam-general-support-topic/?do=findComment&comment=1654307) (ST). It was working but I overhauled the MHO files completely for NAM 35 and this one texture got missed for US users only (the EU variant works).
Sorry to pose a question out of blue, but it's in the to-do-list a RD/OWR/AVE/GLR on slope FLUP portal?
All FLUPs development is currently on hold. If/when it is an active project again, if someone is willing to make the models (always the bottleneck in many NAM projects), then it'd be something we'd certainly consider.
-Alex
Hi!
What is about Buddybud's onslop tunel portals? He used to make rd/owr2/ave portals, and they can be used with NAM flups and subway mode aswell.
Alex, as I remember someone made models for NWM tunels (not onslop), there were pictures about them in the FLUP topic back in 2010, but they've never been released due to some secret in future NAM development.
I'm not inpatient, maybe I will be 60 since than, but eventually we will get those pieces... :popcorn: ;D ;D
- Tyberius
Buddybud's onslope's were designed to work as Subway conversion lots. They are available on a Japanese site somewhere, although he marked them as a beta/preview, I've had no problems using them.
As for NWM portals, I think you might be confusing them with those that Dexter made for the RHW? Either way as per Tarkus' last post, there is no active development around such things right now.
Yepp, but they are working fine with flup pieces aswell, just the slope needs to be 10m.
Sadly all the pictures gone from Dexter's development thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=13715.0 (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=13715.0), but as the bold title said, there were NWM FLUPs in the cue.
But yepp I'm aware of that there is no development in progess on that side, Alex mentioned couple of times when the topic came up. Thats why I said, maybe in NAM 60. :popcorn: ;) :D
Dexter did indeed create some NWM models, but I happen to have the pack of models he supplied the team, and only the RHW models are in there. Unless he resurfaces and happens to still have them on his hard drive, they're presumably lost. IIRC, my attempt at replacing the existing RHW-2 portal with Dexter's required a fair bit of Model Tweaker work, to get things to line up properly.
-Alex
Well he was last active on feb 2nd.... are there plans at some point to have flups under the NWM networks ?
And also, on a completed unrelated note... could the Flexcurves be moved to there own icon like all the other flex stuff ? :)
And Tarkus ... I did send you a PM in march, dont know if you got a chance to see it.
FLUPs-under-NWM would be something that would be handled by the infamous new implementation. I don't think anyone wants to go down the puzzle piece rabbit hole again.
The menus (particularly on the RHW side) are kind of a work-in-progress at the moment, due to the fact that we're in that awkward transitional phase, between being fully PP-based and having the FLEX system built up to the desired extent. It'll be possible to get amazingly compact with the menus once we get to the point of FLEX build-out.
And I did (finally :-[) get back to your PM.
-Alex
While we're on the subject of the RHW buttons, would it hurt to move the Deprecated Height Transitions button down a bit? It should be just one variable.
Also, what's this about a new FLUPS implementation?
Oh, one more word about FLUPs. I'm using rivit's latest "beta" RUM for RRW mod, and mgb's SWN (1.0 beta something) and NGN mods, and I choosed the option using concrete texture under the rail flups (as you can see on the attached picture), but there is no other concrete flup piece (or I missed something) on the TAB ring, so when I would like to make a diagonal FLUP under rail, or longer underpass with more tiles, I've got this zig-zag effect due to the different usable textures. Can the NAM Team put this concrete texture (straight, cross, T, and curve routes under the texture) with the other FLUP pieces? I know it's PP and things like that, but in urban areas this would be better, and that would be great if it wouldn't have pedestrian paths on it like on the original (as the picture shows).
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkephost.com%2Fimages%2F2017%2F05%2F02%2Fb26bec43fbab16bf07967912b8f3bb5b.png&hash=4765caef7f515d0953e23e47a683271a27b4c7f5)
Thanks in advance!
- Tyberius
The thing is, we can't offer every choice in the NAM installer, this really comes under the realm of third party mods.
Here's a conundrum for you, make a similar setup, but instead of rail, use a road for the diagonal network. See how it all matches perfectly with sidewalks? Now consider that if you change the sidewalks to concrete, that setup would no longer match, even if the rail did?
What I've done is make a override for the 2nd Maxis pedmall type (the pink ones) with concrete. This way the regular sidewalk option will still exist too, allowing you to choose between them. Find that attached, it needs to load after SWN, place it in the same folder as the SWN FLUPs and you should be fine.
As for removing the pathing, the piece is "FLUPs under Pedmall", those paths are necessary if connected to other PedMalls. It won't cause any problems though with setups like you've shown. Including them just saves having to have additional pieces (i.e. it's more efficient).
One of the more daunting tasks I'm currently undertaking is (finally) updating and revamping the NAM documentation. As you may know if you've followed the saga, the documentation has laid mostly untouched since the NAM 31.x releases (over 4 years ago), in large part because of the sheer difficulty in working with the source files for the new PDF documentation introduced back then.
The new documentation marks a return to the old HTML format that the team used in NAM 30 and earlier, based on Andreas' tried-and-true templates, but with some modern touches on the HTML side (like replacing the old table layout with divs and spans, and using CSS formatting). Here's the work-in-progress start page:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/namdoc-07212017-1.jpg)
And here's a peek at some of the things I'm looking to do with the feature guides--this is a table out of the NWM section:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/namdoc-08012017-1.jpg)
-Alex
Alex,
I am highly appreciative of the great amount of time and work I know it takes to update the Doc of this huge mod..
But I absolutely love what you are doing here :thumbsup:
The orthogonal transitions chart is a fantastic idea !!!!
Alex,
This is looking really good!
it all looks very promising... :thumbsup:
personally I pdf format -as used for my autocad/turbocad...
BUT html and its standards are just as good and better at some things over pdf...
:)
@Jack_wilds: We appreciated the pdf format as a very handy way to package the documentation, but the biggest issue with it was trying to edit the files to add or change information.
The pdf files were so large that they would continually crash the editor. Additionally the conversion to HTML will make integrating the documentation onto the wiki much simpler, as in theory almost no converting will need to take place to set up the files. Eventually I understood the plan was to move as much of the documentation online so that referencing it would be much easier and then installation of the official "offline" documentation could be an optional install.
The other advantage of a move to HTML and a wiki-based documentation format is that the files can be edited on the fly (as it were) once new features, techniques, or information becomes available, rather than having to wait for the next NAM release and a very rigorous editing process. Documentation is often one of the hardest parts of software development, and the ability for other NAM team members to take on some of that workload is crucial to helping the community get the most out of the mod.
Quote from: APSMS on August 01, 2017, 10:55:28 PM
The other advantage of a move to HTML and a wiki-based documentation format is that the files can be edited on the fly (as it were) once new features, techniques, or information becomes available, rather than having to wait for the next NAM release and a very rigorous editing process. Documentation is often one of the hardest parts of software development, and the ability for other NAM team members to take on some of that workload is crucial to helping the community get the most out of the mod.
Not to mention that if plain terms are used in the HTML they can be translated into different languages through online tools like google translate.
With such a diverse array of people from different backgrounds and language types it makes sense to make this stuff more accessible to others who don't have the same proficiency of English as others. This is an English speaking site however we should be mindful that quite a few users would prefer to have access to content in there specific language. We as a community really need to knit together if we want to keep the status quo. Just like when we go to say a German or Japanese fansite we usually have to translate them to make sense and navigate.
As the premiere Transport mod the NAM should be aiming to cater for all users independent of there locality and language.
On a side note there have been requests to simplify the use of the RRW Flextrack and FARR. First stage is a quick overview cheat sheet I am working on to cater for the quick reference of the turnout types and patterns. The next NAM will possibly have Flex Pieces that will completely bypass the need to draw patterns and conform to Flextrack standards. Both methods will maintained however ;)
So this is my opinion on the matter. It has been a long ride to make most of the content Flex and I will continue to work on solutions to ease the use and make the NAM a joy to use. ;D
-eggman121
I would be happy to help checking the spanish translations for legibility and errors (you know, Google Translator has become much more intelligent lastly, but still has considerable issues with niche technical jargon). What would be needed would be to fix standard translations for common used terms: f.e. highway = autopista and expressway = autovía.
And about the flextrack learning curve, yes, it is steep, but is also really fun to climb. I've had a great time experimenting with it, maybe only comparable with learning to use the RHW!
Is it just me or is it unusually quiet here right now? Would that mean it's all bugfixes now?
Our first alpha build from May was pretty solid, but the problem is that the three main developers of this release have all had pretty significant periods of RL since, which has complicated things in various ways. That and trying to get the documentation revamp have kept us from getting to a second alpha build. I suspect that once we can actually get to that second build, and the most brutal part of the documentation is in hand (the RHW documentation is at about 95% now), things will progress again, but until then, we're still in standby mode.
-Alex
Speak of the devil . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/nam36-a02.jpg)
Just passed it over to the rest of the team. The new RHW documentation is basically finished, too.
-Alex
Oh my...
&hlp
A big giant Thank You to you guys putting all the work you do into this mod.
I can't wait to see it.
Cheers, tiger
Oh man! This is exciting :)
Is there gonna be a Mac installer for this version?
Thanks for the support everyone--it's been a long journey, for sure, and it feels good to have this build together now. :thumbsup:
Quote from: tomvsotis on August 24, 2017, 11:31:23 AM
Is there gonna be a Mac installer for this version?
The Mac situation will likely be identical to how it was for NAM 35. We'll run a Wineskin wrapper over the Windows installer so it'll also run on macOS. Mac-specific tech support will probably remain pretty limited on our end, unfortunately.
-Alex
... sorry for the crazy idea but have draggable tunnels ever been considered? As in, it would have a "ramp" like the height pieces, but instead would go x meters below ground, and then viola, a rhw tunnel.
We have indeed given that idea some thought before. However, due to all our other projects taking up so much of our time, we have yet to work out the kinks that our earlier testing revealed. That's about all I can say about it without spoiling anything.
Obviously you wouldn't be able to put lots on top of draggable tunnels, right? I'm aware of the game's limitations, unless there's something I'm missing.
On the other hand, it's good to see the NAM update is happening soon, it's been a while.
@Wiimeister: Actually I guess you can, just need to do some little tricks on the models. I think noachlem made some experiment what he showed in his Siljoki thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=12162.msg517768#msg517768). It's quite exciting :)
But yepp, dragable underpass tunnels????? Well that would be something really awesome! After that what is next? Dragable Pedmalls? :D :D
Thanks for the whole NAM Team all those efforts what they have done and will do in the future! :)
- Tyberius
Quote from: Tarkus on August 24, 2017, 04:11:08 PM
The Mac situation will likely be identical to how it was for NAM 35. We'll run a Wineskin wrapper over the Windows installer so it'll also run on macOS. Mac-specific tech support will probably remain pretty limited on our end, unfortunately.
OK, good to know. Thanks.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on August 24, 2017, 11:20:52 PM
Obviously you wouldn't be able to put lots on top of draggable tunnels, right? I'm aware of the game's limitations, unless there's something I'm missing.
That very much depends on which network the draggable tunnels use.
Quote from: Tyberius06 on August 25, 2017, 08:25:14 AM
@Wiimeister: Actually I guess you can, just need to do some little tricks on the models. I think noachlem made some experiment what he showed in his Siljoki thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=12162.msg517768#msg517768). It's quite exciting :)
Unless I'm mistaken, Noah's tunnels are a result of some clever terraforming, not something the NAM would do. There are a couple of ways to use terraforming to make fake tunnels, and I've forgotten which one he used.
Quote from: woodb3kmaster on August 25, 2017, 07:57:57 PM
Unless I'm mistaken, Noah's tunnels are a result of some clever terraforming, not something the NAM would do. There are a couple of ways to use terraforming to make fake tunnels, and I've forgotten which one he used.
He made offset props from the buildings (which has modelled base) and put them onto tiny 2x2 or so lots so they are overhanging. Quite smart. :)
A minor issue I've noticed with the NAM 35 installer. When it runs to determine what is already installed, it never seems to flag real railway. I always have to go through the list & manually check it. Don't know if it has been mentioned before, but you may want to check it out during NAM 36 testing.
almost.. there...
(https://zippy.gfycat.com/CourteousWarmHarborporpoise.gif)
Not for public release, eh? I have a feeling that won't be the case for much longer . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/nam36-a04-installer.jpg)
One could even say it's . . . imminent . . .
-Alex
&apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls :bnn: :bnn: :bnn:
Oh boy this is update is really going to make a huge difference. Great job and anxy to the generous release &apls &apls &apls &apls
Quote from: gn_leugim on August 30, 2017, 05:23:29 AM
almost.. there...
(https://zippy.gfycat.com/CourteousWarmHarborporpoise.gif)
"Keep on target", don't loose sight"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ohhh.....i`m about to wiggle around on my Chair from Exitement... :bnn:
Oh yeah! Another nice installer for NAM 36! :thumbsup: Keep moving forward! &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls :bnn:
Quote from: Tarkus on September 05, 2017, 05:45:09 AM
Not for public release, eh? I have a feeling that won't be the case for much longer . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/nam36-a04-installer.jpg)
One could even say it's . . . imminent . . .
-Alex
You and that I-word, Alex...
Quote from: fire on September 07, 2017, 09:03:45 PM
when nam 36 release
"Soon" is all I can tell you. We don't try to predict our release dates at all, simply because the development cycle is so unpredictable.
There are no new bridges I'm aware of as part of NAM 36.
Following on from this thread (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=17898.0), I've done some further curve work.
The design on this one isn't final yet, but it should give you some idea:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/nam-10302017-1.jpg)
And the 3-tile S-Curve, designed to port the Street network's functionality over to the Road network, is now accepting overrides:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/nam-10302017-2.jpg)
-Alex
Great work &apls Noticed the extra dragging options you were working on in the other thread and think they'll be real hand. Can't have too many options for curve geometry--there's so often a big gab between the real smooth curves and the original ones, avenue being a perfect network example of that--and excellent to go to draggable!
The AVE-4 two-tiledness ( :P ) keeps it in the shadows sometimes, so it's good to see nice features like this one ported over to the network.
I had made do with the FAR-2 style draggable s-curves until this point; this new s-curve is one of those nifty little additions you didn't know you wanted until you see it. A great bonus!
Good work! :thumbsup:
Quote from: Tarkus on October 30, 2017, 03:21:56 AM
The design on this one isn't final yet, but it should give you some idea:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/nam-10302017-1.jpg)
I had actually re-made that Ave Curve myself a while back. I have all the resources including the Road/Street/OWR junctions, all with full wealth textures for that piece. So at the risk of messing with your plans, if you want a copy, just holler and I can send them to you.
Great to see you working on improving some of these pieces, and NWM overrides, yes please. I guess having just found Bender you've been inspired to go the extra mile. I know it's made my texture work much easier.
Can I abuse of this a bit to make a request? I've been doing big roundabouts with the OWR but when overriding it with NWM starters they become unable to do smooth curves nor connect adequately to diagonal avenues or wide NWM networks, even orthogonally. And it would be really nice to have big roundabouts, particularly for the AVE-6.
I know that what I'm asking would mean some thousands of lines of code to make it work, but as you are almost infinitely inventive, maybe you can see an easier method to do this...
Thanks, Noah, metarvo, mgb, and matias (and everyone who hit like)! :thumbsup:
Quote from: mgb204 on October 30, 2017, 04:24:07 PM
I had actually re-made that Ave Curve myself a while back. I have all the resources including the Road/Street/OWR junctions, all with full wealth textures for that piece. So at the risk of messing with your plans, if you want a copy, just holler and I can send them to you.
The curve I made is actually a 3x3 variant (an equivalent of the Road Short 90° WRC) rather than the default draggable 2x2, so we may be mess-free, though either way, I'd be curious to see what you have--thanks for the offer! :)
Quote from: matias93 on October 30, 2017, 06:14:56 PM
Can I abuse of this a bit to make a request? I've been doing big roundabouts with the OWR but when overriding it with NWM starters they become unable to do smooth curves nor connect adequately to diagonal avenues or wide NWM networks, even orthogonally. And it would be really nice to have big roundabouts, particularly for the AVE-6.
I know that what I'm asking would mean some thousands of lines of code to make it work, but as you are almost infinitely inventive, maybe you can see an easier method to do this...
eggman121 has been looking at new roundabout proposals as part of the REW project. I've also toyed with the idea of a FLEX implementation of something similar to what Mandelsoft had done with his later roundabout setups.
In any case, here's a few more peeks at things. Here's a comparison of that 3x3 Avenue 90° curve versus the 2x2 default. As I couldn't find a good, working draggable footprint (one of the tricky things with 2-tile networks), it's a FLEX piece.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/nam-10312017-1.jpg)
And, tying in with the REW, OWR-1 and OWR-3 variants of the 3-tile S-Curve:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/nam-10312017-2.jpg)
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on October 31, 2017, 12:38:03 AM
Thanks, Noah, metarvo, mgb, and matias (and everyone who hit like)! :thumbsup:
Quote from: mgb204 on October 30, 2017, 04:24:07 PM
I had actually re-made that Ave Curve myself a while back. I have all the resources including the Road/Street/OWR junctions, all with full wealth textures for that piece. So at the risk of messing with your plans, if you want a copy, just holler and I can send them to you.
The curve I made is actually a 3x3 variant (an equivalent of the Road Short 90° WRC) rather than the default draggable 2x2, so we may be mess-free, though either way, I'd be curious to see what you have--thanks for the offer! :)
Quote from: matias93 on October 30, 2017, 06:14:56 PM
Can I abuse of this a bit to make a request? I've been doing big roundabouts with the OWR but when overriding it with NWM starters they become unable to do smooth curves nor connect adequately to diagonal avenues or wide NWM networks, even orthogonally. And it would be really nice to have big roundabouts, particularly for the AVE-6.
I know that what I'm asking would mean some thousands of lines of code to make it work, but as you are almost infinitely inventive, maybe you can see an easier method to do this...
eggman121 has been looking at new roundabout proposals as part of the REW project. I've also toyed with the idea of a FLEX implementation of something similar to what Mandelsoft had done with his later roundabout setups.
In any case, here's a few more peeks at things. Here's a comparison of that 3x3 Avenue 90° curve versus the 2x2 default. As I couldn't find a good, working draggable footprint (one of the tricky things with 2-tile networks), it's a FLEX piece.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/nam-10312017-1.jpg)
And, tying in with the REW, OWR-1 and OWR-3 variants of the 3-tile S-Curve:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/nam-10312017-2.jpg)
-Alex
Nice looking curve. I hope this will be included in the next NAM. :)
My recommendation: use the modular road system if possible.
Simple things (I think) that makes the joy of many people!! NAM 37 can be released sooner if you add these only $%Grinno$% $%Grinno$%
Now, on a more serious note, could this excellent job be added as a patch?
I love the curves that you propose Tarkus, this is more realistic! The curve of 90 ° Avenue Maxis is too square, with the way you do, cars pass the turn better and it seems more natural!
The curves of the other types of roads are also very beautiful, by the way! &apls
Wow! Another awesome goodies &apls Do you also think about making a wider curves, like 4x4? With my eyes of imagination I can see some compact curves for trumpet interchanges ;)
Quote from: gn_leugim on October 31, 2017, 07:58:18 AM
Now, on a more serious note, could this excellent job be added as a patch?
Adding new content like this as a patch is a mixed bag. Technically it can be done, but would require you manually update/run the controller compiler for the RUL code. Frankly I think such things are better waiting until a proper release, since it's not a bug fix it just makes our job as developers harder.
Finally getting back to this, I've reworked many Ave textures for the upcoming TGN release, here's some samples of those changes:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4454/26345155389_a647ecc69b_o.jpg)
Obviously not everything there is perfect. But the way these work is that parts of one piece are re-used for others, so it's a tough job to match everything up whilst keeping things smooth. I disliked the way a number of the wealth textures didn't line up properly for sidewalks and grass, something I have fixed here for the Ave End Pieces. Speaking of which, that's pretty much my motivation for creating full on replacements for the original 90-Degree Curves. Along with getting rid of the Yellow markings for EU users and improving the geometry. Don't worry, the defaults are still yellow, it's just that now the EU ones are white. Similarly, whilst I'm showing TSR variants here, the defaults are with Maxis Streets, I just don't use them myself. Anyhow, here's all three wealth variants, I think these are a huge improvement, they certainly took a lot of time perfecting:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4454/38121506461_6193fbbc11_o.jpg)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4455/26345157199_c1e7c8e94d_o.jpg)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4535/38090082802_04f9dd50cf_o.jpg)
The eagle-eyed will note that the grass median remains even for Med-High density zoning. This prevents a mis-match that can otherwise occur, plus I think it looks really good too. I've attached Generic Maxis versions of all these textures for those who might want to try them out.
- Ave New 90 - XX.dat - Pick either the EU or US (where XX) version.
- Ave New Curves.dat -Contains the 45 Degree, S-Curve and other textures.
Note these files must load after z___NAM folder to work, so prefix the folder containing them with z____ (that's four underscores) to guarantee they appear.
@Alex: the Ave New 90 files are pretty much ready to be chucked into the NAM if you fancy using them. The other pieces may need some work, but feel free to use whatever you like however you see fit.
The TGN is a remarkable addition to our networks, so I'm thrilled to see more progress. Good work, mgb! Even the densest concrete jungles can have grass in the medians.
Is it OK if I mention a few of the relatively minor things that would be huge QOL improvements if they were added?
I think one of mine would have to be roundabout connections to NWM networks (especially the OWR roundabout). It would certainly increase their utility to connect AVE-2s (or other single-tile networks) into them.
The other would be NWM crossings for GLR in avenue/road, though obviously that's a harder thing to work on. It would likely require the overrides that don't touch the tile, like the RHW overpass implementation.
Those two little things would give me a lot more flexibility!
Quote from: mgb204 on November 02, 2017, 01:34:07 PM
@Alex: the Ave New 90 files are pretty much ready to be chucked into the NAM if you fancy using them. The other pieces may need some work, but feel free to use whatever you like however you see fit.
Thanks for the files! :thumbsup: They look great, and I'll give them a go.
Quote from: Tracker on November 02, 2017, 05:57:56 PM
I think one of mine would have to be roundabout connections to NWM networks (especially the OWR roundabout). It would certainly increase their utility to connect AVE-2s (or other single-tile networks) into them.
The other would be NWM crossings for GLR in avenue/road, though obviously that's a harder thing to work on. It would likely require the overrides that don't touch the tile, like the RHW overpass implementation.
Those two little things would give me a lot more flexibility!
And they're both great ideas. :thumbsup: The first one--at least with respect to the OWR roundabout--is pretty easy to do, fortunately.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/nam-11062017-1.jpg)
-Alex
Wow, sweet! That will work wonders to make small European styled boulevards &apls
It would be as easy to do the same for 2-tile NWMs and the 4 tile roundabout?
Cool to see NWM working with the OWR Roundabouts :thumbsup:
Personally, I've just finished the code for El-Rail and Monorail to work with SAM Streets:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4540/26439655569_0620c1b315_o.jpg)
Shown here with NAM overrides for Moonlights BTM and Alternate ElRail mods, but don't worry if you don't use either, the regular El-Rail and Monorail pieces will of course be supported too.
Of course the real reason for doing this is that the El-Rail code needs to be in place before I can make the GLR network interact with SAM, which is the next thing on my list. I have OxO crossings sorted already though. After the base SAM2 is fully covered, it's just mostly copy/paste work to support every SAM variant. Hopefully this will be ready for NAM37.
Very nice job Tarkus and mgb!
The roundabouts finally have connections with the NWM AVE! :thumbsup:
Thanks, Matias, Robin, and 000 (and all the "like"-minded folks, pun fully intended). :thumbsup:
Pathing operations are going forward on the curves.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/nam-11092017-1.jpg)
I've actually been able to use Bender to turn the pathing for curves into a "paint-by-numbers" exercise. This is a far cry from the days of yore--I still remember how long it took me to path that 9x9 Rail 90° Curve several years ago.
-Alex
I love seeing the NRD-4 getting some love.
Nice NRD-4 curve version! &apls :bnn: :thumbsup:
Quote from: Tarkus on November 09, 2017, 07:37:16 PM
Thanks, Matias, Robin, and 000 (and all the "like"-minded folks, pun fully intended). :thumbsup:
Pathing operations are going forward on the curves.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/nam-11092017-1.jpg)
I've actually been able to use Bender to turn the pathing for curves into a "paint-by-numbers" exercise. This is a far cry from the days of yore--I still remember how long it took me to path that 9x9 Rail 90° Curve several years ago.
-Alex
Nice, smooth curved NRD-4. Continue working, NAM Team!
And we have lift off for the base GLRxSAM pieces:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4554/38396700401_106b411637_o.jpg)
Just porting that code now so it works for the other GLR styles (Rural, Alt Grass/SW). Once that's done, I'll add some stability code so you can have junctions and other pieces next to the crossings. At that point it's just a copy/paste job (a LOT &Thk/( of copy/pasting), to cover every SAM mod from 2-11.
Guys you need to stop!!!! You're making me drool all over the floor almost daily. ;D ;D ;D
Just kidding. Keep up the awesome work. I'll fetch a broom to clean the mess. :P
MGB,
Thanks so much for your efforts here :thumbsup:
I think it had to because I have only seen limited use as a game player with the SAM pieces.., that this came as a surprise to myself... I did start out using the SAM content a lot during there earlier releases.. But I had no idea until your posting here that the GLR X SAM was non - functional with these crossings until your posting came out &mmm
Greatly appreciated what your doing here, especially in light of the fact of the amount of content you have to mod, and it does sound like somewhat tedious work here to make this happen for the rest of us, so its just that much more appreciated by myself your taking the time to do all of this ...
Excellent! With these new SAM compatibilities they are no longer limited in city use, we can exploit the most of them! Good to see them seeing some love! :D
How beautiful! ;D
Now GLR in the historic brick street district is not out of reach. Great work! :thumbsup:
Just dropping this here ::)
(https://i.imgur.com/UbljLnr.jpg)
These intersections are very common on rural four lane Highways in Victoria.
-eggman121
wait, whaaaaa....????
Wow, it seems to me that this type of roundabout is dangerous ... I find it very strange that a roundabout is built in the middle of a highway, the risk of accident is high.
In Switzerland / Europe, for this type of configuration, sub-channels or viaducts are used.
Anyway, it does not detract from the beauty of the work. &apls
Quote from: 000 on November 19, 2017, 11:32:07 AM
Wow, it seems to me that this type of roundabout is dangerous ... I find it very strange that a roundabout is built in the middle of a highway, the risk of accident is high.
In Switzerland / Europe, for this type of configuration, sub-channels or viaducts are used.
Anyway, it does not detract from the beauty of the work. &apls
Thanks
000,
Seaman and everyone else that hit
LikeThey are dangerous intersections. But when traffic volumes are down these are the intersections that are employed.
Here is one example (https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-36.816674,145.4403648,274m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)
I personally hate having them on Highways that I drive on but that is Australia for you :innocent:
-eggman121
... I've been through actual highway roundabouts in Barbados that are rated for 80 km/h .... you do not want to know what its like to cross these things from the intersecting road.
That could also be used for an urban boulevard, maybe. Will the wider OWR be used for anything else?
I love maps and oh boy there are this type after one after another of this type of interchange (round-about) in the center. The U.S. sort of has items similar to this just not as round.
Actually have a 3-way version of one of these (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2324847,-123.1595454,209m/data=!3m1!1e3) not too far from me, at the junction of OR-99W and OR-47 . . . used to drive through it regularly, in fact (I basically learned to drive on OR-99W).
-Alex
It appears to me, that (although shaped like one) this is, in fact, not a roundabout rather than a sort of shifted intersection. The right of way of the main road seems to go clearly through and the separated middle helps drivers on the intersecting road to focus only one direction, where traffic might come from.
And its waaay cheaper to build this than a subchannel or viaduct.
I love it for the sake of diversity this might ad to the range of intersections in SC4. I'm really looking forward to you opening your REW-box of wonders, eggman :)
Actually, it might be safer if there was a way for traffic entering the expressway to merge slowly, so a version where the OWR-4 continues might be a good idea. In the longer term, maybe? A transition between the variant OWR-4 and NWM's OWR-4 would be nice as well.
In regards to eggman's intersection, I think it looks rather interesting. While I've never seen this variant, nor have I seen the T variant as Tarkus has shown. I think this is a wannabe roundabout however. It is just a rounded version of a road crossing a divided highway, and the turn lanes included.
Wiimeiser, I've found that there are such things as left lane acceleration lanes, such as this intersection.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Rocky+Ford,+CO+81067/@38.0644521,-103.7477268,183m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x87120fd3a2bb35c5:0xeda6a4565b9b796c!8m2!3d38.052508!4d-103.7202274
This is my usual route to and from work.
Eggman121 that's an interesting roundabout thingy, I like it very much.
I have some questions about the future and possibilities. When I saw b22rian's post in the RHW topic (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=990.msg522091;topicseen#new), it reminded me about a FLUP related question. Since I know there is no more puzzle pieces development, and the whole FLUP system is Puzzle Piece based, so there is no chance for this, but it came up into my mind why hasn't been made any FLUP pieces under elevated networks (apart from the PEDMALLS). I mean underground roads under El Rail or L1/L2 RHW etc...
Other question with these. Is there any technical possibility to make actual FLEXIBLE Underpasses. I mean where we have a "starter", f.e. the underpass ramp, and drawing one of the networks it makes flups under the other networks etc. So basicly is there a way to replace the Puzzle Pieces with an actual "network"?
Same question with the PEDMALLs? Is there a technical possibility to develop flexible pedmalls?
Anyway the FLUP PPs under elevated networks would be nice... I know there is no more PP development, and the team has limited men/women/other-gender power... :)
- Tyberius
Quote from: Tyberius06 on November 22, 2017, 04:19:11 AM
Other question with these. Is there any technical possibility to make actual FLEXIBLE Underpasses. I mean where we have a "starter", f.e. the underpass ramp, and drawing one of the networks it makes flups under the other networks etc. So basicly is there a way to replace the Puzzle Pieces with an actual "network"?
At least in theory, yes--that's the oft-mentioned "new implementation" for the FLUPs.
Quote from: Tyberius06 on November 22, 2017, 04:19:11 AM
Same question with the PEDMALLs? Is there a technical possibility to develop flexible pedmalls?
No reason we can't rig up an override network.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on November 22, 2017, 03:52:55 PM
Quote from: Tyberius06 on November 22, 2017, 04:19:11 AM
Same question with the PEDMALLs? Is there a technical possibility to develop flexible pedmalls?
No reason we can't rig up an override network.
-Alex
Would this make it possible to develop Resi in pedmall??
Quote from: gn_leugim on November 24, 2017, 10:45:14 AM
Quote from: Tarkus on November 22, 2017, 03:52:55 PM
Quote from: Tyberius06 on November 22, 2017, 04:19:11 AM
Same question with the PEDMALLs? Is there a technical possibility to develop flexible pedmalls?
No reason we can't rig up an override network.
-Alex
Would this make it possible to develop Resi in pedmall??
For what I understand, it wouldn't, as residential lots need a car exit to send commuters to their workplaces, but I might be wrong...
Quote from: matias93 on November 24, 2017, 02:51:14 PM
Quote from: gn_leugim on November 24, 2017, 10:45:14 AM
Would this make it possible to develop Resi in pedmall??
For what I understand, it wouldn't, as residential lots need a car exit to send commuters to their workplaces, but I might be wrong...
Sounds about right to me, technically the Pedmalls are a Road already, so more than likely that's the cost of removing car traffic on them.
and what about adding some dummy car paths to them? In the way that they would have "car traffic" but it would net get sims anywhere, so they would have to walk out. &idea
or "actual" car paths but far below the ground, similar to the (RHW) neighbour connection pieces? Possibly with some kind of "connection" piece that allows the underground paths to actually connect to the real road network? Wouldn't work very well to avoid having sims use their car, but probably would allow zoning?
I've actually just started using the pedmalls with FLUPs under them in significant area of at least one of my recent regions and they apparently work just like zoning next to roads, though you'll need a transition from surface street to FLUP for them to be able to get somewhere beyond wherever that network under the ped malls can get. A lot transition of some type, which I wouldn't be surprised if it already exists, should also work.
There was a Korean modder ages ago (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=10942.0) who reportedly had some success using trick car paths, but my own attempt at replicating those findings didn't turn out as well.
-Alex
oh gosh now that I see that I remember why I had that idea, I tried to work it out that time actually too :-[ ??? ???
After someone mentioned problems using dual OWR networks with GLR in the median and crossing such setups with NWM, I figured that would be useful if we could support it. Cue 480 lines of new adjacency code and we have:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4586/27091580029_b78c1bcbe3_o.jpg)
Long and short, you can now use a pair of either OWR-1, 2 or 3 networks to create an avenue with a one tile gap. Single-tile NWM networks will happily intersect with any of the supported rail-type networks and remain stable. I think that's a pretty good return on investment for such a small amount of code.
One last little fix, I know there isn't a lot of clearance for a train, but L1 ERRW under L2 networks is something I still want to see:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4546/38152544424_1d67af2cd4_o.jpg)
MGB,thanks for your excellent posting here :thumbsup:
QuoteOne last little fix, I know there isn't a lot of clearance for a train, but L1 ERRW under L2 networks is something I still want to see:
I would have to fully agree here as well..
Sometimes you have to give up a little in realism, to open the door quite wide in terms of game play options. To me, this is one of those instances..
And I do not see problems. If the railway, which passes at an altitude of 7.5 meters (L1), will pass under the overpass, which is at an altitude of 15 meters (L2) - then the altitude for passing the train (7.5 meters) is quite enough.
Great job! :thumbsup: Very in demand. &apls &apls &apls
Quote from: b22rian on December 06, 2017, 03:13:46 AM
Sometimes you have to give up a little in realism
Well, I don't see, where we have to give up a little in realism... :) ;) That setup is not unrealistic at all, since I know in real life setups, where 2-5 different angled rail lines in more or less different high level are crossing each other and of course other transit networks are crossing below of them.
But I'm very happy that we will have this setup, and thanks to MGB204 for the OWR-GLR/etc-NWM crossings workaround as well!
That will be a nice addition too!
- Tyberius
It's not that the setup in particular is unrealistic, it's that the in-game height values for most train automata are very close to 7m (if not well over for taller railstock.
Obviously IRL 7.5 meters is more than fine, but then again 22 feet for most overpasses is already excessive, and yet in game it feels almost low, so YMMV.
Robin, would dual tile NWM be too much adjacency code to run about for all the possible configurations?
Here we go... :)
(https://i.imgur.com/lYeIAZB.jpg)
I was thinking to myself the other day how there would pretty much never be a W 12-2 sign, let alone a "Low Clearance" plaque, in SC4 since even 7.5 m translates to roughly 24' 7" in imperial units. That number would look absurd on a W 12-2 sign. From a BATters point of view, however, it might just seem low because of the game's perspective — an effect akin to the BAT squash which implores BATters to upscale BATs to 133% of source height. It's just the game's isometric perspective. Adjusted for "inflation," you really have 5.6 m or 18' 6" in RL terms, even though the overpass will be 7.5 m in-game. This number is much more reasonable in my mind for highway overpasses IMO.
It begs to question. If these signs were in fact made, should they use the game's nominal measurements or the adjusted ones? ;D
I suppose you could always work up two models and see how it looks. Quite frankly the only time I've seen clearance signs were when the overpass was less than 16 feet about, not quite 5 meters. I've never seen a sign that reads 18 ft.
Of course, train have different clearance requirements, though perhaps it goes without saying that most rail lines lack clearance signs simply because if you don't already know the clearance of the rail line, then you're basically screwed already by dispatch, assuming they give you consists that are too tall, since by the time you realize it it will be far too late to do anything about.
Quote from: APSMS on December 06, 2017, 11:47:24 AM
It's not that the setup in particular is unrealistic, it's that the in-game height values for most train automata are very close to 7m (if not well over for taller railstock.
Exactly, the real issue is the perspective of the game, which makes it look like trains won't fit cleanly under the highway. Especially when whilst the highway is at 15m for the roadway, there are parts of the model below that height.
QuoteRobin, would dual tile NWM be too much adjacency code to run about for all the possible configurations?
Not necessarily more code, more that it adds another level of complexity to the code, since you have to deal with outer/inner tiles. Whereas the single-tile networks once one is out the way, becomes mostly a copy/paste job. Getting all the various multi-tile networks in there, is likely to be more arduous. If anything I would prioritise adding OWR-4/OWR-5 setups for the dual-avenue networks, before adding intersections for any dual-tile networks. But certainly there is room for expansion here, I'm just not sure how far I want to go right this moment.
Quote from: mgb204 on December 06, 2017, 09:21:22 PM
If anything I would prioritise adding OWR-4/OWR-5 setups for the dual-avenue networks, before adding intersections for any dual-tile networks. But certainly there is room for expansion here, I'm just not sure how far I want to go right this moment.
No problem. ;) Thanks for the work you've already done. I can already see uses for it in my head. &idea
Here's an interesting reference that would answer the railroad height clearance:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/rcbook_55515_7.pdf
According to the State of Michigan, the height would be 22' 6" from the top of the rail to the top for available clearance space. While this is one state's representation, this is a standard that can be used to compare to the game. The 22' 6" clearance space given could hypothetically fit in the 24' 7" number (7.5m). Realistically, this must include factors such as height of rail from base to rail top, and overhead width concerns. However, I don't see how the L1 rail/L2 RHW could not be possible.
Nam Discord Chat Announcement : "$Deal"$
Recently we have decided , to open up the former NAM discord chat room to non NAM members ;D
We will be keeping # NAM as a private room for NAM discussions only still...
However you are welcome to attend any of our other 3 channels which include the main channel-
# General, -which mostly focuses on NAM content / transit /traffic/ other sc4 chatter , but also has a general topic theme to it also..
# Pictures - focuses on either presenting pics for demonstration of NAM content and transit (issues + bugs)
- but also has pics of peoples recent work in there CJ's and cities..
# Help Desk - an area to post issues and bugs, ( not only with the NAM Mod but in any aspect of the sc-4 - the game) in order to take advantage of "live help" for these.. in the chat room..
# How to NAM- A newly created channel , and will feature NAM and transit related tutorials
Our membership currently stands at 31 members. But we are (hoping for), and would like to welcome all Devotion community supporters..
Here is the Discord Invite Link - https://discordapp.com/invite/NsNZHEC (https://discordapp.com/invite/NsNZHEC)
Looking forward to seeing new members soon ! :thumbsup:
Thanks, Brian
So, there's been no real activity on the NAM front lately. Does that mean NAM 37 is close? Or is it just RL issues?
Quote from: Wiimeiser on October 16, 2018, 10:03:22 PM
So, there's been no real activity on the NAM front lately. Does that mean NAM 37 is close? Or is it just RL issues?
Based on similar questions in the past, I assume Tarkus will say that NAM 37 release is "imminent" (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1138.msg520527#msg520527) :D
(jokes away, I believe most dev work for NAM37 is done and they are in testing and installer building now)
As of this moment, there is no build for NAM 37 internally, but discussions are underway regarding a new version. The three main developers (Tarkus, Eggman and myself), have all had really hectic RL the past year, but behind the scenes have been continually working on new content. As for when that can be finalised and collated into a release, honestly throw a dart at a calendar, we couldn't give you a better answer at this point. *cough*, I mean a new release is imminent :P
To echo mgb204's Comments, The NAM 37 Dev cycle has been strained by the RL of the main developers this year.
There is only a few of us working on content and the installer is one of our bottlenecks.
Regarding content, there will probably be a whittle down of the content to just add on some new functionality to existing projects.
It is no easy feat pulling a large package together.
At the moment I am focusing on the NWM MRCs
(https://i.imgur.com/5mCTx0U.jpg)
As you can see I am adding wealth textures to the set.
So realistically speaking from my side RRW Flexpiece and NWM MRCs will probably be my content for NAM 37.
-eggman121
Still no REW for NAM 37, then? That's a shame...
If only I could help some way... All I can do is offer ideas...
Of course the side that has all the traffic is only one lane, while the opposing lanes sit open unscathed.
The types of projects in the works have also complicated things with NAM 37. I'd say at this point, we're mostly looking to clear out a few smaller projects with this release, in order to give the community some new content to enjoy, while we work out the roadmap going forward. There is at least one long-awaited surprise coming from yours truly that is currently almost a given for NAM 37, however.
As my NAM colleagues have mentioned, RL's been a complication, and some of the larger projects that have been in the works--namely, the REW and P57-Mark IV--in addition to being quite extensive, pose some significant packaging and file architecture issues. The installer has gradually been getting more and more broken each release, in part due to all the complications from the likes of "Maxis Rail vs. RRW", "(default) Maxis Highway vs. MHO", the cross-linkage between such options, as well as the numerous cosmetic options on top of that. The potential for "Maxis OWR vs. REW" adds yet another similar complication to the mix.
P57-Mark IV is a HUGE improvement in RHW stability over the current Mark III code, though it has steep technical requirements. There's been discussing of whether or not it even makes sense to include it in the NAM proper because of that, though given how much of an improvement it is, I don't think any of us want to continue fielding Mark III-related bug reports and issuing patches for essentially dead code, either.
-Alex
Is there somewhere a list or kind of a thread, where one (like me) could take a look, what would be to do, or where one can get involved to help? What I'm looking for is a list of tasks that could be outsourced to others, to take a little of the work load from you three...
Just like with a lot of open source projects of all kind, where a github repository exists and others can get involved for just one thing, or as they like for more.
I have no idea, if this has been discussed, or is even possible or wanted (copyright and the will to give out code), but a lot of projects benefit from this kind of sharing and placing it in the community.
Is there something like that anywhere? :) I would really love to help in some way, but tbh I have no idea, what is even needed.
Is it worth exploring the option of drawing a line in the sand with backwards compatibility with each release and possibly splitting the two systems between the stuff you are making and the old Maxis stuff?
Those of you left developing obviously have a much keener interest in the items you are making RRW/REW/RHW and so on without the drag of trying to make something that can install all of the old Maxis stuff which really won't have any future changes.
Purely from a process point of view you could just leave one version of the NAM (say, V36 or V37) for the folks who simply "have to have" the clunky old Maxis rail, highway (etc) and and leave the future updates for the stuff that you enjoy making which may just ease the burden of installer work. It becomes an either/or selection for the user rather than you trying to be all things for everyone (which is impossible). If they insist on Maxis stuff, then they can't have the new stuff and vice/versa. Ultimately your dev time is more important and more valuable to the community than the loud protests from some (very small, but noisy) parts of the community
Anyway, that's just my thoughts that I'm putting out there...I don't need a response :D
Regardless, the new NAM-37 looks to be a real treat :thumbsup: :bnn:
Quote from: paddy0174 on October 18, 2018, 01:39:48 PM
Is there something like that anywhere? :) I would really love to help in some way, but tbh I have no idea, what is even needed.
The NAM Team is always looking for volunteers, but that means you must be skilled in transit modding, or having the will to learn these things. There are various tutorials and guidelines, but it's certainly not something for the faint-hearted, as it involves a steep learning curve, and most likely, it will take you months to get a good grasp of what is needed to be done.
Many "easy" things are outsourced to excellent tools like texture batch processors and such already, and since the number of active developers is very small these days, you're pretty much on your own when it comes to learning. Naturally, there's always a place where you can ask things, but don't expect anybody to take your hand and teach you the basics. ;)
Some items that are stalling the current development have been named already, such as building a better installer that is easier to use, and "crosslinking" all the various NAM items. This means making one item working together with another, such as, say, a FAR oneway road intersecting with a diagonal railway line. There are so many possible intersections in various angles and rotations, and for each of them, special code is needed.
Personally, I got lost a long time ago, and since programming was never my cup of tea, my active time in the NAM Team was over once it got the advanced installer that we have now. Maintaining the readme and publishing a German NAM was mainly a chore, so if you don't have any modding skills, maybe that would be a job for you? I'd certainly introduce you to this task, such as updating the German language file, and translating all the new and updated readme stuff, but beware, it's long and boring work alright. :-\
Quote from: paddy0174 on October 18, 2018, 01:39:48 PM
...Is there something like that anywhere? :) I would really love to help in some way, but tbh I have no idea, what is even needed.
Yes and no really, whilst we do have a GitHub account for NAM development, its not really necessary from the perspective of those outside the NAM team. We use it internally to fork and recombine code, but it doesn't handle everything.
The process for making NAM content is based on some key tasks, each of which requires different skills, but the reality is that a combination of them are necessary to make anything functional. RUL coding (RUL0, RUL1, RUL2 and INRUL), Pathing, Texture making, Transit Modelling (S3Ds) and Exemplars are the key components of making things work. When you install the NAM, all the RUL code is output into the following location; \Documents\SimCity 4\NAM Auxiliary Files\Tools\Controller Compiler\Network Addon Mod\Controller. All the RUL code is in separated .txt files, there is nothing to stop anyone from contributing, by creating their code in a new .txt file and passing it to the team. However, depending on what you are creating, you will need other components for it to work. There is no repository of these, outside of the DAT files contained with the NAM itself. That said, those same files contain a lot of parts, which will typically be invaluable as part of any development work. But you need to find and extract them for modifying somehow, it's something all the main developers found their way to doing at some point. There is rarely, if ever, a list of things to do, because that's not really how we work.
For example, right now I'm going through the process of adding further RHW support for both the cosmetic El-Rail and BTM (Monorail) mods by Moonlight. So I start by digging into the RHW files, taking template S3D models (The El-Rail / Monorail x RHW ones). I then remove the original El-Rail/Monorail parts of those models manually using Reader. Next I combine them in Model Tweaker with similar templates containing the updated El-Rail/BTM models. It's not as simple as it sounds, because once more I've had to find and in many cases adapt those template models. Lastly, since it's an override, there are no new textures, paths or RUL code needed, but I do have a lot of T21s to make for the sake of completeness. So again, I have to find and adapt other T21s, in order to fit these modified pieces. Of course, it's always an option to make new things from scratch, but usually it's just easier to take what exists and adapt it to your needs, where possible of course.
All in, it's quite the involved process, but whilst obviously it was an outstanding task, ultimately I've made these pieces, because that's what I wanted to contribute at this time. All of us work this way, we find something we want to improve, add or support, then work on making it happen. At a team level, we come together when we've sufficient contributions to make a release and by and large Tarkus handles the process of the installer/release from there. We don't have a list of tasks or assign them, because this is not our job, but our hobby and if we are to all stay motivated, it helps to be free to work on those things we're interested in. We don't take applications for new team members, but anyone who proves themselves to be a capable transit modder, will surely catch our attention in the process. But if you want to get involved, the best first step is to decide on what it is you want to achieve and start working on it. It's a great idea to start a thread somewhere to both show your progress and ask for help where necessary. We always have time to help those who committed to learning and creating content.
Quote from: mattb325 on October 18, 2018, 01:58:47 PM
Is it worth exploring the option of drawing a line in the sand with backwards compatibility with each release and possibly splitting the two systems between the stuff you are making and the old Maxis stuff?
It's an interesting idea, although personally I'm ideologically opposed to it. The problem there is that as a modular mod, doing this restricts the ability to pick and choose between those things a user might want or not. That said, RRW development has taken this tract, if you don't use RRW, you're left with Rail as it was when RAM was last updated. Cross linking can be an uphill battle installer wise, but that's really the main issue at play here.
Quote from: mattb325 on October 18, 2018, 01:58:47 PM
Ultimately your dev time is more important and more valuable to the community than the loud protests from some (very small, but noisy) parts of the community
It's one way of looking at things, but I don't think protests are really the problem here, neither are those members such a minority either IMHO. Plenty of players simply don't want or like the style of certain aspects of the NAM, RRW once more being a key example. So whilst those users won't get new rail content, should they also be forced to never get RHW updates, purely because they didn't want RRW?, especially when little of those updates are likely to pertain to RRW in any way? This is really my concern, that we might leave many people out of the loop by forcing such a change in philosophy. With an ever-dwindling community, splitting the NAM this way seems like it might have unintended consequences. It's rare to get complaints about these things, once again at the core of the issue, is simply making it work from an installer perspective. The developer who made that is no longer around and as someone who's dabbling in NSIS coding myself, I can tell you it's really a complex mess beyond a certain point. Sans the resources to test every change, unexpected errors creep in as a result of changing something which wouldn't obviously affect other parts. It's not a simple issue that's going away, because there is no good solution for moving the installer code to another platform or rewritting it. In fact both these options are almost unthinkable from a sheer workload perspective. Even without the cross-linking, those problems are inherent to the installer as you continually update it. I think I'd sum it up by saying, it's gotten so big and complex, that it's becoming very difficult to properly test. An issue exacerbated by the small dev team and limited time to devote to testing it. There is no quick fix to that, but certainly it's something we're all aware needs addressing before it gets out of hand.
^^ All valid points of course, but having led and managed many organisations through difficult changes over the years, as a small team I would simply look at what is most important to yourselves and play to your core strengths - is it the installer that's more important or the files therein? Or perhaps both have equal importance? It's something that only the three of you can determine.
Sometimes, we get attached to a process that made perfect sense once, but may no longer makes as much sense today or tomorrow. Maintaining that process just because it is a 'nice to have' for users who might miss out on a whole new version because they don't want or use one part of an upgrade, can act as an ever tightening noose around your neck.
When push comes to shove, as in when the developer numbers dwindle; it the users who should adapt, not the other way around. Because the inevitable (ie the possibility of no more NAM releases) will also force users to adapt. It is that simple.
But again, that should be a discussion for yourselves: however as an outsider who is familiar with maintaining the status quo of teams' processes within the SC4 community (BSC were also obliged to use simplistic installers, and believe me, there was little unanimous consensus at the time despite the united front) it is worth having the discussion amongst yourselves, particularly, if as you have all mentioned, it is the complex installer that is as much of the bottleneck as the development itself. Certainly as an outsider, the first thing that springs to my mind when I think about the NAM team is the amazing and varied content....the installer, is way, way down the list of things that first come to mind.
Again, just my thoughts.....
All I can do is offer suggestions. For example, I still think cutting the FlexSPUI in half would make it more modular.
Quote from: mattb325 on October 18, 2018, 03:39:03 PM
^^ All valid points of course, but having led and managed many organisations through difficult changes over the years, as a small team I would simply look at what is most important to yourselves and play to your core strengths - is it the installer that's more important or the files therein? Or perhaps both have equal importance? It's something that only the three of you can determine.
. . .
Certainly as an outsider, the first thing that springs to my mind when I think about the NAM team is the amazing and varied content....the installer, is way, way down the list of things that first come to mind.
First off, Matt, thanks for the encouraging and thought-provoking comments! :thumbsup:
The content in the mod is indeed the foremost aspect of the mod for me as well. That's the real passion part of being a NAM developer--expanding the array of transportation options available, for both ourselves and our fellow SC4 enthusiasts. The whole underlying philosophy behind the NAM and the NAM Team is that we're essentially the Department of Transportation for the SC4 custom content world, a key portion of which entails managing RUL-bound transportation content for the benefit of the community, ensuring maximum intercompatibility between items.
If you're thinking about the content, and not the installer, that's a good sign. Our intent with having the installer is to do the heavy lifting for the end user, such that they (hopefully) don't really have to think about the whole process of installing the mod, or having to get dirty with the file architecture. When the installer fails to work its magic properly, however, that's when the problems arise, which is the case right now.
The alternative--a manual installation--is fiendishly complex with the mod in its present configuration, and it would pretty much require that the end user be a NAM developer with intimate knowledge of each component, and how they're all supposed to fit together. There's also the fact that a full installation requires the game's executable be switched to Large Access Aware via a "4GB Patch" (which the installer handles) in order to avoid CTDs (something we found out the hard way with NAM 31), and the issues of the mod being installed on versions of the game that do not actually support it (versions lower than 1.1.638, including the infamous Origin retail edition), which the installer's version check prevents.
Our "Mac version" up through NAM 30--the last before we went "Monolithic"--was, in fact, just a loose .zip, and the users on that platform were expected to perform a manual install. At that point, we also had most of the other larger components--the RHW, SAM, RAM, etc.--as separate downloads, and also packaged those as loose .zips for manual installation for the Mac users. A decent percentage of the Mac userbase had technical issues with this process, and that was when "The NAM" proper was a mere fraction of what it is now, with everything rolled into a complete, all-in-one package.
While NAM 30 does seem to still have its supporters :troutslap:, the general sense I've gotten talking to various segments of the community over the years (including those not particularly active in the SC4D/ST forum side) is that the "Monolithic" concept is quite appreciated, especially in the context of some of the broader distribution/packaging discussions from the past couple years. I don't believe the "Monolithic" packaging is the problem, but rather, what we're looking at is really an execution issue.
Regarding the "legacy components"--i.e. the Maxis Rail stuff--some of it could be mitigated with some improvements to the file architecture. I don't think completely dropping the support would be a tenable solution, but one possibility I have considered is that of offloading it to a separate-download "as-is"/"no support" legacy file. We also have a number of other cosmetic options that with our current staffing, we are no longer able to consistently support, either. Those could potentially given the same treatment.
I'm definitely curious to hear more feedback on this side of things.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on October 21, 2018, 01:33:16 AM
For example, I still think cutting the FlexSPUI in half would make it more modular.
FlexSPUI is already a half-SPUI. If you talking about (drawing and) quartering it, that might be something down the line, though it does complicate things considerably to have asymmetrical setups with only onramps or only offramps (especially once one gets into LHD support). The priority right now is getting the broken NAM 30-era version retired at long last.
If I can figure out what is up with the QuickChange Xpress issues (they're not going into NAM 37, barring a miracle), there will be SPUI QCXs, too.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on October 23, 2018, 08:06:31 AM
Regarding the "legacy components"--i.e. the Maxis Rail stuff--some of it could be mitigated with some improvements to the file architecture. I don't think completely dropping the support would be a tenable solution, but one possibility I have considered is that of offloading it to a separate-download "as-is"/"no support" legacy file. We also have a number of other cosmetic options that with our current staffing, we are no longer able to consistently support, either. Those could potentially given the same treatment.
I'm definitely curious to hear more feedback on this side of things.
-Alex
I've been puttering around in the same rather large region since 2013. My early work was mostly wiring all the city-sectors together using rail and highway -- all Maxis highway -- and avenues with plopped interchanges. There are now dozens of densely populated towns / cities built up around some of those Maxis highways and their compact interchanges. I have continued to use such because I have never gotten the hang of RHW's free-form interchange construction (the difference between plopping a ready-made interchange versus spending all day fighting ramps is monumental, at least to me).
Ripping out my Maxis highways from 300+ sectors and laying RHW highways and interchanges in their place, including dozens embedded within existing towns would be a nightmare that might take months, so obsolescing Maxis highways would be a drop-dead show-stopper preventing me from upgrading the NAM, probably forever.
[Note: I am looking forward to ploppable interchanges. I hope to add some RHW to my region for the first time when those interchanges appear.]
QuoteRipping out my Maxis highways from 300+ sectors and laying RHW highways and interchanges in their place, including dozens embedded within existing towns would be a nightmare that might take months, so obsolescing Maxis highways would be a drop-dead show-stopper preventing me from upgrading the NAM, probably forever.
[Note: I am looking forward to ploppable interchanges. I hope to add some RHW to my region for the first time when those interchanges appear.]
I don't think making the Maxis Highway obsolete will happen for the aforementioned outline but we have to come up with a solution for both end user and developer.
Holding onto projects that will not be worked on can be a challenge of the developer end and since the NAM has gone in so many directions it may well be the case that we need to tidy up some things in the way things are packaged.
Now ploppable large interchanges won't happen for complex setups due to the sheer amount of work involved but we are open to the idea of making subset parts either through new models or existing model for the RHW. Lucky the Maxis Highway is a standalone network and I have contemplated using "Flex cores" linked with the RHW ramp system to make pseudo Pre Made interchanges that to a large extent can be made to specification. They would need to use the Maxis Highway override however.
I think this is a healthy discussion since there is only a small team working on the NAM so our direction has to be focused on projects that are viable.
-eggman121
What I'm suggesting is not to make certain elements completely obsolete; it's just to leave them as is and when new elements are created (that align with the remaining developer's interests), these old pieces do not receive backwards compatibility prior to releasing the updated NAM. At a certain point all legacy systems are no longer feasible to support. Case in point is Microsoft with XP/Vista etc. They still work, and people & businesses still use the operating systems but they and the systems which depend on these operating systems, become less desirable to use as time goes on.
As I see it, when developer numbers plummet, those remaining have a number of options available and they relate to issues of succession planning and processes if they wish to see the development continue in the public sphere.
1) Business as usual: time will take care of the details. One of you will get married, move to a big city, get a better job, or just get tired of trying to make the updates. No more NAM releases.
2) Up-skill someone else in the team. That's a lot of work, and there's no guarantee that the new trainee will stick around or even be any good.
3) Write a how-to-manual. Also a lot of work and a brave step: you completely divest yourself of everything you've worked hard for over the years.
4) Look at partitioning certain aspects of the build; leaving them as is and concentrating on things that are likely to keep you developing new content
5) Simplify or split the installer: is it possible to leave the last known built installer that worked really easily for you as is and then add a second/third installer for new stuff added?
6) Anything else you care to think of....
If the issue is around the monolithic installer which, to my eye as an outsider, seems to be a series of either/or selections related to content and interchangeability of such choices, surely the end user can run a few separate installers based on their choices? EG: one for LHD; another for RHW; another for RRW; another for legacy, etc, over and above a "base installer" of content that you as the developers determine to be a standard or ideal set up.
I could be completely off-piste in that line of thinking: but it hinges on the question of how the installer benefits you three, and you three only. Does it ultimately make your lives easier? Does it reduce support issues after a NAM release (bearing in mind that support issues will have decreased anyway based on fewer community members)? Is having that installer important for transferable skills in the real-world? Etc, etc.
As long as functionality remains the end-users can adapt to the packaging (saying something is no longer supported or expanded upon is completely different from making it cease to function; and I know the NAM team would ever deliberately trash the Maxis rail or Maxis highways just to move users to the new stuff). While I am in awe of the achievement of the NAM installer, I am in more awe of the goodies inside it and I don't mind if I do a half auto installation and a half manual installation if it makes it easier for the team to get new content out :thumbsup:
It will always boil down to what you guys decide upon. In the end it just has to work for you.
Quote from: Tarkus on October 23, 2018, 08:06:31 AM
If I can figure out what is up with the QuickChange Xpress issues
What seems to be the problem? Not plopping properly?
I have to agree with mattb325, if the number of active developers go down, the system behind needs to be more focused. And from my point of view, it wouldn't be to harsh on users, to simply leave things as they are, especially for some outdated content like the Maxis Highways. I do see the point, that some doesn't want or can change to the RHW, but that really doesn't mean, they need to get new features or updates behind the already existing version(s). I think of this is an alternative, you simply cannot invent new things, if you always have the pit fall not to only cover backwards compatibility but to release new features. At some point, there is simply no way to make everyone happy....
What brings me to my second point. I do know and understand, that it is always some kind of a hard dicission, to "open up" things. But as I said before, I would love to see at least a discussion about making all these things "open source" and make use of collaborating and developing tools, the internet gave us in the last few years.
Let me just describe my thoughts, how this can go further:
- make the code and ways to work the code public
Why? A lot of people are able to help, but only a few are willing to go that deep. But right now, nearly all tasks are stuck upon you three, even the easiest and frustrating tasks with a lot of repeated steps... That can be outsourced.
If there is somewhat like a repository, everyone can see, what is going on, and where a step in can be made. But, if handled via github/gitlab or any other collaborating software, you still would have the control. PullRequest is the key phrase here. - make the development strictly bound to what you like
Sure, if you ask ten people, you will get twenty opinions, what is needed, and what can't be left out. Nope, sorry, that's not the way it works. As of this moment, everything in NAM should be considered as a starting place at zero. Whatever is in there right now, it stays. But only the things you decide will get new development or just bug fixes.
The good ol' three:
1.) nothing is done, no new features, no bug fixes (if a user wants to use it, fine, if he wants to improve it, sure, go ahead, make yourself comfortable with github and make a pull request)
2.) bug fixes (strictly bound to things, where a new version has broken something)
3.) new feautures
=> what mattb325 said - a healthy discussion about the financing for the work on the NAM
what I would really like to discuss, would be the financial aspect of this. My "vision" would be, to make something like a non profit found, that takes care of the financing. I know, I know, everyone tells you the same, not needed, the costs for the site are already hard to get and so on.
I wouldn't have thought about such a way, if I hadn't the perfect example for: Contao (formerly TypoLight). They did it this way, right now the main developer is a paid employee, and a lot of projects get paid for by the non profit foundation.
And for the end of that long post, I just want to go a bit deeper into the last point. I do know, that working on things, you don't like totally, can be a PITA. Getting some money for the hard work you do, doesn't make it less frustrating, but it makes up for it on another edge: go have a big and tasty dinner with your gf, wife, mother whatever. Buy the new keyboard or mouse from this money, whatever. At least it gives you one thing: you have something in return, it is more like "the community shows you respect and aknowledges your work", then the big money, but hey... :D :D :D If we are lucky, in a few years or months the foundation could support ST and SC4D for their monthly costs.
I for one would love to get one larger summ to a foundation, knowing that this helps not only on one corner, but over time can asure a still runnning system.
And btw, I don't find it offensive, to pay for things I want to have. Right now, I would be looking for someone to make a diagonal ERRW crossing over a diagonal road, and I would be willing to pay for that extra. Sure, I cannot pay hundreds of dollars for that, but a few bucks... If this pushes something forward, I want to have... And if the project is something, more people want, why not letting them pay for the fast track?
Just my two cents, and at the end one personal note: I am not a native english speaker. I try my best, but if something in this text is wrong (wrong use of words or grammar) or if there is something that comes down offensive, please let me know. It isn't meant that way, so please bare with my english and correct me! :)
Just want to put in a few quick words while I have a down moment (just completed the third day of a four-day span of 12-hour work days--5:30pm to 5:30am--and about to call it a night/morning).
No one has to worry about the base Maxis Highway features going anywhere. They pretty much require zero technical support from our end--the NAM features that exist for them are ancient and heavily battle-tested--and the only component that bumps elbows with them is the Maxis Highway Override. It's highly unlikely they'll get any updates in their default form--there's been none in the past 7 years, and maybe two in the past 13 years--but we're not going to completely push them out of the NAM ecosystem.
In fact, the only things that have been fully pushed out are (a) things that have been found to be seriously broken--i.e. the original attempt at Draggable FAR in NAM 28 (May 2010), which caused a CTD whenever one plopped a Car Ferry, or (b) are designed in such a way that they actively prevent future development. The original "automatic" version of the Road Turning Lanes Plugin, is the only such case. It was pulled in NAM 31, after being largely responsible for the initial NWM release having a development cycle of 4 years, and then threatening to take Draggable FAR for an especially long detour. The faction of the team that had been most adamant about keeping it ended up joining the removal chorus after that. (Had it been limped along to the present-day, it would have also impacted the Draggable Road Viaducts, and--in an ironic twist--the FLEX Turn Lanes.)
As far as the QCXs go, there's still a lot of internal fact-finding needed there, but suffice to say, the plopping side of things (aside from the lack of proper preview models at present) is not the problem, and works exactly as intended.
I'll have more on Matt's and paddy's thoughts tomorrow.
-Alex
Thanks for your always detailed answers! :)
And take your time, no quick answers needed (at least on my side) :D
As promised, I'm back.
Quote from: mattb325 on October 23, 2018, 02:05:28 PM
5) Simplify or split the installer: is it possible to leave the last known built installer that worked really easily for you as is and then add a second/third installer for new stuff added?
. . .
If the issue is around the monolithic installer which, to my eye as an outsider, seems to be a series of either/or selections related to content and interchangeability of such choices, surely the end user can run a few separate installers based on their choices? EG: one for LHD; another for RHW; another for RRW; another for legacy, etc, over and above a "base installer" of content that you as the developers determine to be a standard or ideal set up.
With that first process, that does actually fit with something that has been periodically discussed internally--the notion of having a "frozen core", coupled with a series of more frequent update packages, containing new/improved features, fixes, etc. that would be applied to it. The "core" would be briefly "thawed" out once enough updates had been issued, with those updates being rolled in, and the core "re-frozen", starting the process again.
The result of the latter process would likely result in something that looks more akin to the NAM 30 paradigm. While that didn't require quite the level of installer complexity, were readily maintainable, and didn't really cause any of our more experienced users to sweat during installation, it did cause some issues for the general user population. In the 6 years during which the NAM existed in that configuration, our consistent #1 tech support issue was the infamous Red Arrow Bug, which resulted from people messing up the process of updating versions, or trying to mix-and-match incompatible versions of the various separate download components (i.e. trying to run RHW 5.0/0.50 with NAM 29, or RHW 4.1/0.41 with NAM 30).
NAM 31, for all its issues (there was a reason people called it "NAM Vista"), did end up completely eliminating the Red Arrow Bug. That said, some of the modern conveniences in the present installer could theoretically be ported over to smaller installers without much issue (save for the occasional user who has a sticking point about installing Java, since the TSCT and Controller Compiler require it), and could potentially introduce some new improvements to a refined version of the old approach.
I think there's quite a few potential ways out of the current situation (including also writing a new Monolithic script, taking what worked from the current version, and working it into a steroid-infused version of the NAM 30 script), though they're pretty much all going to require some dedicated time working on packaging and logistics, rather than development. If they end up making it such that we don't have to spend much time on those tasks later on, however, I'd consider it a worthwhile investment.
Quote from: paddy0174 on October 24, 2018, 04:51:16 AM
- make the code and ways to work the code public
Why? A lot of people are able to help, but only a few are willing to go that deep. But right now, nearly all tasks are stuck upon you three, even the easiest and frustrating tasks with a lot of repeated steps... That can be outsourced.
If there is somewhat like a repository, everyone can see, what is going on, and where a step in can be made. But, if handled via github/gitlab or any other collaborating software, you still would have the control. PullRequest is the key phrase here. - make the development strictly bound to what you like
Sure, if you ask ten people, you will get twenty opinions, what is needed, and what can't be left out. Nope, sorry, that's not the way it works. As of this moment, everything in NAM should be considered as a starting place at zero. Whatever is in there right now, it stays. But only the things you decide will get new development or just bug fixes.
The good ol' three:
1.) nothing is done, no new features, no bug fixes (if a user wants to use it, fine, if he wants to improve it, sure, go ahead, make yourself comfortable with github and make a pull request)
2.) bug fixes (strictly bound to things, where a new version has broken something)
3.) new feautures
=> what mattb325 said - a healthy discussion about the financing for the work on the NAM
what I would really like to discuss, would be the financial aspect of this. My "vision" would be, to make something like a non profit found, that takes care of the financing. I know, I know, everyone tells you the same, not needed, the costs for the site are already hard to get and so on.
I wouldn't have thought about such a way, if I hadn't the perfect example for: Contao (formerly TypoLight). They did it this way, right now the main developer is a paid employee, and a lot of projects get paid for by the non profit foundation.
And for the end of that long post, I just want to go a bit deeper into the last point. I do know, that working on things, you don't like totally, can be a PITA. Getting some money for the hard work you do, doesn't make it less frustrating, but it makes up for it on another edge: go have a big and tasty dinner with your gf, wife, mother whatever. Buy the new keyboard or mouse from this money, whatever. At least it gives you one thing: you have something in return, it is more like "the community shows you respect and aknowledges your work", then the big money, but hey... :D :D :D If we are lucky, in a few years or months the foundation could support ST and SC4D for their monthly costs.
With respect to #1, everything technically is already out in the open in some way or another. The current version of the RUL code is on a publicly-visible GitHub account with an easy to remember URL (https://www.github.com/NAMTeam (https://www.github.com/NAMTeam)). There was once an internal Gitlab for the non-RUL stuff (.dat files), but the server for it crashed and it has not been brought back. That said, as long as one has a tool like ilive's Reader or Tropod's SC4Reader, it's quite easy to peer inside any of the mods files. Granted, the contents may not make much sense if one isn't familiar with how the game's transit network implementation operates, but there are tutorials and spec guides around for much of it, either on the NAM How-Tos and Tutorials board, or the old Wiki. We're also still around to help out with any questions.
Most of us learned how to do all this stuff by sheer determination. Back in 2006, when I started, I really wanted to be able to cross an Avenue Viaduct over an RHW--something which the initial RHW release (1.2/0.12) couldn't do. At that time, there were hardly any NAMites around at all (2006 was surprisingly rough for SC4), and it took me a couple months of studying the documents that were out there (which were far more convoluted than what is available now) in order to start being able to do things.
#2 is actually pretty close to how we approach things. We do generally try to work on the projects that will bring things we want to see come to the game, and that we will enjoy making. This does sometimes result in a rather freewheeling developmental process, in which projects get started, shelved, and then brought back (sometimes multiple times) before seeing the light of day, but it's helped us stick around for almost 15 years now. I would say that "taskmaster" types would probably go insane being on the inside of the project, because our approach often borders mild chaos. We only start to tidy things up and bring order once we think we have enough stuff ready to release. The elusive "golden ticket" would be the ability to do that on smaller batches with a quicker release cadence, without it causing issues on the end user side.
As far as #3 goes, the response to anyone who has offered to monetarily contribute to development has indeed been to direct them to give to SC4D and ST, for fostering our continued existence. While I don't think anyone would really say it out loud in the past, beyond the previously oft-cited angles of wanting to "do it for fun" and "not turn a hobby into a job", I think that is in part due to concern for the logistical and interpersonal issues that could potentially result from money entering the equation.
If one looks at the
credits and acknowledgements list (http://sc4devotion.com/namdoc/9-credits.html) for the NAM, as of NAM 36, there's about 120 unique names on that list, whose contributions vary considerably in type and scope. The list of those actively and regularly contributing to development was around 30 people at one point in 2010. Particularly with some of the internal politics that happened in those heady times, there was no way that the introduction of money into the development process would have produced a good end result.
Would it be nice to make a little extra cash? Sure. And I take it as a significant compliment for what we've built, that people would be willing to pay for it. The idea of an SC4 non-profit is also intriguing. But even with a smaller team in a smaller community, I would still have some pause about some form of the same issues happening.
-Alex
Thanks for the info....it would always tricky to balance the perceived needs of newbies vs. seasoned players.
I know when I've had requests for BATs where the person has offered to pay (it happens a lot more than one might think) I have always directed them to make a donation here at this site if I end up batting it....taking money for bats feels like I should be wearing prophylactics ::)
(Continued from this post (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1444.msg530966#msg530966))
I really wish there was some way the community could help speed things up... All I can really do is give ideas and bug reports... I have a lot of spare time, but I lack the required skills and attention span to be of any real help myself...
If other active community members could share their thoughts, maybe we could get an idea of what needs to be done...
It's still March 31st here in Oregon, so I can assure you this is very much real (and just went out for internal testing).
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2019/03/nam37-a01-03312019.jpg)
This is likely one of the last times you'll see this installer/configuration. We've been having a rather productive discussion internally about the plans for the installer/packaging/file architecture over the past couple weeks, and will be sharing some proposals and soliciting feedback on those fairly soon.
-Alex
is it okay to get excited?... :thumbsup:
here is hoping for Easter release... &apls
Hopefully we'll get a release soon, 2018 was the year of no releases for me (Terraria, Starbound, other things...)
Here's hoping you have kept the DRIs for the MHO ;D
Thanks for all the support, everyone!
Usually, Alpha 01 is a sign (barring anything crazy happening) that we're getting close, though not to the "i-word" stage. It's generally the first time we've assembled everything together (and owlsinger, you'll be pleased to know that the MHO DRIs made the cut), so it's rather rough around the edges. We've already started fixing up some of the messiness with Alpha 01, and I suspect we'll be onto Alpha 02 before too long.
NAM 36 was released after Alpha 04, for reference. That's about average these days. The record number of alpha builds before release, IIRC, was with RHW 2.0 (concurrent with NAM 22), which took something like 13 or 14 (I think I actually still have them somewhere on an old laptop).
-Alex
To those who haven't been keeping up on Simtropolis, there's a new installer in the works.
And I'm a bit concerned at the lack of talk lately...
Quote from: Wiimeiser on May 15, 2019, 04:02:31 AM
And I'm a bit concerned at the lack of talk lately...
Define lately? Sure, it's been a few weeks and generally speaking, I can state publicly how the original plans for NAM 37 had a bit of a spanner thrown into the works. In short, problems with the old installer have prompted us to reconsider using it one more time and driven development of a new installer for the next release. However, that does mean getting to grips with a new system and re-making the whole before we can get a release out of the door. This will require much internal testing, perhaps even with a public pre-release to get on top of any potential issues there. Combined with real life hitting us developers much harder than anticipated, it means things are taking longer than we had hoped. But it's only been a few weeks since the last public announcement and we would kindly ask everyone to be patient.
There is no need for anyone to be concerned about NAM development, it's still very much alive. As usual we won't be drawn on specific time-scales regarding releases. It'll be ready when it's ready as always.
Quote from: metarvo on December 06, 2017, 01:48:42 PM
Here we go... :)
(https://i.imgur.com/lYeIAZB.jpg)
I was thinking to myself the other day how there would pretty much never be a W 12-2 sign, let alone a "Low Clearance" plaque, in SC4 since even 7.5 m translates to roughly 24' 7" in imperial units. That number would look absurd on a W 12-2 sign. From a BATters point of view, however, it might just seem low because of the game's perspective — an effect akin to the BAT squash which implores BATters to upscale BATs to 133% of source height. It's just the game's isometric perspective. Adjusted for "inflation," you really have 5.6 m or 18' 6" in RL terms, even though the overpass will be 7.5 m in-game. This number is much more reasonable in my mind for highway overpasses IMO.
It begs to question. If these signs were in fact made, should they use the game's nominal measurements or the adjusted ones? ;D
Let's do some quick math with both measurements. For reference, I'll be using AASHTO's 6th edition Interstate Highway Standards and pre-stressed concrete beam sections.
Based on the original measurements with no scaling:
* 7.5 meters translates to the 24' 7" clearance, if we somehow assume that the bridge superstructure (deck, beams and railings) is as thick as a paper.
* A real bridge superstructure, we're looking at 8" / 0.2m of bridge deck thickness
* AASHTO's nine pre-stressed concrete beam designs come in all sorts of section heights, the smallest being AASHTO I with a section height of 28" / 0.7m, the largest being AASHTO VI and AASHTO Bulb Tee 72, which have a section height of 72" / 1.8m. Taller sections can span larger gaps below.
* This means that the minimum bridge thickness will range from 36" (3 ft, 0.9m) to 80" (6' 4", 2.0m). Which leaves a gap ranging from 5.5m (thickest bridge) to 6.6m (thinnest bridge). The smallest of these gaps translates to 18 feet, the larger of the gaps translates to 21' 8". AASHTO requires interstate highway bridges to have a minimum clearance of 14 feet in urban areas and 16 feet in rural areas. 18 feet is actually a common typical clearance in many jurisdictions, which means that the 7.5m bridge is fully compliant for AASHTO if we assume SimCity 4's vertical scale to be the same as in real life, and thus wouldn't require warning signs.
If we adjust for the exaggeration of the vertical scale by 33%, equivalent to reducing the game scale by 25% to get real life value equivalents:
* The equivalent bridge height would be 5.625 m, the same as 18' 5".
* Using the thickest and thinnest bridge superstructures would result in gaps of 3.625m / 11' 10" (thickest bridge) to 4.725m / 15' 6" (thinnest bridge). This means that only a very thin bridge superstructure would be compliant with the Interstate Highway Standards, and only for urban areas.
* If I were to suggest a gap to use as a reference for the clearance sign, I'd go with the AASHTO IV section (one of the most common ones), which is 54" (1.37m, round up to 1.4m). This results in a bridge superstructure height of 1.6 m and a downscaled gap of 4.225m / 13' 10". This would just barely miss the Interstate Highway Standard for urban areas and could be simplified to a 14' 0" clearance sign.
just wondering about the NAM status, and release... if it can ever be released sooner than later... is the new installer gonna work for this update... hoping things can happen soon... :popcorn:
Just to give a heads up on status, we've been testing Alpha Build 03a of NAM 37 for the past 5 weeks--mostly because I'm still having to wrestle with tedious, annoying file architecture issues that need to be solved for Alpha Build 04, on top of more normal sorts of things that need to be addressed.
The file architecture issues, as you might guess, are the result of Maxis Rail vs. RRW and Maxis Highway vs. MHO crosslink issues. I'm literally having to rip almost anything Rail or Maxis Highway-related out of non-Rail and non-Maxis Highway plugins, and put them into separate files, to try to contain everything. We're going all in on RRW (Maxis Rail functionality is being spun off into a separate download "legacy" plugin), but because the polls showed an almost even 50-50 split in our userbase between stock MHW and MHO, both of those options will remain as part of the main download.
Additionally, because of the new installer setup (yes, we are indeed going to the new installer), we can't do Controller Compiler routines, Station Updating (SLURP) or automatic 4GB patching anymore--the latter being the most problematic, since we're having to install a full-blast Controller (essentially requiring the user have 4GB+ of RAM, and the patch).
It was the price we had to pay for creating what (once settled) will be a much quicker release engineering process for future NAM releases, with cross-compatibility for non-Windows OSes (critical, since Aspyr is indeed going to update the Mac port to 64-bit). The option to run the Controller Compiler after initial install will still exist, and the tool itself will remain in the NAM package, however, and we're looking at a stripped down version of the existing installer to handle SLURP.
Since it has been a record-long development cycle (we're now at 2 years and 1 month--eclipsing NAM 33's 1 year and 10 months), we are still planning on offering a public "release candidate" of NAM 37 before the "official" release (similar to the old "pre-releases" we used to do). There is, of course, no date or timeline we can announce for either, because we honestly don't know.
Trust me, I'd love to have this interminable release cycle off my back (I haven't been able to make new content for several months), as would everyone else, but we're trying to do it right--at least to the greatest extent possible.
-Alex
I appreciate all the hard work the team is putting into this, it certainly sounds like a monumental (and somewhat thankless) task to do this new installer. I'd rather wait than get an early release that's buggy.
Deep breath......'Patience, Grasshopper' ;D
At first it doesn't sound like that, but this is great news, you are getting an arrangement that works! &apls
About the MHW vs. MHO thing, what about doing separate installers for both options? Would that ease the crosslinking issues?
Hi NAM Team,
I have checked the T21 exemplars for SC4 roads and streets, trying to find out why the streetlight props are mostly not shown after some development takes place. If you try plopping a 1-tile road or street on top of an existing one, the streetlights around may disappear or reappear and the props on the sidewalks (trashcans, mailboxes, flowers etc) may be changed as well. My conclusion is that the reason is the 0xA0000060 prop-family, which includes streetlights of all three wealth-levels, and the prop is selected by "requester satisfaction" (bit 0 in the 2nd LotConfig set), which in this case is wealth. It is "OK" as an approach, but it doesn't always work well, with the effect being that no streetlight may appear.
Analyzed the T21 exemplars and found that it's quite easy, and not actually much work to fix this, resulting in consistent streetlight props. More specifically, T21s with the 0xA0000060 prop-family needs to be split to 3 wealth-level-specific ones, each displaying the streetlight prop directly (the $$$ streetlights are a prop-family as well - 0xA0000075 - but if the requester satisfaction bit is cleared, the game will always display a member of the family). The R- and C-specific T21s are organized this way already, and the I ones use the $$ streetlight only, so no changes are needed here. Changes are needed for the exemplars with the extra sidewalk props (15 in total), which do use the 0xA0000060 family. Also, the two "AllStreet" (AllStreetEven and AllStreetOdd) T21s must be disabled, as the rest ones cover all cases. Maybe these were a last-minute and not-well-studied addition, supposed to fix problems, but actually cause even more. Made a quick test-fix (disabled the "AllStreet" and "Prop" T21s), and this worked splendidly for R and C streets.
So I think it would be nice to include this fix in the upcoming NAM release. I have already found, separated and reordered these exemplars. What is still needed to be done is split the "Prop" exemplars to 3, or sometimes 2, wealth-level-specific ones). The civic ones need to be fixed as well, either split to 3 or just use the $$ streetlight. So, the "mod" I'm suggesting will contain only the (disabled) "AllStreet" exemplars, and the split civic and "Prop" ones. Maybe some few additional fixes, to make the pattern more consistent, but these are really few.
Therefore I'm requesting a range of unused IDs (it can very well be a "hole" in an existing network range). Some 100-120 IDs would suffice, with a two-hex-digit range (256) being comfortable.
Another streetlights pack, made T21s for the tram-in-road puzzle-pieces, using the technique I described above. And these ones are quite more complicated, due to rotations, as the alternating pattern must be preserved, thus requiring a large number of exemplars. But it works wery well, with the streetlights always being displayed, and changed if the wealth of the adjacent lot changes. The pack contains T21s for most, but not all puzzle-pieces, eg didn't make the TramxRoad-under highway one and the likes. I believe it should be covering more than 90% of the cases, omitting only the weirdest and rarest ones; if some certain interchanges are deemed important, I could make them as well. So I think it would be OK for testing and addition into NAM.
Actually, I had made it many years ago, but it was never put into NAM, partly due to lack of time and partly due to a problem (pattern flip of East-West roads) of NAM itself. My pack was made to the original/standard streetlight pattern of roads and streets. But at some NAM version the pattern for E-W roads (but not N-S ones, or streets) was flipped, and it looks weird. I had reported the problem (and what needed to be checked/fixed) by the time (here is the post (https://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=17038.msg499411#msg499411)), but apparently no fixing action has been taken yet.
Another problem I'm facing with streetlights is with two NAM props. More specifically, streetlight props 0x9F9BBC47 and 0xB48B3B43 are included in the 0xA0000060 and 0xA0000063 families respectively. Didn't check details, but they use the original 69AD model ($$). Btw the 0x69AD0000 prop exemplar is correctly included in the NAM props, as a fix was required (wrong mirror model). These props interfere with my streetlight color pack (getting both in roads and streets). I would like to ask why these were included at all (on which networks), and also why they were included into the families. If some T21s use them directly, this was not needed, and additionally, the families already contain such streetlights, so this wouldn't be needed even if some T21s use them through the families. The 2nd one doesn't even have the Wealth property defined. Please consider removing them from the families.
Finally two questions:
- Is the old "ANT" network still available in draggable form? Don't want to make something with NAM, just want to make a custom slope mod for it (to prepare the roadbed for other networks).
- Is it possible to make tunnels for El/GLR and street networks? SC4 doesn't have "Tunnel Entrance" models for these networks, but I could easily make them. However the problem isn't this, while it is possible to modify the "Tunnel" properties and drag the tunnels (albeit missing the entrance prop), they are not functional. Even tried adding SC4Path files, but this didn't help. Don't know if adding/modifying some RULs could make this work. I know, RULs are needed for bridges, for example.
I am working with T21s as well for an undocumented project on a couple of networks. My thoughts are that once we have a public release a T21 mod for the Road network could come to fruition. I have done some experiment with T21 road markings that change based on slopes... (An auto line marking project for rural areas). That could be coupled with some overrides to make a new Linemarking mod.
Quote from: cogeo on October 15, 2019, 09:44:09 AM
Finally two questions:
- Is the old "ANT" network still available in draggable form? Don't want to make something with NAM, just want to make a custom slope mod for it (to prepare the roadbed for other networks).
- Is it possible to make tunnels for El/GLR and street networks? SC4 doesn't have "Tunnel Entrance" models for these networks, but I could easily make them. However the problem isn't this, while it is possible to modify the "Tunnel" properties and drag the tunnels (albeit missing the entrance prop), they are not functional. Even tried adding SC4Path files, but this didn't help. Don't know if adding/modifying some RULs could make this work. I know, RULs are needed for bridges, for example.
The ANT network is the
Real Highway and has been like that for a decade or more. If you want some slope making network pieces for right of way construction the best way would be to make some Flex Pieces based on network slope parameters and with the [#4] Flag, bulldozing one tile would remove the whole segment across a few tiles. That is one of the advantages of using flex Pieces, Once one tile is bulldozed it will remove the whole piece thus making way for cut and fill segments.
I will have more to say later.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on October 15, 2019, 03:38:30 PM
Quote from: cogeo on October 15, 2019, 09:44:09 AM
- Is the old "ANT" network still available in draggable form? Don't want to make something with NAM, just want to make a custom slope mod for it (to prepare the roadbed for other networks).
The ANT network is the Real Highway and has been like that for a decade or more. If you want some slope making network pieces for right of way construction the best way would be to make some Flex Pieces based on network slope parameters and with the [#4] Flag, bulldozing one tile would remove the whole segment across a few tiles. That is one of the advantages of using flex Pieces, Once one tile is bulldozed it will remove the whole piece thus making way for cut and fill segments.
Additionally, it should be possible to just install the L0 RHW-2 network, which is what the former ANT Tool officially became back with NAM 22/RHW 2.0 in January 2008.
-Alex
Alex,
My project about the consistent (and persistent) streetlights for roads, streets, tram-in-road and tram-on-street networks is almost complete. It displays wealth-dependent streetlights while the even/odd pattern as well as the random props are preserved (for tram-in-road and tram-on-street no props other than streetlights are displayed, due to lack of space). Here is a pic:
(https://i.ibb.co/JRmCPNx/Street-Lights.jpg) (https://ibb.co/6RrN52v)
The modding I have done is as I described in my previous post, ie split the 0xA0000060 prop-family needs to be to 3 wealth-level-specific props, each displaying the streetlight prop directly, with the requester satisfaction bit cleared - this is what causes all the trouble.
I think it would be nice to include this into the upcoming NAM version, or alternatively post it as an add-on later. What I need now is the ID range I asked in my previous post - I will have to re-IID them. Please also check the issues I mentioned (streetlight props 0x9F9BBC47 and 0xB48B3B43 included in the 0xA0000060 and 0xA0000063 families respectively, and the pattern flip of East-West roads only).
Another little addition I would like to make is a GLRxAve T-intersection with a road connection, just like the existing GLRxAve T-intersection/GLRxRoad puzzle piece, only this one will be a road connection instead of GLRxRoad. See the pic below:
(https://i.ibb.co/CPT741s/GLRx-Ave-Rd.jpg) (https://ibb.co/1zwqBvJ)
The pic of course is photoshopped and the texture is not yet made. I need an ID range for this (in the GLRxAve range of course - I think 2x2 would be OK because as far as I can remember no tile is needed for the road).
I would like to make and release these asap.
Quote from: cogeo on November 27, 2019, 02:31:56 PM
I think it would be nice to include this into the upcoming NAM version, or alternatively post it as an add-on later. What I need now is the ID range I asked in my previous post - I will have to re-IID them.
ID Ranges for Prop Families are not really handled by the NAM Team. I'm sure we have some ranges, but honestly any ID is fine here. If you don't have some Prop Family IDs to use, let me know how many you need and I can pass you some from my personal range.
Pretty much all your observations re: Maxis T21s / Streetlights are spot on. I happened to be digging through this all myself not so long ago and came to the same conclusions. Like you, I also realised new IDs would be needed and the Wealth property simply isn't working as one might expect. Presumably another long-standing bug?
QuotePlease also check the issues I mentioned (streetlight props 0x9F9BBC47 and 0xB48B3B43 included in the 0xA0000060 and 0xA0000063 families respectively, and the pattern flip of East-West roads only).
I'm pretty sure a similar issue was affecting the NAM T21s for FA-Roads. Marteen (Mandelsoft) included a fix for that problem as part of the LRM mod, file: zLRMv5_Patch_NAM_FAR_Lights_FamilyBlocker.dat. it's only two replacement Prop Exemplars, but might be worth comparing.
QuoteThe pic of course is photoshopped and the texture is not yet made. I need an ID range for this (in the GLRxAve range of course - I think 2x2 would be OK because as far as I can remember no tile is needed for the road).
I'd say that's a good idea for an additional piece. As for ID ranges, don't quote me, but in recent times simply requesting IDs doesn't tend to get a response. Better to "find" a spare ID or group thereof to squeeze such pieces into. I'm no expert on Puzzle Pieces, but you could certainly re-use the textures from the original TiA T-piece, so you'd only need one ID for the new texture with the Road connection. I believe you can re-use the S3D's too, but will need new IDs for the Preview, Paths and Transit Exemplar. Many such legacy components were built only using the 0 through 4 (5 for preview) ID groupings. But we can use 5-9 and A-E also, usually that's an easy way to find an ID gap. In this case, I'd use the same IDs as the current T, but with A-E + F (preview). That should be pretty sure not to conflict with anything.
Quote from: mgb204 on November 28, 2019, 04:27:56 AM
ID Ranges for Prop Families are not really handled by the NAM Team. I'm sure we have some ranges, but honestly any ID is fine here. If you don't have some Prop Family IDs to use, let me know how many you need and I can pass you some from my personal range.
I do have ID ranges for prop-families and textures (for lots), but here I'm talking about network IDs for street and road T21s. It can be an unused (and unlikely to ever be used) "hole", anywhere in the NAM range. A range like 0x5-----## would suffice (no more than 256 IDs are needed). The tram-in-road and tram-on-street T21a use the same ID-range as their corresponding puzzle pieces, of course.
Quote
I also realised new IDs would be needed and the Wealth property simply isn't working as one might expect. Presumably another long-standing bug?
Yup, a Maxis bug (I would rather call it a poor implementation) actually.
QuoteQuote
Please also check the issues I mentioned (streetlight props 0x9F9BBC47 and 0xB48B3B43 included in the 0xA0000060 and 0xA0000063 families respectively, and the pattern flip of East-West roads only).
I'm pretty sure a similar issue was affecting the NAM T21s for FA-Roads. Marteen (Mandelsoft) included a fix for that problem as part of the LRM mod, file: zLRMv5_Patch_NAM_FAR_Lights_FamilyBlocker.dat. it's only two replacement Prop Exemplars, but might be worth comparing.
Well, it would be easy to just remove the aforementioned props from the prop-families for my personal use (and that's what I'm doing for now), but the point here is if these props should have been included in the prop-families at all. Which networks are using them, bridges, idk. If they are referenced by prop IID they don't need to be included in the families, whether my streetlights fix is included into NAM or not. The 0xA0000060 and 0xA0000063 prop-families already include same-looking props anyway. It's about NAM, not me.
Quote
As for ID ranges, don't quote me, but in recent times simply requesting IDs doesn't tend to get a response. Better to "find" a spare ID or group thereof to squeeze such pieces into.
These are puzzle-pieces, and the IDs conform to certain rules, eg an additional tile in the verical axis requires an additional hex digit too. I could look into the GLRxAve ID-range and try to find some available range in there, but I think it would be best to ask for it, if someone manages these ID ranges. Btw, what's the (whole) ID-range for GLRxAve puzzle-pieces?
Quote from: cogeo on November 28, 2019, 05:47:56 AM
I do have ID ranges for prop-families and textures (for lots), but here I'm talking about network IDs for street and road T21s. It can be an unused (and unlikely to ever be used) "hole", anywhere in the NAM range. A range like 0x5-----## would suffice (no more than 256 IDs are needed). The tram-in-road and tram-on-street T21a use the same ID-range as their corresponding puzzle pieces, of course.
Apologies, I got mixed up, but see your plan is to fix it the other way round. When I found this problem, I copied the three affected Props and gave the Prop Exemplars unique IDs and removed any Prop Families. Of course then you'd need to update every affected T21 to the correct Prop Exemplar. Wouldn't that be simpler than making new T21s?
As for ID Ranges, I don't think you need worry too much with T21s. Just find a gap that's not in use. Sticking with using the ID of the Texture or S3D has always worked for me. Since you can increment the last digit all the way to F. I've yet to come across a situation where so many T21s previously existed, that this didn't leave enough room on the 8th digit alone for my needs. Maxis didn't even use such a system, for example the base Road Straight (0x00004B04) range is unused. For fully wealthed texture sets like this, you have at least 128 IDs spare. Since the 7th Digit covers the 0-7 wealth textures, they can all be used for corresponding T21s. I.e. 0x00004B0# through 0x00004B7#.
QuoteWell, it would be easy to just remove the aforementioned props from the prop-families for my personal use (and that's what I'm doing for now), but the point here is if these props should have been included in the prop-families at all. Which networks are using them, bridges, idk. If they are referenced by prop IID they don't need to be included in the families, whether my streetlights fix is included into NAM or not. The 0xA0000060 and 0xA0000063 prop-families already include same-looking props anyway. It's about NAM, not me.
Understanding that probably requires having been part of their development. Otherwise all the rest of us can do is try to see what's going on and unravel it. Like with the Prop changes above, I would think the safest thing is to make duplicate versions of the Props, with unique IDs. This way anything that relies on the original setup, that we might not be seeing, is unaffected by any changes.
That's pretty much why I mentioned the LRM file, because that's exactly the approach Marteen also went for. Then he just updated the affected T21s to link to the fixed Props.
QuoteThese are puzzle-pieces, and the IDs conform to certain rules, eg an additional tile in the verical axis requires an additional hex digit too. I could look into the GLRxAve ID-range and try to find some available range in there, but I think it would be best to ask for it, if someone manages these ID ranges. Btw, what's the (whole) ID-range for GLRxAve puzzle-pieces?
That was really my point, I don't think there's master lists or one person managing all this. So the best solution is to be pro-active in finding gaps inside current ranges.
I've no idea where to find any central lists of such ID schemes, I always just track them through. I'd hazard somewhere deep in the development threads, when these were made, ID's schemes were planned out. But these days, the methodologies I'm outlining here are the best ways to find a small number of spare IDs for minor additions. Obviously, making new networks and/or much larger additions, would need the IDs to be scrutinised. But for the odd piece here and there, this system is just more practical.
I've never needed more than a handful, my biggest project to date, SAM11, had IDs already allocated. Even when I started out with implementing SAM support for El-Rail/Monorail/GLR crossings, I found IDs pretty easily. Luckily in that case, two GLR crossings had reserved IDs from planning. I was able to expand these 2 IDs into 6 working ones, by utilising the 5-9 and A-E sets, giving me the 6 per-network I needed.
Based on the textures and a quick peek in the files, the TiA range is:
0x584*####
*with 0-3 being used for the 4th digit. Given all that, I'm sure there's bound to be some IDs left somewhere in these, since it's a pretty big range.
If I look at the last pieces added, I can see the range 0x5840 was used, with A through F for the 5th digit. These were part of the Draggable TiA to intersect with RHW interchanges.
The standard T, of which this would be a variant uses 5840DE and 5840DF (Preview 0x5840DFF0). Space exists between 5840E1 and 5840EF here, which should be sufficient. Otherwise since only IDs 0-4 for the 8th digit exist, use the same scheme but ending from 5-9 or A-E instead. The game supports such IDs fine, but this information was not widely known. But it basically means we were previously not utilising 2/3rds of the available IDs in a given space. For most legacy content, you can be very confident using such, will not cause conflicts. Note too that RHW, RRW and newer content is typically planned to make better use of the full ID range, since the number of free IDs is always getting tighter.
Again, I think you can re-use both existing textures and possibly 3 out of the 4 S3D files from the normal T-Crossing. Because those parts of your new piece would remain identical. You just need IDs for the single new texture and it's various parts, everything else can link back to the existing pieces. The only potential issue I see is if the paths for the other three pieces needed to be different, then they too would need to be duplicated and given unique IDs.
Having found some seemingly free IDs, it's best to quickly cross-check that with a DAT-Packed NAM. Just to be sure they were not used in an obscure place you aren't expecting to find them.
hello nam...
:)
hoping for idea of when to look for teh release of name 37... will it be released or has this also fallen by teh wayside of real life...
&mmm
how much maybe needed to have a finished package... sure hoping progress is being made and sitting in all these lockdowns perhaps projects are getting done... guess looking for progress update and any plans concerning its release...
:satisfied:
and then further if this likely teh last update will there be a finishing up of features or some sort of finished projects... just hope this also does not languish like too many projects have... :(
Jack_wilds:
We are working on it. Unfurtonatelly, the current lockdowns actually don't really have affects on the two main active developers, since their RL jobs fall under the "essentials jobs" more or less (so as mine). It will be ready, when it will be ready, sooner or later, but it's coming.
- Tyberius
The big holdup, as always, is the bloody crosslinks, which need to die in a fire already.
Due to how the new installer works, we no longer have a z___NAM folder. Everything now needs to be contained within the main Network Addon Mod folder. As has been already announced, we've pulled some cosmetic/reskin stuff (Alternate El-Rail and Bullet Train), partially to simplify things (and also, we're not really able to support those all that well, anyway).
The two big things that were in z___NAM that we aren't pulling out of the main mod itself, however, are the RRW (which is becoming the default and only option in the main mod itself--Maxis Rail is getting jettisoned to a separate-download "legacy" plugin) and the Maxis Highway Override AKA Project Symphony, which is still having to co-exist in the core part of the mod with the vanilla Maxis Highways, since each have about a 50% user share.
And that's proven to be a MASSIVE pain, because it means pulling everything Rail or MHW-related from any non-Rail or non-MHW plugin that intersects either network (which is pretty much all of them), and there's just so many cases of it. It's literally 90% of what we've been fighting for the past several alpha builds.
-Alex
Sounds like it'd just be easier to go the override network route (Though doesn't the RRW already kinda do that?)
As far as I know, RRW is not being an override network for a long time now, since most of its recent and currently under development features are way ahead of anything what maxis rail (RAM) could ever offer. And since Maxis rail stuffs won't be developed anymore the RRW has to stands on its own feet in the future. And MHO is somehow in the same shoes. But MHW likely won't get any new stuffs, while MHO still can get new features considering it's fairly close relationship with the RHW.
So this is a very much necessary, although really painfull process.
- Tyberius
The term "override network" is also not quite being used correctly here . . . generally, it refers to one of the NAM's "new networks", which uses RUL overrides (RUL2 code) and starter pieces in order to change one of the game's base networks into something else on the fly, while still allowing that base network to co-exist.
MHO really ought to be called "Maxis Highway Replacement" or "Re-Skin" rather than "Maxis Highway Override", because it is replacing the base network (you can't build stock Maxis Highways with it installed). The same is true for the RRW.
As Tibi mentioned, the fact that we're effectively having to "purge" the NAM of Maxis Rail is a huge part of this. And since we're ditching all the other re-skins save for MHO, because of the crosslink complications, and the fact that MHO has its own RULs, we're having to get it to stand on its own two feet, without using legacy content as a crutch.
If we can actually get these bloody things to behave . . . then it's going to make things a TON easier for NAM 38 and beyond. But it's meant NAM 37 is a huge, huge pain in the butt on our end.
-Alex
The reason I used "override network" to refer to the RRW is because after installing it any existing rail will need to be clicked to update it.
Actually being able to develop new content again, no longer being wracked by "NAM 37 isn't released" guilt . . . #FeelsNice.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/nam-04262020-1.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/nam-04262020-2.jpg)
-Alex
And there's more . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/nam-05022020-1.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/nam-05022020-2.jpg)
I'm methodically working through L1 Road, and going from there. The OxD situations are largely worked out, and I'm now in the process of getting the DxO setups together. I've done a few DxDs already as well.
-Alex
Really great and much needed! Just to know: is there some chance to add a centre pylon on those long-span overpasses?
Personally, I think we shouldn't start anything new for NAM 38. Now that the NAM Team should be back on the development track, now would be a good time for catchup on half-finished projects. This does include the diagonal stability Tarkus is currently showcasing. Just my two cents, though.
Quote from: Tarkus on May 02, 2020, 07:28:46 AM
And there's more . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/nam-05022020-1.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/nam-05022020-2.jpg)
I'm methodically working through L1 Road, and going from there. The OxD situations are largely worked out, and I'm now in the process of getting the DxO setups together. I've done a few DxDs already as well.
-Alex
:bnn: :bnn: :bnn: :bnn: Got some drool to clean up! Looking forward to some of that FAR development too!
That's some exciting news Alex! &apls &apls
Finally something over those pesky 3 tiled RHW6C diaganol. Great job and great heaps and bounds &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Back in the saddle again . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07062020-1.jpg)
-Alex
Getting the wider DxO setups in place . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07072020-1.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07072020-2.jpg)
L1 Road is close to having all the requisite crossings ready.
-Alex
Very smooth. Nice!
Cool! :D
Thanks, metarvo and AsimPika3172 (and all those who hit "Like")! Work is now underway with the DxD setups:
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07082020-1.jpg)
-Alex
Thanks for all the likes, everyone . . . now for something else fun . . .
(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/383313497964150785/731472368131637258/nam-07112020-1.jpg)
Was pleased I got this on my first attempt with the RULs (and yes, before the prop hounds come out, I do realize there are some weird things going on with those streetlights).
-Alex
COOL!!!! :thumbsup: Elevated version of NWM!!! :bnn: :bnn: :bnn:
Waiting for Elevated 3 Lane One Way Road, Elevated NRD etc... :popcorn:
Actually, that's just what the Avenue Viaducts look like. Granted, the coding work I'm doing on these will lay the groundwork for NWM Viaducts (and other NWM-related things) . . .
In any case, I've decided to tackle some of the trickiest stuff first--the Avenue x Avenue situations.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07112020-2.jpg)
-Alex
just to know: how hard it would be to make a T21 mod to add some median props on the viaduct avenues?
The Euro Textures for the Avenue Viaducts actually put a physical median in there--these new crossings reference the same textures, so they'll get that, too. As far as other props go, there are T21s for the streetlights (which are messed up, as you can see) and the support pillars, so any additional prop work would need to co-exist/work around them.
Also, this (mostly) works now on the RUL end.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07122020-1.jpg)
-Alex
But wait, there's more . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07132020-1.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07142020-1.jpg)
-Alex
Whooooooo... it's a good thing I wasn't still holding my coffee cup!
Coffee spillage would be a very bad thing . . . good thing we averted that. :D
Two more for the road (so to speak) . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07142020-2.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07142020-3.jpg)
-Alex
Exciting stuff!
We want more ELEVATED everything!!! :D
Some more development with the Rail scenery ::)
(https://i.imgur.com/Bi8K14I.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/pSw0PqF.jpg)
Many thanks to @Rivit for the automata in this scene. ;)
More to come...
-eggman121
Nice work, eggman!
The viaduct work continues . . .
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07162020-1.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07162020-2.jpg)
-Alex
Working on the C-Types now . . .
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/383313497964150785/733502089518645258/nam-07162020-3.jpg)
-Alex
And . . . the OWR crossings are a thing now, too.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07232020-1.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07232020-2.jpg)
-Alex
Did someone say transitions?
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07312020-1.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07312020-2.jpg)
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/nam-07312020-3.jpg)
-Alex
Proper DxD RHW intersections, I'm just going to come out and say it:
GAMECHANGER &apls
That viaduct work is amazing Alex!
I have a little progress to show as well:
https://www.youtube.com/v/GJlKKSFdkHY
$%Grinno$%
- Billy
Nice work, Billy--something that I don't think original SAM devs jplumbley or Diggis would have imagined in their wildest dreams!
A little further viaduct work here.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/08/nam-08032020-1.jpg)
-Alex
Those diagonals don't sound like much, but they're a real game changer. If we had diagonal height transitions, I could do diagonal interchanges fairly easily. No more relying on awkward orthogonal interchanges.
I'm guessing this stability is the focus for NAM 38?
And the SAM stuff will come in handy too. I guess it doing really well in the polls did have an influence...
Quote from: Wiimeiser on August 03, 2020, 08:02:01 PM
If we had diagonal height transitions
We will. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Wiimeiser on August 03, 2020, 08:02:01 PM
I'm guessing this stability is the focus for NAM 38?
Lots of stability and gap-filling. You'll be seeing a lot of that with future NAM releases, particularly on my end.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on August 03, 2020, 08:02:01 PM
And the SAM stuff will come in handy too. I guess it doing really well in the polls did have an influence...
We've also (re-)gained a dev team member who is quite interested in SAM content. That's very good news for all the SAM enthusiasts out there.
And in case anyone thought we were kidding around about the whole "shorter release cycle" thing . . . this just went to the NAM Associates for internal testing.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/08/nam38-build01alpha-7aug2020.jpg)
-Alex
agile ! ;)
I smell a NAM release as either a Thanksgiving or Christmas present! Being able to present the first alpha build of the next version a meager month after the previous release is an amazing achievement! It would seem that the NAM development cycle will rapidly catch up in its usual schedule.
Quote from: Durfsurn on August 02, 2020, 02:30:33 AM
That viaduct work is amazing Alex!
I have a little progress to show as well:
https://www.youtube.com/v/GJlKKSFdkHY
$%Grinno$%
- Billy
You made me log-in just to like this (and comment as well) bravo! &apls &apls &apls
Quote from: Tarkus on August 07, 2020, 06:23:43 AM
Quote from: Wiimeiser on August 03, 2020, 08:02:01 PM
If we had diagonal height transitions
We will. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Wiimeiser on August 03, 2020, 08:02:01 PM
I'm guessing this stability is the focus for NAM 38?
Lots of stability and gap-filling. You'll be seeing a lot of that with future NAM releases, particularly on my end.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on August 03, 2020, 08:02:01 PM
And the SAM stuff will come in handy too. I guess it doing really well in the polls did have an influence...
We've also (re-)gained a dev team member who is quite interested in SAM content. That's very good news for all the SAM enthusiasts out there.
And in case anyone thought we were kidding around about the whole "shorter release cycle" thing . . . this just went to the NAM Associates for internal testing.
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/08/nam38-build01alpha-7aug2020.jpg)
-Alex
That's really fast paced! cant wait for the next release! :D
What the . . . ?
(https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2020/09/nam-09072020-1.jpg)
-Alex
ok, now I really don't know what could be happening here
Nice one Alex! After so many years, this finally seems to be coming true! Pretty amazing and crazy stuff! :)
- Tyberius
Is that... Draggable Tunnels...?
Flying cars! ;D
(i hope)
Quote from: Wiimeiser on September 07, 2020, 08:06:57 PM
Is that... Draggable Tunnels...?
that would be god like!
however, one of the sims leaves for the shop, without any exit :D
Quote from: gn_leugim on September 08, 2020, 05:26:54 AM
however, one of the sims leaves for the shop, without any exit :D
That's an unfixable game limitation.
It can be an advantage though. Just think of it... a new form of RCI access without conventional road frontage. It will also boost the underground city scene a lot, with the potential for buildings to have underground entrances.
Quote from: metarvo on September 08, 2020, 08:40:59 AM
It can be an advantage though. Just think of it... a new form of RCI access without conventional road frontage. It will also boost the underground city scene a lot, with the potential for buildings to have underground entrances.
I've found something akin, when using FLUPs to put roads underground, the cars can still park on the bordering lots, as if they had underground accesses
Well, here's the Secret Weapon video to prove or disprove any speculation as to what all that is about . . . ;)
https://youtube.com/v/uhD_A0S4F8U
Direct Link: https://youtu.be/uhD_A0S4F8U (https://youtu.be/uhD_A0S4F8U)
-Alex
Nice underground roads! :D
Is freight able to use these new FLUPs? Does that mean can have heavy rail underground more easily than U-rail?
A few limitations here, but... Draggable tunnels are now a reality! Now we can have actual RHW tunnels!
Quote from: metarvo on September 08, 2020, 08:40:59 AMIt can be an advantage though. Just think of it... a new form of RCI access without conventional road frontage. It will also boost the underground city scene a lot, with the potential for buildings to have underground entrances.
Oh boy, functional underground cities ;D
The idea of expanding our cities downwards when land is at premium, moving huge transportation systems underground to make some room at the ground level, and even build entire subterranean cities, has been around since a long time and it's not going to leave us anytime soon, from this 1925 prediction...
(https://davidszondy.com/futurepast/images/Urban-1925-520x763.jpg)
...to the Alice City proposed for Tokyo in 1989...
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0mTsxo9QMSA/UdU3jQFAtWI/AAAAAAAAGAw/H6n-Vi-o7xU/s374/b4+alice.b.jpg)
...to the Earthscraper proposed in 2011 (I think) for Mexico.
(https://images.adsttc.com/media/images/55f8/1591/9644/1eac/2300/00df/newsletter/main-section.jpg?1442321800)
Mix this new discovery with the underground buildings already made for the game, like these...
(https://i1.wp.com/cdn2.yuhisa.com/simboardfile/geo.JPG)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsuoh.sakura.ne.jp%2FSimCity4%2Fbat%2Fr%2FGeofront.jpg&hash=275aace7a1c7100d638d389dbe6f0953900792b7)
...and we'll have actual underground cities with actual subterranean commute. Endless possibilities &dance
I know it's too soon, but I have some questions. Apart from cars, does this support bus and freight truck as well? Can pedestrians use the flexible underground roads too? Can we cross those roads to build underground intersections? What will happen if we cross those roads with actual subways? Will they interfere with them? Can we use this technology to build flexible underground railroads too? If yes, we could build an underground network of freight railroads right under our heavy industries!
Keep it up and never stop pushing the limits, folks :thumbsup: :bnn:
this is really nice! great work!
what networks are or will be available with this option? :O
Currently I believe only RHW-2 and MIS are supported, with RHW-4 in progress.
Those underground buildings are from here (http://suoh.sakura.ne.jp/SimCity4/bat/index.html), right? For the life of me I can't figure out how I first found that page... Where was the original link?
Quote from: Wiimeiser on September 17, 2020, 08:11:11 AMThose underground buildings are from here (http://suoh.sakura.ne.jp/SimCity4/bat/index.html), right?
And from
here (https://www.yuhisa.com/simboard-archives/) too.
Now I can remake Klyde Warren Park. There is a discussion about doing something similar here in Austin, with the I-35 corridor.
EDIT: The video shows that it works with RHW-2 and MIS. What about RHW-4?
Quote from: Tarkus on August 07, 2020, 06:23:43 AM
Quote from: Wiimeiser on August 03, 2020, 08:02:01 PM
If we had diagonal height transitions
We will. :thumbsup:
That is music to my ears, or rather candy for my eyeballs!!!!!
This is simply amazing! been away a while and this simply blew my mind &apls
Thanks for the kind words, everyone! It feels good to finally be able to show this off to the public . . . and be this close to releasing it at long last. :thumbsup: Now to answer a few questions that have come up here and elsewhere . . .
Does this support freight movement?
Yes. Not only can Cars use this for commuting purposes, but New FLUPs can also support Freight Truck and Bus traffic--a significant upgrade over the old Subway Converter lots, which could only accept Cars.
What underground networks are supported?
Presently, there's only the "RHW-2" and "MIS" versions (which would be used for any 2-lane/2-way and 1-lane/1-way underground network, respectively). Girafe has made RHW-3 portal models, though I've yet to implement those, and there are no RHW-4 portals as of yet.
Eventually, the plan is to support underground networks that mirror RHW/NWM/Base Network counterparts, though "RHW-2" and "MIS" are probably all that'll be in NAM 39.
Can these things cross regular Subways?
Technically, no. They're at the same height level. An actual crossing would require either another sub-level for the underground roads, or the Subway itself (and resultant underground height transitions). There may be a way to cheat it a little, but that hypothesis has not yet been tested.
Can URail be reimplemented using the same technology?
Sadly, no. Both eggman121 and I tested a Subway-based URail replacement extensively, and unfortunately, Rail pathing does not play nice with Subway-based override networks, to the point of such an override being effectively unusable. It's a real shame, since URail is a particularly gnarly mess of puzzle pieces in its current iteration, and we are, of course, trying to shuffle as many old-style puzzle pieces into obsolescence as possible. We'll continue to look for such a way to do that, but that's a huge unknown at this point.
Can Pedestrians use them?
That hasn't been tested, and the existing underground networks do not have Pedestrian paths on them (carried over from the existing FLUPs puzzle pieces). If we are to give an underground Pedestrian network a go, it'll be its own thing, without other vehicular traffic (if you're spending that much money to build a tunnel, there's no sense in mixing Peds and Cars).
-Alex
What exactly happens when Rail paths are put on Subway? A shame, because Urail definitely needs improvement, there isn't even a way to go straight without having a road on top.
The issue is not completely unlike that which affected the notorious "double-decker" version of the Tsing Ma Bridge, once Rail/El-Rail traffic tried to use it--perhaps worse, though. The Subway-based URail turns blood red in the Congestion DataView upon getting any use at all. Traffic can pass through it, but it moves so extraordinarily slow that literally any alternative route (even some that are considerably longer) will be preferred.
With regards to URail without having a Road on top . . . in addition to the PedMall-over-Urail options, a side-effect of the addition of "Tram" functionality to the old FLUPs PPs means that there are Rail paths on them (intended to allow UDI functionality). You should be able to use one of the Blank Terrain FLUPs PPs and get functionality for URail as a result.
-Alex
It's all good! I mean puzzle pieces, while limiting on how much you can do to enhance them, aren't the end of the world. I seem to recall when Rush Hour first came out, it came with its own set of puzzle pieces, and I was happy just to have the new capabilities that they came with.
Just dropping this here ::)
https://www.youtube.com/v/srUqamNHnfw
:popcorn:
-eggman121
Nice elevated roads! :thumbsup: But can't coments on Youtube because of KIDS CONTENTS.... ()sad()
Stupid Coppa.... :angrymore:
:popcorn:
:thumbsup:
just wow...
Wait, what were the FCC's guidelines on video games, again? All for kids unless it's AAA stuff like CoD?
woooooow... ich will das!!! %BUd% %BUd% %BUd%
now seriously, you guys are awesome!
will those also be available in 0 to 7.5m (non on-slope) transitions? the ramps I mean.
The only donwside I have to point is the street texture on the viaducts, don't look good imo, but I can live with that anyway :D
Amazing content!
Just adding to the praise here: I must say, since you guys moved away from the big unwieldy installer, you now all look like you're having fun making cool new stuff for the game, and that's awesome to see! :thumbsup:
My first contribution is shaping up:
(https://i.imgur.com/IZ4u0Ll.jpg)
Quote from: flann on November 19, 2020, 07:46:55 AM
My first contribution is shaping up:
(https://i.imgur.com/IZ4u0Ll.jpg)
Thank you Flann. We look forward to more contributions from you.
Quote from: Terring7 on September 09, 2020, 01:23:32 AM
Quote from: metarvo on September 08, 2020, 08:40:59 AMIt can be an advantage though. Just think of it... a new form of RCI access without conventional road frontage. It will also boost the underground city scene a lot, with the potential for buildings to have underground entrances.
Oh boy, functional underground cities ;D
The idea of expanding our cities downwards when land is at premium, moving huge transportation systems underground to make some room at the ground level, and even build entire subterranean cities, has been around since a long time and it's not going to leave us anytime soon, from this 1925 prediction...
(https://davidszondy.com/futurepast/images/Urban-1925-520x763.jpg)
...to the Alice City proposed for Tokyo in 1989...
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0mTsxo9QMSA/UdU3jQFAtWI/AAAAAAAAGAw/H6n-Vi-o7xU/s374/b4+alice.b.jpg)
...to the Earthscraper proposed in 2011 (I think) for Mexico.
(https://images.adsttc.com/media/images/55f8/1591/9644/1eac/2300/00df/newsletter/main-section.jpg?1442321800)
Mix this new discovery with the underground buildings already made for the game, like these...
(https://i1.wp.com/cdn2.yuhisa.com/simboardfile/geo.JPG)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsuoh.sakura.ne.jp%2FSimCity4%2Fbat%2Fr%2FGeofront.jpg&hash=275aace7a1c7100d638d389dbe6f0953900792b7)
...and we'll have actual underground cities with actual subterranean commute. Endless possibilities &dance
I know it's too soon, but I have some questions. Apart from cars, does this support bus and freight truck as well? Can pedestrians use the flexible underground roads too? Can we cross those roads to build underground intersections? What will happen if we cross those roads with actual subways? Will they interfere with them? Can we use this technology to build flexible underground railroads too? If yes, we could build an underground network of freight railroads right under our heavy industries!
Keep it up and never stop pushing the limits, folks :thumbsup: :bnn:
Interesting images. I can imagine what it would look like if for instance, they would build a pedestrian deck right here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.2665353,-97.7460645,3a,75y,213.64h,91.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX6MNvkb-ZEU_r1GMthwUMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Hello ,
I want suggest a complement, for the RHW (URHW = Underground RHW) .
At this time , this tube existes for the Flup :
(https://i.imgur.com/pUeqqVy.jpg)
With LHD and RHD , I think that is good if there are elements with green light in right and left (only an idea).
To complete this collection of elements, I propose this parts :
Tube entrance :
(https://i.goopics.net/3ZdlQ.png)
Underground RHW in 2x2 :
transition between tunnel and half underground.
(https://i.goopics.net/aGJ8e.png)
transition with a aerial round about :
(https://i.goopics.net/beJOQ.png)
sample transition with aerial way :
(https://i.goopics.net/EXNlV.png)
undercover way in underground for a center of round about :
(https://i.goopics.net/lO17x.png)
part of underground connection :
(https://i.goopics.net/QZ4k9.png)
My skill with BAT are limited . I own Gmax , BAT and SC4PIMX. I'm don't know the system with program to transform a lot / model in TE (transit enable).
I can in first time product a lot in cosmetic or eyes candies.
Cool! :thumbsup: &apls &hlp
That looks great!
I am working on an overhaul of the road-based roundabouts. Here is a teaser of one of many features being added:
(https://i.imgur.com/5xjhYN2.jpg)
Neat. Will we be seeing that with MIS as well?
Quote from: Wiimeiser on March 07, 2021, 02:53:52 PM
Neat. Will we be seeing that with MIS as well?
I am planning to attempt it. Seems like it should be possible, but no guarantees.
Shouldn't be too hard, it's probably just drawing yellow lines on one side and modifying the other.
And after watching this (https://youtu.be/EhqlnJVwOTU) video I think a rail partial Y might be a good thing to have...
Hey Tarkus! I read your post on Simtropolis about diggers and raisers. That is great! I am always raising and lowering by 7.5 and 10 in order to get to 2.5. This just might will make things much easier for me.
(https://i.imgur.com/ioKSK1m.png)
Spot the new flex piece... :P
- Billy
It's where two streets are coming off opposite sides of the same avenue segment. Failing that it's one of the avenueXavenue intersections. Other than that I have no clue.
I also see a standard avenue running diagonally. Those look pretty but can suffer congestion because of the shared cells down the median where the opposite lanes of travel overlap.
For that and other reasons, I switched to using TLA-5, and I dream of the day when basic roads can intersect with their diagonals.
Hello NAM team,
If you want use 3D models GMAX of URHW , it's possible . You can download this here : https://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/34464-urhw-gmax-model/ .
It's not a lot or sc4model ;)
I give up, what's the new piece?
I don't know if that URHW piece would be NAM-relevant...
street x AVE4 x SAM, if I'm seeing it correctly...
&apls &apls &apls
Hello
Quote from: Wiimeiser on May 18, 2021, 05:45:12 PMI give up, what's the new piece?
It's à project for URHW :)
Quote from: Wiimeiser on May 18, 2021, 05:45:12 PMI don't know if that URHW piece would be NAM-relevant...
This piece can be give a mid underground with skyview
---
An other idea : Truck, trafic and train generator with NAM, RHW , NWM , rail pieces . Possible ;D ?
Boop :P
(https://i.imgur.com/PlHFcyj.png)
- Billy
Nice. Will definitely be using this. Ready for NAM 42 I assume?
And I still don't know what the previous piece was, I didn't see a single new Flex piece there...
We want more! We want more! We want more! We want more! We want more! :thumbsup: &apls :bnn:
Quote from: Wiimeiser on May 21, 2021, 06:03:32 PM
Nice. Will definitely be using this. Ready for NAM 42 I assume?
And I still don't know what the previous piece was, I didn't see a single new Flex piece there...
Oh sorry
Wiimeiser! You were 100% correct initially, the piece is currently available in NAM 41 in the Avenue Roundabout menu.
This piece is... unlikely for 42 due to some complexity with how it will be FLEXible but you never know!
- Billy
So I assume it will also accept avenues in that case?
Also, I just remembered. There was a REW piece that was shown before a few years ago, but we haven't heard from it since.
Quote from: Durfsurn on May 21, 2021, 08:08:31 AM
Boop :P
- Billy
This is sincerely wonderful, one of such things that you see in real cities and look unassuming, but in game are truly daunting.
Abusing a bit of your generosity, there might be some chance of an analogous version, but for a divergent diagonal avenue? For reference, I'm thinking on something like this, but without the intersecting road that complicates it:
(https://i.imgur.com/kIdEPgb.jpg)
It doesn't have a lane to turn back from the diagonal avenue to the orthogonal continuation, but the cars that need to do that can turn left on the previous intersection, so it's not an issue really.
Ooh, that one would be nice to have. Slip lane should be optional though (by dragging OWR as usual)
I wonder if diagonal RHW-4 to OWR-2 is getting fixed, that intersection isn't half bad for a RHW terminus...
Quote from: Wiimeiser on May 22, 2021, 08:55:40 PM
I wonder if diagonal RHW-4 to OWR-2 is getting fixed, that intersection isn't half bad for a RHW terminus...
Funny you say that.... I've been working on that transition - it is possible and maybe even likely that it will be fixed in 42 :).
As for that diverging avenue intersection.... that does look like something that is possible, might look into it after the Turbo T's.
- Billy
The way I see the Diverging Avenue working is AVE-6 splits into two AVE4s, and the extra tile for the AVE-6 is on the same side as the diagonal avenue that splits off. And the slip lane would be optional, and made through the normal means of making an OXD slip lane with OWR.
That idea Matias is requesting would definitely be necessary to recreate my home city, wonder how many permutations of the split would be appropriate to match the current state of NWM and avenues!
My city's example:
https://www.google.com.pr/maps/@18.211039,-67.1457435,278m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en&authuser=0
Quote from: LucarioBoricua on May 24, 2021, 12:21:03 AM
That idea Matias is requesting would definitely be necessary to recreate my home city, wonder how many permutations of the split would be appropriate to match the current state of NWM and avenues!
In my opinion: RD-6, REW-6 (two OWR-3) AVE-6 and TLA-7 on the fused alignment, with the extra tile of the latter two being on the side of the diagonal offshoot. RHW-6S and 6C may be plausible in the longer term, but you can just drag them off AVE or REW. Other two can be any dual combination of AVE-4, RD-4, REW-4 (two OWR2) and RHW-4. The offshoot can be diagonal, parallel FAN, and perpendicular FAN, but only diagonal is required. FAN should probably be put off until Flex FANs are implemented (and would tie into it) except for dual FARHW-4 if you really want. Because diagonal AVE-4 is one tile (probably due to technical limitations with the cursor) two versions may be required.
EDIT: Forgot about FTLs. Those can join the fused side.
EDIT2: Correctly remembered that FAAVE already exists.
Yeah, those divergences are quite common where you have two US highways that share the same road surface for stretches, at the junction where they come together.
I am starting to salivate when I see posts about adding Flex-FANWM. One of these days, someone will post some pics, and I'm gonna end up drooling all over the place.
;D We have more upcoming excitement for NAM 42!!! :clap:
Presenting...
Now I know why NAM 42 is taking so long. All of this stability right out of the gate? It's hard enough just to get one piece working correctly...
Oh yeah! I will waiting!!!! :bnn: :thumbsup: &apls
Game changer! very nice addition to the game. a lot of my construction fustration was building compact intersections one slopes.
THE LAST TEASER
(https://i.imgur.com/FM9HcE6.jpg)
Team NAM is not dead but the release of NAM 43 is getting closer and closer. In the meantime, you can see new content from NAM 43.
(https://i.imgur.com/Oi2m3hm.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/JT3zFld.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/ghpFnrL.jpg)
Wow... :o Nice!!!! :thumbsup: I will waiting!!!! &apls &apls &apls
(https://i.imgur.com/BcQHi6o.jpg)
In the Network Addon Mod 44 you can finally use the following components
- Felx Turning Lane (FTL) FLEX-Height Transition (L1-L2)
- FLEX SPUI (Single-Point Urban Interchange)
- RHW 8S-10 & AVE 4 bridge (L1 - L2)
More content coming soon. Because
NAM 44 is just around the corner
More NAM 44 goodies underway!
Diagonal S curve support for the Street Addon Mod!
(https://i.imgur.com/iJRyYfv.jpg)
FLEX overpasses for road, one-way and avenue, shown in a RHW-6C/8C diamond interchange!
(https://i.imgur.com/YStW1jz.jpg)
Draggable ramp interfaces for avenue, using RealHighway (A1 and B1)!
(https://i.imgur.com/9Tn5iZP.jpg)
Trumpet interchange made with curved height transitions, including the new 45° variant and improved stability for the 90° transition!
(https://i.imgur.com/Yv3VZUJ.jpg)
And a directional T interchange incorporating the 45° curved height transitions!
(https://i.imgur.com/UanCLz4.jpg)
&apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
exciting stuff fixing to rip up my cities for... :thumbsup:
good that its construction NAM-orange here on the web page :P
[even if a number of folks do not seem to care for the orange ::) ;
my issue is with too small of text in many places :( ]...
it all looks very promising... hoping some one can make a "how to do it" pdf manual for these new additions... ??? :)
Exciting stuff!
Latest update on NAM development activity at a glance, with NAM 44 fresh out of the oven!
(https://i.imgur.com/774TM0z.png)
:o Uh-oh! Look what's going on! :o
Wow! :bnn: Better added traffic stop lights for person walking over roads, avenues etc
Introducing Network Addon Mod 45 (NAM 45)
Tomorrow at 2:00 AM CEST there will be a live stream on the new features of Network Addon Mod (NAM) 45. The Live streaming will take place on this Twitch channel of UlisseWolf (https://www.twitch.tv/ulissewolf)
(https://i.imgur.com/W0yXkBH.jpg)
First of all, thank you for participating in the stream. For people who missed streaming you can retrieve it here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8PZ4Wz8IdU).
In the meantime stay tuned for more updates
For those wondering why I've been mostly quiet for these past weeks, I've been really busy gradually building up functionality for the Mid-block Crosswalks, the launching feature for the Pedestrian Revolution Mod!
Currently, I'm working on providing Left Hand Drive (LHD) support, once that's done, I'll shift to work on the cosmetics (European textures, T21 and final US texture corrections) and last bits of functionality (path fixes and some adjacency stability code).
(https://i.imgur.com/9WlSe2z.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/PcEPUPO.jpg)
I will waiting!!! :bnn: &apls :thumbsup:
Introducing Network Addon Mod 46 (NAM 46)
9 December at 1:00 AM CET there will be live streaming on the new features of Network Addon Mod 46 (NAM 46) in the channel youtube channel of Ulisse Wolf. Here is the streaming link and use the bell to get the streaming reminder
In the meantime, enjoy some promotional images of NAM 46
PREVIEW CONTENT. THE FINAL VERSION MAY BE DIFFERENT FROM THIS BETA VERSION
(https://i.imgur.com/aC74Rfj.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/lX1fXmw.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/xSjNOgg.png)
Introducing Network Addon Mod 46 (NAM 46)
For those who missed the Live Streaming on the features of Network Addon Mod 46 (NAM 46) can recover it by watching this video. Thank you for participating in the live stream and stay tuned for more NAM 46 news
PREVIEW CONTENT. THE FINAL VERSION MAY BE DIFFERENT FROM THIS BETA VERSION
https://youtu.be/cGIBvHn61ys
:sunny: Just upgraded this with some upcoming NAM 46 goodies for the RealHighway! ;D
(https://i.imgur.com/9maNekk.jpg)
Beautiful, but one thing I'd do differently purely from an SC4 mechanics standpoint: I'd tunnel the entire lowest level from off-ramp to on-ramp, leaving only 2 levels at or above ground where all the cross-overs are.
The connection geometry can be exactly the same, but tunneling traffic effectively teleports, so it doesn't contribute to congestion anywhere between entrance and exit.
On the other hand, multilevel traffic is summed in each cell that is even clipped by a corner of diagonal flow, which means that your visually elegant design could suffer 3-fold "intersection" congestion at several crossing points (a weakness of the game until we get the source code to fix it).
ELEVATED RAMP EVER!!! :bnn: :thumbsup: &apls &apls &apls
From the makers of the Earthworks Tutorials, bringing you...
The birth of the
NAM TUNNEL & SLOPE MOD!!!
Starting with the Medium / Standard variant! This one is intended to mimic accurately the shape of the FLEX ramp-styled height transitions. Steeper and flatter variants will be developed in the foreseeable future.
(https://i.imgur.com/Oxpguzj.jpg)
Appearance of network slopes for an L1 / 7.5m height difference:
(https://i.imgur.com/EZ3rsoj.jpg)
Appearance of network slopes for an L2 / 15.0m (road networks) or 15.5m (rail networks) height difference:
(https://i.imgur.com/xjqdQY8.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/p9axt44.jpg)
This won't make it for NAM 46, but we did fix some important things in the next NAM version to enable their appearance soon™.
&apls
I've long thought that the construction exemplars would be at home in NAM. However, they control a bunch of other things, like bridge starts, pylon limits, construction costs etc. A lot of players customize some settings to suit their own taste for ease-of-construction versus good looks versus functionality. For those of us who tinker, a written table of NAM's alterations would let us merge those with our own.
I especially like setting the smoothing to run more cycles over longer stretches of road/highway. The defaults for those come from an original game designed for minimum computers of 20 years ago when smoothing might affect performance. Given today's CPUs (or even 10 year old CPUs), we can afford much more smoothing.
Continuing the slope mod work, now I have all 5 variants programmed!
1. Very Easy or Very Steep: this is the steepest variant that's still flatter than the Maxis default settings. Even then, it still matches the short height transition between ground and elevated Maxis Highway (example shown).
(https://i.imgur.com/BjmUORg.jpg)
2. Easy / Steep: this variant is steeper than the medium / moderate / NAM default settings, but is flat enough to help make nice-looking networks. This one does not feature vertical curvature, so it's intended to be more forgiving to use at the expense of realism. For the most part, this one is most comparable to the NAM puzzle piece height transitions. This is the option I'd recommend to players who don't want to be bothered with proper design of their networks but still want something that looks nice and is reliable.
(https://i.imgur.com/1BX65Ay.jpg)
3. Moderate / Medium / NAM Default: this one strikes a balance between aesthetics and functionality, by approximating the slopes of the FLEX and smooth height transitions and FLUP portals included in the mod. This one does feature some vertical curvature along some networks, but generally at a limited and unobtrusive level. This one I'd personally recommend as the preferred option for players who take care to design their transportation networks.
(https://i.imgur.com/Oxpguzj.jpg)
4. Strict / Flat: this one favors realism, while still acknowledging some flexibility for gameplay purposes. This has vertical curvature for most networks, with the exception of the street. Players using this one must use precision terraforming, realistic scales in the game, or alternatively flatter topography. This one I'd recommend for more advanced players who value a realistic but still usable set of slope mod settings.
(https://i.imgur.com/hTwcIC6.jpg)
5. Realistic / Very Flat: This one's not for the faint of heart, featuring slopes which are nearly identical to real transportation network designs. This has vertical curvature for all networks, and the curves are especially smooth for high speed networks. Players using this one must use precision terraforming, realistic scales in the game, or alternatively very flat topography. It's also possible to not notice if a network is flat or sloped for the monorail or the rail. It's highly advisable to use the terrainquery cheat and the in-game grid to visualize these really flat slopes. This is the option I'd recommend for players who want to use strictly realistic designs for their transportation networks, with a fair warning on the trickiness of steeper terrain unless doing careful preparations.
(https://i.imgur.com/qQAKqEr.jpg)
Awesome slopes ever!!! :thumbsup: &apls &apls &apls :bnn:
I don't know much about monorail lines, but I do know that HSR has steeper grades than heavy freight. That's because heavy freight is, well, heavy -- plus HSR can put power on every axle, so it can deliver a lot more motive traction to handle steeper grades. Hence:
Quote"The TGV Sud-Est line has vertical grades as high as 3.5 percent (3.5:100). SNCF's use of steeper grades is also considered a plus, as it reduces route miles, earth work, and civil structures costs."
That's something I'm still debating. So far, these are the initial points of consensus from the NAM team members who have given their input:
- There's no interest whatsoever on developing Monorail for its own sake, the nearly unanimous opinion within the team is to always think and treat the Monorail as the base network which we override into high-speed rail variants. As such, slope parameter settings for the monorail, coming from the NAM team, are pretty much guaranteed to be subordinate to its repurposing as high speed rail. Conversely, real monorails do support steeper rails than conventional rail, light rail, metros or high speed rail, their slope support is more comparable to freeways/motorways.
- More members specified that they want to see Rail as steeper than Monorail, despite the actual fact that dedicated HSR lines can support somewhat steeper grades than conventional rail lines providing freight rail service. Meanwhile, the Hybrid Railway has the slope behavior of the RealRailway, owing to the construction of its network flags.
- The team members care more about playability than strict realism. A typical scenario would be novice and casual players trying to build rail lines through existing cities, and then becoming annoyed and frustrated whenever their conventional rail lines fail to build because their slope is too flat for their rolling terrain, compounded by the local flat cells at each grade crossing. Having the RealRailway as the flattest network would be problematic for this.
If I were designing the slope mods on my own, to publish separately (Lucario Boricua's Tunnel and Slope mod), rather than as an official NAM version:
- I'd definitely put HSR as steeper than RealRailway. More specifically, twice as steep. In my own research on railway geometric design, dedicated high speed rail lines tend to top out at around 3.5 to 4% grades. For comparison, freeways/motorways tend to top out at 6-7%, while railways with freight service tend to reach up to 1.5 to 2%. I've revised design standards from German (ICE), Japanese (Shinkansen), Spanish (AVE) and American (California's HSR), and these were the numbers I found for HSR.
- I'd still leave a single tile road network with really steep slopes, for the purposes of precision terrraforming. My personal choice is the RealHighway, as this network benefits from slope flexibility, by putting steeper slopes for the ramps, and flatter slopes for the mainlines. A more practical second choice would be the One-way, which could simply be built with smooth slopes by overriding Road, or by using Road to pre-smooth the terrain. Street is the most likely popular choice, but the lack of native diagonal support is a drawback. It's possible to compensate it with the diagonal street FLEX pieces, but not all players would realize this.
One reminder is that these are prototypes, these are subject to change, and I'm specifically requesting feedback from players. I'll publish the prototype settings once NAM 46 gets published, separate from the main mod. Depending on player feedback, I'll make a second round of adjustments to refine the various slope mod steepness levels.
All reasonable... If anything, I'd allow HSR to be steeper before I'd force RRW to be more level. And if I get good info on where NAM puts its versions of these exemplars, then I can easily customize them to suit my own playing style.
Now available on the LEX! Publishing the Network Addon Mod Tunnel and Slope Mod, Beta version 0.20. Please make sure to provide feedback on its usability, bugs, or any other detail worth mentioning.
https://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=4192
The download contains a readme, including tables listing the main slope mod properties, sample screenshots, and the slope mod files, both unified by slope setting, and separated by network.
Network Addon Mod 47 - What is that thing?
(https://i.imgur.com/iLLogwJ.jpg)
Network Addon Mod 47 - Magenta lights
(https://i.imgur.com/6rNrB62.jpg)
THE TIME HAS COME
Network Addon Mod 47 is ready to reveal its explosive features that will forever change the way we build on Sim City 4.
The first feature to be shown will be previewed on March 13, 2023 at 1:00 AM CET / 7:00 PM EST
Set the reminder not to miss this opportunity to preview the features of NAM 47 and to have a chance to chat with NAM Team
Just a reminder . . . we'll be hosting a NAM 47 Secret Weapon #1 premiere party (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sftw_49ozXQ)over on
@Ulisse Wolf's YouTube channel, at 5pm US Pacific Daylight Time (8pm US EDT, 1am Central European Time)--in about another 2 1/2 hours.
It's pretty exciting stuff--hope to see you there!
-Alex
RHW 12S & X3 RAMP
You read the title correctly. RHW 12S and the infamous X3 RAMP are contained NAM 47. You can see the content in action on this video
But that's not all. NAM 47 will have a feature that completely revolutionizes Simcity 4 by turning it into another new game, but you have to be patient. Waiting for the big reveal here is a nice promotional image of RHW 12S and X3 Ramp
(https://i.imgur.com/24NQJIA.jpg)
Woooooowwww...... :o My dreams was comes trueeeee..... :bnn: :thumbsup:
THE WAIT IS OVER
The release of Network Addon Mod is getting closer and closer and after various tests and fixes we are finally ready to unveil the world's most powerful weapon that will completely revolutionize the way cities are built on SimCity 4.
Set reminders, alarm clocks, write on clipboards and post it notes or on any reminder device because
March 20 at 00:55 CET (March 19 at 19:55 EDT) the biggest feature of Network Addon Mod 47 will be shown in world premiere and nothing will be like before. During the premiere you can talk directly with the NAM Team.
THE REVOLUTION HAS STARTED AND NOTHING WILL BE LIKE BEFORE
IM EXCITED!!!!!!!
DRAGGABLE PEDMALLS WITH RCI GROWTH SUPPORT
THIS IS NOT A DRILL!
You have heard, read and seen well. Those crazy geniuses of the NAM Team members have realized the most modern and requested feature without invoking the infamous DLL Modding.
With Network Addon Mod 47 you finally have the ability to use drag-and-drop PedMalls that support RCI growth. Now you can create all the utopian cities that do not require cars.
(https://i.imgur.com/K9ROepj.jpg)
The new PedMalls have incoported crosswalks with all networks except OWR and work with MidBlock Crosswalks.
If you want to see more of this revolution you can see it with this video.
WELCOME TO THE CITIES OF THE FUTURE
Just put any carparks somewhere and make sim walk through pedmalls into any buildings! :thumbsup:
With the draggable pedmalls an old dream finally comes true! :bnn:
Thank you for this immense game improvement. :thumbsup: